Yeah I think you had to expect AT&T to complain about the commercial. Any rivals companies would want to protect their business model when attacked as openly as Verizon has attacked AT&T. I'm sure Verizon would do the same if AT&T came out with a similar ad attacking a portion of Verizon's service or business.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T Files Complaint Against Verizon Over 3G Coverage Map Commercials
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Their 3G coverage is pretty sad, and this commercial has brought that to the forefront. Good for verizon for doing this, I just wonder what took them so long!
I have both phones (verizon and att service, blackberry and iphone) and att coverage is simply terrible where I live (Utah). When I drive through idaho, montona there is basically no coverage, while Verizon is full bars on 3G
I have both phones (verizon and att service, blackberry and iphone) and att coverage is simply terrible where I live (Utah). When I drive through idaho, montona there is basically no coverage, while Verizon is full bars on 3G
Who is the real cry baby? Both
Verizon is just mad because they lost, and are still losing customers to AT&T because of the iPhone. They knew what they were doing in these ads. Their response was to use some creative, but misleading advertising. Regardless, and unfortunately for Verizon, many people still pick a phone before they pick a service.
Verizon is just mad because they lost, and are still losing customers to AT&T because of the iPhone. They knew what they were doing in these ads. Their response was to use some creative, but misleading advertising. Regardless, and unfortunately for Verizon, many people still pick a phone before they pick a service.
2.XG is NOT almost as good as 3G
For the most part you cannot receive phone calls while your phone is checking e-mail on 2G. There are some caveats, but mostly 2G/EDGE is a mess.
I'm also disappointed by the unholy AT&T / Apple alliance, and will consider the Android as my next phone platform as long as that network also has good 3G/4G coverage.
For the most part you cannot receive phone calls while your phone is checking e-mail on 2G. There are some caveats, but mostly 2G/EDGE is a mess.
I'm also disappointed by the unholy AT&T / Apple alliance, and will consider the Android as my next phone platform as long as that network also has good 3G/4G coverage.
Good for Verizon
I've seen the commercial many times and it seems truthful and accurate to me.
They clearly state 3G coverage. Thats the coverage everyone wants - not the crap 2.5g or worse coverage that forms most of the AT&T footprint.
If the truth hurts - don't sue - upgrade your POS network.
The only thin I feel bad about it this makes it less likely the iPhone will be seen on a decent network in the US anytime soon.
I've seen the commercial many times and it seems truthful and accurate to me.
They clearly state 3G coverage. Thats the coverage everyone wants - not the crap 2.5g or worse coverage that forms most of the AT&T footprint.
If the truth hurts - don't sue - upgrade your POS network.
The only thin I feel bad about it this makes it less likely the iPhone will be seen on a decent network in the US anytime soon.
Phonecalls always take priority, at least on my g1 with t mobile. It kicks you out of any app you're in to answer the call. It also drops the data services (if you're downloading something or connected to an instant messaging client) while you're in the phonecall.
ATT shouldn't say a d@!@ thing since their service sucks even in their 3g coverage areas. 
I'd like to see this go to trial and Verizon prove in a court of law just how bad the ATT coverage is.
And, suing for loss of revenue due to an advertising campaign from a competitor. . . .Seriously? Isn't that how it is supposed to work? Verizon isn't misleading anyone and I bet they could have a line full of ATT customers running out of the courthouse to testify about "not a lot of bars in a lot of places."
And where the heck is my tethering?!?!?!
I'd like to see this go to trial and Verizon prove in a court of law just how bad the ATT coverage is.
And, suing for loss of revenue due to an advertising campaign from a competitor. . . .Seriously? Isn't that how it is supposed to work? Verizon isn't misleading anyone and I bet they could have a line full of ATT customers running out of the courthouse to testify about "not a lot of bars in a lot of places."
And where the heck is my tethering?!?!?!
Not at all. Verizon is the leader in coverage overall. AT&T isn't close. However that doesn't mean that there can't be issues here and there in isolated areas. We are talking nationwide here, not in small pockets here and there.
The iPhone 3G and 3GS are 3G network devices. To get their best performance, you need a 3G network, NOT a 2.5G network.
So Verizon is right to show maps of comparible 3G coverage.
If anything, AT&T should have complaints filed against it for not showing 3G coverage on their website, as it misleads customers with its coverage map which just shows data coverage without explaining which technology.
Here is the UK, carriers must colour code their maps to show the rates expected in each area. I'm not convinced that they are entirely accurate and take into account coverage within buildings and other local obstructions, but they are close.
If AT&T want to retain customers, they need to increase the rate of 3G rollout. Complaining aint going to do it!
So Verizon is right to show maps of comparible 3G coverage.
If anything, AT&T should have complaints filed against it for not showing 3G coverage on their website, as it misleads customers with its coverage map which just shows data coverage without explaining which technology.
Here is the UK, carriers must colour code their maps to show the rates expected in each area. I'm not convinced that they are entirely accurate and take into account coverage within buildings and other local obstructions, but they are close.
If AT&T want to retain customers, they need to increase the rate of 3G rollout. Complaining aint going to do it!
AT&T: "If you cannot compete, SUE!"
Yet MORE proof AT&T is a dinosaur! It's the SCO of wireless... ;-)
Yet MORE proof AT&T is a dinosaur! It's the SCO of wireless... ;-)
The map clearly shows 3G coverage. I don't understand why AT&T is upset. They were the ones that deployed the 3G coverage in the first place.
Verizon defines “3G” between 600 kbps and 1.4 Mbps.
http://phones.verizonwireless.com/3g/
AT&T defines “3G” as anything over 135 kbps, and “EDGE” between 75-135 kbps. I assume anything below 75 kbps is “GPRS,” which AT&T conveniently lumps in with EDGE on their coverage map.
http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/why/technology/edge.jsp
First of all, I would like to know why the FCC hasn’t regulated what can be called “3G” or not. Secondly, there’s a huge gap between speeds on both sides.
Why hasn’t AT&T bolstered their “best” 3G coverage, anyway? It’s not like Verizon has always had a blanket of 3G coverage. They’ve worked hard by deploying more towers and buying up smaller cell carriers (like Alltel) to achieve what they have now.
I’ve used AT&T since the mid-90’s when they were called Southwestern Bell Wireless, but I hope Verizon wins this round.
http://phones.verizonwireless.com/3g/
AT&T defines “3G” as anything over 135 kbps, and “EDGE” between 75-135 kbps. I assume anything below 75 kbps is “GPRS,” which AT&T conveniently lumps in with EDGE on their coverage map.
http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/why/technology/edge.jsp
First of all, I would like to know why the FCC hasn’t regulated what can be called “3G” or not. Secondly, there’s a huge gap between speeds on both sides.
Why hasn’t AT&T bolstered their “best” 3G coverage, anyway? It’s not like Verizon has always had a blanket of 3G coverage. They’ve worked hard by deploying more towers and buying up smaller cell carriers (like Alltel) to achieve what they have now.
I’ve used AT&T since the mid-90’s when they were called Southwestern Bell Wireless, but I hope Verizon wins this round.
Concede the battle, win the war
AT&T should run an ad campaign showing just how much it would cost to use Verizon's 3g network, given lack of unlimited data plans or the lack of WiFi/GPS support in the provided phones. compared to iPhone's free access to starbucks hotspots. It's easy to maintain a network when you don't let people use it.
AT&T should run an ad campaign showing just how much it would cost to use Verizon's 3g network, given lack of unlimited data plans or the lack of WiFi/GPS support in the provided phones. compared to iPhone's free access to starbucks hotspots. It's easy to maintain a network when you don't let people use it.
Well I just switch over from Verizon and I get better coverage with At&T than than with Verizon, so to teach your own.
How in earth is this misleading?
Maybe because Verizon does not have 3G coverage in all those areas. Fact is in some of those areas Verizon doesn't even have voice coverage. Also Verizon is counting its sub 3G area but not AT&Ts edge. The real fact is edge coverage is often faster than Verizons 3G.
This is why I will not own an iPhone until they get off the AT&T network. Since the introduction of the iPhone they have not increased their 3G coverage in North Carolina any. Plus, if you get off the highway or interstate your lucky to get Edge. I switched to Sprint now. I do miss the iPhone, but I love the coverage Sprint has in my area. 3G Speeds even in the area I hunt, which is in the boondocks. Which normally with AT&T could not even send a text. On top of this my plan cost $110.50 a month for unlimited text, umlited data, 1500 anytime minutes, Free anytime mobile to any mobile number in the US, free Sprint Navigation, free NFL Mobile, and Free Nascar App. What does AT&T have to offer me? Just the iPhone. I will get a Palm Pre and Be much happier than paying over $200 a month for comparable service throuth AT&T.
ATT whining ...
ATT is whining ... if they had 3G rolled out, they would not have a competitor taking advantage of their problem.
I have complained numerous times to ATT about 3G not being available where I live (which is NOT in the boonies), but they keep giving excuses. I've been asking about 3G for 2 years, and they kept telling me it will be this summer or 6 more months, or blah, blah, blah.
This time, it's because they have to wait for approval to do adjustments on cell towers owned by the carrier they acquired a year ago.
I'm through with ATT if they don't get their "last century" attitude and mode of operation fixed. Apple, are you listening? Add a second carrier so I can switch.
Oh, and ATT ... are you listening?
ATT is whining ... if they had 3G rolled out, they would not have a competitor taking advantage of their problem.
I have complained numerous times to ATT about 3G not being available where I live (which is NOT in the boonies), but they keep giving excuses. I've been asking about 3G for 2 years, and they kept telling me it will be this summer or 6 more months, or blah, blah, blah.
This time, it's because they have to wait for approval to do adjustments on cell towers owned by the carrier they acquired a year ago.
I'm through with ATT if they don't get their "last century" attitude and mode of operation fixed. Apple, are you listening? Add a second carrier so I can switch.
Oh, and ATT ... are you listening?
I agree that the ads are misleading as it suggests that if you don't have 3G you don't have anything, like the lady sitting on the bench missing the meeting with her 3 friends who seemed to go to a cafe instead (did I interpret that ad right?)... but that being said I have a good laught at the tag line "there is a map for that".