'The Truth Hurts': Verizon Zings AT&T in Advertising Spat

[CWallace]

I'd like to see some traffic modeling done on what would happen to Verizon's network with AT&T's data traffic There's a reason why Verizon slammed the door on Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

Exactly.

Toss a few million iPhones consuming a few terrabytes of data on Verizon's network and see how well it holds up.

Yes, AT&T's service is clearly less than desirable in many areas and AT&T should continue to focus on improving it's performance in those areas rather then engage in silly tit-for-tats with Verizon.

But Verizon's network is not nearly as stressed as AT&Ts, both due to lack of high-data customers and the current technical inability to handle voice and data calls from a device simultaneously.

 

[ChazUK]

I've never had any call reliability problems on AT&T, but I know there are users who do (as there are users that have call reliability problems on Verizon - it's true!).

I acknowledge this but it just shows that anecdotal situations mean bugger all to the majority of people.

Say you want to email someone on your iPhone whilst using a GPS app? Get ready to close the app down before emailing the person. We can all make up some crazy situations to suit all sides of the equation.

I for one am glad that in the UK we use GSM (so the data/voice thing isn't an issue), have generally good coverage and that I now own a phone that can fully multitask

 

[Macsterguy]

Ah, so the 256MB ceiling isn't a limitation worth acknowledging, eh? Whatever.



I'm actually rooting for Android as I see it ultimately as a Windows Mobile killer. And anyone who can thwart Microsoft's control of a market is a friend of mine.

But I do think the hardware fragmentation ("all tastes and needs") for Android will become more liability than advantage in the long run, as will its lack of a cohesive design philosophy - with every manufacturer making Android "its own." I think the integrated model (a la iPhone/iPod, Zune) is going to be the most consumer-friendly offering in the mobile phone space.

Good points

 

[libertyforall]

GO VERIZON! ;-)

AT&T is a dinosaur!

 

[rockland]

AT&T vs Verizon -- battle between two evils!

Both companies are so loathsome, so nasty, and so incompetent that I'm rooting for both to somehow lose this battle.

I can't wait for the FCC to show some teeth and protect consumers from these outrageous extortionary contracts. Let me just buy the phone I want! And choose the carrier I want, for as long as I want.

The technical differences between networks should be easier to navigate, carriers should no longer "subsidize" the costs of the handsets, and consumers should no longer be slaves to the carriers' whims -- and in the case of AT&T to their mediocre service and overpricing.

FCC? FTC? Will the real consumer agency please stand up and protect consumers, rather than oligopolists?

 

[kdarling]

Maybe someone could explain to me how high data use affects the coverage area and dropped voice calls. I would think coverage and dropped voice would have more to do with the amount and quality of towers then the 3G data network being taxed.

Excellent question.

2G systems often used timeslots. Basically, only one phone or the tower could talk at a time. This has obvious user and speed limitations in a cell.

CDMA radios, which are used by both ATT and Verizon for 3G, steps past 2G timeslot (one talker at a time) limitations by basically allowing everyone to instead talk at the same time.

The usual analogy is to a roomful of talking people. You are able to "tune" your ear to listen to just one person.

However, as more people talk, each person has to talk louder to be heard. The rising noise level causes some side effects, a primary one being that the working size of the cell gets smaller. (The in-out change of usable size according to load is called "cell breathing".)

(z x T x z) = starting Tower radius() with users of type x and z.

z (xxTxx) z = smaller Tower radius with more users.

Note the Z users are now outside of that Tower's coverage. So...

1) Phones on the contracting edges have to offload to a different cell or be dropped.

2) If the cells are poorly planned for CDMA because they were originally set up for GSM non-3G (e.g. many ATT towers), the cells can contract enough to open up dead spots = those phone calls are dropped.

3) New callers can be refused because the noise level is too high.

Now the key: for GSM 3G, both voice and data calls are part of this talking party. So more users of either kind, affects both.

Verizon chose to separate voice and data, so data loads cannot affect voice calls.

 

[CWallace]

I'm actually rooting for Android as I see it ultimately as a Windows Mobile killer. And anyone who can thwart Microsoft's control of a market is a friend of mine.

But I do think the hardware fragmentation ("all tastes and needs") for Android will become more liability than advantage in the long run, as will its lack of a cohesive design philosophy - with every manufacturer making Android "its own." I think the integrated model (a la iPhone/iPod, Zune) is going to be the most consumer-friendly offering in the mobile phone space.

Microsoft doesn't control the smartphone market because Windows Mobile is so fragmented. They have been unsuccessful in leveraging their PC monopoly position into a monopoly position on other platforms, including PDAs, smartphones, video game devices, set-top TV boxes, etc.

And the same problem is going to afflict Android. Windows Mobile is (in)famous for effectively requiring a new phone to get a new OS and the features it brings. Android is looking no different, with the Gen 1 Android phones said to be not able to be updated to Android OS 2.0 (or if they are, lacking a number of the features).

Since Microsoft makes their money off the Windows Mobile OS, they don't care if people have to buy a new phone - heck, they likely encourage it because that means another WM license sale with the new handset. And with the OEMs offering so many phones within their own lines, trying to figure out an OS upgrade strategy is too much of a hassle for them - and they'd rather sell you a new phone with a new contract, anyway.

Google is giving the Android OS away, so they don't have a vested interest in forcing users to buy new handsets to generate new license fees. Instead, Google is making their money off the advertisements bundled with their Android applications as well as selling the demographic data. But since they don't make money off the handsets, they are not trying to bring any cohesion to the handset market, instead giving the OEMS and carriers free reign to do what they want - as long as they have those ad-supported Google apps installed (and even that seems optional, since an "Android with Google Phone" has the apps and an "Android" phone doesn't).

 

[iPhoneNYC]

Recently there has been a great quote rolling around about Goldman Sachs which I also offer as appropriate to ATT's position in the cell-phone market: "is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money." For two and a half years ATT has delivered sub-par service at high rates on the iPhone. Can't we please open this up to other carriers???

 

[LagunaSol]

There's a reason why Verizon slammed the door on Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

The reason Verizon slammed the door is because Jobs wouldn't let them call his baby the V-Phone with the V-OS (including V-Mail, V-Address Book, V-Etc.).

The pre-iPhone Verizon was much different than the "Crap, we need to change our philosophy to compete with the iPhone" Verizon of today.

If anything, Verizon fans should be praising Apple for forcing Verizon to change its control-freak ways.

(Yes, now someone needs to force Apple to change its control-freak ways - perhaps that someone will be Android.)

Both companies are so loathsome, so nasty, and so incompetent that I'm rooting for both to somehow lose this battle.

Agree 100%. Both AT&T and Verizon (oh, and Sprint too) suck rocks. Perhaps Google will roll out a free wireless service too?

 

[kryptonianjorel]

Both companies are so loathsome, so nasty, and so incompetent that I'm rooting for both to somehow lose this battle.

I can't wait for the FCC to show some teeth and protect consumers from these outrageous extortionary contracts. Let me just buy the phone I want! And choose the carrier I want, for as long as I want.

The technical differences between networks should be easier to navigate, carriers should no longer "subsidize" the costs of the handsets, and consumers should no longer be slaves to the carriers' whims -- and in the case of AT&T to their mediocre service and overpricing.

FCC? FTC? Will the real consumer agency please stand up and protect consumers, rather than oligopolists?

How are the contracts extortionary? I'd love to hear this one. Don't want a subsidy? Don't get one, nobody is forcing you. I, like many others, enjoy buying a $600 phone for $200 when I sign a contract.

How are we slaves? Because we signed contracts? If you don't want a contract, go prepaid or contractless. Don't like the price, pick a different carrier.

Your points are moot

 

[akadmon]

No complaints about AT&T here in eastern Mass. I get decent 3CG reception in at least 95% of the areas, probably more. Can't remember last time I saw the E on my iPhone or had a dropped call.

You think AT&T is evil? Good luck with Verizon! In my experience, Verizon customer service is far worse than AT&T, and the company is greedy as hell and uber control minded. Christ, before I got rid of my landline, my phone bill was routinely ~$70 for "unlimited local calling" <SNORT>. And don't get me started on their long distance rates! Now I pay half this much for unlimted world calling on Vonage+Skype.

 

[HyperX13]

I don't know about Verizon. I travel in car quite a bit. Whenever I drive through Minneapolis, my Verizon phone would drop calls in at least 6 areas. ATT and TMobile would stay on. As a matter of fact I was on a long conference call using ATT between Madison and Chicago and not a single drop for entire 2 hours.

I will say that Verizons data cards are excellent and ATT data cards are pathetic.

I also like the flexibility of taking my phone to Europe and it working there.

My issues with ATT is customer support. It seems like I am always talked down to. Tmobile has the best customer support bar none.

 

[bergmef]

hey genius, i don't tell you what kind of toilet paper to wipe your big butt with so don't tell me what cell carrier to use.

not that it's your business, but i was with Cingular before AT&T bought it. as others have stated with their experiences, my AT&T service has been flawless. i'm not saying AT&T is perfect. hell, even i hate their customer service. cingular had great CS by the way and never any problems with the service.

also, what the hell does this have to do with apple fanboys?! my iphone has also worked as advertised and it's what works for me. no one forced me to buy it, not apple, not at&t. i made a decision to buy it, because i didn't like any phone i had up to that point, and i believed it would do all the things i felt i had been wanting from a phone.

if you don't like iphones, and you don't like AT&T then there are plenty of other options out there for you, BUT i don't need you getting up in my business. do whatever the hell you want.

ON TOPIC now, since you couldn't be:
i think verizon and at&t are both right in this case. at&t definitely doesn't have as large an area covered by 3G as verizon. verizon is right for calling them out on it. at the same time, i think verizon is being stupid to suggest that at&t can't demonstrate that any harm has come of these ads. WTF?! who are they kidding with an argument like that. if no harm to at&t was ever going to come of these ads, then why would verizon have invested in them. that's the whole point of them, to get people to not like at&t and go to verizon. DUH!!!

it's pretty obvious that verizon would definitely gain the advantage if consumers misinterpreted the ads and thought that at&t didn't have coverage at all in areas that weren't mark. hell, lots of people don't understand what 3G even is, let alone, that there is something called 2G/edge to fill in the gaps. verizon definitely wins here when the consumer is ignorant in this situation.

all that said, i don't think it means at&t has any legal argument. if it bothers them that much, they should fight back with "better" more detailed, educational, advertising of their own and point out that they actually have "more" coverage than verizon, and maybe even demonstrate how they are constantly adding 3g coverage (if they in fact are).

I don't think it's to get new customers now, or that it's saying the iphone is bad. I think over the next 8 months, verizon will be driving the point home that 'ATandT' is not as good as them. Next year when 3G for ATandT is built out a bit better, you'll see 'hey, look at our LTE map, it's as good as the ATandT 3G map was when you were buying the iphone with them'. For verizon, they finished the initial LTE testing with 10 towers each in Seattle and Boston. ATand T announced they are moving up the initial testing for LTE to 2011. Bad news is they will be a year or 2 behind (minimum) on the LTE front. Good news is, verizon is the beta tester for all the new chipsets. My guess, you'll see the iphone on verizon middle of next year with cdma/LTE/svdo (not the mega chip, seperate chips), or at that time it will be promise with a released date being named. The big disclaimer is that the report of the contract length between apple and ATandT must be accurate (mid 2010). Otherwise, all bets are off.

just my 2cents, made up completely in my head (except the LTE testing and ATandT's LTE announcement).

EDIT -> disclaimer, I use verizon, I tested them all and because of the valley I live in, verizon is the only one with a signal right now. I continue to bug people that come over 'who is your cell service with ... any bars?'

 

[Rodimus Prime]

CDMA is inferior technology, which is why it's being dumped. Bell and Telus in Canada just dumped it and moved to GSM. Why should Apple jump onto an inferior and dying technology?

Again as it has been pointed out before CDMA is not an inferior technology. It is the current technology everyone is using. 3G is a CDMA base tech. Now yes there are 2 standards of CDMA but still it is CDMA and everyone switching over to CDMA because it is a better technology than was GSM originally was based on. GSM standard only became the world leader not because it was better but because they did not have to pay royalties to Quadcom.

****kkk you Verizon, why can't your useless network use voice and data at the same time. Why don't you mention that in your wonderful ads.

Ok, yes AT&T's network cannot support the amount of data being consumed on it. But we have to remember that CDMA is old tech compared to GPRS. Verizon 3G does not allow simultaneous voice and data. That means if your surfing the web, using a web-based app, or downloading email, you will not get any calls. You cannot be talking on the phone and surfing or emailing at the same time. = Dealbreaker for me. AT&T should be responding with their 3G advantages.

People keep saying that but lets be real hear. How often do you really need both data and phone call at the same time. The answer is pretty rarely. I have a curve 8900 (Edge) and the lack of pulling data at the the same time I am on the phone has little effect on me. Yes it is annoying at times but for the most part not a huge deal. If I really need to pull data while on the phone I just try to make sure I have WIFI and it solves the problem.

One thing no one though about is Verizon set up which does not allow Data while on the phone in some ways is a great way to help the network. Instead of requiring 4 connections back to the tower like ATT set up does (2 upstream, 2 down) they only require 2. Doubles the amount of room per tower since only 2 of the frequencies are lock up compared to ATT 4.

Remember all cell phones are nothing more than very advance 2 ways raidos so the principles work out exactly the same.

 

[kdarling]

The reason Verizon slammed the door is because Jobs wouldn't let them call his baby the V-Phone with the V-OS (including V-Mail, V-Address Book, V-Etc.).

Cute, but of course incorrect. And Verizon didn't slam anything.

Apple was the one making demands, including where the phone could be sold (ironically, it's now sold in all those places they originally refused).

Apple tried from mid-2005 to mid-2006 to get Verizon to sign up for a phone that didn't even exist yet. Eventually Apple gave up and signed an exclusive with Cingular, who had nothing to lose.

 

[mattster16]

Plenty - Google - Droid reviews (Oh and you will probably use Google to do that) You know, Google:
• Google, the maker of Android.
• Google, the best voice recognition on the planet (gee, voice recognition + smart phone = good things)
• Google - Free navigation on the Droid

Need more data? Google it...

I asked for Data, not Droid reviews. You said the race between Android and iPhone was close - I'd like those numbers.

 

[LagunaSol]

Cute, but of course incorrect. And Verizon didn't slam anything.

Apple was the one making demands, including where the phone could be sold (ironically, it's now sold in all those places they originally refused).

Apple tried from mid-2005 to mid-2006 to get Verizon to sign up for a phone that didn't even exist yet. Eventually Apple gave up and signed an exclusive with Cingular, who had nothing to lose.

Yes, I'm sure Verizon had no demands of its own (namely over the software).

It looks like the "nothing to lose" carrier was the big winner in this deal.

 

[sterlingindigo]

Damage Control

Spend the money on the needed upgrades, not the defense.

 

[Bafflefish]

And the same problem is going to afflict Android. Windows Mobile is (in)famous for effectively requiring a new phone to get a new OS and the features it brings. Android is looking no different, with the Gen 1 Android phones said to be not able to be updated to Android OS 2.0 (or if they are, lacking a number of the features).

To be fair, there are features (MMS, anyone?) that Apple and AT&T have rolled out for the iPhone, that not all models support (the original EDGE-based iPhone still has to depend upon receiving a text message with a URL and username/password to access MMS messages).

 

[LagunaSol]

People keep saying that but lets be real hear. How often do you really need both data and phone call at the same time.

More often than I need 4 simultaneously-running third-party apps, actually.

 

[Bafflefish]

More often than I need 4 simultaneously-running third-party apps, actually.

How are you running four third-party apps on the iPhone at once?

 

[LagunaSol]

How are you running four third-party apps on the iPhone at once?

I'm not of course - but running four third-party apps simultaneously on the Droid seems to be a big selling point in Verizon's marketing.

 

[kryptonianjorel]

I'm not of course - but running four third-party apps simultaneously on the Droid seems to be a big selling point in Verizon's marketing.

Its nice being able to use my web browser without having to close pandora....

 

[Bafflefish]

If anything, Verizon fans should be praising Apple for forcing Verizon to change its control-freak ways.

Back around 2004-2007, just about the only carrier that wasn't really a "control-freak" was T-Mobile. Everyone else tended to put fairly great restrictions on devices, and T-Mobile was just about the only one who allowed phones sold by them, for their network, to take advantage of features others (such as Verizon, Cingular, Sprint, etc.) locked out: Bluetooth syncing to a PC, custom ringtones from your PC (not having to purchase them), tethering (although eventually they ended that).

How exactly has Apple forced Verizon to do anything? From what I can tell, the iPhone is still one of the most restrictive devices available (unless you jailbreak it).

 

[ChazUK]

Its nice being able to use my web browser without having to close pandora....

This is why I dropped my iPhone too.

Last.fm audio streaming whilst browsing, emailing, texting and whatever else I want to do = Heaven for me.