[ebatti]

There is a fantastic complaint letter posted on Lionfish Pictures. Everyone should copy it and mail it to AT&T. It summarizes the double standard AT&T applies to iPhone users quite well.

[reader50]

Please don't do it - you don't have to get disgruntled. They'll catch you after wards. The big trial, the publicity, the million-dollar book deal, the jail time. Not worth it, think of your family.

[ctt1wbw]

You forgot the children.

[ghporter]

What about us gruntled AT&T customers? I even got my iPhone from an AT&T store. The service there was very good, and my telephone service (iPhone and other phones) has been quite good.

Funny how offering a special product can lead to charges of "double standard." If it were not such a desirable product, AT&T wouldn't have nearly the complaints. And they certainly have plenty of other smart phones, "pretty bright" phones and plain old phones to make people happy. I've never felt like a second-class customer because of my iPhone-quite the contrary.

Yep, I'm gruntled.

[QSilver]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

What about us gruntled AT&T customers?

I'm with gh on this one. I've had my iPhone for 2 years as of last week and the AT&T service has been just great.

The only only time I have trouble with service is when I expect to, such as when I'm camping in the hinterlands. That's when it's good to have a mix of service providers. Sometimes, someone's Sprint phone will work, sometimes it's the T-Mobile phone, and so on. I've been in places where I get 0-1 bars, can't make a call, but have enough signal to download a weather report and radar map.

[turtle777]

Uhm, SPAM, anyone ?

-t

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Uhm, SPAM, anyone ?

-t

Yeah, I think this might have something to do with it. But we can have fun with the subject anyway.

[ebatti]

Those of you who are gruntled, are just unaware of how poorly AT&T treats you.

Blackberry users on AT&T get tethering. Why not iPhone? It is an available feature in the OS. But AT&T blocks it.

And why can a Blackberry user stream video via Slingbox to their phone on 3G, but not us iPhone users?

Just try and get a good signal anywhere outside a major metro area. Their 3G coverage is as bad at the "There's a map for that" campaign suggests.

[turtle777]

Why is this a problem ?

Anyone who wants to get a Blackberry can do so.

I'd rather live w/o tethering and Slingbox than having to use a Blackberry.

-t

[ghporter]

Tethering is available, albeit not officially, on an iPhone. Why would I want to stream video to the tiny screen on my iPhone when I can watch video from home on my huge screen?

Further, I have yet to see a problem related to 3G coverage holes anywhere I go-frankly a lot of those "holes" are places so little populated that I'm surprised anyone built a 3G infrastructure for that area. If the only way I had to connect to the world was my iPhone, I might have problems with AT&T's 3G coverage. But when I travel, I stay at hotels with free WiFi. Or I go somewhere to be away from the rest of the world, and then I don't want connectivity.

Your arguments are specious at the very least. When outside a major metro area, what sort of "need" for a strong connection have you had that could not be handled by free WiFi at a roadside rest stop (most Texas rest areas have free WiFi) or restaurant (McDonalds, etc.)?

[Cold Warrior]

@glenn,
do you find the attwifi auto-login feature works well? I'm considering an iPhone and there are many attwifi locations throughout the areas I frequent.

[hab]

I live in Marin (just north of the Golden Gate Bridge) and work in San Francisco during the day. My problem is with simple connection and low data rates. During certain times of the day (especially during the evening commute) I cannot even complete a phone call presumably due to a jammed network. During those times I have to turn off the 3G and go with Edge for any kind of reliable service. I love the phone/apps/sync/integration with iTunes, iCal, and Contacts and am committed to Apple. But the ATT network service in this urban area stinks. Adding tethering and MMS to an already jammed network will only make things worse if that is even possible. Put me into the disgruntled camp.

[Eriamjh]

I'm pretty well gruntled. I guess it's because I live in a decent coverage market.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior 

@glenn,
do you find the attwifi auto-login feature works well? I'm considering an iPhone and there are many attwifi locations throughout the areas I frequent.

Once you enter a password for a WiFi site (like a bookstore or cafe), the iPhone keeps it just like your home WiFi password. It's absolutely seamless.

There may be a difference between my experience and that of others, because I'm also an AT&T DSL customer-and I got the free WiFi already. But everything I have seen indicates that it's just as smooth as I describe for people that aren't DSL/UVerse broadband subscribers.

[ebatti]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Tethering is available, albeit not officially, on an iPhone. Why would I want to stream video to the tiny screen on my iPhone when I can watch video from home on my huge screen?

For example, when I was sequestered away at a lake house for 4 weeks this summer. There was no TV, no internet and no free wifi. I would like to be able to tether to check email, and manage my portfolio. And to be able to catch a show or two on my DVR would have been nice.

More important, why do they let one group of customers (who pay less for service) have these features, but not iPhone users? Does that make sense to any of you?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ebatti 

For example, when I was sequestered away at a lake house for 4 weeks this summer. [...] I would like to [...] manage my portfolio.

Does not compute.

-t

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ebatti 

For example, when I was sequestered away at a lake house for 4 weeks this summer. There was no TV, no internet and no free wifi. I would like to be able to tether to check email, and manage my portfolio. And to be able to catch a show or two on my DVR would have been nice.

More important, why do they let one group of customers (who pay less for service) have these features, but not iPhone users? Does that make sense to any of you?

Usually, someone is sequestered for a reason. Jurors are sequestered, and when they are, they are not allowed access to TV, news, etc. At a lake house? That sounds like a vacation to me. I can see being somewhat bored without the day-to-day distractions of newspapers, TV and such, but I don't see this as being "maltreatment" by AT&T. Far from it; I'd rather they spent their money supporting multiple customers on each cell site in town than covering areas that have populations in the single digits per square mile.

The reason AT&T has provided for why iPhone customers aren't currently supported with tethering, which makes a lot of sense by the way, is that iPhone users could potentially saturate the data network by tethering, and AT&T wants to improve and expand their infrastructure to prevent that from being a concern before they officially support tethering. But since you obviously have a broad background in this subject, I also assume that this is not anything new to you.

It's hard to imagine Blackberry users being able to overwhelm the AT&T data network they way iPhone users could; Blackberry equipment and apps are way more text oriented and there are actually fewer "hard core" Blackberry data users; it's not been a popular consumer phone but rather an "essential business tool" (often known as "the leash the boss uses to yank your chain with"). The only heavy users of Blackberry units that I've ever known were higher level executives, and they were constantly checking on minute details with them, afraid they'd miss something they'd get in trouble for.

Your assertion that AT&T is somehow prejudiced by allowing a relatively few users with relatively "light" data requirements to tether while not allowing iPhone users to do so is as specious as your earlier suggestions that somehow AT&T hates the cash cow that is the iPhone.

[ebatti]

You are missing the point. The iPhone is a device that is meant to have these features. It doesn't matter why I want to use them, just that I want to. The device should operate as intended. If AT&T has a network that cannot support the iPhone, they should not offer it. It was bad business to enter into an agreement with Apple to provide a service which they clearly cannot.

iPhone users are typically power users. They should have a power network behind them.

[turtle777]

I want a pink pony.



-t

[msuper69]

Stupid letter.

Best to switch to another phone and another carrier.

If enough people do this, ATT will take notice when their bottom line is affected negatively.

Anything else, especially a lame letter like that one will do nothing. Golly gee whiz why don't we start an online petition?

[Simon]

Originally Posted by ebatti 

iPhone users are typically power users. They should have a power network behind them.

I don't think that's unreasonable at all. In fact, I'd add that at least in the US these customers are also power payers so I can see why they demand a power network.

What surprises me is how many people (read customers, not sales people) jump to defend AT&T. As long as nothing entirely unreasonable is being asked for I can't see why you wouldn't demand your carrier improve. With the iPhone you're locked to AT&T anyway so they better deliver. By not demanding better service from your provider you're ensuring they don't even try to make the effort.

And before somebody tells me that it's all about the fear of an overloaded network, let me say this. If that's really the problem how come all the apologists are calling for a continued ban on tethering rather than on AT&T finally expanding their network to a sufficient level? How long has the iPhone been shipping? How long have they had the time to fix their third world network? There are countless Asian and European networks that prove this can all be handled to the customer's satisfaction every single day w/o overcharging. Why is it that in the US, even though we otherwise take every chance to point out our superiority over other countries, why is it that when it comes to cell phone networks we defend a status quo that resembles Nigeria's more closely than pretty much any other industrialized country's?

[turtle777]

I really don't get all the bitching.

If anyone doesn't like AT&T, he should switch or STFU.

The constant whining about how bad and evil AT&T is is really annoying beyond anything.

-t

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Simon 

What surprises me is how many people (read customers, not sales people) jump to defend AT&T. As long as nothing entirely unreasonable is being asked for I can't see why you wouldn't demand your carrier improve. With the iPhone you're locked to AT&T anyway so they better deliver. By not demanding better service from your provider you're ensuring they don't even try to make the effort.

And before somebody tells me that it's all about the fear of an overloaded network, let me say this. If that's really the problem how come all the apologists are calling for a continued ban on tethering rather than on AT&T finally expanding their network to a sufficient level? How long has the iPhone been shipping? How long have they had the time to fix their third world network? There are countless Asian and European networks that prove this can all be handled to the customer's satisfaction every single day w/o overcharging. Why is it that in the US, even though we otherwise take every chance to point out our superiority over other countries, why is it that when it comes to cell phone networks we defend a status quo that resembles Nigeria's more closely than pretty much any other industrialized country's?

Let me point out that I am not "defending" AT&T. I am, on the other hand, refuting that this huge corporation is intentionally "being mean" to specific users by not supporting a particular feature at the present time, particularly since there isn't a single US network that is up to the standards for coverage, availability and capacity that many European users take for granted. I think AT&T is glacial in getting up to speed, and that they seriously underestimated the popularity and demand for the iPhone.

I DO demand better service, but complaining about how I didn't have tethering while "away from it all" at some lake house is certainly not the way to go; why should a mindless, soulless corporation care about one customer's summer vacation? Instead of this (which I see as whining), I contact AT&T sales on a regular basis, asking when new features on the network will be available (and what they'll cost!), and not-subtly reminding the sales people that there are a lot of customers out here who see European carriers offering a lot more features, so why can't the biggest telecom of all manage to offer the same? That's the kind of activism AT&T understands. The only thing to do that would be more effective is to buy stock and then lambaste the rest of the stockholders about how the company is not cashing in on these features at the next stockholder meeting.

Finally, when a US customer signs up for an iPhone, he/she does so understanding the limitations that AT&T places on the service. Considering that AT&T has been the carrier that has offered the most features with the least crippling of devices (remember the Moto RAZR?), I think we're only waiting for these features to be "compelling" to AT&T, and perhaps for more network upgrades to be in place.

But I still think that whining and complaining are not the way to go, and I certainly and utterly reject the OP's "conspiracy against iPhone users" assertions.

[Simon]

Regarding the AT&T network it's quite interesting to see what the NYT's David Pogue had to say on the Droid.

AT&T's poor network is really killing the iPhone's popularity and Pogue points this out. As someone frequently in NYC, the iPhone is useless as a phone here. I know many people who have an iPhone and still need to use a Verizon phone for phone calls. The Droid will be tempting to them. I've had similar experiences in SF.

Pogue on "App Phone" Droid: Toss up vs. iPhone | 9 to 5 Mac

[ebatti]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Finally, when a US customer signs up for an iPhone, he/she does so understanding the limitations that AT&T places on the service. Considering that AT&T has been the carrier that has offered the most features with the least crippling of devices (remember the Moto RAZR?), I think we're only waiting for these features to be "compelling" to AT&T, and perhaps for more network upgrades to be in place.

Actually, not true. When I got the original iPhone, I did not have any knowledge of how they intended to treat iPhone users. There was no information available to warn me that they would prevent features from being used because their network couldn't support them.

For everyone who says, just leave AT&T, I would if the iPhone worked on another network. It seems the bastards have me over the proverbial barrel. I want to use that phone, but alas, it only (partly) works on AT&T.

(Note: This is kind of like DirecTv having me over that same damn barrel since they are the only ones who offer NFL Sunday Ticket).

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ebatti 

Actually, not true. When I got the original iPhone, I did not have any knowledge of how they intended to treat iPhone users. There was no information available to warn me that they would prevent features from being used because their network couldn't support them.
.

BS. When you got the original iPhone (which was EDGE, btw), nobody promised you tethering or Slingbox streaming. Quit making sh!t up.

-t

[Mojo]

I have had some problems with the sales associates at a local ATT store. A couple of times they neglected to inform me that I would be charged a $36 "service fee." I received wrong information regarding the multi-paring capability of a Bluetooth headset I purchased. Porting-over my home and office numbers took more time than it should have because of how a sales associate set up the cell phone accounts; if I hadn't checked on what was holding up the process I would probably still be waiting.

I am likely forgetting at least another couple of screw-ups...

On the other hand, when I have contacted ATT regarding the $36 fee it has been waived because the sales associate did not inform me about it.

I have come to the conclusion that ATT store employees are there to sell phones, plans and accessories, period. Providing service before and after the sale isn't part of their job description. If you happen upon a reasonably knowledgeable sales associate count yourself lucky. You can be sure that I will be more careful when it comes to dealing with the ATT store in the future.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Mojo 

I have had some problems with the sales associates at a local ATT store. A couple of times they neglected to inform me that I would be charged a $36 "service fee." I received wrong information regarding the multi-paring capability of a Bluetooth headset I purchased. Porting-over my home and office numbers took more time than it should have because of how a sales associate set up the cell phone accounts; if I hadn't checked on what was holding up the process I would probably still be waiting.

I am likely forgetting at least another couple of screw-ups...

On the other hand, when I have contacted ATT regarding the $36 fee it has been waived because the sales associate did not inform me about it.

I have come to the conclusion that ATT store employees are there to sell phones, plans and accessories, period. Providing service before and after the sale isn't part of their job description. If you happen upon a reasonably knowledgeable sales associate count yourself lucky. You can be sure that I will be more careful when it comes to dealing with the ATT store in the future.

Sometimes the sales folks are indeed sales drones. Not all of them are, though. I have been fortunate enough to get very good, very customer-oriented sales associates at three different AT&T Stores, and that's meant that I kept going back to them. The whole "satisfied customers come back" bit works, and some sales people understand this. Others? Well, they don't stay selling the same thing for very long. Sorry you got borked by poor examples.

[ebatti]

The entire cellular industry is a scam.

Imagine if you bought a TV and it only got NBC.

Or a radio and it only got AM 1070.

Or a computer and you had to get internet from AOL.

No other consumer electronics device is forever linked to a single content provider.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ebatti 

The entire cellular industry is a scam.

Imagine if you bought a TV and it only got NBC.

Or a radio and it only got AM 1070.

Or a computer and you had to get internet from AOL.

No other consumer electronics device is forever linked to a single content provider.

You have the option of not playing their game. Simply don't have a cell phone and you won't be part of the scam. But you're wrong in suggesting that AT&T is "a single content provider." Quite the contrary; they are not providing content at all. They are the conduit through which the content is provided. And you agreed to this when you signed up for AT&T service in order to get an iPhone. Sorry, but them's the breaks. It is indeed their game and their back yard; if you want to play, you have to accept their rules.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by ebatti 

The entire cellular industry is a scam.

Imagine if you bought a TV and it only got NBC.

Or a radio and it only got AM 1070.

Or a computer and you had to get internet from AOL.

No other consumer electronics device is forever linked to a single content provider.

You've got it all wrong, along with most of your argument. It'd be like buying a TV that only accepted service from Comcast, a radio only accepting Siruis and not XM (Oh wait, that's how it is), and a computer only working with Comcast.

I understand what you're getting at, but that's the way things are done. This is not the free market you're looking for.

[Rumor]

[ghporter]

Sweet... While AT&T, the corporate entity, may be huge and soulless, it is staffed by real people-many of whom have a sense of humor.