November 13, 2009 2:40 PM PST

AT&T: Verizon ads are 'blatantly false'

by Marguerite Reardon
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 146 comments

AT&T wants to set the record straight about its 3G wireless coverage.

The company has placed a statement on its Web site defending itself against critical advertisements Verizon Wireless has been running that highlight areas of the country where AT&T lacks 3G coverage.

"We typically don't respond to competitors' advertising," AT&T said in its statement. "However, some recent ads from Verizon are so blatantly false and misleading that we want to set the record straight about AT&T's wireless-data coverage."

Verizon's initial advertisement, which began airing on TV a couple of weeks ago, mocks Apple's "there's an app for that" slogan. Instead, Verizon's advertisement says "there's a map for that."

The ad campaign shows two maps with red-and-white splotches. The white area indicates no 3G coverage, and the red indicates areas where 3G service is available. In the ad, Verizon shows an AT&T map that has lots of white spaces, whereas the Verizon map is almost covered in red.

AT&T has filed a lawsuit claiming that the ad is misleading because it implies that AT&T customers can't use their phones in areas where the carrier does not offer 3G wireless coverage.

Verizon has modified its ad slightly to indicate that the map applies only to 3G coverage and not regular 2.5G service, which is adequate for making voice calls and connecting to the wireless Internet at slower speeds.

But AT&T is still not happy with the adjustment, and the company wants Verizon to stop running the ads or to alter them further.

What's more, AT&T has added a complaint about a newer Verizon commercial, which characterizes the iPhone as a new arrival to the Isles of Misfit Toys, to the lawsuit. The Isles of Misfit Toys refers to an island where broken toys and misfits would go in the popular Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer Christmas special.

In the ad, a toy elephant asks the iPhone what it's doing with the misfits, since it has so many cool apps. The iPhone doesn't really answer, instead flashing the AT&T map, which indicates the spotty 3G coverage. All the toys seem to understand.

AT&T hasn't launched ads of its own to combat the Verizon commercials. But the company's statement on its Web site is its attempt to refute many of Verizon's claims. For example, AT&T points out that its data coverage reaches 303 million people, or 97 percent of the U.S. population, using a mix of wireless technologies. Of course, AT&T admits that not all of these customers are able to access the faster 3G network; only 75 percent of the U.S. population can get access to AT&T's 3G wireless network.

AT&T also emphasizes in its statement that it has twice as many smartphone customers as Verizon. And it says it offers the most popular smarpthone in the industry, the Apple iPhone. AT&T says it offers more mobile applications than its competitors. And finally, it points out that it has the fastest 3G wireless network in the nation, a claim some customers who use the service may question.

There's no question that Verizon's ads are hard-hitting. But it's difficult to say whether they have affected consumers' purchase decisions. Anecdotally, it looks like the ads might have helped Verizon win a few customers. One Motorola Droid customer I interviewed at a Verizon store in New York this week said he decided not to buy the iPhone because of the Verizon ads he saw on TV.

"I was considering the iPhone," said Henry Goodison, of the Bronx borough. "But I saw a commercial about AT&T's 3G coverage. It said, 'Here is AT&T's 3G coverage, and here is ours.' And I thought it would be better to have Verizon, if I travel to another state, where AT&T doesn't have 3G coverage."

Marguerite Reardon has been a CNET News reporter since 2004, covering cell phone services, broadband, citywide Wi-Fi, the Net neutrality debate, as well as the ongoing consolidation of the phone companies. E-mail Maggie.
Recent posts from Signal Strength
RIM beats expectations on strong BlackBerry sales
Biden to unveil $2 billion in broadband grants
FCC digs into broadband controversies
Wireless and broadcast industries begin spectrum debate
AT&T 3G service disruption hits San Francsico
GAO to FCC: Wireless users need more protection
Nokia to close its two U.S. flagship stores
AT&T considers incentives to curb heavy data usage
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 4 pages (146 Comments)
by mrcjacobs November 13, 2009 2:58 PM PST
The truth hurts huh AT&T? Fix your crappy network and your worries will be over. It's not as if VZ lied in their ads. Hell, they used your very own 3G coverage map to show that their 3G coverage is superior. Get over it!
Reply to this comment
by kewell82 November 13, 2009 3:35 PM PST
Agreed.
by szettervall November 13, 2009 4:01 PM PST
Can you read? The Verizon ads initially indicated that was AT&T's coverage map.
by NathanPiechocki November 13, 2009 4:18 PM PST
@szetterval: No... the ads ALWAYS compared 3G coverage; Verizon went back to make that even more abundantly clear. I'm neither an AT&T nor Verizon customer, but I understood the advertisements. They're using AT&T's OWN 3G coverage map to boot.
by Paul_Christie November 13, 2009 5:54 PM PST
All I know is that there is 3G coverage in Alaska. I noticed that there seem to be no spots on that region; Alaska is shown to be all white (supposedly Alaska has absolutely no coverage).
by solitare_pax November 13, 2009 6:41 PM PST
But the ad doesn't explicitly state that it is AT&T's 3G coverage area - to the average person who glimpses it, it looks like that it AT&T's total coverage area for data and voice.

Either way - AT&T ought to stop being so lazy and expand their coverage area.

And Apple ought to drop AT&T - its hurting their image.

Even without Verizon's ad.
by cp256 November 14, 2009 11:58 AM PST
They BOTH suck, but AT&T should stop whining and address their DEFICIENCY!

"It's not fair, they're saying bad true things about us! WAAAAAH!"
by alexpoho November 15, 2009 6:21 PM PST
I love how Apple runs all kinds of ads bashing Microsoft but when Verizon takes them on they go running to their mommy. Grow up Apple and fix your crap network.
by teraguru1 November 15, 2009 9:07 PM PST
funny part is both companies charge IDENTICALLY for their plans and there contracts of 2 years standard. I wonder if they are kissing cousins. DARN you telcos, GOOGLE had to invent a FREE OS for you and where are the SAVINGS for customers?? big fat liars.
by caseyboy November 15, 2009 11:05 PM PST
@alexpoho -

"I love how Apple runs all kinds of ads bashing Microsoft but when Verizon takes them on they go running to their mommy. Grow up Apple and fix your crap network."

While I use an iPhone and am very happy with it, I'll be the first to admit it's not perfect and there is room for improvement. And, I know there are plenty of people out there who don't like Apple and will jump on any chance they get to bash the company. But your comment is just plain stupid. First of all, Verizon didn't take on Apple; they took on AT&T and their 3G coverage. Then you tell Apple to grow up and fix their crap network. What?! You do know that Apple builds the PHONE right, not the NETWORK?

I think you're the one who needs to grow up and think about your comments for just a few seconds before posting.
by Thomas, David November 16, 2009 4:51 AM PST
@alexpoho


*SIGH*

Apple, Network .... Apple fix "their" network?


What's wrong with some of you people? Do ANY of your brain cells actually work?
See more comment replies
by ywkhgqo November 13, 2009 3:00 PM PST
AT&T is complaining because what Verizon is saying is true. Those other "fact" statements that they said don't address the map.
Reply to this comment
by kewell82 November 13, 2009 3:35 PM PST
Agreed.
by Tinman52 November 14, 2009 11:10 AM PST
Yup. AT&T and Apple have also put out many questionable adds too. I think it's funny that they think legal action is going to solve their network problems.
by Peter N. Glaskowsky November 16, 2009 9:00 PM PST
Verizon is using a map that shows only the fastest part of AT&T's 3G network, the part that provides service using the HSDPA protocol. This part of the AT&T network is faster than Verizon's 3G service. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSDPA

That map omits the slower parts of AT&T's 3G network, the part that provides service using the EDGE protocol. This part of the AT&T network is slower than Verizon's 3G service. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDGE

AT&T's overall 3G coverage, which is visible at http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/#?type=data , is reasonably similar to Verizon's.

. png
by techman21 November 13, 2009 3:07 PM PST
The truth hurts - your complaint is assuming that customers are incapable of understanding what 3G means, so why not educate?
Reply to this comment
by kewell82 November 13, 2009 3:35 PM PST
Agreed.
by Tergon November 13, 2009 3:11 PM PST
In all of this I've yet to see AT&T post a map that refutes the map portrayed by VZW and I've looked. . . HARD
Reply to this comment
by kewell82 November 13, 2009 3:36 PM PST
Agreed.
by faceless128 November 13, 2009 7:28 PM PST
That's because the map is accurate, the source for the map is AT&T. It's the same map you can get on AT&T's website. This is just a case of sour grapes, and them making a big deal out of it just makes even more people notice.
by Roy2115 November 14, 2009 4:32 AM PST
The map Verizon depicts as AT&T's 3G coverage is outdated. For example, they depict no 3G coverage over the Florida Panhandle (where I live). This is completely false as I get reception over much of the state when travelling. If the map of AT&T's coverage was more accurate, then Verizon would have a leg to stand on.
by Lerianis3 November 14, 2009 6:45 AM PST
The map might not be outdated, Roy2115..... that might be the most current map that they had WHEN THE COMMERCIALS WERE MADE, which running outdated commercials is not illegal as far as I know of.
by DasScooter November 14, 2009 1:45 PM PST
if you want to see the real coverage look at Verizon mobile TV coverage to At&t's.
Mobile tv coverage is a carriers true 3G coverage all the other crap Verizon claims is their 3G coverage, is Roaming 3G.
Verizon has yet to see Data saturation on their network.
On my iPhone 3G I can switch between 3G, and EDGE(2.5G), and when there is Data saturation all I do is switch to EDGE and it can be faster than the saturated 3G.
by DasScooter November 14, 2009 1:47 PM PST
if you want to see the real coverage look at Verizon mobile TV coverage to At&t's.
Mobile tv coverage is a carriers true 3G coverage all the other crap Verizon claims is their 3G coverage, is Roaming 3G.
Verizon has yet to see Data saturation on their network.
On my iPhone 3G I can switch between 3G, and EDGE(2.5G), and when there is Data saturation all I do is switch to EDGE and it can be faster than the saturated 3G.

At&t 3G Map

http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/#?type=mobiletv


Verizon 3G Map (Make sure its on Mobile TV)

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/CoverageLocatorController?requesttype=NEWREQUEST&coveragetype=broadband
by DasScooter November 14, 2009 1:52 PM PST
I Apologize for the partial double comment.
also my EDGE network is faster than my girlfriends EVDO network

At&t's Rebuttal

http://www.att.com/gen/landing-pages?pid=6080
by brickman5721 November 14, 2009 8:54 PM PST
@DasScooter: You are mistaken. MediaFLO's TV service requires separate transmitter and receiver hardware from the normal CDMA radios found in all Verizon handsets. This is why not every market where 3G (1xEVDO Rev. A) is available has mobile TV service. Verizon never claimed they had more mobile TV coverage than AT&T has 3G coverage. In case you want to check my facts: http://www.mediaflo.com/mediaflo/index.html
by sdf0013 November 13, 2009 3:22 PM PST
Yeah, I have to agree with everyone else. There's no false claims here. AT&T 3G coverage is what the map says. And, as has already been pointed out, AT&T is not refuting that at all. So, I'm not sure what they're basing the "blatantly false" claim on.

In fact, Verizon could twist the knife if they could somehow compile iPhone user gripes about poor service on the over crowded 3G network (ala the many stories on Cnet).
Reply to this comment
by kewell82 November 13, 2009 3:36 PM PST
Agreed.
by szettervall November 13, 2009 4:05 PM PST
I think your comment about AT&T's network being crowded is accurate in many areas. Unfortunately it is an indication of the success of the iPhone being locked to a single provider as much as anything.

The false claims come in the play with the initial ads that did not specify it was a 3G network map but implied it was the coverage map.

Personally I do not have problems with the AT&T network. Other than an evening when they were activly working on the local tower, I never get a droped call, data always works (AT&T).
by pentest November 13, 2009 4:37 PM PST
If you don't have anything to add kewell don't post.

What are you, on AOL? Posting 'me-too' is very 1998.
by alstatr November 13, 2009 5:26 PM PST
Verizon IS misrepresenting AT&T's 3G coverage in Michigan. There is 3G in Traverse City, MI. (Northwest of the lower peninsula) There is also more 3G coverage along the I-94 corridor.

If Verizon is misrepresenting AT&T's 3G coverage in Michigan, how do we know they are properly representing the rest of AT&T's 3G coverage correctly?

I live in Jackson, MI (south of Lansing). There is no 3G here but the EDGE network suits my needs while I am out and about. I think this is the point AT&T is trying to make. Yeah our 3G coverage isn't everywhere but its not like your phone is a brick in all the blank areas of the map that Verizon is showing.
by faceless128 November 13, 2009 7:31 PM PST
@alstatr: AT&T is misrepresenting their own coverage then, since the AT&T 3G coverage map is from AT&T's website. How can you blame Verizon for AT&T's own map being inaccurate? If a potential customer in your city wanted to check out coverage maps online before going with a provider, they would think AT&T had no 3G coverage there.
by Vegaman_Dan November 14, 2009 10:57 PM PST
@Pentest:

"What are you, on AOL? Posting 'me-too' is very 1998. "

Today people just post " +1 "
by gerrrg November 13, 2009 3:23 PM PST
Apparently AT&T lawyers see fit to freely use the English language with double-speak...or is that their lawyer-speak?

"Blatantly false" = completely true
"Misleading" = exceptional veracity
Reply to this comment
by DasScooter November 14, 2009 5:06 PM PST
You sir Fail at life

Definition for Blatantly
http://www.aolsvc.merriam-webster.aol.com/dictionary/blatantly
Definition for Misleading
http://www.aolsvc.merriam-webster.aol.com/dictionary/Misleading
by CajunCody December 5, 2009 4:39 PM PST
@ DasScooter

Please tell me how gerrrg "fails at life"? If anything, YOU SIR, fail at life.

Your post makes absolutely no sense and merely reinforces the BLATANT evidence (of your other posts) that you are an idiot. He clearly copied said phrases from AT&T's ads and those weren't his own words.

Go be an AT&T fanboy somewhere else why don't you?
by DVSD91 November 13, 2009 3:32 PM PST
BAH BAH BAH!! I Have been with *** AT&T for about 10 years, they suck! The day the iPhone move to another carrier I will switch!



This just shows how stupid AT&T is nobody thinks this shows non connectivity it just shows how many places do not have fast coverage, the whole purpose of haveing a nice phone. EDGE or 2G connectivity is about 3 times slower or more.



LATER AT&T; I like so many of my freinds are all gone as soon as the iPhone is with any other carrier!
Reply to this comment
by pentest November 13, 2009 4:39 PM PST
If they suck, why do you use them? Don't tell me that you have been using an iphone for 10 years.
by dfrisco November 14, 2009 4:53 PM PST
pentest is right. If you have been using AT&T for 10 years and you say they suck...well you look like the stupid one, not AT&T.
by haglerbl November 13, 2009 3:39 PM PST
The maps that verizon is using are fudged just like their service.
The verizon map shows coverage for vice and messaging, while the map for att shows just the coverage for mobile tv. If you were to actually compare maps you would see that verizon's coverage for what they term broad band is just about the same as what att has.
I have no preferences about one cell provider over the other, the thing I have against verizon is from dealing with them back east, no pleasant stories about their customer service, just disgust.
Reply to this comment
by cbscowards November 13, 2009 3:46 PM PST
Cool... Verizon gives us a map for vice! I was wondering where to go tonight!
by szettervall November 13, 2009 4:07 PM PST
Agreed.

Verizon has iPhone envy bad
by bousozoku November 13, 2009 4:12 PM PST
AT&T's 3G coverage is 2 or 3 years behind what Verizon and Sprint offer.

It's okay for AT&T to say that they offer 3G in metropolitan areas and that the coverage services all but about 78 million people, but what about quality of service for those they serve and what about travel?

When I go practically anywhere, Sprint has 3G coverage and that includes Sprint TV, as well as the rest of their services. AT&T offers very little unless you're right where they hope you'll be.
by ejeon1989 November 13, 2009 4:21 PM PST
No it's not. The AT&T 3G map is from AT&T's website: wireless.att.com. Although apparently they now will not let you see where there is 3G coverage anymore, just their entire network, which by the way, still has spotty coverage in the midwest.
by ulm_warhawks2008 November 13, 2009 6:30 PM PST
@ejeon1989 The map will show you the 3G areas you just have to enter an address or city and state then click submit. Once the map loads the area you are looking for then check the box that says 3G and the map will change to blue if that area has 3G service.
by dfrisco November 14, 2009 5:14 PM PST
Verizon loves to bend the truth as does Apple and AT&T. Verizon customers are just as hardcore as Apple customers. I use to work for Verizon and you should see how they treat their workers (just like Apple). It is pretty pathetic.

Also people that scream Verizon has great customer service are probably the ones that have gotten things out of Verizon (like credits towards their bills) because what they don't know is Verizon will roll over for most customers in order to keep their SLA percentages high. Yes Verizon does outsource their incoming customer service calls to third party companies. Call in and watch them squirm when you state you will get a lawyer or will change carriers.

And the reason these customers get credits? It is mainly because the supervisors in the call centers want nothing to do with speaking to an angry customer. So the reps put in the credits and then get hit hard come pay day once they pass the $50 minimum credit limit each rep has per month. Oh and if the rep sees through the customers bs, the customer then can give that rep a poor survey score also hurting their call center numbers and finally their end of the week paycheck. Gotta love how big business runs....the little guys get run over while the managers and supervisors point fingers..*roll eyes*
by jd_in_sb November 13, 2009 3:41 PM PST
AT&T claims that Verizon's ad is blatently false, and in their rebuttle statement that don't even mention what is false. Not a word. This indicates that Verizon is actually telling the truth and AT&T "can't handle the truth" as Jack Nicholson would say. So the only one lying at this point is AT&T! What a bunch of whiners.
Reply to this comment
by saurey1 November 13, 2009 3:41 PM PST
Verizon should counter-sue AT&T for claiming to have the FASTEST 3G NETWORK. How can you prove that? Considering overload, dropped calls etc. GREAT IDEA!
Reply to this comment
by szettervall November 13, 2009 4:08 PM PST
AT&T could certainly claim the busiest network.

Btw, I had as many dropped called in 4 days with Verizon as I did with AT&T for 8 months.
by fxf008 November 13, 2009 3:44 PM PST
Well it's about time that verizon called AT&T out! Good for them. AT&T coverage is a disgrace outside of major metropolitan areas. It's not exactly award winning in metropolitan areas either. Time for Apple to cut the cord. They are doing their loyal customers a disservice by using such an inferior network.
A lawsuit? The only lawsuit that will have any meaning will be the one where current and former AT&T customers launch a class action suit against AT&T for false advertising about their 3G network.
Reply to this comment
by szettervall November 13, 2009 4:09 PM PST
I have had excellent coverage with my iPhone on AT&T. Care you share what your experience is using AT&T?
by Roy2115 November 14, 2009 4:50 AM PST
Right, after Verizon's adds attacked both Apple and AT&T, I'm sure Apple is falling all over themselves now to get to Verizon.
by Perry_Clease November 13, 2009 3:57 PM PST
Here guys go tussle over this

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/11/10/att-defends-its-data-network-from-verizon-ad-attacks/

I am off to get some dinner.
Reply to this comment
by studiodave56 November 13, 2009 4:29 PM PST
These people here will not go to roughlydrafted.com because they are afraid of the truth. Just like Verizon is afraid of the truth. Verizon, "We always stop working for you". Verison's high speed network is half the speed of ATT, half as reliable, with less than half the internet traffic as ATT.
by Lerianis3 November 14, 2009 6:52 AM PST
studiodave56, sorry, but no. Verizon is widely regarded as the absolute best provider in the entire United States, with the lowest volume of dropped calls and best coverage in the United States.... bar none.
That's not hyperbole, that is blunt fact according to the various organizations that keep track of that stuff.
by Pappawtom November 18, 2009 7:56 AM PST
I did check it out and find it interesting that there is some misleading by Verizon. I have been an AT&T customer for the past 4 years. I live in area that does not have 3G coverage but work in one that does have it and have known that for some time because of checking it out on that AT&T site. Last night I was comparing the two sites for the coverage and was never made aware on the Verizon site that all their 3G coverage was not true 3G coverage. I find this to be misleading to the consumer. AT&T did make the distinction. Thought about switching to Verizon but now that I have found this out I have had second thoughts!
by David Dudley November 13, 2009 4:04 PM PST
AT&T is making money off of iPhone customer, but severely needs to resolve back haul issues and deploy more cells. For example, when I'm in the Mission district in San Francisco, I have no 3G coverage and this is seemingly the mecca of iPhone usage. And I'm not the only to have experienced this - I remember reading years ago where the CEO of AT&T admitted that he has no AT&T coverage at his own home.

I think what AT&T is really doing is deploying only to certain strategic spots where they absolutely have to and even then, due to their slow deployment, it seems they are doing so begrudgingly if just to hoard their cash before the iPhone jumps to a competitor's network.

What this ad may not take into account is any shared TMobile 3G network sharing. TMobile and AT&T effectively share networks due to the fact that both have subpar coverage within the US. On a positive note, on 3G GSM phones, you can use data and voice at the same time, something that is not possible on CDMA phones (Sprint and Verizon).
Reply to this comment
by redbullie November 14, 2009 8:46 AM PST
What, where did you hear this nonsense? No, there is no 3g network sharing. T-mobile uses the 1700 and 2100 Mhz bands while ATT uses 850 and 1900. Even if they did share there wouldn't be a phone technologically capable of using the other's 3g network.
by iknowwirelessbetter November 16, 2009 7:28 PM PST
@rebbullie....do you really know anything about wireless networks? Most of the phones that AT&T sell are quad-band meaning they have 850,1900,1700 and 2100 (which is predominately used overseas in Japan and Korea)....many wireless carriers still do roam off each other's networks.

@Dudley.....while some carrier may roam, AT&T and TMobile do NOT share networks. ATT does need to improve the backhaul, which became overloaded because of increased data usage - yes, more Smartphone users do choose ATT. ATT also has more cell site than any other carrier (check that fact).

The problem with the ad is that Verizon misrepresents their 3G coverage - there is no distinction between their 2G 1XRTT network and their 3G EVDO network (which, as stated, only allows a user to talk or surf but not at the same time).
by deepen05 November 13, 2009 4:10 PM PST
yea I am an AT&T customer and this is a disgrace by this company. Instead of whining and complaining, why don't they improve their 3g Coverage? Verizon has every right to advertise how they want and when they want. This whole thing makes AT&T look bad if anything.
Reply to this comment
by Roy2115 November 14, 2009 4:39 AM PST
Verizon Customers: "AT&T, you need to stop crying and improve your coverage!"

AT&T: "Done. Just like you suggested, we 'fixed' our network. Man, we should have listened to you long ago. Who knew it would be that easy."

Verizon Customers: "Yeah, but you should have been able to do it overnight. It's not like fixing your coverage would be a big undertaking. Come on, get it together."

AT&T: "Yeah, you're right Verizon users. We should have been able to upgrade everything overnight. What were we thinking?"
by Lerianis3 November 14, 2009 6:55 AM PST
Roy2115, get real. The fact is that AT&T has been dragging their boots for YEARS in improving their coverage. What you posted is nothing more than hyperbolic CRAP, to be blunt about it.

AT&T has no coverage at my home, even though we are supposedly in their 'best' area of coverage.... it's gotten so bad in fact that my parents have to WALK 300 FEET UP OUR STREET in order to get any coverage. And what does AT&T tell us about that? "We are having problems with an antenna in your area!" BULLCRAP! I could understand having those problems for a week, at most.... not for 3 years almost.
by Roy2115 November 14, 2009 7:54 AM PST
Then why are you still with AT&T? It's simple, we all chose the companies/products that we back. You can change your service if you want.

As I mentioned in further down the page, I was very unstatisifed with my AT&T coverage when I moved down to Florida. I am happy to say that they fixed the service a few months back by adding 3G and improving reception. Knowing how I felt before the upgrade, I can't blame you for being mad. But the truth is that all of the carriers have problems. The key is to finding the one that best suits you.
by curious_trout November 13, 2009 4:10 PM PST
The one and *only* reason my wife and I don't own iPhones is AT&T. I have personal experiences with that carrier and the blogs are flooded with people angry with AT&T. This company used to be an American icon. Well, they sure flushed their reputation down the toilet. I'll go to that carrier the same time I'll get a Yugo... NOT EVER. I have no idea what Apple was thinking when they picked AT&T. They usually show more common sense.

It's funny that AT&T sues Verizon. They'll just put themselves in the news with most people completely agreeing with Verizon. Good. Perhaps they'll find out just how bad they really suck. I remember when my boss visited me from Europe. His cell phone worked perfectly in our building. I couldn't get a *single* bar.
Reply to this comment
by cp256 November 14, 2009 12:09 PM PST
I unfortunately had a very unpleasant business relationship with AT&T (6 T1's of phone lines) due to AT&T gobbling up the CLEC with which I had a contract. I had a great relationship with the CLEC and their service was fantastic. As soon as AT&T took over, everything went downhill in a hurry. I was ecstatic the day I was able to dump their sorry butts.

I despise Verizon (they are the ILEC so I have had to deal with their BS for the past 20 years too), but AT&T is at the top of my list of communications companies that suck suck suck and suck some more.
by ATLone November 13, 2009 4:10 PM PST
I live in Atlanta across the street from where the top brass from BellSouth/Cingular sat. I can watch the bar go up and down while sitting still. Seriously, I can see the building at the same time. Dropped AT&T calls. Would get an iPhone, but not with the crappy network. It is not just rual areas that have problems. Same **** happens in NYC, DC, and all over ATL. Enough Another Tapped Telephone...
Reply to this comment
by jd_in_sb November 13, 2009 4:21 PM PST
Ok, I now see why AT&T is complaining. I didn't before. The Verizon map is showing their entire network, not just the 3G-speed portion of their network. Verizon's red map includes areas that only get EDGE-speed. Their AT&T map only shows the 3G-speed areas and no EDGE-speed areas. That IS blatantly false advertising by Verizon.
Reply to this comment
by DrtyDogg November 13, 2009 4:29 PM PST
The commercials point out several times that they are displaying the 3G coverage of AT&T. As for Verizon's map, their network knows one speed.
by jd_in_sb November 13, 2009 4:48 PM PST
Incorrect. Verizon has two speeds. Their Verizon map shows the EV-DO Rev. A areas (3G speed) plus the areas without EV-DO Rev. A (download speeds of just 400 to 700 Kbps). Verizon is hiding the fact that Verizon calls their slow speed areas "3G" while AT&T does not. Verizon includes high speed & slow speed on their map, while including only high speed on AT&T's map. Verizon is being totally misleading and should be sued.
by faceless128 November 13, 2009 7:41 PM PST
@jd_in_sb: EVDO rev0 is still 3G, so their comparison is valid.
by DasScooter November 14, 2009 9:14 AM PST
@faceless read before you comment

"Incorrect. Verizon has two speeds. Their Verizon map shows the EV-DO Rev. A areas (3G speed) plus the areas without EV-DO Rev. A"

again "EV-DO Rev. A areas (3G speed) plus the areas without EV-DO Rev. A"<- non EV-DO = non 3G
by November 15, 2009 5:23 AM PST
false, verizon's entire ev-do area has been already been completely overlaid with rev-a
by VirtualMachines November 13, 2009 4:35 PM PST
Verizon is no better, shoddy signal strength, horrid customer service and over billing and expensive for what you get. Living and working in the Silicon Valley the SF and San Jose Bay Area one would think the service would be far better. Not even close. Lousy signal and more dropped calls than when I was with Sprint years ago. I will never go back to Verizon or Sprint even if it was free.

Is AT&T better? perhaps, perhaps not, However, I have no problems receiving a signal, making or receiving calls in my building where I work with my iPhone. Nor at home or when I travel. There are over 1600 iPhone users at work. I am currently enrolled in a test program within our company with regards to Verizon and their service using the Blackberry Storm and Storm 2, and 3G Curve as well as the Blackberry Bold.

The company is looking to switch carriers from AT&T to Verizon. I have been using Verizon for over 6 months continuously everyday. Every call work related and personal. Verizon service stinks and not as good. I am glad our company decided to stay with AT&T. The amount of dropped calls was driving me insane with Verizon. I can't even drive over to the coast without losing a signal, this is the SF Bay Area this should not be happening. Where is that Verizon dude and his backup, I think their AWOL. LOL

After arriving from a 5 hour flight in Houston, I power on the all the cell phones I am using and testing and I receive no signal with Verizon or it took over 5 minutes to make a call. AT&T iPhone 3G and 3GS no problems at all. Same thing happened in Las Vegas last year.

A great match would be if T-Mobile purchased Sprint and combined them then Apple went with T-Mobile instead of VZ. That would be great!
To all the Verizon pumpers out there, good luck with your Droid and over inflated service, I'll stick with the lesser of two evil's. I know I have been testing VZ for over 6 months , no thanks...
Reply to this comment
by haglerbl November 13, 2009 4:39 PM PST
If you are wondering, the reason verizon shows all those people standing behind verizon customers in the tv ads, it's because it takes all those people to resolve the issue you have when you accidentally hit the browse the web button on your phone when you pull it out of your pocket and you don't have a data plan and try to get them to block that feature on your phone and refund the $23.88 you got charged even though you canceled it and did not browse the web, that is if you can actually get someone on the phone before you get transferred 3 times and your call is disconnected 2 more times before you decide that you will stop in at the verizon store to have them help you out and all you get for the first 30 min is someone telling you that you need a deferent phone because the one you have is out dated although you just got it from them 60 days ago when you signed up. Please take me out and just shoot me because I can't get out of my contract with out it costing over $200 and I can't use the phone on any other network not even sprint because of the bad custom os that they have put on every phone that they have.........
Reply to this comment
by billd888 November 13, 2009 4:41 PM PST
I have known many people who have used AT&T for years, most that I know do not really like it, but they live in areas where AT&T's coverage is no worse than anyone else's. Prior to AT&T's acquisition of Cingular the FCC reported that they had more complaints of dropped calls from AT&T subscribers than from any other network. Adding Cingular could not have helped them because Cingular phones from different parts of the country couldn't even roam without issues. I had a guy from Ohio travel to California and his Cingular phone was unusable here, is an area where Cingular was the dominant carrier.
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 4 pages (146 Comments)
advertisement

Google's top antitrust defender: 'It's fun'

Life at Google is certainly different than government service for senior competition counsel Dana Wagner, but his past and present collide on a daily basis at the search giant.

CE industry hopes 'Avatar' is a hit

Good box office returns for the 3D film are expected to spur 3D entertainment from the theater to the living room.

About Signal Strength

Marguerite Reardon has been covering the telecom beat for more than a decade and knows more about wireless and IP networking than she cares to admit. She has been a senior writer for CNET News since 2003, covering all things wireless and broadband related from iPhone launches to major telephone company mergers to IPTV developments. She often appears as an expert on news networks, including CNBC, MSNBC, NPR, and the BBC. Maggie loves visiting CNET's headquarters in San Francisco, but she's an East Coaster at heart, living and working in Manhattan.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Signal Strength topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right