Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

AT&T Admits New York City iPhone Service Sucks

Posted by kdawson on Fri Jan 29, 2010 01:02 PM
from the but-we-knew-that dept.
RevWaldo notes a post up at The Gothamist on AT&T's admission of its poor cell service in New York. "AT&T has realized that the first step towards recovery is admitting it has a problem. The phone giant has confessed that its New York City iPhone service is not up to par, according to a presentation slide published on Tom's Guide noting that the company's 3G Voice Composite Quality in the New York metro area — particularly in Manhattan — is below its performance objective. ... The slide does contain some good news for AT&T subscribers. Apparently, AT&T has had '[t]hree consecutive months of improvement'..."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Real Improvement? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ivogan (678639) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:07PM (#30951426)
    I am left wondering if the improvement stated is a result of consumers switching carriers from AT&T.
    • by Lumpy (12016) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:19PM (#30951662) Homepage

      Probably. The sad part is that their network is at best mediocre everywhere else. Detroit or Chicago I also get lots of dropouts and keep dropping back to the Edge network instead of 3G. Even voice calls have problems everywhere on an AT&T network.

      They need to upgrade and expand EVERYWHERE.

      • Or alternatively maybe the improvement was defined as narrowing the distance between their goals and the reality and they accomplished that by just lowering their standards.

      • by sconeu (64226)

        You mean the Verizon "There's a map for that" ads are accurate? But the AT&T guy says they have coverage (G-type not specified) everywhere!!!

        • Re:Real Improvement? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by slimjim8094 (941042) <slashdot1@justconnected.net> on Friday January 29 2010, @02:32PM (#30952856) Homepage

          No, they're not accurate. Neither is being particularly truthful, but Verizon is outright lying. They're comparing apples to oranges.

          Verizon's 3g is more like AT&T's 2g (EDGE). AT&T's 3g (really HSDPA) is wicked fast (I've gotten a real-world 4.5mbps with 100ms latency). I don't think Verizon has anything that even comes close to that. So AT&T's HSDPA service is pretty limited, sure, but they have 2g (which is Verizon's 3g) over their *entire* service area.

          There's a lot of things AT&T needs to improve on, but I don't think their coverage or technology is one of them. They just need to deliver what they're capable of more frequently.

          • There's a lot of things AT&T needs to improve on, but I don't think their coverage or technology is one of them. They just need to deliver what they're capable of more frequently.

            Finally a voice of common sense.

            It's also true that Verizon has outspent AT&T on investment in its wireless infrastructure over the last few years. AT&T's wireless network's capital expenditures [pcworld.com] from 2006 through September 2009 totaled $21.6 billion, versus $25.4 billion for Verizon and $16 billion for Sprint (including Sprint's investments in WiMax operator Clearwire). Per subscriber: Verizon - $353, AT&T - $308

            But despite this, Verizon's 'high speed service' is not real high speed. It's a sha

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by saterdaies (842986)

      It isn't an improvement from customers switching away. AT&T added more customers than Verizon last quarter and had a similar churn rate of 1.4%. So, no, AT&T has more customers than ever and customers are staying with AT&T at the same rate as Verizon and more customers are signing up for AT&T than Verizon.

      It's a real improvement.

  • by frinkster (149158) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:09PM (#30951486)

    I rarely get 3G data service during the week. Usually it's EDGE and not very fast EDGE at that.

    Weekends are much better.

    Anyone thinking of getting an iPad should really think about the real value of the 3G option - will it be worth anything in your area?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Idbar (1034346)
      I was in Orlando last weekend, and 3G kept dropping the connection, and the calls were often dropped too.
  • by soren100 (63191) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:12PM (#30951522)

    Now if they can just admit their service sucks everywhere else too, then they can take some of all that iPhone money and actually improve the service.

    What's really amazing about AT&T and the iPhone is that if you are in a large crowd of people (such as a festival), the service becomes overwhelmed and you can't even make or receive a call.

    Even just going to LA can make the phone get pretty unresponsive as it waits for a signal from the overloaded tower, so you can't really use it for much.

  • by Chineseyes (691744) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:13PM (#30951558)
    Thanks for finally fucking noticing. I've called to complain to ATT numerous times over the years and every single time i was given the following bullshit excuses:
    - You need a new sim card
    - Your phone might be damaged
    - We don't see any problems in the area

    So when is ATT going to give me my money back for diminished service?
  • Y axis? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Flavio (12072) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:15PM (#30951602) Homepage

    What's that graph supposed to represent without an y axis?

    This is marketing disguised as an objective quality metric. Without showing the numbers, they've admitted to nothing, and promised nothing.

    • The Y Axis is how much BS you're willing to buy from AT&T.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by crankyspice (63953)

      As long as we're using AA doublespeak here ("first step . . . admitting . . ."), might as well continue in that vein. "Progress, not perfection." The line just shows progress. And that's all that matters. Oh, yeah, and "fake it 'till you make it."

      (No, I've never been in AA, but I was (am?) in recovery from anorexia, and eating disorders and the various addictions have a high degree of population overlap.)

      (As an anorexic, I already know that I'm not *worthy* of good service, and so I never complained abo

    • "Voice Composite Quality" is correlated with the bandwidth available for voice calls. Voice in recent GSM takes 4.5 to 12.2 kbps; the AMR codec [wikipedia.org] can drop down to lower bitrates if the tower is congested.
    • by garcia (6573)

      Without showing the numbers, they've admitted to nothing, and promised nothing.

      Even if they gave us the numbers it wouldn't tell us jack. Numbers mean nothing w/o context of how they are getting the data they are charting. Is this a customer survey? If so, how is it administered and who is the population (people who call in to AT&T CSRs, random sampling via e-mail, what?)

      I'm willing to bet that this is some sort of valid survey conducted on a regular basis by AT&T but the marketing team took it, str

    • What's that graph supposed to represent without an y axis?

      The Y axis represents "3G Voice Composite Quality Index", duh! Don't you speak marketing robot? High fives all around, everyone, team meeting at the Sizzler!

    • It has a y-axis. Don’t you see “Performance Objective”?

      Whatever that is, the y-axis is the percentage of it achieved.

  • I wonder if AT&T is having problems in New York and Chicago and some other large cities because they don't know who to bribe or what local bosses control what happens. There are fewer people standing in the way of upgrades like this in some places than in others.

    • AT&T is one of the oldest and most entrenched corporations in the country, if not the world (the British East India Company is older of course, but is a shadow of its former self). I doubt they don't know the right way to grease the right wheels.

      • by Kohath (38547)

        Maybe they're not willing to do it. Or maybe they can't compete with the favors their competitors are offering in exchange for slowing AT&T down. Who knows?

    • I wonder if you are just another right-leaning jagoff who will use the summary of any story to blame something lefty like "unions" without regard to the necessity of proof to level yet another of your accusations.

      (checks Kohath's comment history)

      Reasonable hypothesis.
  • AT&T NYC service (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 29 2010, @01:32PM (#30951890)

    I was in Downtown Manhattan /w AT&T service a few months ago - 3G service in general (Not just IPhone) wasn't just slow it was so slow that the effective result was it didn't work at all - don't waste your time trying slow. The experience was comparable to GSM data service (14.4k) of decades past. In contrast call quality was quite good and I never had any problems there.

    Thankfully outside of the Metro area all was well in 3G land. At the time I suspected all of those massive Sprint displays in times square had some sort of magical influence over my data connection :)

  • It sucks out on Long Island too! Hope they don't just focus on Manhattan. I mean it's ridiculous how bad AT&T service is in all facets. Sorely tempted to trade my beloved Iphone for a Nexus. I get so mad everytime I see what's his face from Old School talking about how fast their network is. Also so what if it's faster, you don't get any coverage anywhere! I mean really, I could have the fastest race car in the world, but if I can only drive it up and down my drive way it's pointless!
    • It sucks out on Long Island too! Hope they don't just focus on Manhattan. I mean it's ridiculous how bad AT&T service is in all facets. Sorely tempted to trade my beloved Iphone for a Nexus. I get so mad everytime I see what's his face from Old School talking about how fast their network is. Also so what if it's faster, you don't get any coverage anywhere! I mean really, I could have the fastest race car in the world, but if I can only drive it up and down my drive way it's pointless!

      The Nexus One is a nice phone but I feel some of the UI features lack the polish/maturity of the iPhone. Specifically: multi-touch and the way it handles dropdown menus.

      And while T-Mobile coverage isn't horrid by me, it is noticeably weaker than AT&T.

  • by MikeURL (890801) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:56PM (#30952316) Journal
    If anyone was listening to the ATT earnings release you'd know that T has announced a 2 billion dollar increase in their capex for 2010. This will still leave them below 2008 capex levels but will but them significantly above 2009 levels (which were absurdly low given that it was the year of the iPhone). 2 billion may not be enough to really fix every problem but neither is it a trivial increase.

    In short, they know there is a problem and have devoted all of their FCF from 2009 to try to address the problem. They aren't standing still hoping the problem will fix itself.
  • by astrashe (7452) on Friday January 29 2010, @01:57PM (#30952326) Journal

    I live in Manhattan, and I own an iPhone. Believe me, I know about all the problems. I complain a lot to my friends.

    But they're clearly trying to climb on top of this. They're opening up about the problems, and they had that incident a month ago or so when they stopped selling iPhones. They're trying to figure it out.

    I ran a dial-up ISP in the 90's. Tons of people came on to the net, and everyone in the business was trying like crazy to grow their phone banks and their networks to handle the new people. Back then everyone complained about their ISP -- it was hard to keep up.

    That's what's happening now with wireless. Everyone is starting to use lots of data. Three years ago, almost no one used wireless net access. Three years from now, almost everyone in the city will want to be able to stream video to their phones at the same time. All of that infrastructure has to be built, and all of it has to be financed. Imagine if some other major chunk of infrastructure had to be built from the ground up -- electrical wiring, or roads, or whatever. It's a big job.

    The transition is inevitably going to be bloody. We just need AT&T to be open about it, and to really step up and try to keep up with the growth. When they come clean like this, it's a very positive sign. And once everyone's online, and the growth stabilizes, things will get a lot better.

    (I realize that no one will buy this. But I figured I'd put it out there anyway.)

    • by BitZtream (692029) on Friday January 29 2010, @02:42PM (#30952982)

      it was hard to keep up.

      Only if you over sell and never say 'we are at capacity and can not take any more subscribers at this time'

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I live in Manhattan, and I own an iPhone. Believe me, I know about all the problems. I complain a lot to my friends.

      But they're clearly trying to climb on top of this. They're opening up about the problems, and they had that incident a month ago or so when they stopped selling iPhones. They're trying to figure it out.

      I ran a dial-up ISP in the 90's. Tons of people came on to the net, and everyone in the business was trying like crazy to grow their phone banks and their networks to handle the new people. Back then everyone complained about their ISP -- it was hard to keep up.

      That's what's happening now with wireless. Everyone is starting to use lots of data. Three years ago, almost no one used wireless net access. Three years from now, almost everyone in the city will want to be able to stream video to their phones at the same time. All of that infrastructure has to be built, and all of it has to be financed. Imagine if some other major chunk of infrastructure had to be built from the ground up -- electrical wiring, or roads, or whatever. It's a big job.

      The transition is inevitably going to be bloody. We just need AT&T to be open about it, and to really step up and try to keep up with the growth. When they come clean like this, it's a very positive sign. And once everyone's online, and the growth stabilizes, things will get a lot better.

      (I realize that no one will buy this. But I figured I'd put it out there anyway.)

      If ATT had been honest about this of if they'd even shut up and not commented, nobody would be bashing anything. Everybody knows that building out a network takes time. But ATT has consistently been denying any issues whatsoever, claiming that its network was the fastest, most reliable, largest, most advanced, shiniest network on Earth, and that any customer who claimed otherwise was a lying, mentally retarded psychopath for suggesting so. Even to the point where its PR people were arguing openly with blogg

  • I remember reading in the consumerist that an AT&T consumer representative said "the phone is not offered to you because New York is not ready for the iPhone." They (temporarily) stopped selling one of the best selling phones in the country's biggest market! Isn't this already an admission that their service sucks? I guess it could be interpreted as AT&T blaming the iPhone and New Yorkers instead of their own network, but I think we all saw through the rep's thinly veiled admission.

    http://consumeris [consumerist.com]

  • the first step on the road to recovery.
  • by PDG (100516) <pdg@webcrush.com> on Friday January 29 2010, @02:39PM (#30952948) Homepage

    I hear NYC and SanFran AT&T horror stories all the time, and then people jump on the bandwagon and say it sucks everywhere else too.

    Well, works beautifully in Boston. Recent reports show that its faster and more reliable in Boston than Verizon as well. Believe me, I was a 12 year Verizon veteran and shied away from AT&T because of the 'stories' I heard. One day, work gave me an AT&T serviced BlackBerry and I swapped the sim card into an iPhone off EBay and was astounded that I got better and faster service than my Verizon account gave me.

    Dropped Verizon and went AT&T within a week. Nary a problem since.

    • Mr. Anderson, what good is 4G connectivity if there's no way to connect it?

      Seriously, the limit isn't the mobile devices - it's easy to build a $500 device with better b/w. It's much harder to upgrade tens of billions of dollars of infrastructure to support it. Especially when most* of the country has no data service whatsoever.

      *by area

        • by chill (34294)

          Here in Chicago, too. http://www.clear.com/coverage [clear.com]

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by chill (34294)

              Yes. The U.S. is really a 2nd World country when it comes to broadband and high-speed telecom. We don't like to outright admit it, but that is the truth compared to places like Sweden or S. Korea.

              • 2nd World? My iPhone worked better in the Masai Mara National Park in Kenya than here in San Francisco.

                • by chill (34294)

                  Oddly enough, the better thought "tech" areas in the U.S., like Manhattan and San Francisco, are more like 3rd World when it comes to wireless.

                  You'd figure, with Pac Bell's (now AT&T) HQ being in San Ramon, service in the Bay Area would be better than elsewhere. You'd figure wrong, sadly enough.

              • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                by Lord Ender (156273)

                Yes. The U.S. is really a 2nd World country

                Hoo boy are you confused. Let me make this easy for you:

                • First World: democratic capitalism, aka The US and its allies
                • Second World: dictatorial communism, aka the Soviet Union and its allies
                • Third World: everyone else (These countries were not allied with either of the above groups primarily because they were too poor to matter in the great struggle over property rights and liberalism.)

                To say the US is "second world" is absurd, as being aligned with the US is the

                • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                  by chill (34294)

                  No, I'm not confused. You just didn't understand my use of the analogy.

                  I was talking about the state of telecommunications, specifically related to broadband availability, speed and cost. I was doing it using the same scale you defined, but in relation not to political-economic strata but telecom.

                  Thus, I was just breaking down the levels of telecom in the world into three segments:

                  The first world being marked by places like Sweden and S. Korea, where things like 100 Mbit data to your home or office is che

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Vegeta99 (219501)

      Not that I'm backing them up, but just a measly 5 years ago, the most a phone could suck down the pipe was about 300kbps, tops. And nobody had phones that did that; a call only takes up 8-13. Now, they're sapped by phones like mine that can pull up to 7.2Mbit, and a LOT more people using data.