From: nospam on
In article <7ill56tjqi01s3f9theq58ujb0frr06geg(a)4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >> Is it not possible that some of the dissatisfaction of AT&T by
> >> iPhone owners is from antenna/dropped calls problems of the phone being
> >> blamed on the operator?
> >
> >Not if it's from people who had AT&T prior to iPhone 4
> >
> >They really do suck.
>
> In some places. Not in others.
> No one carrier is great/best in all areas.

most people don't use a cellphone in only one place.

at&t has consistently ranked low, not just for coverage but for how
they treat their customers. for instance, their bait & switch on the
ipad unlimited plan. they knew months before its launch that they were
going to move to a tiered plan, yet they announced and sold an
unlimited plan for just a couple of weeks.
From: nospam on
In article <lloydparsons-2C9285.10404005082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd
Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote:

> And for all the complaints about how good/bad AT&T is,
> there has been much conjecture that if any other provider had been given
> the iPhone exclusive, they would have had the same problems that AT&T
> has had with the useage patterns.

except that with the explosion of android phones, you don't see very
many complaints about verizon, yet you still see complaints about at&t.
From: nospam on
In article <qbrl56hqhtk2vn11uhjg2iuhh9jbq8cmmd(a)4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >Drivel: One thing I *REALLY* like about the iPhone 4 is the large
> >number of used 3G and 3GS phones appearing on the used market. The 3G
> >and 3GS are what the iPod Touch should have been, with a camera, GPS,
> >and built in mic/spkr. My 3G makes a fairly good PDA with the phone
> >turned off and using Wi-Fi.
>
> The annoying thing is that you have to activate it on AT&T before you
> can use it as a fancy PDA/iPod.

wrong.
From: Lloyd Parsons on
In article <050820101301232886%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>,
nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <lloydparsons-2C9285.10404005082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd
> Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
> > And for all the complaints about how good/bad AT&T is,
> > there has been much conjecture that if any other provider had been given
> > the iPhone exclusive, they would have had the same problems that AT&T
> > has had with the useage patterns.
>
> except that with the explosion of android phones, you don't see very
> many complaints about verizon, yet you still see complaints about at&t.

In the grand scheme of things, that explosion is not a big one. The
numbers are still pretty low.

--
Lloyd


From: nospam on
In article <lloydparsons-E4398D.15041505082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd
Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote:

> > > And for all the complaints about how good/bad AT&T is,
> > > there has been much conjecture that if any other provider had been given
> > > the iPhone exclusive, they would have had the same problems that AT&T
> > > has had with the useage patterns.
> >
> > except that with the explosion of android phones, you don't see very
> > many complaints about verizon, yet you still see complaints about at&t.
>
> In the grand scheme of things, that explosion is not a big one. The
> numbers are still pretty low.

although there are a lot more iphones than android devices, android is
selling a *lot* of devices and there aren't very many problems on
verizon, sprint or t-mobile. with the iphone, at&t had problems from
day one.