var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
tbax929
December 16, 2009 11:51 AM
Moderate | Flag for review

I'm all for consumer disobedience, but doesn't AT & T already know and acknowledge the issues with their coverage? I would vote with my dollars and go to another carrier.

Reply
12 replies
\"user-pic\"
phonebem
December 16, 2009 5:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

OK, I have to point out the sad fact that people actually using their phones in the manner they were intended could be even remotely considered \"consumer disobedience.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
kern2000
December 16, 2009 4:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Capitalism in this country isn't what it should be. There is barely any healthy competition. And that means your dollar votes only go towards the player who, in a sense, lobbies the most. That's why the consumer cries to unlock the iPhone to promote competition falls on deaf ears. For the corporations, the game is not about winning the customers. It's about lobbying members of congress in an effort to deregulate themselves.
We don't live in a Capitalist society.


Reply
\"user-pic\"
TechnoDestructo
December 16, 2009 7:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It always warms my heart to see another person come to that realization.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Naame
December 16, 2009 1:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree that voting with your wallet is a more effective way to react to this situation and a lot of people wish they could simply switch to another carrier. Unfortunately, many are stuck with AT&T because they either have a locked iphone or are in contract for god knows how long with a ridiculous EFT. Otherwise, people could do exactly what you suggest and allow consumer friendly market competition to flourish as it should.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
tbax929
December 16, 2009 1:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I couldn't even get service, I'd cancel. EFT or not. There should be a way to get out of the contract, anyway, if they can't provide the service.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
thisistobehelpful
December 16, 2009 2:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well the other thing is they're not providing no service they just can't provide this service as well. If it was a case of no service they'd probably have to waive the ETF but it's just crappy instead.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Naame
December 16, 2009 1:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It is not that they aren't getting the service at all. It is that they are getting poor service. AT&T's contracts are setup in such a way which does not allow their customers to get out of them like that. They are aware of their network issues. They just don't care because they don't have to care. This is not a consumer friendly free market industry where if you don't care then you get creamed by your competition. This is an oligopoly. The rules are different and the consumers lose due to lack of competitive choices.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
rdm
December 16, 2009 1:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There should be, but there isn't. I canceled Nextel/Sprint shortly after moving to Dallas from Michigan because I had 0 coverage at my apartment. They still hit you with the fee.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
December 17, 2009 12:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

You yeah you get nailed because as long as you have coverage according to the terribly inaccurate and over optimistic maps they use, regardless of if you are dropping 10+ calls a day, you can't get out without an ETF.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YouDidWhatNow?
December 16, 2009 12:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

But that would mean leaving behind the Jesus phone, and your God/Saint Steve Jobs. Unthinkable.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RogerTheAlien
December 16, 2009 9:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Douche-y comments promote douchiness. Don't be a douche.

-A message from your local anti-douchebag advisory board.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
veronykah
December 16, 2009 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You don't have the leave your jesus phone behind. I have one running on T-Mobile just fine right now. AND I even get signal in Los Angeles. Win/Win!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
halothane
December 16, 2009 12:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yup. Because heaven forbid AT&T fix their network so that people can, you know, use their iPhones as intended. :P

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
December 16, 2009 12:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Actually, no they don't. AT&T has refused to acknowledge any problems with its coverage. Any problems that exist can only be the fault of others (in particular, resulting from users doing too much, and Apple making iPhones too data-dependent).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
tbax929
December 16, 2009 1:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

AT&T has absolutely acknowledged there's a problem.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
December 16, 2009 9:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

They have only blamed everyone but themselves. As far as they're concerned, the network is fine. Everything else is the problem. This is FAR from an admission that there are problems with their network. Instead, it's the exact opposite ... they use this kind of reasoning to rationalize refusing to fix it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
azntg
December 16, 2009 12:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

From my personal experience, it seems that AT&T does acknowledge their network problem on a local level, but basically refuses to do anything about it until a few people call in to complain.

For about two-three months, the cell tower on my apartment building has degraded to the point that the signal is still strong enough for a 2-3 bars reception, but not functional enough to handle incoming/outgoing calls (don't really care about data, since I don't use it). So, people would call my cell phone while it's powered on, it would likely be forwarded straight to voicemail without me ever knowing if they called. If I try to make calls, it would most likely not go through. And the few times it does, voice quality would be terrible.

I finally had enough. I called AT&T CS with my landline phone and reported in. According to the CSR who was handling my call, I found out that AT&T KNEW ABOUT THE TOWER PROBLEM FOR AT LEAST ONE MONTH, BUT FAILED TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Until I called in apparently. The CSR immediately transferred me to a Network Technician and we sorted out the details. Problem was fixed within two weeks and got a few technicians calling me a few weeks after the fix to follow up.

I'm glad they eventually had the problem fixed and even followed up for weeks after the fix. But why can't they be more proactive (especially if they know about the problem in the first place)?

Every support/billing related phone calls I made to AT&T CS over the years were excellently handled with any issues/problems being resolved immediately or within a reasonable timeframe (unlike Verizon CS). But frankly, as pleasant as it is to deal with AT&T CS, I'd rather not have to call in the first place.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Mackinstyle
December 16, 2009 11:52 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Unless it goes Top 15 on Digg, nothing will come of this.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
diasdiem
December 16, 2009 12:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Get the guys at 4chan involved. They'll put on Guy Fawkes masks, down the network, and tape a picture of a black guy with an afro to AT&T headquarters that says \"Network's Closed!\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
December 16, 2009 1:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't know, they're no scientology...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
halothane
December 16, 2009 12:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's already on Slashdot, and you know how THEY do...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
redwall_hp
December 16, 2009 12:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You're giving Digg too much credit...

There will be plenty of people involved. A crapload of people read Fake Steve Jobs, where the post got its start; the Mashable reposting alone has been tweeted 1120 times; and I imagine the FakeSteve post (as well as the many mentions on other blogs) have had their fair share of social media coverage; A podcast I listen to (with thousands of listeners) mentioned it. And just think of the word-of-mouth!

Given AT&T's overly-fragile network, this plot will succeed greatly.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Nighthawke
December 16, 2009 11:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Leave Anakin out of this racket. If you want someone Truly Evil that is of Star Wars, Pick Palpatine or Tarkin.

All AT&T will do is shuffle bandwidth from their other clients to supplant the meager service until it is over.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
ScarletsWalk
December 16, 2009 12:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I would think Anakin was used because of Darth Vader's effective use of CHOKING his underlings.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hawkins
December 16, 2009 1:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I thought they used Mr. Vader because of the remarkable resemblance between the AT&T logo and the Death Star.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
lukesdad
December 16, 2009 11:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Somehow I don't think this will solve anything.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Wombatish
December 16, 2009 5:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If they have a chance to find the top organizers I could easily see some FCC fines coming of this.

In some areas emergency services are on the cell band, though I have no idea how 3g vs. COM-DATA vs. whatever affects that.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Federalist
December 16, 2009 3:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

it's like protesting congestion around NYC by having everyone drive at the same time

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 11:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's great. So my service is going to be shot on Friday because of a bunch of idiots decided to purposely act like children throwing a tantrum. Wonderful.
Here's a thought: Don't like AT&T? Use a different provider.

Reply
24 replies
\"user-pic\"
Garybaldy
December 16, 2009 10:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If i understand you correctly. You view civil disobedience that inconveniences you. As the partakers acting like spoiled children and brats?

Guess Martin Luther king was acting like child and a spoiled brat.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 17, 2009 3:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Except that this isn't \"civil disobedience\" and can't be compared to someone fighting for civil rights. This is a bunch of whiney spoiled people acting out against a private corporation and disrupting communications with a felony DDOS attack because their Fart App isn't fast enough for them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
redrolla
December 17, 2009 2:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Martin Luther King Jr was fight for equality. These brats are fighting to watch utube videos.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
fxsoap
December 16, 2009 2:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm excited, I hope more of these happen!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ubermex
December 16, 2009 2:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You get that AT&T actually told it's customers to use less data that they had paid for, right? Their \"acknowledgement\" was to basically say that even though they were charging an arm and a leg, the customer who paid for unlimited data should use less of it to help them out.

Yeah, screw them. If they're gonna charge us this much, they should upgrade their network to be able to actually provide what we paid for.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 2:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Seriously, I really don't understand your problem with their acknowledgment. It's no different than the electric company asking people to conserve, or the water company asking people to conserve. Mostly I think iPhone users are just spoiled rotten babies.

I've paid for lots of things in my life that I wasn't ultimately satisfied with. But I don't organize mobs with pitchforks to try and bend corporate will to remedy my dissatisfaction. I simply cut my losses and move on. You know, like adults do.

As for \"charging us this much\", and \"charging an arm & a leg\".... if paying for your data plan is really costing you \"an arm & a leg\", perhaps you can't afford it, and maybe that's your real problem.

I would recommend you consider evaluating your finances and think about scaling back to something you can better afford that won't cause you so much stress.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
December 16, 2009 6:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

lolol the water company and electric company ask people to conserve because water is a finite supply and most places are running out, and electricity is essential to daily life so they ask you to conserve there so EVERYONE can have it, otherwise you get rolling black outs or brown outs or whatever. further, if you don't use that electricity or water because you listen, you don't get charged for it. again, AT&T gives unlimited data, so they really have no leg to stand on when it comes down to it. they charge the same amount regardless of if you conserve or not. it's just a way for them to get by with not upgrading their network. i'm trying my best not to insult you further so I'll just stop here knowing that you probably don't feel too good about yourself now.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 8:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"they ask you to conserve there so EVERYONE can have it, otherwise you get rolling black outs or brown outs or whatever.\"

Isn't that pretty much the same deal with AT&T's data? Conserve so everyone can have it, otherwise you get \"brownouts\", or in this case, slow downs.

Oh I know, conserving bandwidth is for those \"other\" people. You paid your $20 bucks this month, let the taps flow right?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 2:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't have a problem with my service. I am also a PAYING customer. However now, I am to be punished and possibly denied my service so that a bunch of adolescents can get their \"revenge\" on AT&T. Why exactly do I deserve this?

And when this little mass-tantrum doesn't work, then what? Do they step it up to actual physical attacks on AT&T's buildings or employees? How about other customers that do not participate? Will there be retaliation against us?

I think anyone that participates in this should have their accounts closed and be banned from using AT&T ever again. I think THAT is an appropriate response from AT&T. As a bonus effect, it would free up the network for the rest of us.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Xzigraz
December 16, 2009 7:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Will, if by doing so I can get off the hook and not be charged for the ETF. I am down.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ubermex
December 16, 2009 2:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Also, man, who the hell are you to whine about what OTHER people do with THEIR contracts with AT&T. That crap cuts both ways, you know. If you don't want to be on a network where people do this stuff, you can always leave.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ubermex
December 16, 2009 2:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Accounts closed for what? How do you define \"participation\" if all they are doing is using an amount of data which falls within their legally binding contract with AT&T? How do you identify \"offenders\" when the only definition is someone who is using a lot of data on an UNLIMITED PLAN.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 9:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You know, you're right. You have a point there.

But keep in mind that \"unlimited\" does not necessarily equal \"fast enough for YOUR satisfaction\". As I understand it, AT&T asked people to conserve, they aren't cutting you off or charging you more. So even if it's slow, you're still getting your \"unlimited\" data aren't you.

Therefore, you have nothing to complain about.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RogerTheAlien
December 16, 2009 9:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Then they shouldn't call it \"unlimited\". And nobody's complaining about the speed of downloads. It seems you're completely missing the point of why people are so up-in-arms. It comes down to the fact that AT&T has acknowledged their network is inadequate, yet are not doing anything (or marginally enough, even) to fix it, while raising rates, requiring two-year contracts, and charging ETFs. Essentially, you're saying that these people are whining because they feel they're entitled to reliable voice and data coverage/capabilities as outlined in their contract.

It's not JUST about data. Get that out of the picture. It's about EVERYTHING AT&T frequently scews up. Using data to prove a point with AT&T is just a method. People are complaining about how AT&T's WHOLE network, voice included, is terrible with no improvement in sight. So, what level of service do YOU, the genius that you are, feel people should be receiving? 50% call throughput? 75%? Draw a line in the sand before you assume AT&T customers are spoiled brats.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 17, 2009 10:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm saying that if I was THAT unhappy with my service, which I'm not, I wouldn't be throwing online tantrums and organizing mobs against the company. I would ditch their crappy service and move my phone business elsewhere. Pay the stinking ETF, stop crying, and MOVE ON.

The ETF is there because you didn't want to pay full price for the phone. They didn't FORCE you into it. Want out? Pay the damn thing. Too cheap to pay it and move on? Then what are you doing with a $500 iPhone in the first place?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
December 17, 2009 11:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

You haven't tried getting a \"no-contract\" plan, have you? I had my own phone (iPhone first-gen unlocked) and wanted to get a no-contract plan with AT&T because I was only going to be in America for a couple months. They wouldn't let me. Store and kiosk staff said the iPhone had to be on a contract plan even if I already owned it free and clear (because out here, there are unlocked and even pre-jailbroken iPhones for sale). Said \"screw it\", used my Chinese SIM to roam. Ended up being cheaper because I mostly text and my provider doesn't charge for incoming text no matter where I am in the world. Outgoing texts back to China only run $0.20-something each.

I also had a look at Boost. Similarly-spec'd phones cost an order of magnitude less on this side of the Pacific. WTF is up with iDen phones being so expensive?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RedCatLinux
December 16, 2009 1:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is certainly an option for those not addicted to the electronic crack that is the iPhone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Naame
December 16, 2009 1:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If all of these contracts with the silly EFTs didn't exist and smart phones like the iphone didn't lock you into a single carrier then I am sure they would switch, but they can't. That is precisely why these contracts and the locking of phones into a single carrier is highly anti-competitive.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
December 16, 2009 1:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yeah, I guess protesting could be described that way, sure. Kind of a broad brush to paint that kind of action with...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
idip
December 16, 2009 1:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If you're up happy that the network can't handle the load on Friday...

Here's an idea...: Use a different provider.

Here's perhaps a reason not to:
1) You're PAYING for unlimited data.
2) You're paying for phone service.


But I guess if you ever buy anything and it doesn't operate as advertised when sold then we'll just tell you.... \"Get a different device/product\" Who cares if you're out the money.

3) It's not as easy as \"Use a different provider\" ... If a provider advertises a service, isn't it a valid expectation for that service to work as advertised?

Also... it's not just as easy as getting another provider, because there are early termination fees, fees for buying a new phone.

The consumer should not have to dish out that money because the provider could not follow through on the services they sold.

PS. If you're upset, why don't you call AT&T and tell them you're upset that as a paying user your service could be interrupted because their networks cannot handle data loads.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 1:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No one forced you or anyone else to take the contract deal. You could have paid the no-contract price and been free to switch providers at any time you choose. And no one is forcing you to use the iPhone. There are plenty of other phones available that make & receive calls perfectly fine.

Whining about your iPhone or because you took a contract price is frankly, being a baby.

You are not OWED an iPhone. Get over it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
idip
December 18, 2009 12:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"No one forced you or anyone else to take the contract deal. You could have paid the no-contract price and been free to switch providers at any time you choose. And no one is forcing you to use the iPhone. There are plenty of other phones available that make & receive calls perfectly fine.\"


You're right, no one forced these people to buy the iPhone (Which can only be used on AT*T regardless of price)... but just because they made a decision to be a CONSUMER and entered a contract for services then their complaints about poor service are no longer valid?

What? That makes no sense.

In addition, some phones don't work on all phone providers, so constantly switching every time someone goes wrong is not a always possible. If the company's would just fix the issue everyone would be happy.


\"Whining about your iPhone or because you took a contract price is frankly, being a baby.\"

They are not 'whining' about the iPhone price. They have a legitimate complaint about the service they are receiving.

\"You are not OWED an iPhone. Get over it.\"

You're right, they are now \"owed\" an iPhone. In fact, they PAID AT&T for the iPhone, through up front costs and contracts.

What they are \"OWED\" is proper service through their service provider because of the contract that binds them both.

Seems to me that you are... for some unknown reason... just very anti-iPhone.


Probably like those who say, \"People who buy Macs are sheep, they just follow the crowd\"
I like to respond...
\"Oh... what about the what... 90% of people who buy PC's just because everyone else has a PC?\"

Let me throw my disclaimer in here: I bought a launch iPhone 4GB with two year contract. That contract is up and I now currently use a TracFone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
friday3
December 16, 2009 1:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If the service does not work as advertised that is a breach of the contract on their end. You call them and complain, and tell them that if this is not fixed i plan to consider it a breach of the contract, return the phone and pay no ETF. I would also send this to them is writing.
Of course, causing every person who may not have an issue by purposely overloading the system will only show ATT that they do not have to fix anything. If every person ran every appliance and electronic device they had at the same time, most utilities could not handle the extra strain on the system. You could not afford that service. Act like an adult and go through proper channels to get things done, ot go ahead and be a whiney bitch. and get nothing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
idip
December 18, 2009 12:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"If the service does not work as advertised that is a breach of the contract on their end. You call them and complain, and tell them that if this is not fixed i plan to consider it a breach of the contract, return the phone and pay no ETF. I would also send this to them is writing.\"

We all know this doesn't happen because they will pull something about \"Our records don't show any dropped calls etc\".

Also... why should you have to leave? When you breach the contract (going over minutes) they charge you for more. Why don't we start charging phone carriers for not fulfilling their contracts.


\"Of course, causing every person who may not have an issue by purposely overloading the system will only show ATT that they do not have to fix anything. If every person ran every appliance and electronic device they had at the same time, most utilities could not handle the extra strain on the system. \"

Yep. If AT&T systems go down... people like you won't be calling and complaining. You'll just sit her and condemn iPhone users. I'm sure there are more people who use data on the AT&T network then just iPhone users. It'll be interesting to see how much the network can take. Apparently though, not much if regular usage in major cities will bring the network to it's knees.


\"You could not afford that service. Act like an adult and go through proper channels to get things done,\"

They have. How many times have iPhone users called AT&T that they are not getting adequate service. That there are issues with calling and data usage. What has AT&T done?

I'm sure that following your advice, \"going through the proper channels\", things will get done.

Just like the iPhone teathering. It's been over a year and that still isn't working.


\"ot go ahead and be a whiney bitch. and get nothing.\"

Language like that, helps no one.

Sometimes I wonder. If this wasn't the iPhone we were talking about, but the Sidekick, Blackberry, or any other phone well known and sold in abundance... if people would be so against consumers wanting proper service.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
oblivious87
December 16, 2009 1:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If your network can't handle its users using the network, change providers? Oh wait, that's what you just said!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 1:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If this stupid act of childishness actually affects my service, I WILL switch providers immediately. I do not want to be on the same network as a group that would take part in such ridiculous antics that could affect responsible people who are also PAYING for service. If my service goes down, I won't blame AT&T, I will blame the idiots taking part in this, but I assure you AT&T will lose my business because of it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Parsnip
December 16, 2009 12:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd love to switch my service. I can't afford to do so with the ridiculous ETF fees.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 1:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Again, no one forced you or anyone else to take the contract price. You could have paid the no-contract price for the phone and not had to ever worry about ETFs. You took the deal to save a buck, so no whining about it now.

Why did so many people opt into a contract with ETFs? Wasn't it a good deal at the time? If it wasn't a good deal, then why'd you do it? If it was a good deal, then live with your end of the deal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hooray4Zoidberg
December 16, 2009 2:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You should probably step down from your high horse because you can't see the point from up there. ETF or not the point is people were advertised a service and it's not being met. Would you be saying the same thing if McDonald's advertised a deal for a double cheeseburger and unlimited fries and soda for $2.99 then when people bought it they found the burger only had one patty the fry bin was always empty and the soda was flat?

I don't agree with what these people are doing but I do see their concern. You're paying $90 a month for an advertised service and it's not being met, I don't get your apologist angle? They should have known prior to the 3g release that the new wave of AT&T customers on smart phones were going to overwhelm the network to the point where service in major metropolitan ares is splotchy? Was that in some Nostradamus prophecy on a history channel special or something?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 17, 2009 4:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I go to McDonalds and get a crappy burger I don't organize a mob to retaliate. I go elsewhere to get my burger from then on.

Just because you PAY for something doesn't mean you're going to like it. I've bought lots of stuff I wasn't happy with and ended up throwing away. I didn't go and firebomb the stores.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PTB315
December 16, 2009 2:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Quit bitching at people who signed contracts, I'm not interested in paying $500.00 for a blackberry bold when I basically get a free $400 by agreeing to stick with AT&T for 2 years. I don't enjoy a level of income that lets me piss away $400 willy nilly thank you. I don't have the power to tell AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint that they have to stop customizing phones to work within their networks and force people to sign contracts to avoid paying the high prices of mobile phones.

Everyone understands your point, ETF wouldn't come into play if we didn't sign the contract. It is a fairly high cost consideration to get the good phones without signing a contract. The fact of the matter is people are planning a service interruption on a work day during standard work hours to make a point. This is not AT&T's fault. NOTHING IS GOING TO BE MADE BETTER BY THIS ACTION. Why would AT&T care about this? The officers of the company are going to sit around in a meeting and say \"oh man some people caused a short interruption in service protesting how we handle things, we better pay more attention to them?\" The group most affected by this are the customers. This is complete bullshit if it works.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Maz
December 16, 2009 12:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If people could get their iPhones on Verizon, I'm sure they would.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 16, 2009 12:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No, please. Data & voice are on completely different bands. 3g (UMTS) is capable of doing both at the same time, and if your phone supports UMTS, it will default to that as it is the best. However, your phone also supports EDGE and GPRS for data as well as plain old GSM for voice. So the UMTS band will be SHOT because people are going to be eating up the data. Most likely GPRS and EDGE will pick up the slack - they're slower though.

But your *calls* should go through as intended. If you're REALLY worried - disable 3g on friday.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Pants McCracky
December 16, 2009 12:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Heh. Yeah, I've been there. This is sorta like when protesters clog up traffic, and you're like, \"I don't even have a dog in this fight...I just want to get home!!\" But that's kind of the point of protests, to draw attention to themselves. If they were polite and inobtrusive, no one would ever know about them.

So, now that they've got your attention, are they going to get you on board their cause? Probably not. But a lot of people more sympathetically inclined are going to hear about it who otherwise wouldn't.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nodaybuttoday
December 16, 2009 2:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Completely agree. Look at all of the attention we are giving it right now. It's exactly what the \"protesters\" want, even if they can't get that many people to go along with the scheme on Friday.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
axiomatic
December 16, 2009 12:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

AT&T is stupid to legitimize this event with a corporate reply. Seriously AT&T. Fire the marketing department. They're idiots.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
axiomatic
December 16, 2009 1:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Now that I've had time to think about it. A more apropos protest would be to bring the AT&T wireless network down using phones other than an iphone.

THAT would really poke a hole in AT&T's counter argument.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
HIV 2 Elway
December 16, 2009 12:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I've never had a problem with AT&T coverage, then again I'm not in a major metropolitan area.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
yantelope
December 16, 2009 12:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Everyone votes in a free market and your ballot is your dollar. If ATT sucks so bad switch to someone better.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
ARP
December 16, 2009 1:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I know your comment was snark, but that's the issue. When companies engage in monopolistic behaviour, voting with your dollar has less of an impact. In this case, I would argue there are (finally) alternatives to the Jesus Phone that make going to another carrier viable, but that's not always the case, especially in certain areas (e.g. exurbs or rural) where is is only one or two carriers that provide coverage.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
yantelope
December 16, 2009 1:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's kind of my point in that the argument should be about the legality of ATT having a monopoly on the iPhone as opposed to the quality of the network.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 16, 2009 1:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If you realistically expect a Jesus Phone to work in rural areas, you have got to be bonkers. Besides probably not having 3g anywhere near you, the question just becomes WHY?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Naame
December 16, 2009 1:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Tell that to those with an iphone and live in a metropolis. Yet, they have terrible 3G connectivity. Not even AT&T denies that what I am describing is true in many case. Their network is shit because their business practices are highly anti-competitive. Yes, there are also other reasons but that is biggest one. You can thank contracts with EFTs and smart phones that lock you into a single carrier no matter how bad the service gets.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BridgetPentheus
December 16, 2009 2:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

AT&T's problems are AT&Ts fault and not the Iphone owners. I had a phone that I bought outright while still on an AT&T contract that was not a smart phone but was everything I wanted with more features than the iphone. Than the 3g came out. I live right next to NYC and my service became deplorable. So what are you going to tell me to eat the price of the phone + ETFs+buy a new phone since the only 'national' GSM 'competition' is t-mobile which my husband was using and didn't work well either. Don't blame the consumer blame the company for not living up to what it promised. Furthermore the fact that we don't have one standard in this country is why phones are exclusive, why we have such terrible coverage since companies don't share towers and why we have such high mobile prices. Furthermore the no contract option only works if you are already on at&t and have a current contract to finish out or are month to month if you buy a no contract phone and want to get service they make you sign a new contract (cute catch)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
outlulz
December 16, 2009 12:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Awesome, my service is going to be bad because of some assholes? Thanks.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
drizzt380
December 16, 2009 1:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Your service is going to be terrible because AT&T is having a large number of people pay for a service that they cannot provide.

Its not like their doing something illegal. Their not hacking AT&T's network or anything. Their using their device as advertised and at the limits they have negotiated with AT&T. How is that their fault?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Cant_stop_the_rock
December 16, 2009 1:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Every network is designed with the assumption that every user would not be fully utilizing it at all times. It would be idiotic to design a network any other way. In most areas of the country AT&T is able to provide the service they promise in the absence of a denial of service attack.

As for legality, I have no idea about the legality of a denial of service attack in the US.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 2:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yes, see my comment below. Using your device as advertised does not constitute a DDoS attack; however, coordinating with others in order to bring down the network potentially might. There are laws that have been successfully used against people who do such things, although I doubt that it would be very easy to apply that sort of thing in this case.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Traveshamockery
December 16, 2009 12:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Honestly, what network WOULDN'T be brought to its knees by all its users simultaneously using data-intensive apps?

This is juvenile.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Fred E.
December 16, 2009 12:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That an AT&T spokesman has commented on it is a victory in itself.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Wireless Joe
December 16, 2009 12:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm going to protest traffic congestion by getting in my car and sitting on the freeway during rush hour.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
drizzt380
December 16, 2009 1:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

More like I'm going to protest by attempting to ride down the freeway as much as possible while following all applicable laws.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Wireless Joe
December 16, 2009 1:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yeah, I didn't mean \"sitting\" parked, I meant \"sitting\" in traffic with my road-raging brethren as we crawl along at 5 mph.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
MercuryPDX
December 16, 2009 12:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I hope some of those 80 milion customers are not Emergency Services. A stunt like this could unnecessarily put lives in jeopardy.

I third (fourth) the \"Quit pitching a tantrum and just go elsewhere\" sentiment.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 16, 2009 12:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Emergency services have priority on all the towers, plus voice band has absolutely squat to do with data. Only reason iphones suck with it is because they default to UMTS for voice as well (which is 3g band). When you have no 3g coverage the stupid iphone triiiies its damndest to find it anyway, even if it means you can't make calls. It only defaults to GSM if you turn the 3g off.

911 goes out on the very most basic of bands, and has priority on all the towers. So yeah, no one will die.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coym
December 16, 2009 7:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It doesn't only default to edge when 3G is turned off. Mine switches back and forth all the time when I'm traveling

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
admiral_stabbin
December 16, 2009 12:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have to admit I'm not impressed with \"Operation Chokehold\".

First of all, a pissing match isn't going to help the situation. Further, this is like having a pissing match with a fire hose. Even if you get 20 of your friends together to try and \"win\", they merely need to dispatch another fire truck to put you on your arse.

To answer the question no one has asked, \"Should I just standby and do nothing?\", the answer is: yes. Let AT&T dig their own grave on this one...they broke ground long ago, and recent events have them feverishly shoveling dirt aside.

As an AT&T + iPhone user myself, I won't be taking part in this Operation Sausage Party.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
redwall_hp
December 16, 2009 12:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review
To answer the question no one has asked, \"Should I just standby and do nothing?\", the answer is: yes. Let AT&T dig their own grave on this one...they broke ground long ago, and recent events have them feverishly shoveling dirt aside.

So we should let them astroturf, fight their way out of network neutrality legislation, and jack their prices...for a product they don't deliver?

A bit of consumer revolt is in order.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
admiral_stabbin
December 16, 2009 1:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I guess I'm not the type to subscribe to an attempt to affect a service disruption that could affect all of their customers. I hate to use the word, however, it is a form of terrorism (you can substitute sabotage if it feels better).

A similar situation comes to mind...

When my last ISP kept under-delivering on service (both at home and my office), I didn't take it upon myself to organize an assault upon their network. Instead, I took the ~$225/month in recurring billing the old ISP was getting from service at both locations, and I now give it to their competitor. The service is twice as fast, and immeasurably more reliable.

I really do find AT&T to be a despicable service provider. I just don't think terrorizing their network is the right way to handle them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
azntg
December 16, 2009 12:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree that a consumer revolt is warranted.

But if anybody seriously thinks that the choke will get AT&T to haul ass in making networks improvements and changing their tone, I have a bridge to sell them. If anything, all it'll do is to make a few men giggle uncontrollably over what they unleashed.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
robocop is bleeding
December 16, 2009 12:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm a iPhone user/AT&T customer and I'm looking forward to see what comes of this. I don't think I'll be participating (3pm in Boston on a Friday is Time For Drinking, not Time For Downloads), but I will check to see if my service drops. If it does, then that means a small number of users are able to bring down what should be a robust network, which does not bode well for future reliability.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
rekoil
December 16, 2009 12:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So, they're going to bring the network to its knees by...*USING IT AS DESIGNED*?

I understand oversubscription models - that's why no one dinged the wireless carriers on 9/11 - but at some point the carriers need to man up and realize that not building this capacity may be good in the short term but will completely fark them in the long term. Do you think Apple would be seriously considering moving the iPhone to Verizon if AT&T's network *didn't* suck rocks?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
yevarechecha
December 16, 2009 12:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If they are protesting the slow network by doing something that will make it even slower, how do they know anybody will even be able to tell?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
MyTQuinn
December 16, 2009 5:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's the irony of the whole thing - no one will even notice. :)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
cynical_reincarnation
December 16, 2009 12:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

like a turtle stuck in molasses in january...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
halothane
December 16, 2009 12:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

OT, but... OMG! It's.... NANNERPUSS!!!

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Starrion
December 16, 2009 12:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I believe the point is that AT&T has this wonderful but bandwidth intensive handset that they got a market exclusive on, and they are not making the investment to keep their network up.

When they got this monopoly, they should have made the investment instead of sitting here years later saying their customers are using the product too much.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
December 16, 2009 12:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wonder whether we're going to see a small drop in this juvenile delinquency on Friday between the hours of 3 pm and 4 pm when all the people running data-intensive apps realize they have to start recharging their phones around the 3:40 mark.


/has an iPhone, will not be participating

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
moore850
December 16, 2009 12:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

can you hear me now? muhahahaha!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
jeremy11
December 16, 2009 12:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have AT&T and am in the nashville area, my service is great! I have an iPhone for personal use and use it all the time. My job gave me a blackberry on the verizon network and the first weekend I had it I had a total of 7 dropped calls!

I know verizon typically is better from my experience in other parts of the country at least in Nashville AT&T is far better.

That is unless you all decide to take the network down. :) I agree with others, instead of purposly attacking the AT&T network in hopes to bring it down just cancel your contract, pay the early term fee (ETF) you agreed to when you got your phone and leave AT&T. No one is forcing you to stay.If you don't want to pay the ETF just live out your contract and cancel when it's over.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
vladthepaler
December 16, 2009 12:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I misread \"irresponsible\" as \"irresistable\". It's amusing and sad that AT&T's response to rampant criticism of its network is to deny there's a problem rather than to fix the problem.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Rectilinear Propagation
December 16, 2009 12:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Announcing that it's your fault the network goes down isn't going to hurt AT&T. Why do something that practically supports the \"It's the user's fault\" argument?

If they manage to get enough people on the network long enough to bring it down AT&T will just say, \"See, it's users being stupid about their data usage that's the problem!\"

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Naame
December 16, 2009 1:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think the actual act of this protest is silly, but one thing that a lot of people who are against Operation Chokehold should realize is that consumers rarely react this way when they are dealing with a product and/or service where a truly competitive environment full of quality customer choice exists. That is not the case here because this industry is not consumer friendly and not enough competition exists. Instead it is an oligopoly.

I also believe it will get better though if phones matching or exceeding the quality of the iphone come out which by default come unlocked. That and less of these ridiculously long contracts with massive EFTs will help too.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
December 16, 2009 1:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It shouldn't matter why the network is going down, though, if ATT is saying it can provide a certain level of service, and fails to

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rectilinear Propagation
December 16, 2009 4:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree that it shouldn't matter and for a lot of people it won't but it will to AT&T. They'll say this proves that it's the user's fault, or that this level of usage never happens and it's unreasonable to expect that it wouldn't affect the network, they'll say we should be pissed at the iPhone users and not them.

I don't know how they'd keep it secret from AT&T and the media but it'd have been better if they could have done this without the announcement. That way AT&T can complain about how it shouldn't count since it was a deliberate attack.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rectilinear Propagation
December 16, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree that it shouldn't matter and for a lot of people it won't but it will to AT&T. They'll say this proves that it's the user's fault, or that this level of usage never happens and it's unreasonable to expect that it wouldn't affect the network, they'll say we should be pissed at the iPhone users and not them.

I don't know how they'd keep it secret from AT&T and the media but it'd have been better if they could have done this without the announcement. That way AT&T can complain about how it shouldn't count since it was a deliberate attack.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Jbondkicks
December 18, 2009 9:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree. From an AT&T standpoint, what's the solution to this? Invest millions into creating a much better network or capping data and using this as proof positive that a small percentage of users are causing all the problems? I know what my money's on.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
bigd73
December 16, 2009 12:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I say do it. I used to work for the Deathstar in manufacturing as did my Wifes Grandfather and her Uncles and my Mother / Father in-law. It is high time that AT&T stops living off of their name from 60 years ago and starts improving what they have. They still operate with the attitude that everyone in the country rents their home phone from them and their the only shop in town, but their not and if they don't get that through their thick skulls they will go the way of G.M. Maybe that would be best but it's sad the way it's happening. Just look at their reaction to Fake Steve Jobs, it wasn't were going to improve, No it's everyone else is wrong and not us.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 12:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

While I certainly feel that there probably are serious capacity problems in some areas on AT&T's network, this sort of stunt really proves nothing. NO data network aimed at consumer applications is designed to handle the absolute peak usage that would ever theoretically be possible. That would be ridiculous and would make the service cost a lot more than it currently does (since most of the capacity would go unused most of the time), and so this stunt isn't really proving much of anything that isn't already obvious.

Where AT&T clearly is having problems is with keeping up even with just average load in some places. THOSE places, I think, need some major network upgrades. But that's entirely a different issue from a statistical anomaly such as a huge, artificially generated traffic spike.

BTW, AT&T's data and call service sucked here until this summer, when they did some huge upgrades to the local infrastructure. Before, I was getting slow data and tons of dropped calls. Since then, it's been extremely fast and I've had almost no dropped calls. So I'm now happy with their service. They just need to roll out the same sort of upgrades everywhere else, and they need to do it continually (as greater capacity always begets greater usage).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Quatre707
December 16, 2009 12:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This will not accomplish anything positive for consumers.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
AK47 - Now with longer screen name!
December 16, 2009 12:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sorry to go off-topic, but I'm so creeped out by that picture . . . .

Reply
1 replies
","","","
\"user-pic\"
punkrawka
December 16, 2009 12:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If someone has a medical emergency at 3:00 on Friday and can't get 911 service, I hope the family subpoenas the IP addresses and names all the participants in a wrongful death suit. AT&T has problems but this is not a mature solution.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 16, 2009 1:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You're going on the assumption that voice and data go across the same networks. They don't. Your tower can be down for data but still working on voice. There's about 5 different \"bands\" working at the same time off of any one tower. Two of them support voice. Four support data. (UMTS (3g) supports both). The vast majority of iphone users are going to be eating up the UMTS data band, when that fills up it will trickle down to EDGE then to GPRS if it gets really bad. GSM is the only band on there that is voice only and should stay up regardless. Because the UMTS band will be taken up, GSM may experience higher load to cope with the lack of 3g voice services, but it shouldn't choke unless there is a really HUGE emergency that pushes voice usage up exponentially as well.

Plus, numerous people have already stated emergency calls get priority on a tower no matter what. You can call 911 with no service. So, your point is moot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 1:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Since you seem to have an understanding of how exactly the towers are set up...

I'm familiar with the basic protocols that you mention. However, how does the \"upstream\" (ie, from the tower to the rest of the phone network and the Internet) currently work? I know how it used to work, but I'm wondering how they've chosen to integrate these high-speed data networks (e.g., 3G) into that infrastructure. Is it possible for data volume to saturate the upstream bandwidth from the tower to the network, thus impacting voice calls? Or does it remain completely segregated, with voice calls given priority?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
December 17, 2009 12:40 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

More than that, emergency calls are supposed to go through on ANY available network. People clogging up AT&T? It's supposed to be able to see T-Mobile signal if available and force the call through.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
December 16, 2009 12:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If someone has a medical emergency at 3 pm, I hope they're not trying to send a tweet to 911. Voice will be unaffected.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
thinkoplex
December 16, 2009 12:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Since I don't get an AT&T signal in my apartment, I doubt that running something data-intensive via my wireless network would fit the spirit of the protest. I suppose I could go out, but, since my iPhone often switches over to the Mexican carrier Telcel in AT&T's many, many dead zones, that wouldn't work either.

Sarcasm aside, if the AT&T network were to crumble on Friday due to this protest, the fault would still lie entirely with AT&T. They sold a service based on unlimited data usage, they have reaped enormous profits from iPhone customers in particular, and yet they have sat on their hands (and piles of cash) and done nothing while their network performance degrades daily.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
NeverLetMeDown
December 16, 2009 2:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No. Just no.

1. They never committed to any bitrate. Look through your contract. Do you see an SLA? I didn't think so.
2. Even for enterprise wireline services that do have SLAs, the carriers don't plan for everybody using it as once. That would be insanely expensive. The wireline voice network, which is about the most robust network around, would be brought to its knees if 1/6 of Americans all picked up the phone at once.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Peter Gibbons
December 16, 2009 11:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is a lot worse than slow downloads of youtubes. I live in the absolute middle of san francisco -- type san francisco into google maps, zoom in all the way, and you're a block from my house. However, I do not get AT&T 3g at my apartment. I can only talk on my phone at the front of the house because I drop calls when I move to the back.

AT&T advertises FULL STRENGTH high speed coverage, without exception, throughout san francisco. That is 100% false and they know it -- I've called to complain. But they still lie in their promotional maps, which show no variation in 3g coverage throughout sf.

THAT is what pisses me -- and a lot of other users -- off. AT&T blatantly lies, knows it, and won't let us out of our contracts when we complain. They deserve whatever's coming to them.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
gqcarrick
December 16, 2009 12:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is why having phones locked to a certain carrier sucks. Most of the people complaining are iPhone users. If they could move their iPhone to Verizon they would, but because they can't and they love their phone they do thing slike this. Its a good idea, unfortunately the companies aren't going to give up their lock on a certain handset if they don't have to.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
veronykah
December 16, 2009 2:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have an iPhone on TMobile other than the physical PHONE itself being too quiet, I don't really have any issues.
TMobile FTW!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 12:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd really like to see some sort of antitrust enforcement over this issue by the U.S. government. It really does seem like anticompetitive collusion between the carriers and the device makers, to me (as well as possibly between the different carriers, as this probably also inhibits the entry of new competitors to the market). The device makers can still have a viable business model without network locking, obviously, as they could just sell their devices to consumers directly based on their merits/needs. The networks would also have a viable business model, but they would have to actually be competitive (ie, offer better customer service, more reliable/faster networks, less restrictive contract terms, etc). I don't see how this wouldn't be a big win for everyone except for a few huge corporations that currently have a stranglehold on the market. We would get better wireless service, better wireless devices, and wouldn't be stuck with crappy carriers just to get a certain phone or a crappy phone just to get a certain carrier.

Of course, our government is run mainly for the benefit of big corporations, and not the people, so I doubt it will happen.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gqcarrick
December 16, 2009 12:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Thats exactly it, the government will do nothing. AT&T better hope Apple never jumps ship, otherwise they will be tied with Sprint for users.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
sp00nix
December 16, 2009 12:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Quit complaining and get a Nokia. Never had an issue with it.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 16, 2009 1:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Thats because Nokia isn't a smart phone, 1, and 2, even if it were it doesn't have near the capacity to suck up data like the iphone does.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Miraluka
December 16, 2009 3:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Apparently you have no idea about the kind of phones Nokia makes if you say they aren't smartphones...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 1:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The issue is with AT&T's network, not the iPhone. My iPhone works wonderfully, but as I mentioned upthread, the AT&T network was recently upgraded where I live. So it's clearly a network problem, not a phone problem.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
highmodulus
December 16, 2009 1:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

And this helps how?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
dmuth
December 16, 2009 1:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think I'll run the speedtest app on Friday, and report the results from Philadelphia. :-)

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
blogger X
December 16, 2009 3:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

How is your service in the city? My friend has an iPhone and he tells me he doesn't have any issues. I think he's bullsh*tting.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
coren
December 16, 2009 1:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

80 million? I assume that's got to be worldwide, i can't imagine over a quarter of the US on ATT

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Red_Eye
December 16, 2009 1:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What good does it do to try and grab all the bandwidth if you cant even get connected LOL.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
scribble something
December 16, 2009 1:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If this protest is successful, wouldn't it legitimize a plan for tiered pricing to \"prevent data hogs\" from slowing down the network?

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
SkuldChan
December 16, 2009 1:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So how do I tell if AT&T's network is brought down by this scheme? It never works for me properly anyhow during \"normal\" operation.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
ubermex
December 16, 2009 1:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Too many people int he comments don't understand what actually happened. AT&T actually said that their customers should refrain from using so much data. They actually said that this week. They told their ACTUAL CUSTOMERS to stop using the SERVICES THAT THEY PAY FOR because their network cannot handle actually providing them.

THAT is what started this. THAT is why AT&T deserves this.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 2:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't have a problem with my service. I am also a PAYING customer. However now, I am to be punished and possibly denied my service so that a bunch of adolescents can get their \"revenge\" on AT&T. Why exactly do I deserve this?

And when this little mass-tantrum doesn't work, then what? Do they step it up to actual physical attacks on AT&T's buildings or employees? How about other customers that do not participate? Will their be retaliation against us?

I think anyone that participates in this should have their accounts closed and be banned from using AT&T ever again. I think THAT is an appropriate response from AT&T. As a bonus effect, it would free up the network for the rest of us.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
phonebem
December 16, 2009 5:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm really having a hard time seeing what people don't seem to get about this whole thing... Everything was touched-off by AT&T stating that their customers WHO WERE FORCED TO PAY FOR UNLIMITED DATA CONTRACTS in order to use a product they were sold with or without an ETF agreement actually have the gall to USE THE UNLIMITED DATA THEY WERE FORCED TO PAY FOR...
To me the crux of the matter isn't even AT&T offering a product they can't hope to deliver on, its the fact that they force you to buy the product that they can't deliver on. To borrow the McDonald's analogy, its the same as if you could only eat the hamburger you bought if you pay for the unlimited fries... Then being asked to leave the store because you had the gall to ask for more than the 7 fries they were able to give you. Oh and they have to stomp on your burger before you leave because it can't be eaten anywhere else, but feel free to keep it...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 10:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Nobody \"forced\" you to buy anything. Nobody held a gun to your head and forced you to buy a damn iPhone. You bought the phone & the contract of your own free will. So the service sucks. Cancel it and move on and stop whining already.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
phonebem
December 16, 2009 11:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You totally missed the point of my post...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
phonebem
December 16, 2009 11:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You totally missed the point of my post...

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
davebg5
December 16, 2009 1:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Maybe if AT&T devoted more of the $10 BILLION in profits they made last year into fixing their craptastic network instead of paying Luke Wilson all that money to shill for them...

Maybe if the CEO of AT&T didn't admit his network's shortcomings to investors, while customer service denies it to customers reporting issues...

...maybe their customers wouldn't be angry enough to resort to such measures to call public attention to the matter.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Namrok1
December 16, 2009 2:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Yeah! Operation Chokehold is so awesome! We're really sticking it to the man! I'm so excited, I could-- Uh-oh. I seem to be actually choking. This is not good. No problem. I guess I'll just call 9-1-1 and get an ambulance over here... (dials) Stupid network won't let my call go through. I'll just try again. (dials) Still nothing. Hmmm. My throat appears to be closing. Activism forev-- (collapses and dies).\" --Guy Who Dies During Operation Chokehold

Honestly, though, AT&T sucks, but making the network worse for an hour could have some serious real world ramifications.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 2:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So far, cellphone DATA networks aren't really a critical emergency service. Voice is separate.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Tankueray
December 16, 2009 3:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Right. I've had data cards and smartphones from AT&T for years. The data has always sucked. The iPhone actually works to pull data. I can tether my iPhone at 3mbps, yet either of my data cards get maybe half that. I've not switched the sims around to see what's what, but when the iPhone came out, my data cards suffered. And that damned software they make you use for the data cards, it's so much crap. I canceled one card last weekend, and I have to wait a while to cancel my other one. I'm waiting for approved tethering on iPhone before I do.

And why is it that the other carriers that offer data cards have little wireless routers now and AT&T does not? Because they talk a big game but simply do not have the infrastructure to handle it. They're selling plasma televisions on a desert island, damned things don't even float.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Tankueray
December 16, 2009 3:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Right. I've had data cards and smartphones from AT&T for years. The data has always sucked. The iPhone actually works to pull data. I can tether my iPhone at 3mbps, yet either of my data cards get maybe half that. I've not switched the sims around to see what's what, but when the iPhone came out, my data cards suffered. And that damned software they make you use for the data cards, it's so much crap. I canceled one card last weekend, and I have to wait a while to cancel my other one. I'm waiting for approved tethering on iPhone before I do.

And why is it that the other carriers that offer data cards have little wireless routers now and AT&T does not? Because they talk a big game but simply do not have the infrastructure to handle it. They're selling plasma televisions on a desert island, damned things don't even float.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
allknowingtomato
December 16, 2009 2:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

People took the ETF price because they assumed their devices would function as advertised and as reasonably expected. The ETF fee is only supposed to apply when the consumer is deciding to breach the contract and leaves early; it shoud not apply when the provider breached the contract by not providing the advertised service. ATT is inconsistent about acknowledging its service shortcomings.

These people are not in the situation where consumers take the ETF contract and then decide that, despite the fact that ATT is living up to its end of the bargain, they want to switch to verizon; you're right, no whinging there. For these people, ATT is holding itself out as offering more than just voice support with its network, and then it is not living up to that offer once accepted. Because ATT refuses to admit this and let people out of the contract with no ETF (because it's ATT's breach, not the consumer's), the consumers are trapped living up to their side of the bargain without the quid pro quo that put them in that situation in the first place. Even consumers who thoroughly research the service areas of ATT are often surprised and disappointed by the service they receive

your service will be shot Friday because people will using their phones within the rights of their contracts. if you don't like it, change providers. and no whining about the ETF if you have one. what's that? it's not your fault that your phone does not work the way you contracted for it to, so you shouldn't have to pay the ETF? TFB, join the club. We're having a protest on friday.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
asten77
December 17, 2009 10:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yeah, except tath anyone who bought a 2G iphone is out of contract by now, and can move. Anyone who bought a 3G/3GS recently easily could've known this issue existed, if not beforehand, surely within the return period. I don't feel too sorry for people who go out and buy something knowing full well what the pros and cons are, and then expect the cons to somehow not apply.

Or do they just want their toy?

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
allknowingtomato
December 16, 2009 2:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

People took the ETF price because they assumed their devices would function as advertised and as reasonably expected. The ETF fee is only supposed to apply when the consumer is deciding to breach the contract and leaves early; it shoud not apply when the provider breached the contract by not providing the advertised service. ATT is inconsistent about acknowledging its service shortcomings.

These people are not in the situation where consumers take the ETF contract and then decide that, despite the fact that ATT is living up to its end of the bargain, they want to switch to verizon; you're right, no whinging there. For these people, ATT is holding itself out as offering more than just voice support with its network, and then it is not living up to that offer once accepted. Because ATT refuses to admit this and let people out of the contract with no ETF (because it's ATT's breach, not the consumer's), the consumers are trapped living up to their side of the bargain without the quid pro quo that put them in that situation in the first place. Even consumers who thoroughly research the service areas of ATT are often surprised and disappointed by the service they receive

your service will be shot Friday because people will using their phones within the rights of their contracts. if you don't like it, change providers. and no whining about the ETF if you have one. what's that? it's not your fault that your phone does not work the way you contracted for it to, so you shouldn't have to pay the ETF? TFB, join the club. We're having a protest on friday.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 16, 2009 9:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You're getting your \"Unlimited\" data aren't you? Whether it's slow or not is not the point. You're not being charged extra for using extra data.

You have NOTHING to complain about. You are getting \"unlimited\" data.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
December 16, 2009 5:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's within the rights of people's contracts to coordinate with each other in order to intentionally disrupt the network? Creating a massive traffic spike has NOTHING to do with demonstrating anything about shortcomings in AT&T's service. No network could deal with that, if it involves enough people.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
ElizabethD
December 16, 2009 3:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Great comment and responses! I am all about Lord Vader in his Anakin incarnation.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
xCarsonx
December 16, 2009 4:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

A municipality asks for people to conserve water and power because its for the greater good of the community. If they run out of water people have no water to drink. If they run out of electricity people cant cool and heat their homes leading to problems for the elderly and people who cant handle extremes.

You are complaining that for an hour your service will be disrupted. Isn't that the same thing they are arguing? That when they need to access the internet or whatever they can't? Sounds like you should be joining the protest! Instead of talking against it.

ps. I have verizon and all your service are belong to us.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
MisterE
December 16, 2009 4:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well, since AT&T had plenty of notice this was happening, perhaps they shifted resources on the network to accommodate the expected traffic? Better yet, upgrade infrastructure to meet customer demand. Oh yeah - everyone else has thought of that.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
SteveinOhio
December 16, 2009 5:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Isn't this just proving that offering an unlimited plan is a bad idea, and maybe the new way forward is data caps? Not sure this protest makes sense given that it highlights the exact problem that AT&T is trying to point to (real or imagined), that the largest data users on unlimited plans are ruining it for everyone.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
BridgetPentheus
December 16, 2009 6:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Data caps aren't the issue, if people were allowed to pay for the amount of data they want to use (i can't even do 1gb in a month trying really hard) then people wouldn't be mad. They're being forced to pay for 5gb that they can't get to because the networks are so poor. AT&T there's an easy solution set caps and do what providers in other countries do, once you hit the cap if your use is bottling up the network AT&T slows down your speed.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
TexasJim
December 16, 2009 5:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't have AT&T service but I used to work as CSR for them. Hated every minute of it because folks would call in mad about loss of service and I always had to tap dance around why their service was so bad. After not fixing the problem I was then required to upsell to buy accessories. Maybe I should go to the call center on Friday and watch the representatives scream and pull their hair out.

Concerning the ETF... If a phone was discounted at purchase with a two year contract then shouldn't the voice/data service plan reflect this(i.e. be a higher cost)? Conversely, if a phone is purchased at full retail without a discount then shouldn't the voice/data service plan be less expensive?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
JollyJumjuck
December 16, 2009 5:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

And it's reasons like this that I don't ditch my landline. No, I'm not on the AT&T network, but unless and until cell networks become more reliable, I'm not going to rely on my cell phone as my sole source of telephone communication. Need to dial 911...oops, can't get a signal. Waiting for that important call from the hospital where I have a family member going in for emergency surgery...oops, can't get a signal.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
coym
December 16, 2009 7:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ugh. Yes, please slow down the network for the rest of us were it works fine. Seriously, this is not the way to do it. It's a very selfish thing to do and is not going to solve anything. Hurting other users (of other phones besides the iPhone as well) and only think about yourselves.

Looks like I'll be using Edge during that time since everyone feels the need to be abusive.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
consumerd
December 16, 2009 7:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

To those bitching about a contract:

There's this invention called \"Prepaid\" ever hear of it? yea I have one, and you know what? for an average of about $30/month for my wife's phone and mine I really don't have a contract, nor fees, nor well even an ETF. My phones? They only cost me $60 a piece. So I spent a whopping $120, and have had the best service to date. If the carrier has too many problems? Well I just simply switch to another carrier's product. Even QWERTY phones are now starting to make it to the prepaid market!

They should have named it March of the iPhone babies come this friday. WOuld have gotten a much better participation factor!

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
BridgetPentheus
December 16, 2009 8:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You are just a troll. The issue isn't iphone owners only, the issue is that for people who were already with AT&T had their service downgraded no matter WHAT phone they were using. AT&T won't let you use most smartphones with a pre-paid, not with an iphone whatsover (except for the 1st gen and not anymore) and for me pre-paid is pretty expensive when you get charged a dollar a day to use it and if a wrong number calls you, you lose money. All people are asking for is what they are promised. You are jealous of people with iphones The problem lies with the network infrastructure here in America and until that is fixed most people can't make a stand with their money.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
consumerd
December 17, 2009 6:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Troll? that's harsh maybe...

Naaa, I use a phone for what it is.... a phone!

Imagine the F**K that? Holy H*LL

Granted... I have an iTouch, but not an iPhone. For some crazy reason I decided to keep it seperate. I guess all the teenagers (including yourself) couldn't seperate that could you?

Bottom line..... no one made you purchase an iPhone... you did that yourself!!.... I don't feel sorry for the suckers there are in America. There is a saying...... \"a fool and his money are soon parted.\"

Did you learn anything? I am guessing not..

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
soj4life
December 16, 2009 8:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Fake Steve is backing down after the FCC's DHS liaison called it irresponsible, or rather threatened him off the record with some type of charges if he continued.

I so go for it, what is the harm? It is not like cellphone networks are able to handle large events, let alone a disaster. All this will do is just show that being able to be the fastest network, doesn't actually mean that. Really the FCC should be investigating why at&t's network drops so many calls and is not able to handle itself call volume.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
vanctuckymyfoot
December 16, 2009 9:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I was in New York City a few years ago with a friend of mine. He had a Verizon phone, I had Cingular (which previously was and later returned to being AT&T). Sitting in the exact same location in midtown Manhattan, he had full bars, I had no service.

I canceled my service at the end of that month and switched to Verizon. I *never* get dropped calls with them.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
newfenoix
December 16, 2009 10:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I live in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area and have ZERO problems with AT&T. I have no problems in my home area or in downtown Dallas or in downtown Ft. Worth. But, I don't have an iPhone and will NEVER have an iPhone. I will not own ANYTHING from Apple.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
PTB315
December 16, 2009 11:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

To the editors of Consumerist: I do NOT understand the logic you employ on your tone with the posts you make. You have no problem getting on a soap box and labeling a Chris Farley DirectTV commercial with words like \"tasteless\" or \"offensive\", or whatever specific negative words you used in that particular post, but then we have a post about people making a conscious effort to interrupt a major cell phone carrier's service and you do nothing more than point out their effort. Where is the counter point that if this was ever achieved it would have extremely negative repercussions for AT&T customers? They're doing this on a work day during standard work hours. This could be awful.

I feel I can comfortably say that more people depend on their mobile phones more than any other invention since the industrial revolution. Working cell phones are critical to individuals and businesses for so many things throughout the course of a day. They're needed in emergencies to get a hold of authorities or locate people in a hurry. I can't even list all the ways cell phones are so important. But for this article you choose to just point out whats happening and put no commentary addressing any of these realistic concerns in it?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Matt08642
December 16, 2009 11:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wanna call 911? Too bad, iPhone users are refreshing the Apple homepage over and over again on Friday
*in protest

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Chris.W
December 17, 2009 1:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

How bout this AT&T, less marketing and more infrastructure upgrading.

This is akin to Broadband Companies offering unlimited high speed broadband and then complaining when everybody uses this unlimited broadband in the manner it is advertised.

Stop promising the world (in big bold letters).

Chris

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 17, 2009 5:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wonder if it would make everyone happy if AT&T did just that.

Make a big announcement stating, \"Due to misunderstandings we are discontinuing the use of the term 'Unlimited' and replacing it with the phrase 'Slow, Spotty & Crappy'. That's all. No other changes. Our focus groups have concluded this more accurately describes the network to our user's satisfaction.\"

Wouldn't that effectively accomplish the \"stop making promises\" portion of the complaint? Then everyone would not be confused by the magical word 'unlimited' and confusing it with \"so damn fast I can't even keep up with it!\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
VagrantRadio
December 17, 2009 9:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The comments here are hilarious! It's not like protesting congestion by sitting in it, it's the paying consumer sending a damn message to At&t to get off their high horse and do something.

I know, I know.. vote with your dollars. \"Go somewhere else if you don't like the service\"

I already paid for my phone and continually pay every month for shitty service. I can't take my phone elsewhere because of the agreement between Apple and At&t and I'm not about to pay an eft to get out, buy another phone, get yet another phone number and yada, yada, yada. I shouldn't have to. I should get better service on a network that is supposed to be able to handle data intensive apps and some damn picture messages.

Don't worry, 911 calls go through no matter what. There's a separate service and towers for that.

\"Boo-hoo, my service is going to be bad because of some assholes!\" Now you know how I feel, my service is bad because of some assholes, At&t!

\"So, they're going to bring the network to its knees by...*USING IT AS DESIGNED*? \" At&t has already put the blame on the users for them having a shitty network because too much data is being used by apps and messages. If that's the case, they're screwed if this works.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 17, 2009 11:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I told a similar thing to a waitress once. I felt she was taking to long between trips to my table, so a pounded my fists on the table and said, \"I should get better service! I'm paying for it!\" (small lip twitch and a single tear fell off my cheek).....

When she acknowledged that she was a little slow, and asked if I would be patient, I rounded up a bunch of customers and we all decided to eat large kitchen-intensive meals all at the same time to teach her a lesson.

It was OUR RIGHT as PAYING CUSTOMERS to get better service dammit! I'm going to go pout in the corner now.

Moral of the story:

The world does not revolve around you and your stupid phone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
VagrantRadio
December 17, 2009 3:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No, you're right. All of us little cry babies should sit back, take it and leave that waitress a big fat tip!

My god man, what were we thinking? daddy_froglegs has answered all of our problems in reply to comments on a website dedicated to informing consumers about their rights! The world doesn't revolve around my stupid phone, it revolves around not being one of the assholes that screws up his service on Friday.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
daddy_froglegs
December 17, 2009 4:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Once again, just because you think the service you're getting sucks, doesn't mean you're not getting the service. There is no breach of contract. You're paying for unlimited, you're getting unlimited. Is it crap? That's for you to decide. But you're not capped and you're not charged extra beyond what you agreed to. That's \"unlimited\". It may be \"unlimited crap\", but it's still unlimited. Your impatience does not mean they're in breach.

Don't like it? You have a choice.
1. Participate in a felony DDOS to accomplish nothing.
2. Find a different provider.
3. Live with it.

It's really that simple. Whining about ETFs, the cost of an iPhone, and your \"rights\" is going to continue to get you nowhere fast. Nobody cares. Especially not AT&T. AT&T is not going to sit back, allow their network to be taken down without consequences, and then suddenly proclaim to the world, \"We were wrong! We're going to throw billions of dollars into fixing this RIGHT NOW so these guys can watch YouTube better!\"

Are you daft?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
crazydavythe1st
December 17, 2009 11:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Do you even know what DDOS is? Why don't you look it up before you go name dropping acronyms everywhere. Heck, I want to participate if only because of your response. A felony, huh?

hey everyone! It's a FELONY for me to listen to Pandora on my phone tomorrow at 3 pm. It's a FELONY for me to use the service that I've already paid for.

I AM ENTITLED to an iphone, IF I PAY FOR IT AND THE SERVICE.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
asten77
December 17, 2009 10:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I had an iphone i borrowed at work, set it next to my AT&T Moto Q9h, and the iphone 3gs right next to had 0-1 bars, the Q had 4. I still get network issues, but it seems clear the iphone radio isn't the greatest to begin with.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Berz
December 17, 2009 11:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"The goal is to have every iPhone user (or as many as we can) turn on a data intensive app and run that app for one solid hour\"

I'm a bit puzzled, are some apps alot more data intensive than others? I know most of the ones i run connect right on launch then that's about it.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Lucky225
December 17, 2009 1:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

At the risk of sounding like a shill, I 100% agree with AT&T, intentionally DDoSSIng their service is wrong.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
crichton007
December 17, 2009 1:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd totally do this but I'm on Verizon. Out of solidarity I'll stream some Slacker radio.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
peebozi
December 17, 2009 2:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world, the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
PaulWisconsin
December 17, 2009 2:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It’s ironic that all the people who are actually defending AT&T’s poor service don’t realize that if AT&T just upgraded their network, they wouldn’t even need to worry about people doing something like this as it would have NO EFFECT on their service.

But what’s even more ironic is that there are so many of these users on a site called “The Consumerist – Shopper’s Bite Back.”

Gee why might people be annoyed? Let’s take a look at what AT&T promises their customers right on their website.

“The nation’s fastest 3G network”
“Ranked #1 in customer satisfaction among smartphone owners”
“The best coverage worldwide”
“Twice as many people choose AT&T for their smartphones versus Verizon”

So here’s a thought. Since AT&T advertises directly to the people who are most upset with this issue (smartphone users) I see no reason why these people can’t voice their opinion in the form of consumer protest.

In the end you might actually thank these people when the company you give your hard earned money to actually does something for you… the consumer. Instead of just asking you to bend over backwards and spread your cheeks for them.

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
consumerd
December 17, 2009 6:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Troll much yourself?

Your comment pretty much proves 4 things

1.) I am entitled and everyone is lower than me
2.) I was *forced* at gunpoint to buy an iphone even though I didn't need it.
3.) I am a baby
4.) I am a fool with money and it was parted from me boo hoo!!


Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
PaulWisconsin
December 17, 2009 8:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

After re-reading the comments in this thread I’m convinced that anyone arguing on behalf of AT&T in this case either makes a living by screwing other people over, or works for a phone company plain and simple.

The customer is entitled to want whatever they want. Working in the retail industry I understand this. Is it always rational? No, but that’s not your choice to make as a business. If you hate your customers so much try doing business without them.

I am shocked by the abundance of people out there that actually argue in favor of Ma’ Bell or any other multi-national corporation. We truly have become a nation by the corporation, for the corporation and of the corporation. The marketing majors out there really have done a number on your heads. Give yourselves a pat on the back.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Lucky225
December 18, 2009 10:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's right, the customer CAN want whatever the hell they WANT. If the resources simply aren't their for a corporation to supply the customer with that WANT, there's nothing that can be done about it. As to the comment about try doing business without your customers, try using your iphone without a 3G network in the first place. This is a 2-way street, the customers didn't go out and physically make a nationwide 3G network, so don't b1tch when the service sucks, it will be improved eventually, these things take time. It's funny how something that wasn't available just a couple of years ago is now in such a high demand that people want to cry when it doesn't work in such a way that they think they deserve it simply because they pay a bill each month, a bill that can be adjusted if you don't find the service satisfactory, turn your data plan off and just use voice.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
PølάrβǽЯ
December 17, 2009 8:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

On one hand, I'm thinking, \"Great, even worse AT&T service tomorrow.\" On the other, I'm thinking, \"Since I'm running CyanogenMod on my unlocked G1, I can tether it to my computer and do some serious youtubing.\"

What? You can't tether your JesusPhone? I guess it isn't that smart after all.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
askmrlee
December 18, 2009 1:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I can hear the cries now \"wah wah wah, but I love my iPhone\" ..... Problem here is that iPhone/iPod Touch has the best mobile experience over everyone else's phones assuming it works. People want the iPhone so bad they're willing to put up with AT&T's shoddy network. AT&T responds by \"encouraging\" you to step into Starbucks and use AT&T Wi-Fi since it's included in your plan. And in January, you'll be encouraged to go into McDonald's too. I believe AT&T is the only carrier in the iPhone carrier in the world that has disabled tethering since they can't handle their existing traffic.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Nick Olsen
December 18, 2009 4:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

iPhone is not beyond reproach. The problem is with the phone not the network.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/business/13digi.html?em

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
mathewstuart
November 22, 2010 2:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can 'Operation Chokehold' be stopped?Is Operation Chokehold melting AT&T In your area?
If I hadn't switched from AT&T to T-Mobile in October, I likely would join in tomorrow's planned denial-of-service attack. Whether or not the call to action was real or a gag designed to drum up pageviews for Fake Steve Jobs no longer matters. There appears to be real momentum behind AT&T customers -- particularly iPhone users -- venting their frustrations in one massive crowd-sourced DoS.
This is such a good topic for essay writing. Writing on such a topic will help the students to know about the new technologies. now a days many services help the students for essay writing. Must check the custom essay writing review for selecting reliable online services.

Reply
");