Verizon to AT&T: The Truth Hurts, Doesn't It?
I love the smell of corporate drama in the mornings.
The battle of, "I am rubber, you are glue!" rages on between AT&T and Verizon. Verizon this week issued a statement claiming the only reason AT&T is even upset about their commercials is because "the truth hurts."
According to Engadget, documents filed by Verizon in the ongoing legal proceedings between the two read, "AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon's "There's A Map For That" advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts."
AT&T's beef is that Verizon's ads do not correctly represent the coverage offered by the largest carrier in the country. According to AT&T, the "there's a map for that" commercials imply that customers can't get any coverage at all outside of areas where 3G connectivity is available. Then again, many (including Verizon) argue that the TV spots are clearly comparing 3G to 3G, and to suggest Verizon compare 3G to 3G+2G is like asking them to compare apples to oranges.
In the most recent documents filed by Verizon, the company says this "apple-to-apples comparison" does nothing but confirm that AT&T has failed to invest adequately in 3G.
"In the final analysis, AT&T seeks emergency relief because Verizon's side-by-side, apples-to-apples comparison of its own 3G coverage with AT&T's confirms what the marketplace has been saying for months: AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business, and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly."
- PS3, Linux Used to Catch Child Pornographers
- Man Robs GameStop for 100 Copies of MW2
- Verizon Ups Termination Fee from $175 to $350
- Gearbox's Randy Pitchford: id and Crytek Will Fail
- Switzerland Sues Google Over Street View
- NASA Bombs the Moon and Finds Water
- After RIAA, Verizon Now Sending MPAA Notices
- Technology May Lead to Attention Deficit Disorder
- Britney Spears Targeted by Satanic Hacker
- Watch the Assassin's Creed II Lineage Movie
- Nintendo Will Develop Another Metroid Prime
- Startup Company Can "Print" Animated Graphics
- T-Mobile: Employee Really Did Sell Personal Info
- Modern Warfare 2 Censored in Russia
- Nintendo: Next Console More than Wii HD
- Konami Slashes Prices of App Store Games
- T-Mobile Starts Selling Discounted Sidekicks
- AT&T and Verizon Verdict Expected Later Today
- Google Phone Possible for 2010
This might end up a very good thing for AT&T customers hahaha
Ouch. I think AT&T is doing more harm than good with this lawsuit. They aren't going to get an injunction to halt the ads so the best thing they could possibly hope for is monetary damages and even that is extremely unlikely. If people weren't aware of these advertisements or haven't seen them they probably have now thanks to the headlines AT&T keeps grabbing with the legal battle.
AT&T lost this one, lol. Go Verizon! Not that I care, but it's funny.
Verizon does look much better in comparrison. My friends with other carriers always drop calls and I hate even talking to them. My verizon serive, I can't even remember ever losing a call.
I'm an AT&T user - and pretty happy with their service. Biggest reason I'm with them - simplified and slightly discounted billing along with my landlines and the fact that I'm very happy with my iPhone.
All the same - looking at the maps I have to say I agree with Verizon on this. Times when all I can get is 2G I find the service to be unacceptably slow.
I hope that AT&T sees the writing on the wall. I guess this sort of thing is what people refer to when they say: 'competition in the marketplace benefits the consumer'.
Speaking as a former AT&T customer: AT&T *DON'T* have the 3G coverage. Period. The truth does hurt...
haha, if the case gets thrown out of court this will end up as a major free advertising for verizon
verizon's coverage is great . 3g in remote areas feels like a dream , i've had that experience .
Also, At&T claimed that "unlike Verizon, AT&T has the fastest 3G network".
Wrong. If you average the network speed with the area where it is available, I bet Verizon is several times faster.
It doesn't matter if AT&T's 3G does 1.7Mbps to Verizon's 1.3Mbps
If Verizon's 3G is available where AT&T's isn't, it is faster.
The comparison is completely appropriate, and AT&T is scared because the ads come right before the holiday season.
Verizon is right. How can AT&T sue them for telling the truth? Even AT&T admits its the truth. I guess the truth does hurt.
It is time for you AT&T to step up to the plate and poof that verizon is wrong.
Verizon have it spot on. AT&T are upset because Verizon is speaking the truth. The only reason I'm with AT&T is because of the iphone. I've never had 3G turned on because it can never connect. No point wasting what little precious battery power this phone has trying to find a non-existent network.
The phone itself is starting to tick me off so once my contract is up, I'm going back to Verizon and getting the Droid or something similar . Never had any problems with Verizon before switching to AT&T. Now its a crap shoot if I'll have good signal or not.
Verizon have it spot on. AT&T are upset because Verizon is speaking the truth. The only reason I'm with AT&T is because of the iphone. I've never had 3G turned on because it can never connect. No point wasting what little precious battery power this phone has trying to find a non-existent network.
The phone itself is starting to tick me off so once my contract is up, I'm going back to Verizon and getting the Droid or something similar . Never had any problems with Verizon before switching to AT&T. Now its a crap shoot if I'll have good signal or not.
I am personally a happy AT&T customer with a 2G iPhone and am very happy with it, and any issues I've had with it haven't been any major ones; in other words, I can live perfectly fine with them. However, to sstym's comment, yeah ok Verizon might have more coverage than AT&T, but I'm sorry...location has nothing to do with speed, it simply makes it more convienient to get 3G speed that is slightly slower that AT&T's IN THOSE AREAS.
They could put in micro print somewhere "This does not include 2G areas. Truth still hurts don't it ATT"
On a more personal note, I would respect Verizon far more than I currently do if they weren't so f*cking arrogant about things. IMO, it seems like they're the bullies of the wireless network world, and at the moment AT&T seems like they're the victim and they're crying about it. But that's because Verizon are being assholes.
Finally, if AT&T does indeed decide to act on this an invest in more 3G coverage, I will definitely be happy about that. Although being an EDGE user for almost 3 years now, if not more, 3G anywhere will be just grand. Oh, and everyone I know that has 3G service with AT&T has no problems where I live.
It is time for you AT&T to step up to the plate and poof that verizon is wrong.
You're right: it is time for them to go *poof*
to sstym's comment, yeah ok Verizon might have more coverage than AT&T, but I'm sorry...location has nothing to do with speed, it simply makes it more convienient to get 3G speed that is slightly slower that AT&T's IN THOSE AREAS.
If your car can drive at 100mph on the first 10 miles of a trip but is limited to 30mph on the remaining 90 miles, and mine can do 70mph all the way, my car is faster on that trip, period.
While we're on the topic of AT&T's potentially uneven development priorities... why on Earth have they not yet provided tethering for the iPhone? I wonder if it has something to do with not having enough 3G coverage?
On my old brain-dead AT&T tilt tethering worked fine (though I'll never buy a Windows mobile device again).
I'm wondering why ATT doesn't point out the errors of Verizon's map. Like they're full of it claiming 3G coverage for the full state of North Dakota.
OTOH I've been in lots of areas where I could pick up a phone signal and talk, but the browser would not work.
LOL go Verizon! The truth does hurt. In a way, I do hope AT&T gets more tower systems up for 3G or the upcoming 4G. Only reason saying so is because it will cause more competition with all the carriers which will benefit all customers.
I am personally a happy AT&T customer with a 2G iPhone and am very happy with it, and any issues I've had with it haven't been any major ones; in other words, I can live perfectly fine with them. However, to sstym's comment, yeah ok Verizon might have more coverage than AT&T, but I'm sorry...location has nothing to do with speed, it simply makes it more convienient to get 3G speed that is slightly slower that AT&T's IN THOSE AREAS.
Location does. What if I was a businessman that travels constantly in the US and I need to download attachments, or anything on the go? Makes perfect sense to have 3G then to me at least.
On a more personal note, I would respect Verizon far more than I currently do if they weren't so f*cking arrogant about things. IMO, it seems like they're the bullies of the wireless network world, and at the moment AT&T seems like they're the victim and they're crying about it. But that's because Verizon are being assholes.
Thing is, Verizon is right about 3G in the square mile. AT&T has been around. They should have well over the 3G tower system than they have now. They don't invest in their own technology unfortunately. the way I personally see it is AT&T is the asshole here for not providing consumers the adequate equipment for their phones hence dropped calls and barely any 3G coverage. The customers are the ones who are really suffering.
To AT&T,
Don't waste money on litigation. Spend it were it will do the most good, on infrastructure.
In the audio industry there is a saying about one company that goes like, "Better sound through marketing." This same company also has sued a lot of companies so the saying can be changed to "Better sound through litigation."
I think I can make one more change to apply it here, "Better 3G coverage through litigation."
Makes sense to me. If you cannot beat them with technology, sue.
Just my 2 cents.
Correcting myself. Hey Tom where is the edit function?
"Spend it were it will do the most good, on infrastructure."
Should read
"Spend it WHERE it will do the most good, on infrastructure."
I'm suing the yellow pages for correctly listing my name, address and phone number even though I want that information published.
I can attest to the horrible 3G coverage on AT&T. I had 3G coverage when I was in the Smokey Mountains using my work phone on Verizon! I can be downtown and my 3G coverage is spotty with AT&T. Plus I tried their air card for my laptop and it was pathetic. I have one more year on my contract and then good riddance.
I have an AT&T smartphone. I'm posting this from it now and not having any trou
Reminds me of the old product comparison commercials from years ago. This time it's getting out of hand.
I can't help but feel the US has gotten a raw deal with mobile network infrastructure. Here in the UK we regularly get 2+Mb/s almost anywhere in a built up (or village) area, and, the worst thing I get is the occasional notspot. (Which sadly my house borders very close to on my network, full speed, but occasional "dead hours").
I once got 3.5MB/s in a car, in the middle of a field. In fact, that was the ONLY time I got that high...
I'm jealous (and I'm guessing most of us are).
Has anyone actually checked the AT&T 2G map? I bet it sucks just as much. I had a plan with them from 04-06, and the coverage sucked, with many dropped calls, and dead spots. I was taking a commuter train everyday, and the phone would constantly lose signal. Then I switched to Verizon, and it never loses signal. Ever. Even in TUNNELS!
AT&T needs to stop paying for lawyers and start paying for infrastructure; the iPhone wont carry them along for much farther.