AT&T Says NYC is 'Not Ready' For the iPhone

[jitpublisher]

News this morning stated that the problem was due to a software or network problem with online orders from a few area codes, and it has been fixed.

 

[hennnry]

Wow... to think that "third world" country like China or India have 3G reaching or have already reached the tall mountains and deep ravines, the poorest areas of provinces, and yet AT&T can't even get it working in NYC, just Wow!

 

[banthracis]

[citation][nom]hennnry[/nom]Wow... to think that "third world" country like China or India have 3G reaching or have already reached the tall mountains and deep ravines, the poorest areas of provinces, and yet AT&T can't even get it working in NYC, just Wow![/citation]

Not only that, but they manage to get almost zero dropped calls and can maintain 1mbps+ DL speed even at prime time in the middle of a city >.<
I have some family in China that laugh at us in the US, considering they have a much higher population density, and consume much more bandwidth, yet have none of the issues we have here in the US.
ATT providing worse service than a third world country is just fail.

 

[razor512]

The biggest cities generally have the fewest towers because of 2 reasons

1, rending the space to put one is more expensive and putting more towers will take thousands of dollars out of their billions in profits

2, they want the city people to learn to share so they put a tower designed to handle 400 people, in an area with 70,000 people

 

[bamslang]

[citation][nom]banthracis[/nom]Not only that, but they manage to get almost zero dropped calls and can maintain 1mbps+ DL speed even at prime time in the middle of a city >.< I have some family in China that laugh at us in the US, considering they have a much higher population density, and consume much more bandwidth, yet have none of the issues we have here in the US. ATT providing worse service than a third world country is just fail.[/citation]

This is simply due to the fact that the US infrastructure is much older than that of China. Think about this. The US infrastructure is decades old while China (relativly speaking) is brand new. It is much easier to simply put the infrastructure in place than it is to replace older tech. You have to take out the old and put in the new.

Think about it in a dumbed down sense. You have an old computer. Would it be easier to A. Build a new computer from scratch or B. Take all of the parts out of the old computer, part by part. Go into each piece of hardware and upgrade them one by one, and then put them back into the old case, which you also upgraded with small adjustments. Obviously situation A is going to be much faster and have much less waste to dispose of. The fact that they are starting from scratch gives them a big advantage when it comes to having the latest tech. Trust me, in 30 years their technology will look old and outdated compared to the tech that emerging economies of that time will have in place.

Now this isn't an excuse for ATT or anyone for that matter. The US has always had the problem of looking for quick fixes rather than long term solutions. All the time you see highways being paved with asphalt that warps after a few years instead of actually laying concrete roads. The asphalt lasts 5-10 years max before it needs relayed, while the concrete lasts 20-30 years. Companies are judged on their quarterly performance and often make short term cuts to see quick gains and suffer in the long term. It's everyone's sense of urgency and having instant gratification that is the problem.

Do you honestly think the stock holders of ATT would be happy if they were told that the company is sinking millions of $ into updating their infrastructure so that they can see profits in 10 years when they could simply push out a new model now, even if their infrastructure can't handle it, and see profits now? Of course the stock holders are going to go for option B because they see gain out of it, even if the company and the market suffer for it in the long run.

 

[ryokinshin]

[citation][nom]bamslang[/nom]This is simply due to the fact that the US infrastructure is much older than that of China. Think about this. The US infrastructure is decades old while China (relativly speaking) is brand new. It is much easier to simply put the infrastructure in place than it is to replace older tech. You have to take out the old and put in the new.Think about it in a dumbed down sense. You have an old computer. Would it be easier to A. Build a new computer from scratch or B. Take all of the parts out of the old computer, part by part. Go into each piece of hardware and upgrade them one by one, and then put them back into the old case, which you also upgraded with small adjustments. Obviously situation A is going to be much faster and have much less waste to dispose of. The fact that they are starting from scratch gives them a big advantage when it comes to having the latest tech. Trust me, in 30 years their technology will look old and outdated compared to the tech that emerging economies of that time will have in place. Now this isn't an excuse for ATT or anyone for that matter. The US has always had the problem of looking for quick fixes rather than long term solutions. All the time you see highways being paved with asphalt that warps after a few years instead of actually laying concrete roads. The asphalt lasts 5-10 years max before it needs relayed, while the concrete lasts 20-30 years. Companies are judged on their quarterly performance and often make short term cuts to see quick gains and suffer in the long term. It's everyone's sense of urgency and having instant gratification that is the problem. Do you honestly think the stock holders of ATT would be happy if they were told that the company is sinking millions of $ into updating their infrastructure so that they can see profits in 10 years when they could simply push out a new model now, even if their infrastructure can't handle it, and see profits now? Of course the stock holders are going to go for option B because they see gain out of it, even if the company and the market suffer for it in the long run.[/citation]

China doesn't have to deal with all the legacy stuff. Just to sum up what you said lol.

 

[banthracis]

I agree bamslang with your assessment of the American system. Many companies simply refuse to invest or think about the long term, (congress too, but that's another matter).

The asian system is much more different, and even though their economy, isn't doing the best, the Japanese exemplify the long term investment mentality.

Their willingness to invest for the long term has been paying off greatly in the auto and electronics industries, where America is now busy playing catch up.

Incidental, the Japanese infrastructure is amazing, even though it's been around as long as ours. I was in Tokyo last year and if a train is more than 1 min late, you get a refund and a note for your boss, try that with the MTA here in NYC.

Back to your computer analogy, hopefully ATT will realize someday that it'll actually be cheaper to build a new computer than to keep upgrading that old one.

 

[jitpublisher]

There is no reason our infrastructure should not be the model for the world. The problem is in a nutshell, too many AT&T executives are more worried about paying for their luxury homes, yachts, and private golf course memberships than whether or not your cellular network is fast and reliable. And believe me, AT&T's time is coming. They are going to find them selves in big trouble, and it is right around the corner.
And all their buddies over at Apple fit right into the same seat with them. Just my 2 cents. Just sit back and watch.

 

[banthracis]

Yea, corporate greed is a pretty big issue here in America. In Asian companies the salary discrepancy is much lower than than the US. Relatively speaking, you have janitors making basically $30,000 while top executives make $300,000. Here in the states, the janitor makes $15,000 while the executive makes $15 million.

To the rest of the world this huge difference seems outrageous, yet to us, it's perfectly normal.

Also, American executives like to switch companies every few years, so they're just there for the short term to bring up the stock and then use that short term gain to score a better gig. Asian companies hire executives for life. I'd bet those ATT execs would be more willing to invest in the long term if they were committed to the company for life, and not just ship soon as the windfall from their short term thinking starts.

 

[bamslang]

@banthracis

You're spot on. According to THIS article on CNNMoney.com the difference in pay when comparing a CEO to a worker is 364 times. I first saw this in a business week that showed other countries, and in most, the difference is between 15-30... not 364 (which is down from 411 in 2005).

It's always easy to look at others, but we're all guilty of it. Consumers want things NOW. Look at all the crap blizzard gets from people who want D3 and SC2 NOW. They don't care that blizzard makes quality, polished games... they just want their product now. Who cares if McDonalds food = garbage... you can have it NOW!

Until we have a shift in the way consumers approach life in general, we will continue to see other countries beat us in the market. Americans spend somewhere around 110% of their income ever year (this might not be true now with the recession, but guarantee you it was before hand). Americans continue to get in debt and blame the bankers for forcing these loans on them. Now don't get me wrong, the banks should be held accountable for their actions. In a relationship where one party, who is less knowledgeable than the other, is seeking guidance and advice from another party, who is an "expert" in their respective field, there needs to be some accountability.

I mean hell, they have 100 year bonds in Japan while people in the US simply pass on their debt to their children. Don't even get me started on pork barrel spending that occurs on both sides of the party lines or how both parties are the same wolf in sheep’s clothing, making empty promises and only furthering their own interests while giving a middle finger to the citizens.

 

[Guest]

toms hardware needs to update this article citing these 2 sources which will explain with more detail the problem then just ranting by this writer
: http://micurl.com/EwhGe or large original url:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091229/ap_on_hi_te/eu_britain_o2_4;_ylt=AmICRWPFFt7uc1LNTFZOYURbbBAF;_ylu=X3oDMTE2YWZic2I0BHBvcwMzBHNlYwN5bi1yLWItbGVmdARzbGsDZXYtdWsnc28yYXBv

and

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tec_spectrum_shortage.

 

[CChick]

[citation][nom]Glorian[/nom]The iphone would kill any network in high concentration cities filled with yuppies who feel they need to have the latest trend electronics. Even if AT&T was ready it is still amazing the amount of people who "need" this novelty.I also think they are taking "NY isn't ready" a bit too serious, because it is in fact AT&T that's not ready. It's like someone asking me if I finished building a house and I respond "no the house isn't ready" its not the house fault it's not built it's mine.[/citation]

wrong.

In Hong Kong, Every 5 person you see an iPhone. and they all download/watching stuff from the internet.

Just admit that AT&T/Cingular Network sucks.

 

[banthracis]

[citation][nom]CChick[/nom]wrong.In Hong Kong, Every 5 person you see an iPhone. and they all download/watching stuff from the internet.Just admit that AT&T/Cingular Network sucks.[/citation]

Agreed. For an even better example look at Tokyo. Their networks been around longer, handles a much higher population density, and a far greater percentage of the population is on smart phones, with the average japanese smartphone user consuming more bandwidth than even an iphone user here in the US.

Yet, their network if perfectly capable of handling the usage, with the advertised speeds, not here with the ATT network which is advertised at 1.4 or was it 1.6 mbps yet delivers (for me) about 56k on average in NYC.

The technology to accomplish this clearly exists, it's simply a matter of whether or not ATT is willing to spend the money, rather than take in record profits to boost their stock short term.

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

I bet Daphne is getting canned... 🙁

 

[mutantmagnet]

The next time my LG Xenon disconnects I'll remember to blame iPhone instead of ATT next time :|

 

[intesx]

One more thing that I think merits talking about here... everyone that keeps comparing US infrastructure policy with that of 3rd world countries is forgetting one thing: If your wireless carrier told you tomorrow that "we are turning off our old network today and to continue using it you will have to buy another phone regardless of when you purchased your old phone. Oh yeah, you can't break your contract so you have to continue paying us even if you can't use the service."

This happens in "developing" (3rd world) markets. That would NEVER work here. Anyone here, regardless of whether they are an AT&T, Verizon, Sprint or T-Mobile customer would complain if their carrier did this. Again, I agree that all of the carriers have failed to sufficiently plan and upgrade their networks...

AT&T: can't handle the capacity.
Verizon & Sprint: EVDO is so horribly dated and slow it's pitiful.
T-Mobile: took SO too long to launch their small 3G network that most serious customers have jumped ship.

But it's not as simple as building an entire new network based on 100Mpbs LTE technology one day and turning off the EVDO or HSDPA the next. Not only are there a lot of costs involved but a lot of collateral damage in the form of frustrated and pissed off customers.

 

[hennnry]

Intesx:

I agree with you to a large degree in that it's not as easy to swtich because of money involved.

However, this is what bugs me the most. In US, where market is supposedly free for all players, a few big players set up the rule that nobody can break. They enter some sort of non-compete agreement in a certain way, for example, the old rule where if you switch network, you loose your phone number.

Because of this, these big players have very little incentive to innovate, which start to push USA behind the technology curve.

 

[enforcer22]

[citation][nom]Abrahm[/nom]This is awesome. The more people AT&T pisses off, the more people that will see beyond the trendy glamor and move on to the superior android system. Let the rise of the android system to dominance commence![/citation]


im sorry but the iphone is garbage but i had a android phone and its IMO a bunch of gimick and really nothing special. All the apps for it coming out or that have been out already came out on another OS already. the only thing i cared for is the google sky map and the google navigater which they will be giving out for free once its out of beta.. Really those things even are just gimmicky. The phone didnt nothing special and had nothing different to offer then a 3 screen desktop which god old after a few days of flipping through them.

but hey not evenone has 24billion to boot into thier network betting that it will pay off. I mean really who would want to go get something that works everywhere pretty much "perfectly" they would rather have a gimmicky phone with a I in it. Iphone... another phone there is nothing special or really new about. Though i give the next iPhone this.. at least it looks good this time.

 

[MrJbot]

At&t failed to invest in 3g Infrastructure and now will pay the price. People want more from their phones end the company who has the Iphone should have long ago invested in a better 3g network. Notice At&t no longer advertises the fewest dropped calls . They didn’t invest in towers and had to merge the voice and data networks.

 

[eddieroolz]

It looks as if AT&T is purposely trying to get bad publicity by doing these things.