AT&T's Network Crumbles At Coachella > Get used to it.

reply to Logan 5

Re: Get used to it.

"Sooooooo.. becuase there was a concentrated area of a LARGE, but temporary, amount of users in one location, and the network was over loaded, that this is somehow tied to the same problem - in general - of ATT's network? I dunno.. just seems to me that the same would happen to Verizon, Sprint, or Tmo as well."
Except it didn't! If you RTFA, the first comment says "I work for one of the bands, and I was warned ahead of time by other event coordinators that AT&T coverage was bad, so we all used our Verizon phones with no problems."
You can apologize for AT&T all you would like, but there's plenty of cases mentioned in blogs, howardforums, etc., at conferences, in stadiums, etc., where AT&T is virtually non-functional while Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mo *all* either work flawlessly, or work but are a little slow or whatever.

"This is, however, most likely, one downside to having a device like the iPhone which does attract more usage by nature... probably due to the fact that they ARE easy to use and most people that have them use them to their potential."
A recent article said Verizon and Sprint carried 16,000TBs more traffic than AT&T, AT&T is actually behind both in terms of data traffic carried. The "it's the IPhone's fault" excuse simply doesn't fly.

I mean, whatever, you all can keep AT&T service if you'd like. But these problems are not as normal as you make them out to be. Most carriers do not have these problems... they don't build networks so they are running at 90-100% load during a "normal" day's peak load, so they behave admirably under unexpected extra load.

""I work for one of the bands, and I was warned ahead of time by other event coordinators that AT&T coverage was bad, so we all used our Verizon phones with no problems.""

Warned by WHO? sooo.. somehow, becuase there is an event, all the infrustructure should be in place and capable of handling it? Like I said in another post,. I was at a similar even in bumfu*k WI and had NO Sprint coverage and only AT&T Edge.. I suppose I should have tipped off BBR so they could have ragged on Sprint for not even having coverage?

So what? So what that AT&T's coverage wasn't the greatest there.. there are places where AT&T has better coverage that Sprint or Verizon.. not everyone has perfect coverage in every area.

You can also knock it off with the "you can apologize" for att.. where did I once say I was sorry? Where did I once defend them? I'm simply stating facts of life.. period. So someone attends something and there is supposed to be coverage? See above. I suppose my country jam should have had MUCH better coverage becuase there was an event, huh? I should be beating down Sprint's door becuase my sprint phone wouldn't work there. right? Deal with it.

You stated, too, that "att virtually non0functional while VZ, Sprint, etc. worked flawlessly" or "but are a little slow or what ever"... um.. did att not work "slow or what ever"...? Still.. I know that the ATT service didn't work or work well or at all. You guys like to focus on BBR keywords like "apologize" or "turf" or what ever, but you always, like trained line-toters, never listen to any other view but your own.. what ever - enjoy that. However, I made a VERY good point about THIS particular situation. An EVENT placed a strain on a network. Maybe the event people should have warned the cellular companies about this.. as if they even really need to in the first place. I think they're responsibility ends at making sure they have security, toilets, and all the other things that make an event work. People's cell phones really have nothing to do with an event, and there is NEVER guaranteed coverage where you go. Apparently, this is an area that AT&T lacks in.

For all those blogs and posts of people complaining about AT&T service not working, there are people out there complaining about the lack of Sprint and VZ coverage as well. Maybe not as much, but the point is that no network is perfect.

As for that last article you mention about data carried.. I suppose you believe everything you read at face value simply becuase it makes sense to you?

I dunno.. I think the internet is warping people's sense of reality.

I'm done with this conversation as I think it's pointless. Some people just like to be angry to be angry and look for anyone to side with them no matter what.

I'd really like to know how many of you guys who are "experts" and "all knowing" really "know" anything more than what they read on a site like this.

I tend to take a grain of salt with what I read on a site like this, especially. I also take with a grain of salt anyone that doesn't like a certain carrier, in this case, and continues to do business with them if they are so bad. In this case, people have choices. The easiest solution to any problem like this is to change networks and be done with it.