Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·DIRECTV
 ·Optimum Online
·Cablevision
| So glad I just left for Verizon I get my verizon phone on tuesday, knowing AT&T they will take the worst parts of both companies.
AT&T will retain their crappy customer service as the migrate t-mobiles excellent customer service to their crappy service and the fast growing t-mobile network deployment will grind to a halt as AT&T hates spending any actual money on their network.
This is going to be a LOSE - LOSE for everyone, I feel worst for the current t-mobile subscribers the current network has patchy coverage but if you live in an area that is well covered the speeds are nice and fast. |
|
jus10
join:2009-08-04
Sterling, VA Reviews:
·Comcast
| I think most t-mobile subscribers who hate AT&T like myself will leave when our contracts are up. Fortunately, it looks like it'll take at least a year for the AT&T integration to be approved so that should give enough time for my existing contract to expire.
Then it'll be Verizon or Sprint if Sprint becomes what T-Mobile used to be before the dark times. Before the Empire ... |
|
|
|
| reply to MovieLover76
You're doing as if Verizon is any different. Hello, both of them have bought the Government wholesale.
Verizon may have a good product in limited areas with FiOS, and nationwide with wireless service.
But just look at how they have basically hung out many customers in rural and even suburban areas to dry. If Verizon truly cared they would not sell off rural markets to losers like Fairpoint and Frontier, and make them agree to ridiculous conditions like not allowing them to expand their fiber optic service areas.
It's all about the money. But the FiOS fanboys got theirs so all hail Verizon. |
|
 Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | said by fifty nine:It's all about the money. But the FiOS fanboys got theirs so all hail Verizon. If I could get FiOS here, I'd jump right over.
..but this is Montana, so I highly doubt we'll ever see it. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Windstream
| reply to jus10
My guess is that you wouldn't have that choice -- Verizon would swallow up Sprint in response.
The real question to me is whether they try to do so as a tactic to get the ATT/TMO deal scotched. This would be similar to Coca Cola buying Dr Pepper in response to Pepsi buying 7-Up in the mid 1980's. The FTC killed both deals as anti-competitive. This is similar, with a helluva lot more importance on the US economy than sugar-water. The question is whether the FTC still has a spine. |
|
| reply to Simba7
said by Simba7:said by fifty nine:It's all about the money. But the FiOS fanboys got theirs so all hail Verizon. If I could get FiOS here, I'd jump right over. ..but this is Montana, so I highly doubt we'll ever see it. No FiOS for you! You'll take capped LTE and enjoy it! |
|
Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | said by fifty nine:No FiOS for you! You'll take capped LTE and enjoy it! ..if we even see LTE here.. Maybe in 3-5 years (which is typical).
For now, I'll enjoy my unlimited smartphone 3G goodness. No extra fees here and no bill-in-a-box. |
|
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:But just look at how they have basically hung out many customers in rural and even suburban areas to dry Why does Verizon always get criticized for this while T-Mobile gets a pass in spite of the fact that they haven't even bothered to serve those same markets?
Punch up T-Mobile's coverage map for rural America and compare it against Verizon. It's not even close. In my area of Upstate NY T-Mobile is useless the minute you leave the city or wander more than two miles off the interstate.
I realize you are talking about the wireline side of Verizon as opposed to the wireless side but I've never been able to figure out why T-Mobile is immune to this criticism while Verizon is ripped for it. At least with regards to wireless service Verizon makes an effort to reach rural customers. |
|
 cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | said by Crookshanks:I realize you are talking about the wireline side of Verizon as opposed to the wireless side but I've never been able to figure out why T-Mobile is immune to this criticism while Verizon is ripped for it. At least with regards to wireless service Verizon makes an effort to reach rural customers. Because T-Mobile has never billed themselves as being a rural cellphone provider or having as large of a rural footprint as AT&T or Verizon have. T-Mobile has always been a predominantly highway and major city provider since it was VoiceStream.
T-Mobile also hasn't built up an area only to offload it to an inferior sucker alternate carrier who struggles to provide even standard services at a competitive price. Well, at least until they sold out to AT&T. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·DIRECTV
·Optimum Online
·Cablevision
| reply to fifty nine
Verizon may not be a nicer company, but they at least invest money in their network, while taking all of our money
AT&T finds every way to invest as little as possible and still charges us the same amount as verizon for a vastly inferior product |
|
fldiverPremium
join:1999-12-27
Jacksonville, FL | reply to jus10
Ditto on that! |
|
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to cdru
said by cdru:T-Mobile has always been a predominantly highway and major city provider since it was VoiceStream. So they get a pass on investing in rural America while Verizon gets ripped for allegedly failing to do the same?
said by cdru:T-Mobile also hasn't built up an area only to offload it to an inferior sucker alternate carrier who struggles to provide even standard services at a competitive price.
Well, two things I'd say to that:
1) Verizon didn't "build up" any rural areas, they inherited most of them from GTE.
2) I don't know anything about Fairpoint but why does everybody here beat on Frontier as some sort of "inferior" carrier? I've lived in and around Frontier's footprint for most of my life and they've made considerable investments in my area to bring DSL to rural areas. I've seen Frontier deploying remote terminals all over the place around these parts. I've yet to see Verizon do the same. Verizon doesn't even bother deploying RTs to reach the suburban areas that are out of range, never mind the rural ones. There are whole neighborhoods in Binghamton that can't get DSL. I can't say the same thing for any of the areas served by Frontier around these parts. |
|
cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | said by Crookshanks:So they get a pass on investing in rural America while Verizon gets ripped for allegedly failing to do the same? They don't get a complete pass, but T-Mobile is a fraction of the size of Verizon. It's not unreasonable to expect major cities to get service first, smaller cities, major towns, smaller towns, then rural. T-mobile has a large amount to grow even in major towns, let alone smaller towns and then rural. Verizon in comparison already has a much larger footprint and while metropolitan areas may get updated towers or upgrades, to continue growing their footprint Verizon is much closer to spreading out in more rural areas.
said by Crookshanks:1) Verizon didn't "build up" any rural areas, they inherited most of them from GTE. So most of Verizon's current rural coverage is just from GTE? So they haven't replaced, upgraded, or added additional towers throughout their coverage area? It's just been pretty stagnant for the previous 11 years?
2) I don't know anything about Fairpoint but why does everybody here beat on Frontier as some sort of "inferior" carrier?
Frontier recently, after telling regulators that they weren't going to cut services, that they could provide the same level of service that Verizon had, and that they were committed to remaining competitive jacked up cable rates 46% and install fees to $500 for FiOS customers. They also want to transition people from FiOS TV to DirecTV. Frontier also usually ranks at the bottom of the Good/Bad/Ugly list based on reviews here at DSLReports. They also, until relatively recently, had a 5GB cap in their AUP.
If lying to regulators, not providing basic required services, poor customer support, raising rates and fees by an obscene amount, and generally poor reviews don't qualify for inferior carrier status, I'm not quite sure what does.
I've seen Frontier deploying remote terminals all over the place around these parts. I've yet to see Verizon do the same. Verizon doesn't even bother deploying RTs to reach the suburban areas that are out of range, never mind the rural ones. There are whole neighborhoods in Binghamton that can't get DSL. I can't say the same thing for any of the areas served by Frontier around these parts.
|
|
 mech1164I'll Be Back
join:2001-11-19
Lodi, NJ | reply to LostInWoods
said by LostInWoods:The question is whether the FTC still has a spine.
One word NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
 AlcoholPremium
join:2003-05-26
Climax, MI
kudos:3
·Comcast
| reply to LostInWoods
said by LostInWoods:My guess is that you wouldn't have that choice -- Verizon would swallow up Sprint in response.
The real question to me is whether they try to do so as a tactic to get the ATT/TMO deal scotched. This would be similar to Coca Cola buying Dr Pepper in response to Pepsi buying 7-Up in the mid 1980's. The FTC killed both deals as anti-competitive. This is similar, with a helluva lot more importance on the US economy than sugar-water. The question is whether the FTC still has a spine.
Verizon said they don't want Sprint.
Also, you should look up how much AT&T has paid (bribed) the government in the last 10 years.
--
I found the key to success but somebody changed the lock. |
|
