AT&T has teh butthurt. I thought it was a clever commercial.

/Resisting the urge to filterpwn myself....

I was pretty aware that the maps were 3G only - so what's the big f'n deal? AT&T's coverage is awful, so what?

Typical big business behavior. Truth hurts? Sue to suppress the truth, and since you're big and powerful, the law will be on your side eventually even if you have to lose a few and keep trying.

We're really messed up as a society. Time to have a revolution and start over.

What are they suing for? It looked to me like a fair comparison of 3G coverage areas. What does AT&T think that is? Libel? Slander?

I don't get it...

"Go ahead and sue. We like the publicity" - Jay Ward

IStateTheObvious: What are they suing for? It looked to me like a fair comparison of 3G coverage areas. What does AT&T think that is? Libel? Slander?

I don't get it...

They're arguing that most customers don't know the difference between 3g and voice and data networks, so they'll think AT&T doesn't work at all in the blank areas.

It's a pretty legit concern but if companies can be sued for taking advantage of customer stupidity the advertising market would be pretty crippled

So ... ATT is suing on behalf of their stupid customers who cant read a chart? It was obvious to me and, although I kind of think those 'calling out the other guy comercials' are week sauce, I chuckled the first couple times I saw it. Of course ... I have Verizon so ...

I have AT&T and enjoyed the commercials.

/has iffy 3g

So AT&T is angry because Verizon is calling them out on their 3G coverage and is angry that they are not showing how much 2G coverage they have? Wow, shut the fark up AT&T. Verizon has you beat here no matter how you try to spin it.

Just tell people when AT&T will roll out their 4G network. In 2011, at some point, whereas several other carriers will have their's out in 2010.

I figured that someone was going to get their panties in a bunch over that commercial, but I thought it was going to be apple crying copyright infringement on the app/map substitution.

oh how i wish i could use my iphone on verizon's network...

/iphone 3gs
//live in a place with only 2g coverage
///at least my battery lasts longer as a result!

So it's Verizons fault that AT&T didn't explain to their own customers what 3g was? And it's not like Verizons 3g map shows coverae coast to coast. So basicly AT&T is suing on the grounds their customers our stupid? I'm sure their cutomers appriciate AT&T spending money on lwsuies and I don't know... Upgrading their network?!

/writing this on my mobile phone
//great coverage
///no spellcheck

THERE'S A VISINE FOR THAT.

/STFU AT&T
//You have no grounds for a suit

Yeah I know that's not what the suit is allegedly about, but essentially it is.

Shhh. I love you, AT&T. Don't listen to them.

I get coverage outside in downtown manhattan (The center of the f*cking humanity !!) about 60% of the time. It's NY,NY!?!!!?!!!???? The city that never sleeps!!!! As far as I know, human civilization is a pretty big deal and AT&T might wanna cover it.

I get no bars in my soho appartment. I called up and naively went through some trouble shooting. I casually mentioned that "if I can't get reception in my apartment I can't use my phone.". Know what she said??? " oooh your indoors!!! We don't cover that!". I sh*t you not friends. There is a map and it's totally false. AT&T blows.

puuukeey: IAT&T blows.

See, that's funny, because I can get perfect reception here, (new window) as well as all manner of indoors, underground, and out in the boonies. AT&T has been pretty good to me.

IStateTheObvious: What are they suing for? It looked to me like a fair comparison of 3G coverage areas. What does AT&T think that is? Libel? Slander?

I don't get it...

Slander. They're giving disingenuous information by implying that AT&T's 3G map is their COVERAGE map by using phrases such as "you're out of luck" if you're outside the 3G coverage map.

/Not saying I agree with AT&T's claim, just saying what their reasoning for the suit is.
//And don't tell me people wouldn't mix the two up. People are stupid.

yogaFLAME: I figured that someone was going to get their panties in a bunch over that commercial, but I thought it was going to be apple crying copyright infringement on the app/map substitution.

Parody. Energizer tried to sue Miller over a commercial they did with Leslie Neilson dressed up as the Energizer Bunny, but Miller got the case thrown out because it was a parody. Funniest part was that Energizer got the Energizer Bunny by ripping off a Duracel commercial with a bunch of toy bunnies with snaredrums.

Mentalpatient87: puuukeey: IAT&T blows.

See, that's funny, because I can get perfect reception here, (new window) as well as all manner of indoors, underground, and out in the boonies. AT&T has been pretty good to me.

I didn't get squat for reception with two different phones when I was there at the end of September. Even from here:

puuukeey: I get coverage outside in downtown manhattan (The center of the f*cking humanity !!) about 60% of the time. It's NY,NY!?!!!?!!!???? The city that never sleeps!!!! As far as I know, human civilization is a pretty big deal and AT&T might wanna cover it.

I get no bars in my soho appartment. I called up and naively went through some trouble shooting. I casually mentioned that "if I can't get reception in my apartment I can't use my phone.". Know what she said??? " oooh your indoors!!! We don't cover that!". I sh*t you not friends. There is a map and it's totally false. AT&T blows.

For all that NY is the biggest, best city in the world, it is often way
behind on the tech curve because the sheer scale of the market (bigger
than may states) makes tech vendors shy of rolling things out until they
are well proven.

/"Biggest" and "Best" doesn't imply clean, however
//Loves NYC

cmunic8r99: Even from here:

Hey that looks familiar. Southern Illinois?

Since 3 out of the 3 big 4 going LTE will they be able to use each others towers?
/What about for data

I love how AT&T is the same company that goes:

"Buy a Windows Machine and you'll get viruses and die"

with no disclaimers

Another company goes "Your 3G coverage sucks, here's a map labeled 3G COVERAGE" and they go "ZOMG SUE!!!!!"

it's only fair when they prey on customer ignorance.

Smiths: I love how AT&T is the same company that goes:

"Buy a Windows Machine and you'll get viruses and die"

with no disclaimers

Another company goes "Your 3G coverage sucks, here's a map labeled 3G COVERAGE" and they go "ZOMG SUE!!!!!"

it's only fair when they prey on customer ignorance.

Holy crap I'm drunk still... I just did Apple to AT&T.

Ignore that post!
or flame on because wow... brain is still booting up.

drjekel_mrhyde: Since 3 out of the 3 big 4 going LTE will they be able to use each others towers?
/What about for data

Feeling like Smiths

I figured AT&T would get butthurt over Verizon twisting their phrase, not insinuating that their coverage sucks. And I'm not sure how Verizon is making incorrect inferences. It pretty clearly states "3G coverage area." Sure, some people are just farking stupid, and will completely ignore that, but that isn't the fault of Verizon or AT&T. I suspect your average half-wit, if they focus on the commercial, would be able to take away from it that Verizon is attempting to cover 3G coverage, and not simply places you can use the phone.

Verizon's coverage area is not all Verizon towers
The map was just a map of AT&T tower coverage areas not At&Ts total coverage area

Hey it's the Apple fanbois against the Verizon fanbois!

I have a pretty equitable hatred for all telcos, but between this ad and the Droid ad, I may just have to switch.

Could it be an intentional, and quite interesting, move? Maybe, "Hey, let's advertise in a way that appeals to geeks and/or those with more than two neurons to rub together and/or a snarky sense of humor -- they're easier to support and less needy than turtleneck-wearing trendy idiots and teenagers" or something?

These threads remind me of the Mac vs. PC threads - full of people who have no idea what they're talking about having irrelevant pissing contests.

So...by suing they are basically admitting Verizon is right? Verizon's ads clearly state "3G coverage" on them, and a voice over says voice and data is still available elsewhere. They don't seem to be disputing the coverage claims at all, only that customers can be mislead into thinking the map represents full coverage...

Misleading? I don't think so.

can't wait to get my Droid

The best part of Fark: The cell phone carrier holy wars.

Who gives a shiat? They're all just the Phone Company^TM, even though they want you to believe it's all about choice.

chemical_angel: So ... ATT is suing on behalf of their stupid customers who cant read a chart? It was obvious to me and, although I kind of think those 'calling out the other guy comercials' are week sauce, I chuckled the first couple times I saw it. Of course ... I have Verizon so ...

But realize there is also a very large segment of the population that uses geeksquad for all their electronic needs...and they think it's good deal.

I was at radio shack when a women brought in her new cell phone and it "wasn't working" after her battery died. She charged it, but it still wasn't working...The sales person took it and turned right on. Apparently, She was not aware that you need to hold the power button for 3 seconds to turn it on.

/So I would say AT&T concerns are real.

I've got a real simple idea for AT&T here...

SPEND SOME FARKING MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE YOU IDIOTS!

I've been a customer of ATT (or it's predecessors) since 1995. I took a two year break to go to Verizon because coverage is so bad. That was before WLNP so I didn't even get to keep my number.

Now the bozos can't even run a 3G *voice* network properly.

Like most consumers, however, it hasn't annoyed me enough to drop my iPhone and single-device-worldwide capability.

/I suppose I am perpetuating the fail by continuing to spend $1000/mo with them

moistD: can't wait to get my Droid

Will be getting mine next weekend when I get paid.

slykens1: I've got a real simple idea for AT&T here...

SPEND SOME FARKING MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE YOU IDIOTS!

I've been a customer of ATT (or it's predecessors) since 1995. I took a two year break to go to Verizon because coverage is so bad. That was before WLNP so I didn't even get to keep my number.

Now the bozos can't even run a 3G *voice* network properly.

Like most consumers, however, it hasn't annoyed me enough to drop my iPhone and single-device-worldwide capability.

/I suppose I am perpetuating the fail by continuing to spend $1000/mo with them

1000$ ?

F that plan.

Is "There's an app for that" not trademarked? I assumed it was and that's what the lawsuit was about. That's the only thing that makes sense. This lawsuit is just dumb.

In most of the world, picking your phone and your carrier are two different steps...only in the US to you see phone/carrier exclusivity...

I say open the phones up completely, let the best carrier, not the 'best' phone, win...

Lots of AT&T butthurt in this thread. The map obviously is misleading. I live in Durham, NC and that map seems to state that there is no 3G coverage in central NC. I have an iPhone and have no problem picking up 3G coverage in Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Morrisville, and even farking Goldsboro. I say go ahead and sue.

/Misleading map is misleading

ihatedumbpeople

I agree wholeheartedly. The fact that phones are tethered to one particular carrier is asinine. You shouldn't have to buy a new phone if you switch carriers. It would be exactly the same if you were required to buy a new TV to switch cable companies, or a new computer if you switched ISPs.

That kind of deal should be totally illegal.

cmunic8r99: Mentalpatient87: puuukeey: IAT&T blows.

See, that's funny, because I can get perfect reception here, (new window) as well as all manner of indoors, underground, and out in the boonies. AT&T has been pretty good to me.

I didn't get squat for reception with two different phones when I was there at the end of September. Even from here:

Well that's odd, and pretty convenient, given that I actually made a phone call from right...


And yes, custom Riblet, that is southern Ill. That's Garden of the Gods, fun place to climb rocks.

chemical_angel: So ... ATT is suing on behalf of their stupid customers who cant read a chart? It was obvious to me and, although I kind of think those 'calling out the other guy comercials' are week sauce, I chuckled the first couple times I saw it. Of course ... I have Verizon so ...

This. If the information presented by Verison is correct and not skewed, there's no claim. Now, if Verison showed a map of their voice/data coverage and a map of ATT's 3G coverage, that would be misleading and probably sufficient to award damages.

Sirsky: These threads remind me of the Mac vs. PC threads - full of people who have no idea what they're talking about having irrelevant pissing contests.

Don't forget those who add nothing at all to the discussion...

I don't "like" one company more than another, I tested both and went with the one with superior coverage. Around here that is Verizon by a LONG shot. I still get annoyed about plenty of things with verizon but my biggest gripe has been slow to market and crippled PDA phones.

I am getting a droid on Friday, so that might change.

This sort of thing is always tense and awkward, so I think we all need to talk to Verizon and AT&T separately and tell them that we still love them very much.

There's nothing we can do to help them work through their issues with each other. All we can do is promise that no matter what happens, we'll still love each of them, and that it's not a contest.

That's what family means, after all. You stick together no matter what. They're the ones who taught us that, when we were barely old enough to understand the commercials!

mitEj: 1000$ ?

F that plan.

Business with many lines. I could take it all to Verizon but I like phones that aren't Fisher-Price mode and having one device to use worldwide.

GibbyTheMole: ihatedumbpeople

I agree wholeheartedly. The fact that phones are tethered to one particular carrier is asinine. You shouldn't have to buy a new phone if you switch carriers. It would be exactly the same if you were required to buy a new TV to switch cable companies, or a new computer if you switched ISPs.

That kind of deal should be totally illegal.


You have to buy or lease their equipment.

Mentalpatient87: puuukeey: IAT&T blows.

See, that's funny, because I can get perfect reception here, (new window) as well as all manner of indoors, underground, and out in the boonies. AT&T has been pretty good to me.

you got luckey? want a farkin cookie or some shiv?