Jump to content

Similar forum like this but for AT&T?


xmx1024

Recommended Posts

Yikes, that sounds awful! Were you able to recover the loss without much hassle? I'd be really angry to have that happen, as would anyone, but I hope you didn't have much difficulty recovering your loss.

 

It really seems to depend on who the driver is, the area, and a bunch of different factors with these shipping companies. Some people have awful experiences with UPS, others with FedEx, though I'll say both seem much better than what I've heard of small shipping carriers on a few Amazon-related blogs I've read of people who've complained of their experiences with shippers. Most people on there like both UPS and FedEx, but have lots of bad stuff to say regarding smaller shippers Amazon sometimes uses instead of UPS and FedEx.

Oh yes, got the replacement the next day. Thankfully our fedex express driver is much better than the ground driver was.

 

 

Sent from my Gold iPhone 6s Plus 128GB using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to echo AJ's comments, things don't always work perfectly. Honestly, you should never move to Hawaii :) Things here break lots. Life on a volcano 2500 miles from land. Cell phones are pretty much the most reliable things here. There power is off more than a whores panties, roads frequently closed for 6 hours. Its just life. Tmo messed up sending my my current phone, because I was feeling particularly cheeky I did call them and wangle some credits but it didn't sour my experience. They're shipping tens of thousands of phones across a huge country in one day. Stuff is bound to go wrong and it probably wont get fixed quickly. Thats just a reality.

 

At work I see it every day, parts we overnight take a week to turn up. People send the wrong stuff, or to the wrong place or a courier delivers it to the wrong place so they can go home early. If I got upset about that kind of stuff I'd have jumped off the pali years ago. You prepare for others to screw up and when it happens just take a deep breath and carry on. **** happens. Honestly you do seem to be very unlucky or have expectations that are a little too high, these types of service are offered on a best effort basis and for good reason.

 

If you are wanting verizon service for tmobile money then you are bound to be disappointed. I have tmobile and have had sprint and verizon. I know the difference and I am happy now with tmobile (although they are getting worse). There is a trade off for sure, but we each make our own choice and don't get belligerent when our own choice bites us in the ass.

 

Every day we get is a good one because no matter how bad it may seem its a hell of a lot better than not getting another day. 

 

Hawaii looks very beautiful, but I wouldn't want to be so far offshore to where I could escape from a natural disaster, let alone an evil UPS or FedEx driver :D.

T-Mobile has resolved things, thankfully. Now have a direct contact with the information to contact her directly, not just the Executive Relations department. So, now those concerns of getting someone who isn't helpful and even worse than what should be for a customer service experience, is not an issue now. I still feel badly for people who have those experiences and would like for companies to at least try to offer their customers a more fair experience for the money. However, with what I've heard of T-Mobile with employee groups complaining, I wonder if maybe that had something to do with my bad experiences, if the employees we spoke with were upset at T-Mobile nd they weren't really trying in their jobs because of it. That is the impression I'm getting, as it was quite unusual, even for T-Mobile's Executive Relations department, which my mother has had plenty of positive interactions with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes, got the replacement the next day. Thankfully our fedex express driver is much better than the ground driver was.

 

 

Sent from my Gold iPhone 6s Plus 128GB using Tapatalk

 

That is great you were able to get it resolved without an issue and have a better driver now. I know these shipping carriers certainly have their mix of both good and bad drivers, even the nightmarish ones I've seen videos of, where drivers do some awful things with peoples' packages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So out of curiosity, the other day I dug out my iPhone 3G (my first iPhone) and surprisingly it fired right up so I stuck my SIM card in and decided to see what was happening with AT&T's GSM service in my area since WCDMA has been moved to the PCS F block where I suspected GSM1900 used to reside. 

 

I found about 11 850 GSM channels all wedged in the guard bands and 2 of those were in the old AMPS control channel, just as suspected. And also as suspected I found no GSM1900. 

 

Today I'm in the city and borrowed a friends T-Mobile Note 3 on AT&T and used band selection to see if GSM1900 is gone in the city as well...and sure enough, it is. Only was able to pick up some weak GSM850 from a distant cell site. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, that is fast!

 

Is this on AT&T and is there any mention of what band of frequency it was obtained on?

Its on howardforums also. His best was 202 down. Has a iphone 6s. They think it was x3ca. Band 12 + 2 + 30.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Is WCDMA really prone to co-channel interference? The past few months something has been going on in about a 3-4 mile radius around my house that makes one of the two 850 channels completely useless on one of the towers frequently, and on two others sometimes. Not even a call can go through. Very sporadic like someone is running a cell jammer or perhaps co-channel interference. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

AT&T has made the jump to "wideband" PCS LTE in the Chicago area as of sometime very early this morning. Now running at 15 MHz FDD.

 

C3DD8A82-6217-4815-B674-1733B7E37A4D_zps

 

I'm using an iPhone 6 which is CAT4 and can't aggregate more than 20 MHz DL so that has to be just B2:

 

65C14432-3E8B-4DFC-B275-8FCDABB1F03A_zps

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I setup my brothers iP6S on GoPhone for him today and much to my surprise I found band 30 while sitting on my front porch. I couldn't believe it because the tower it came from is over 3 miles away and through lots of forest. Apparently AT&T out does Sprint in distance on every band, because I never saw band 41 reach further then a mile, maybe 1.5 miles at best. I had assumed B30 would be limited to about a mile based on my experiences with B41.

 

AD5BE3CC-995A-444B-B9F0-70A81157DB4C_zps

240901D4-1EE5-49FE-BC52-2AC176BA5E1C_zps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I setup my brothers iP6S on GoPhone for him today and much to my surprise I found band 30 while sitting on my front porch. I couldn't believe it because the tower it came from is over 3 miles away and through lots of forest. Apparently AT&T out does Sprint in distance on every band, because I never saw band 41 reach further then a mile, maybe 1.5 miles at best. I had assumed B30 would be limited to about a mile based on my experiences with B41.

 

AD5BE3CC-995A-444B-B9F0-70A81157DB4C_zps

240901D4-1EE5-49FE-BC52-2AC176BA5E1C_zps

Yeah, not sure how they do it but AT&T band 4 routinely outreaches band 26 in my area. And it's only a 10x10 of band 4 so it shouldn't be a massive difference. They really push their gear to the limits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, not sure how they do it but AT&T band 4 routinely outreaches band 26 in my area. And it's only a 10x10 of band 4 so it shouldn't be a massive difference. They really push their gear to the limits.

If sprint could increase power on their B26 so that it was 5-6dbm better everywhere, it would work wonders for coverage and reliability in general.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, not sure how they do it but AT&T band 4 routinely outreaches band 26 in my area. And it's only a 10x10 of band 4 so it shouldn't be a massive difference. They really push their gear to the limits.

 

In my experience in this area, all of the other carriers have better LTE reach than Sprint does, even on comparable bands.  In some of the more rural areas here, it seems worse than it does in the city; I lose LTE completely on Sprint as soon as I lose line of sight, even though those towers may have all three bands; meanwhile, AT&T and Verizon and even T-Mobile B2 have LTE available on some band, never falling to 3G.  (I'm thinking particularly of 29 south of Warrenton.)  Verizon's 10x10 PCS LTE, which is only on select towers, seems to go on forever and at good strength, often preventing me from seeing AWS or 700 on towers I don't have without toggling airplane mode.

 

It definitely seems to be a configuration or optimization issue, as I never had this problem when I visited the Shentel region.  I did see 3G from time to time, but it was in the really viciously rough terrain areas, and in those areas the other carriers were no better off.

 

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience in this area, all of the other carriers have better LTE reach than Sprint does, even on comparable bands. In some of the more rural areas here, it seems worse than it does in the city; I lose LTE completely on Sprint as soon as I lose line of sight, even though those towers may have all three bands; meanwhile, AT&T and Verizon and even T-Mobile B2 have LTE available on some band, never falling to 3G. (I'm thinking particularly of 29 south of Warrenton.) Verizon's 10x10 PCS LTE, which is only on select towers, seems to go on forever and at good strength, often preventing me from seeing AWS or 700 on towers I don't have without toggling airplane mode.

 

It definitely seems to be a configuration or optimization issue, as I never had this problem when I visited the Shentel region. I did see 3G from time to time, but it was in the really viciously rough terrain areas, and in those areas the other carriers were no better off.

 

- Trip

I used to chalk it up to Sprint using 5x5s and everyone else using 10x10s, but then once I got my Verizon moto E I started realizing that Verizon's second AWS carrier (a 5x5) performs just about as well as the larger first carrier. It's probably my biggest network gripe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to chalk it up to Sprint using 5x5s and everyone else using 10x10s, but then once I got my Verizon moto E I started realizing that Verizon's second AWS carrier (a 5x5) performs just about as well as the larger first carrier. It's probably my biggest network gripe.

I was just in Southwest Michigan where USCC squats on 700A and B leaving AT&T with just lower 700C and the coverage was fantastic on the 5x5 channel, very few towers and all forest. The only complaint was that speeds were sub 1 Mbps when the signal was weaker, miles from a tower, but it was still better then the HSPA alternative (actually HSPA worked ok but in general the latency is never as good as LTE)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's crazy how far AT&T's band 2 reaches in my area. Even before moving to 20x20

I wish we could get 20x20 B2 here. Not gonna happen since their PCS isn't all contiguous.

When it first went to 10x10 in the fall is when I first started experiencing band 2 at pretty good distances. Prior to that they had the threshold set at something like -112 dbm so I always fell to B17 pretty quickly, though once I was able to hold onto it about 2.5 miles from the tower when it was 5x5. When they went 15x15 is when it really started to shine though, going to that bandwidth made it stable enough that I can now stay connected all over town just about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish we could get 20x20 B2 here. Not gonna happen since their PCS isn't all contiguous.

When it first went to 10x10 in the fall is when I first started experiencing band 2 at pretty good distances. Prior to that they had the threshold set at something like -112 dbm so I always fell to B17 pretty quickly, though once I was able to hold onto it about 2.5 miles from the tower when it was 5x5. When they went 15x15 is when it really started to shine though, going to that bandwidth made it stable enough that I can now stay connected all over town just about.

Even when it was 10x10 it was still close to matching B17 which is 10x10 here. Maybe they have the power turned up high or have really tuned their network well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even when it was 10x10 it was still close to matching B17 which is 10x10 here. Maybe they have the power turned up high or have really tuned their network well.

Yeah at 10x10 I was still able to drive across town and hang onto B2 everywhere on a good day. Towers are 4-6 miles apart in a lot of places around where I am too which makes that fairly impressive. Now at 15x15 I'm almost always on B2 anytime I'm outdoors almost anywhere, and in fact at home my B2 signal is stronger then B17 sometimes now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read about Verizon's new pricing plans and I'm expecting AT&T very well might follow with something quite similar. However, I'm thinking of how AT&T could do something new, yet different, all while still responding to Verizon's changes.

 

In the past, I haven't been supportive of the additional line charge being above $15 monthly. However, I'm now beginning to support the idea if it means reducing the per gb data charges. Meanwhile, I've also begun to look against having a flat per gb data charge I've otherwise been supportive of. I'm still not fond of data buckets though, but the concept of giving a large allowance intrigues me, charging less for it while more for the lines.

 

AT&T could do something unique by bridging the gap between data buckets and unlimited data by creating an affordable access plan that trades rollover data for lesser data cost. Despite Verizon adding their version of carryover data, I don't believe the feature will last once new innovative pricing plans become common from here on.

 

Edit Note on 7/18/2016 : I realized I posted this rate plan idea rather quickly, and didn't write all of this accordingly to what I have in mind for AT&T to implement as a counter to Verizon's recent plan changes, particularly the overage protection. So, my idea is for AT&T to have the starting rate be $75 monthly for the first line, which would get 5gb of high-speed data, then have 3mbps capped unlimited data thereafter. Other high-speed data plans with capped unlimited data would be $90 monthly/10gb, $105 monthly/15gb, $120 monthly/20gb, $135 monthly/25gb, $150 monthly/30gb, and so on. Shared data lines are $30 monthly for each additional line sharing data with the first line. An innovative idea I have which I'm unsure if this has been done before, is to have an option where an unlimited amount of lines on an account or even lines between accounts can share data between themselves in a shared data pool at $15 monthly for each line sharing data. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm quite interested in the new Samsung Galaxy S7 Active on AT&T. My mother is going to an AT&T store later this morning to speak with a manager and have contact with them and retentions to work out a deal. If this doesn't yet again work out, I'll end up getting the Sony Xperia Z5 Premium while staying with T-Mobile. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I think it is likely that T-Mobile will be forced to honor any existing US cellular roaming agreements in those areas as a condition of them taking over the spectrum.  In that case, there would be no improvement of service unless T-Mobile improves the service offering in those areas.
    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...