By 
Sprint is at it again. Long time opponent of the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile merger, they have been pretty vocal about the buyout since the beginning. Which makes perfect sense seeing how they have the most to lose in the deal.
Well, instead of just appealing to the courts on how this deal could potentially hurt American consumers and free market in the US, now they’re coming up with actual solutions. Sprint has filed a technical analysis with the FCC detailing the actions AT&T could take if they in fact, wanted to increase their spectrum, data speeds and network without T-Mobile’s help.
According to Sprint, AT&T could actually spend far less than the $39 billion they’re spending to acquire T-Mobile, all while increasing their network capacity by more than 600% by 2015. Sprint said in a statement,
AT&T could increase its capacity by developing its warehoused spectrum, accelerating its 4G network buildout, and implementing a more efficient network architecture.
An AT&T spokesman fired back saying,
A company that has outsourced the management of its own network shouldn’t be giving advice to others.
But Sprint isn’t the only one giving management advice. A public interest group called Public Knowledge has also said that they will be filing a preliminary economical and technical report on how AT&T and T-Mobile could both better their networks without the need for a merger.
This whole merger business has many current T-Mobile customers fired up as well, signing online petitions and making their own voices heard which ironically, puts them in Sprint’s court. But how do you guys feel about all of this? Is there anyone out there that is actually FOR the AT&T-Mobile merger?
[Via Reuters]
I, for one, am also against this. This will make AT&T the only GSM (I think) carrier in the states. But thats not the big part, many users depend on the unlimited services that T-Mobile offers and if AT&T buys them those unlimited plans will go away.
I am currently on Sprint (Nexus S 4G and love it) and couldn’t be happier, but if this merger does happen, I will only be able to recommend Sprint (which although they need to move faster on putting up 4G towers, are still the best because they offer unlimited plans)
Thats my 2 cents.
T-Mobile has already said they will be going to tiered data. AT&T acquiring T-Mobile will make way for much lager developments in the tech industry. Imagine if we didn’t let companies buy eachother when the analog towers were up, there would not have been any reason to expand and invent 3G and give other reasons to come over. This is going to be amazing for consumers in the long run.
Larger developments in the tech industry? There’s only four major carriers as it stands now. Removing one of those key players and making Sprint largely obsolete compared to Verizon and AT&T if this deal goes through means that Verizon and AT&T don’t have to work as hard. Less competition means less innovation. There will be less of a force to satisfy consumers with T-Mobile part of AT&T. The whole reason AT&T is buying T-Mobile is to eliminate competition and make it a two horse race between them and Verizon, not because of spectrum or 4G network rollout. That’s a bunch of bull crap because AT&T has the most spectrum out of anyone and they could easily rollout their own 4G network faster if they felt like it, like Sprint is suggesting. If this deal goes through, expect Verizon and AT&T to get lazier because they can and developments to slow down.
Actually, AT&T has the least amount of spectrum of the main 4, it does have the most digital GSM spectrum, which is 2G tho…. Sprint, by miles, has the most spectrum. With Verizon a distant, distance 2nd. And T-Mobile behind them. Sprint’s problem… is that they’re morons, and bought their spectrum with strings attached, or with the aid of other companies… such as cable companies controlling their nationwide AWS spectrum, and Clearwire being created in full control of their 2.5 ghz spectrum. AT&T wants T-Mo’s competing nationwide AWS spectrum… that they’re currently wasting by launching HSPA on it. AWS is the worldwide hot-spot for LTE… it’s the lower bands that the differences lie, 700 vs 800…. 800, by the way, is also something Sprint has nationwide coverage in. AT&T is spectrum poor… this needs to happen for the tech industry, just as he has said. Carriers are nothing but that… a carrier. The big deal, is in the devices that utilize their network. And stronger and stronger networks are needed to realize their full potentials.
This article contradicts your claim that AT&T has the least amount of spectrum: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20058494-266.html
Do you have a source to back up your claim?
Actually your article very specifically says “top 21 markets”… while this is about nationwide coverage. So try again. And since 2G is dead… maybe you should look at AWS and 700 mhz holdings next time you make that effort:
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=187This is about the plan to harmonize the wireless landscape *worldwide*. It can’t happen when the US has it’s largest AWS holder, T-Mobile, rolling out HSPA over it… and the 2nd largest holder of AWS, Sprint, doing absolutely nothing with because they bought it with a group of cable companies, who want to exhaust 2.5 ghz WiMax first… your piss-poor article is short-sighted, and ignores the band plans both nationally AND internationally… either that, or they – and you – must find it acceptable that your phone needs no less than 6 radios to be truly “global” on a “global” standard service… 8 if you want to add CDMA radios to the mix.
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=187 & http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99 to put them back in… since it was truncated.
AT&T is paying 39 billion for a 20 billion dollar company . Obviously they are trying to buy more than cell towers & spectrum . Then you put a twenty billion dollar loan on top of a promise to spread LTE to every unprofitable area of the country ? You’re trying to buy to big to fail . To pull that off you are obviously trying to buy price control as well . NASDAQ raised the value of AT&T’s stock on future price control . AT&T has had plenty of time to acquire spectrum . They did just buy a large block from Qualcomm . Still ,they shouldn’t be rewarded for not investing as much as other wireless providers in their network .
This makes no sense. Competition drives innovation, not mergers.
Since when? I’d like to see some real world examples to back your use of hyperbole…
Perhaps you should start by looking at the things the original AT&T invented as a monopoly with their Bell Labs… such as broadband coaxial cable, UNIX, the fax machine, cable tv (over a phone line at that time in the 20s), the technology that added that little thing called SOUND to what were to that point only silent movies, stereo recordings, high frequency radar, touch-tone telephones, the transistor, the first mobile phone in 1946 (which allowed all of 3 simultaneous phone calls at one time on an entire network!), solar cells, lasers, communication satellites, fiber optics, video calls, C++ coding language…. and more….and while we’re at it… Bell Labs also was the first group of scientists to find the echo of the Big Bang…
Do you honestly believe that?
I am a bad judge of sarcasm so i have to ask.
I didn’t come up with the idea of competition fostering innovation. It’s been a central concept of economics for centuries.
I’m quite familiar with Bell Labs, as my father worked for them for much of his adult life. And it’s clear you’re not familiar with them, as Bell Labs was spun off from AT&T in 1996, and is now owned by a subsidiary of French company Alcatel-Lucent. You’re falling for branding lies if you think the AT&T of today has anything to do with those innovations. Besides, the AT&T and Bell Labs of decades past wasn’t a monopoly, it was a regulated monopoly. The Justice Department, the FCC, and state and local public utility commissions all regulated AT&T. That environment is nothing like today’s corporate free-for-all.
But even if we ignore all that, the fact that Bell Labs innovated doesn’t disprove my point. Because you have to imagine how much more innovation there would have been with several companies pursuing research. Dozens of companies. Hundreds of companies. All pursuing original research, to try to get an edge on each other. It’s about fostering (i.e. encouraging, promoting) innovation, rather than allowing a dwindling oligopoly to dominate the market and rake in profits.
We’ve had nearly 30 years of research and innovation from multiple companies pursuing it… how far have we come? As far as we did from 1900 to 1983? How about as far as we did from 1950 to 1980 even? It seems to me we’re still using the same old internet… and most broadband users get their internet from cable companies, a technology virtually unchanged since the 20s… we’re still using the same landline phones… the same cellular phone technologies… the same coding languages…
One recent technological change we’ve made is HDTV… technology first researched and demonstrated by the likes of Bell Labs, RCA and GE in the 20s…. the Great Depression slowed that down a little bit… but the thing here is… large companies, with large R&D budgets can afford to truly innovate. If something fails or doesn’t become reality for 80 years, it doesn’t spell doom for them… several smaller companies doing R&D with smaller budgets… they can’t afford to fail. It’s precisely why technology in the past 30 years has been *evolutionary* rather than revolutionary… and why we’re barely improving things incrementally as we advance…
And to tie this to cellular companies…. since when do they innovate anyways? At this point, they truly are the dumb-pipe… handset makers innovate and compete against one-another… the GSMA dictates it’s own direction, starting with rebranding Bells TDMA service as “GSM”… and Qualcomm created IS-95 from Bells CDMA service… all the carriers really do is lease air and then resell it.
Bell labs had nothing to do with INVENTING sound in movies or stereo recordings…both of those technologies came from EUROPE….get your facts straight……and that’s just what i KNOW off the top of my head…i’m sure if i spent 10 minutes on google i could disprove at least 3 more of your claims. fail.
Also…Perhaps you should start by looking into why the monopoly was BROKEN UP!
You do realize you couldn’t be more wrong…. right? Sound on film… was demonstrated as a *concept* in Paris. Bell Labs brought it to life. The first feature film to have sound was The Jazz Singer in 1926. On Vitaphone, a product created by Bell Labs, at the time named AT&T Western Electric. Stereo **RECORDINGS** were invented by Bell Labs as well… just as I said. In Paris, again, what was done is a live transmission of an opera to a separate room, with 2 speakers, using a telephone system. Nothing was recorded. EMI owns the patents on how to cut a recording into the wax on vinyl, where it reads 2 sides of a wall for the 2-channels. Bell Labs actually put together the array of microphones and other recording devices, it’s their technology… just as stereo sound on film is their technology… which later was further developed by companies like MGM and Disney…. Disney of course inventing Surround Sound and releasing Fantasia as the first movie to utilize it.
And I also know why the company was broken up… long distance rates. Which, ironically, are free now… imagine that. You pay considerably more for local service than you ever did before… through your local Bell operating company… so that companies like MCI could offer long distance… companies that ultimately were bought by the baby Bells. Good work there! I mean, their combined market cap only increased 1300% since the breakup because they charged less and competition is good for consumers…. right? They didn’t turn record profits… company worth 59 billion pre-merger, now worth over 900 billion combined… local service rates rising faster than the rate of inflation for those cheaper long distance rates… right. Who failed exactly? Morons like you, that falsely believe the hyperbole that more competition is better, which is patently false in every real world example that we’ve seen thus far., now worth over 900 billion combined… local service rates rising faster than the rate of inflation for those cheaper long distance rates… right. Who failed exactly? Morons like you, that falsely believe the hyperbole that more competition is better, which is patently false in every real world example that we’ve seen thus far.
Now excuse me while I go get some water from my monopoly water provider, cooled by a machine utilizing electricity from my monopoly electric company… because I’m sick of using the internet right now, made possible by a former monopoly company’s universal infrastructure and UNIX system and C++ coding language. Maybe I’ll make a few phone calls on my cellular phone, invented by that same monopoly, using CDMA technology, also invented by them… to call a friend who uses a GSM phone, which is a TDMA technology… invented by…. take a guess?
You do realize you couldn’t be more wrong…. right? Sound on film… was demonstrated as a *concept* in Paris. Bell Labs brought it to life. The first feature film to have sound was The Jazz Singer in 1926. On Vitaphone, a product created by Bell Labs, at the time named AT&T Western Electric. Stereo **RECORDINGS** were invented by Bell Labs as well… just as I said. In Paris, again, what was done is a live transmission of an opera to a separate room, with 2 speakers, using a telephone system. Nothing was recorded. EMI owns the patents on how to cut a recording into the wax on vinyl, where it reads 2 sides of a wall for the 2-channels. Bell Labs actually put together the array of microphones and other recording devices, it’s their technology… just as stereo sound on film is their technology… which later was further developed by companies like MGM and Disney…. Disney of course inventing Surround Sound and releasing Fantasia as the first movie to utilize it.
And I also know why the company was broken up… long distance rates. Which, ironically, are free now… imagine that. You pay considerably more for local service than you ever did before… through your local Bell operating company… so that companies like MCI could offer long distance… companies that ultimately were bought by the baby Bells. Good work there! I mean, their combined market cap only increased 1300% since the breakup because they charged less and competition is good for consumers…. right? They didn’t turn record profits… company worth 59 billion pre-merger, now worth over 900 billion combined… local service rates rising faster than the rate of inflation for those cheaper long distance rates… right. Who failed exactly? Morons like you, that falsely believe the hyperbole that more competition is better, which is patently false in every real world example that we’ve seen thus far., now worth over 900 billion combined… local service rates rising faster than the rate of inflation for those cheaper long distance rates… right. Who failed exactly? Morons like you, that falsely believe the hyperbole that more competition is better, which is patently false in every real world example that we’ve seen thus far.
Now excuse me while I go get some water from my monopoly water provider, cooled by a machine utilizing electricity from my monopoly electric company… because I’m sick of using the internet right now, made possible by a former monopoly company’s universal infrastructure and UNIX system and C++ coding language. Maybe I’ll make a few phone calls on my cellular phone, invented by that same monopoly, using CDMA technology, also invented by them… to call a friend who uses a GSM phone, which is a TDMA technology… invented by…. take a guess?
not true they are selling u lemons for new spectrum from t mobile. think about this, why are they using 39 billion dollars to take a company out completely? when they know that they can use less money to better there spectrum and towers? why cant u see that at&t is lying to u. u think that this isnt an personal business long term investment. imagine the deal does go through u think they are going to guarantee u lower cost on ur phone bill after a take over. u think these blood thursty money hungry carriers careafter the merger. price will go up, they will care less after time passes, jobs will be lost for former tmobile employees. last but not least u will be pulling ur hair out after they take all ur money and laugh at u for supporting the deal u was suppose to be fighting against. u dont even know how much u already lost. if u like at&t so much why u dont have there service?
Not the only one, but that would only be because of prepaid and regional carriers. National, postpaid… yeah.
Nope…….
nope, no one
Nope not interested.
At&t is a good thing becuz t mobile has terrible coverage and I’m on Sprint and used to be on at&t and sprint is terrible so I’m switching back to my iphone and maybe there will be unlimited plans added after the merger
Almost everywhere I go in the LA area, tmo works when at&t is lacking. If the merger goes through I’m moving to england where carriers don’t bloat the phones to shit and I can keep my happy sim carded gsm phone. Rogers/Orange here I come.
so we now know that in San Antonio, Austin, Houston and Los Angeles with a combined population of 16 million that tmobile has the best service. can anyone else add their city to this list?
AT&T and T-Mobile both have the capability to have better, faster, and higher quality coverage, but their terrible management and general farting-around has not allowed for this.
I love how sprint gives a general statement about a way AT&T could improve their network and AT&T’s response is basically “STFU” I hope the FCC reads these types of remarks from AT&T and see’s why this merger should be blocked.
I think AT&T would have been better off reiterating it’s stance on how the FCC should let this go through as a way to improve consumer satisfaction then to just give sprint the sucker punch. LOL!
I think T-Mobile is gonna have to destroy all copies of that commercial where the cell phone bills are so big that they break the tables cause this is exactly what’s about to happen once this deal goes through.
yeah, if att thinks sprint is giving bad advice, they should specifically address why sprint’s comments would not work, not a passive dismissal. the reaction just validates that sprint is on the right track.
It’s OUTRIGHT SAD that at&t can’t invest in there own network but can focus on purchasing someone else’s TALK ABOUT A JOKE…
It’s OUTRIGHT SAD that Sprint hasn’t improved their network, but wants to tell AT&T how to do things. Sprint is a failing compamy, that relies on gimmicky phones, roaming, and the government to try and keep them competitive
YOUR A VERIZON FOOL
*You’re* ignorant….
Hahahahaha schoooooooled!
I’m with T-Mob, but if the merger goes through, I’ll be headed over to Sprint…
+1 Seriously is Tmo losing money? Is this merger really necessary? Tmo needs to stop being a p***y and step up their game. If the merger gets green lighted Im red lighting and moving to Sprint.
Deutsche telecom is intelligently stepping in the background. Still reaping the rewards of stock gains and cash by maintaining seats on the board of directors, just like their major ownership in I-wireless, a current network affilliate. They essentially maintain a great income without being in the public eye per se.
It seems to be a win-win for T-Mobile, more specifically Deutsche Telekom, their parent. If the merger goes through, they get an influx of cash, and out of the American wireless race that they were losing anyway. If it doesn’t go through, there’s a stipulation in the buyout that AT&T still owes them something crazy like $6 billion dollars. Either way, they come out happy.
Im already going to sprint tmobile cost the same as sprint but sprint has better phones and pricing……and better codverage…sprint here i come come motorola photon or galaxy s……… No att
Nay.
I’m a long-time T-Mobile customer and I dread the merger. (Where can I find one of those subscriber petitions so I can sign it?)
Just look at how Cingular treated its adopted customers when it acquired AT&T Wireless: They treated the AT&T customers like dirt, degrading their service and pressuring them into new, inferior Cingular plans. It was so bad that there’s an ongoing class action lawsuit by former AT&T Wireless customers.
So why wouldn’t they do the same to T-Mobile customers? It worked out quite well for them last time.
Against it completely
Will drop my Sensation 4G for the EVO 3D is the merger goes through…
I will be picking up my EVO 3D FRIDAY and yes it will rule android. 3days till the NATIONAL EVO HOLIDAY..
Engadget gave it a 7/10. The “underspecced” Charge beat that. Rule Android, pfft….
Engadget reviews make no damn sense. Most other reviewers give it an 8-9/10.
Really, most other reveiws say the same things. Horrible battery life, subpar camera, subpar screen….In any sense, it is far ffrom the best phone or one that “RULES ANDROID”. The Sensation beats it hands down. The ONLY thing the Evo has, is 3D.
Name some reviews beside engadget. Because Cnet say that the battery life is good. The sensation and 3D has the same screen, same battery. Keep talking troll
STOP THE MADNESS MY FRIEND EITHER BUY THE BEST OR SHUT UP..YOUR AS BAD AS THAT CRAPPY SITE ENGADGET..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQwXsgdFNrI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
@ duong ngo Last I heard, the Sensation didnt have a 3D screen, so no, they dont have the same screen. The viewing angles on the 3D are horrid. They might have the same battery, but the 3d screen, wimax,et al, eat through the battery a lot faster on the Evo. I am not saying it isnt a fantastic device, I am simply saying it wont “RULE ANDROID”, it isn’t the best out there now. I would take my Charge over it any day to be honest. My Charge affords me excellant battery life, a FULL 2 days, as opposed to “barely a workday” that CNet claims.
@Yarrel Ahh, did Engadget hurt your feelings for putting your phone were it belongs? IE, not on top?
Who keep WiMax on the whole time? The screen is the same as the sensation both of which are qHD. The 3D has two screen displaying two image to have the 3D effect. For someone on a tech site you really don’t know what you are talking about. Many site say the 2D image are as good as the sensation. The 3D on the other hand is not so good. We all the fact that any phone on sprint is bad. You are the Rich of Verizon. Get over it. BTW I have the nexus s, so I am not a fanboy of the 3D
I keep LTE on at all times. Sorry your 4G tech doesn’t allow it for fear of draining your battery. My Charge gets phenomenal battery life, even with 4G on at ALL times.
Now, the Evo does NOT have 2 screens. It has 1, that mixes both images. It has a membrain that is over it, so that your left eye sees on image, while your right eye sees another. For Someone on a thech site, you sure dont know what you are talking about. BTW, the Atrix has a qhd screen, does that mean they are the same? No, that is resolution, and a screen has many other factors. Fact remains, the screen on the Evo is worse than the one on other phones. The battery on the Evo drains rapidly. The camera quality is pathetic. The aesthetics are horrendous. There are some things that make it a goodphone overall, but it is fatr from being able to claim that it is the best phone. Even HTC says the Sensation is their flagship phone. Why? Because it is a better phone…
At&t & t-mobile should not merger and its true t-mobile and sprint need a little more boost in signel but so does at&t in some places and sprint and t-mobile is cheeper in price plan than at&t and verizon
On a side note I like how that AT&T spokesman just totally network slapped Sprint in the return shot of a statement
Lol i know the Sprint spokesman must be pissed but AT&T shouldnt be talking since they charge premium for low quality service both customer and network wise. Atleast with Sprint if there network sucks there customer support backs it up. Im surprised with the US carriers especially since the 4G bs started since US 4G is not even up to speed with the 3.5G thats around the global.
Um… I’m hoping that I’d get better internet service when the merger happens. I also know that “if” the merge does happen, you keep your same contract and it won’t change until you get ready to start a new one. If AT&T actually has a cheaper plan alongside Tmo’s prices now, I may stay with them. The only reason why I’m not on AT&T is because they don’t have as good as reception as Tmo in Houston. ( I’m witnessing it right before my eyes. My friend doesn’t have reception where I do), and they are way to expensive with their data plans. Don’t give me any bull with unlimited all plans since I’m not even using unlimited all. LoL!!
But, yea. I prefer Sprint since they don’t give you data caps, and I’m sure that I’d still be able to keep my current plan and it won’t change until it expires. That’s part of the merger deal. Read it. LoL!! And no data cap is pretty awesome!! I’d actually pay for tethering just to support Sprint for giving us no data cap. :P
I think the merger would help Sprint myself. People go to Sprint & T Mobile because of at&t and Verizon. The way I see it, one less choice for Sprint to lose out to.
no….competition is only way we have to put pressure on the big player on give us..”customers” more for less….on this days hard days after all economy problems we had …we definily need to rely on competition. If this deal goes thru than….we better start praying for virgin mobile and boost to get better on themselves….because a lot of us will be heading their way….
Get over it, anyone that actually thinks this buyout won’t go through as planned is drinking some tasty kool-aid. The notion AT&T would enter into a buyout and take a chance of losing $5-6 billion without gaining anything is completely crazy. At this point the drama surrounding this topic is all for show and the deal is pretty much a slam dunk for AT&T. Sprint is using the whole thing as a marketing ploy, you know the guys willing to fight for Joe America.
I have to agree. we live in a capitalist nation as Republicans are always shouting. telling a business what they can and can’t do is communism they’ll say. besides deutsche telekom wants to sell. can the government actually tell companies no! you can’t sell
Totally opposed to the deal.
Shut the fuck up Sprint. If only you put this much time and energy focusing on your own fucking business, maybe you can be a stronger contender.
Go back to the drawing board and negotiate to get BETTER FUCKING PHONE, and updated LTE
Oh come on you sound just like the TYPICAL VERIZON CLOWN. Sprint has every right to dislike or fight this BULLSHIT MERGER just like everyone else who is against this. Ass T&T is nothing more than a FLOP JUST LIKE VERIZON ripping of everyone left and right. Verizon with there CRAPPY OUTDATED PHONES WHICH ARE FAR TO OVERPRICED and ASS T&T WITH THEIR CRAPPY SERVICE AND DROPPED CALLS ALL DAY LONG. If you think things suck now on VERIZON AND ASS T&T wait till this merger gets approved IF IT DOES you will see how much WORSE IT GETS. If your part of tmobile now don’t jump ship just yet be patient because all the right people are lining up to make sure this merger is BLOCKED. If not then yes SPRINT IS AND WILL BE THE BEST PLACE TO GO TO they care about the little guy and have all THE BEST ANDROID PHONES ON THE MARKET not to mention yes the IPHONE COME SEPTEMBER. If your smart you WILL DUMP BOTH VERIZON AND ASS T&T WITH THE QUICKNESS…
Your ridiculousness amuses me.
yeah I also have to disagree with something you said. sprint has all the best phones? no…. freaking way. the nexus s4g evo 4g and soon evo 3d. of all the carriers I like tmobiles phones best ( for android any way) especially now with all the new phones their adding
HAHAHAHAHA! This is the EXACT SAME crap you’ve been saying for MONTHS. Right down to the stupid (and downright childish) “Ass T&T” moniker to the “outdated and overpriced phones on Verizon” to the E3D “ruling all of Android”. Try using an argument that actually makes sense and is NOT over a month old. Otherwise, you’re just another spam generator.
I’m for the merger. T-Mobile’s network is a piece of crap, it will help their customers and it will only make AT&T’s powerful network even stronger. All of you guys that think AT&T’s network sucks etc., are naive and stupid.
Not sure I agree with you on that. I have been with tmo for about 8 years without a hitch. Good data (3mb/s) unlimited for only $20 a month… And they are the OG of the android world, as my g1 and Nexus One can attest to. I for one will not stay with att. Seems they are too uncomfortable with android. Time will tell.
Yet no TMO customer wants to leave that piece of crap network . Yeah AT&T has said they can’t compete without TMO’s network . Boy that must be some AT&T network . Or they are dishonest . Or maybe they need to grow a pair , roll up their sleeves and compete without taking over competition . You would have to be an idiot to believe your rates won’t go up if this merger passes AT&T boy . AT&T is taking out a 20 billion dollar loan and promising to bring LTE to every unprofitable area of the country . You will be asked to subsidize it .
AT&T has a powerful network.. not really. My area just got 3G after being promised it for 3 years and then it only happened after AT&T bought out a regional carrier network to piggyback on. Since the switch I have had more dropped calls and lost SMS and Voicemails then when they had just their standard 2G services. AT&T has a Large network but powerful is not an adjective I would use to describe it.
you’re stupid! AT&T is only good if you live out in the middle of no where like a dumb redneck who wants to go back to the stone age. but if you live in one of 15 biggest cities in America. your tmobile service would be excellent. I don’t even live in the biggest city in my state, San Antonio tx (3rd largest) and tmobile is the best from here to Austin. not to mention tmobile has the best customer service of any carrier provider. oh.. their customer service is like chocolate!
Funny, a Texan using the term “redneck” as an insult to others…
Im for it. Faster and better coverage for me and better innovation in phones. Bigger phone selcetion
Nope. I’m another T-Mobile customer who’s dreading this. Not perfect to be sure, but in my experience T-Mobile has been by far the best to work with.
I’ve been a long-time t-Mobile customer. At one point I changed jobs from a more technical role to actually working for VZW support for a couple years. I took advantage of the time to learn what I could about the whole industry.
VZW’s biggest issue, besides value, has been just making things too dammed complicated. There’s 3 different “dates” and people can’t discern when the contract is up, and the plan changes are just …weird. However, I’m like a mechanic buying a used car, so they’d be my 2nd choice, and they do respect privacy. After all they *DID* successfully fend of the RIAA.
SPRINT customer service doesn’t seem to know what the words mean, and God help you if you have a technical problem. I actually had to report them to the FCC when they illegally stored my credit card info. Got a call the next day! FCC rocks!
AT&T is horrible, primarily in how they relate to their customers. I have lost count of the number of legal run-ins they have, not just lawsuits by individuals or groups, but punishments by local municipalities! Fines on top of ordered paybacks…
My concerns are less about anti-trust, and more about good service and reasonable packages. If it were T-Mobile or Deutsche Telekom buying out AT&T, I would feel very much different.
when was your last experience with sprint’s customer service because it has gotten a lot better over the past year, it is now rated as good as VZW.
Im against this as they come… i hate AT&T and i switched from them with my family 4 years ago and i have no plans on sticking around if they buy out my tmobile. Ill be headed to sprint as well
im for the AT&T/T-Mobile merger so i can get ATT HSPA+ /LTE
ahhh. dont ya just love capitalism? When the going gets tough buy your competitor. Im obviously against this being a former ATT customer. They charge too much
my service is pretty good in Jersey City and whenever I go to New York. Amazing in Hoboken.- T-mobile
Im for it. More Coverage with my existing phone : )
love t-mobile and was on the verge of going back home (had to do a Verizon stint for a couple of years) but this merger has me spooked. I had AT&T and I don’t wanna go back to them ATTall