backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 24 comment(s) - last by Jcfili.. on Dec 3 at 6:40 PM
Sprint says reviewers need to test use more tests and avoid bad cell towers and poor weather

Verizon has been hammering AT&T with some (rather factual) commercials about the coverage and dependability of the AT&T 3G network. The series of commercials shows a map of the AT&T 3G coverage area compared to one of the Verizon coverage area.

The commercials riled AT&T enough that the wireless provider filed suit against Verizon. AT&T fired back with claims that it has more data traffic than Verizon thanks to iPhone users. Presumably, this was a key point for AT&T to justify the fact that more traffic means slower speeds and dropped calls. Things were bad enough for AT&T that Apple came out with its own ads to help support its exclusive retailer in America.

Verizon isn’t content with simply slapping AT&T around in commercials and the courtroom. The company is going after Sprint's claim of most dependable network. The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has asked Sprit to drop its claim of "America's Most Dependable 3G Network" after the claim was challenged by Verizon.

According to the advertising watchdog, independent tests by Nielsen Co. have proven that Verizon actually has less dropped calls that Sprint. Sprint countered with reviewers need to look at more tests and avoid events like bad weather and bad cell towers in their rankings. I'm sure all of the tests were conducted on a bad tower or during bad weather, right Sprint?

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Is it hot in here?
By SlipDizzy on 11/25/2009 11:56:41 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder what has caused Verizon to turn up the heat on its competition. Although I do agree with what Verizon is saying, I am just curious as to why now and not when these commercials started. Someone must have sent someone a nasty e-mail...




RE: Is it hot in here?
By amanojaku on 11/25/2009 1:04:17 PM , Rating: 2
Sharks circle when they smell blood in the water. Sprint has been hemorrhaging customers and cash for a few years now. What better time to attack a competitor than a recession, where there is less money for advertising and upgrading the network?


RE: Is it hot in here?
By mcnabney on 11/25/2009 1:25:45 PM , Rating: 2
Verizon wants the remaining good customers that Sprint has. All those millions of Sprint customers that churn out every year need to go somewhere. Verizon would be happy to take them. It is also a lot cheaper to make a competitor stop lying than run your own adds to counter it. I imagine that marketing thinks that the for every hundred customers leaving Sprint, Verizon is likely to get a third of them. So it really makes sense to turn up the churning spigot at Sprint.


RE: Is it hot in here?
By hightechfella on 11/25/2009 2:08:01 PM , Rating: 2
The competitor "lying" here is Verizon.

They cannot attack AT&T on the basis of 3G data coverage -- and then attack Sprint on the basis of 2G voice coverage and say that proves Sprint's 3G network isn't better.

Sprint's 3G network IS more reliable -- data has lower latency, it's faster, it penetrates buildings better, there's more backfeed, and there are more base stations. Study after study provides that for 3G data, Sprint cannot be beaten.

By taking the debate to 2G calls, Verizon is handing AT&T a victory -- now AT&T can claim a "bigger 3G network" than Verizon since its GSM coverage is wider across America than Verizon's.

Verizon cannot have it both ways. Either 3G means 3G, or it doesn't.


RE: Is it hot in here?
By Screwballl on 11/30/2009 1:28:14 PM , Rating: 2
You are missing the point. 3G means 3G, NOT GSM, CDMA or any other signal. 3G is the higher "broadband" based speeds at which data can travel. Without the 3G (or LTE/4G) signal, it it not considered broadband because of the higher latency, slower speeds and increased connection drops.
Verizon is directly comparing 3G to 3G, not 3G to 4G, 3G to GSM, 3G to voice signals.... 3G to 3G. In this case, Verizons 3G is massively faster and much more widespread than AT&T/Bellsouth/Cingular networks.

And about Sprint, you need to do some reading: Sprint and Verizon have almost the same signal and coverage areas because of the shared 3G towers and networks. It may be that your phone gets better signal in the locations you described under Sprint because the phone handles the signals slightly differently. I have had cell phones and 3G plans through an unlocked phone on 5 different carriers and Verizon has always had the best signal everywhere I go... but for 3G signals and strength, Verizon and Sprint has always been exactly the same. Take 2 exact same unlocked phones side by side, one with Verizon, one with Sprint, and compare the 3G signals. You will see that you will have the same signal strength and speeds 99% of the time... because of the shared 3G network.


RE: Is it hot in here?
By Jcfili on 12/3/2009 6:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure every company run their test on their own phones and not unlocked phones ........


RE: Is it hot in here?
By stimudent on 12/3/2009 12:02:21 PM , Rating: 2
Verizon's conduct in the marketplace is beginning to raise eyebrows and some questions regarding ethics.


Verizon is going balls to the wall
By Leper Messiah on 11/25/2009 12:20:17 PM , Rating: 1
I love it, more or less because they have studies and stuff to back up their claims.




By hightechfella on 11/25/2009 2:37:53 PM , Rating: 2
No they don't -- the study they're citing includes 2G voice coverage.

If I was running Sprint, I'd file Verizon's complaint to the BBB as a friend-of-the-court brief in AT&T's lawsuit against Verizon.

Verizon is arguing *in court* that 3G is NOT voice coverage. Yet they argued in their BBB complaint about Sprint that 3G is almost *entirely* voice coverage.

If Verizon is right in their criticism of Sprint, then they should lose their case to AT&T. It would be fun to see an AT&T lawyer grill the Verizon guy about why they consider 2G voice as "3G coverage" in Sprint's case but not AT&T's.


RE: Verizon is going balls to the wall
By Gio6518 on 11/26/2009 6:02:15 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I love it, more or less because they have studies and stuff to back up their claims.


HMMMMMMMMMM theres a graph for that
http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=167391&page=1&zoomI...

i cant slam sprint service i have great service pretty much everywhere except at my home, but in all fairness verizon, t-mobile and at&t all dont work by my home and im just outside a major city, but sprint does 1 thing others wont they gave me a free Airave and waived the monthly fee.

http://www.nextel.com/en/services/airave/index.sht...


RE: Verizon is going balls to the wall
By heulenwolf on 11/30/2009 3:21:50 PM , Rating: 2
Nice link to the PC World article - http://www.pcworld.com/article/167391/a_day_in_the... - I think the opening lines well summarize their results:

quote:
A Day in the Life of 3G During March and April, we spent a day testing the major 3G services in 13 cities across the United States. Verizon's service showed a combination of speed and reliability, Sprint's results lent credence to its 'most dependable' claim, and AT&T's network showed fast upload speeds in most cities. Mark Sullivan, PC World Jun 28, 2009 8:00 pm


Note that they tested in 13 big cities across the continental US, no rural areas. They don't disclose the 20+ locations they tested in in each city or how they were chosen, but its a start.


By Gio6518 on 12/3/2009 1:50:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Note that they tested in 13 big cities across the continental US, no rural areas. They don't disclose the 20+ locations they tested in in each city or how they were chosen, but its a start.


thats all the cities and sites the were able to test in due to the lack of 3G support on AT&T


What?
By MADAOO7 on 11/26/2009 12:47:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sprint says reviewers need to test use more tests and avoid bad cell towers and poor weather


Did you not read your article before posting it? I have no idea what this means.




RE: What?
By MADAOO7 on 11/26/2009 12:50:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Verizon actually has less dropped calls that Sprint.


Seriously? It's "Verizon has less dropped calls THAN Sprint."


RE: What?
By Gondorff on 12/2/2009 3:41:08 AM , Rating: 2
If we are correcting spelling/grammar, let's go all the way...

"Verizon actually has fewer dropped calls than Sprint."

Fewer is for things you can count, less is for things you can't.

I also seem to remember seeing "Sprint" being spelled as "Sprit" somewhere in the article. At least it's just a blog post. :)


Too bad Verizon is wrong...
By hightechfella on 11/25/2009 2:01:57 PM , Rating: 3
Voice is not 3G -- it's 2G 1xRTT on CDMA (or EDGE/GPRS on GSM).

No doubt Verizon has fewer dropped calls in rural areas of the country... but Sprint isn't claiming the fewest dropped calls, they are claiming the most reliable 3G (data) network.

In that claim, they are completely correct. Test after test shows that Sprint's 3G network is faster, more reliable and lower latency than Verizon.

Ironically, by attempting to move the debate back to voice, Verizon is conceding AT&T's point about wireless coverage.

Verizon cannot bully AT&T by claiming it has a better 3G network with more 3G coverage, and then turn around and bully Sprint by claiming that 2G voice calls represent 3G network reliability.

Either Verizon's criticism against AT&T is valid (and thus its criticism of Sprint is bogus) or the other way around.




By inperfectdarkness on 11/27/2009 12:49:46 AM , Rating: 2
agreed.

sprint isn't irrevelant. at&t actually is--but there's so many iZombies funneling them cash that cingular will live on for quite some time.

i've been relatively happy with sprint for years. this was due in no small part to them having sanyo phones. now that sanyo phone is now owned by kyocera...i'm not sure what the future holds...


Seriously?
By clovell on 11/30/2009 10:56:13 AM , Rating: 2
> I'm sure all of the tests were conducted on a bad tower or during bad weather, right Sprint?

I'm sure this is an article and not a blog, right Shaun?




RE: Seriously?
By chruschef on 11/30/2009 12:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
actually, it is a blog. check out the orangish text above the article title.
"Blog: Gadgets"


enough
By tastyratz on 11/25/2009 12:31:59 PM , Rating: 1
While I do think these are all factual claims and Verizon is indeed making the most accurate advertisements... enough is enough. This feels like voting season and I for one find competitors commercials and mudslinging appalling. Verizon has a quality enough network to stand out on its own without stooping to childish methods.




RE: enough
By mcnabney on 11/25/2009 1:29:27 PM , Rating: 2
Wireless is an extremely compeititve market. If you don't lead with your A-game you will be history. Sprint still has nearly 50 million customers, but they are already irrelevant. The market has already written them off (see: current Sprint share price) and everyone is just waiting for the vultures to pick the bones clean before someone buys out the remaining assets. Hopefully, Verizon won't buy them out. Let Charter or Time Warner try to put humpty-dumpty back together again.


RE: enough
By hightechfella on 11/25/09, Rating: 0
By blueboy09 on 11/26/2009 1:49:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Sprint's 3G network IS more reliable -- data has lower latency, it's faster, it penetrates buildings better, there's more backfeed, and there are more base stations. Study after study provides that for 3G data, Sprint cannot be beaten.
I have wondered about the reliability of our service w/Verizon, cause were only 10 miles from the interstate. but when you get near an area of trees, the signal drops dramatically. I have a Samsung Omnia, and I don't know if it's just the phone or the service, cause they seriously need to get some more towers were we are at, and I'm in a rural area. I had a Motorola RAZR (was a POS) but it got better reception as a whole than my new phone does. P.S. There are more AT&T tower and even a Sprint tower than Verizon towers, but that still shouldn't be an excuse either. If they claim better coverage overall, then they need to back up those claims, and as I stand on this issue I'm not seeing it. - BLUEBOY




Verizon has the best coverage
By GardyMajor on 11/26/2009 5:13:52 AM , Rating: 2
Verizon has the best coverage and they deserve to go after the claim. They have spent a lot of money over the past few years improving their network while the other providers just went after smartphones, now the others cant support the traffic so having a fancy smartphone is useless because of dropped calls and inadequate coverage. When Verizon does get smartphones they will be the best provider in America. I am not interested in smartphones but network coverage and price are very important to me which is why I have a prepaid Straight Talk phone which runs on Verizon's network nationwide. I only pay $45 per month for unlimited everything and I love it.




"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh













botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki