Archive for February 25th, 2010
This is a post I started…a while ago so it’s sad that I’m only getting to it now. Anyway…
Over the last few months at the viral and national marketing level, there has been a “war” going on about ATT’s 3G coverage. This has been fueled mostly by disgruntled iPhone users that aren’t getting the kind of data speeds they want. ATT’s coverage is spotty, it’s 3G coverage is even spottier, etc.
There have been protests held where users try to overload the ATT network (not best link, but wanted to provide something…) by using a lot of data-intensive apps all at once. Then Verizon has been attacking ATT’s coverage quite aggressively, with ATT striking back with their own advertising campaign.
The funny thing is…why is no one blaming Apple?
Apple was the one that said that
- the iPhone would be branded as an Apple product and initially (and for quite a while) sold at Apple stores
- would not be branded at all as an ATT product
- advertising for it would be for the phone, not for the carrier
- Apple would get a big cut of the sale price of each phone
Supposedly, when Apple approached Verizon and it’s huge network about this, Verizon refused. ATT acquiesced.
So if it’s Apple that forced the iPhone to go to ATT (heck, whatever if it ended up on T-Mobile or Sprint, which has even worse coverage in general?)…why keep blaming the provider? Why not blame the manufacturer that had such ridiculous stipulations?
Addendum: PC World did a test of data transfer speeds of the various carriers, and ATT came out on _top_. Hm.