Slashdot Mirror


More on AT&T Wireless's Bungled System Upgrade

An anonymous reader writes "CIO.com has posted a very in-depth article on the recent failings of AT&T Wireless that resulted in the state of the company today. What's fascinating about this article is the sheer amount of accurate information gleaned from former and current employees on the company's bungled attempts to follow FCC mandates on local number portability last November, the inside story on outsourcing efforts, and terrible executive management decisions that ultimately led to its demise. Ironically, the scathing and sometimes highly sarcastic commentary at the end of the article from former employees makes this read even better."

285 comments

  1. Best quote ever by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    '... many of us spent 3-4 days awake, with minimal sleep, listening to "Mr. Jazz Hands" (Deloitte leader), lie his way through the explanations as to why it was deploying so poorly ... "We greatly underestimated the complexity of the integration of Siebel 7". What a load of crap! "We" = Upper management and Deloitte.'


    [huge grin] wonder how he got *that* nickname :-)

    Seriously, someone who has new/wonderful management process *can* help a company tread a dangerous path, but you *need* the domain expertise to be well-represented in a solution to a technical problem. Imho, at least. From the reports, it seems the process wasn't that wonderful, either :-)

    His 'new operating model' was such a joke that one new VP hired to help implement it resigned after less than a month on the job.

    You can expect a certain level of bitterness in ex-employees, especially after a disaster, but there ain't no smoke without fire, and when there's lots of smoke, start looking for the towering inferno...

    Simon.
    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:Best quote ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian Shirt Day...

  2. I'm using AT&T Wireless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Including wireless internet access to write this on Slashdot, and I've had no pro

    1. Re:I'm using AT&T Wireless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im still laughing. What were you saying?

    2. Re:I'm using AT&T Wireless by MegaFur · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, I really *do* use att wireless and it really *does* have wireless Internet. (But I'm not on my phone right now.) It's still working. The "wireless Intnernet" is not the best since it's all WAP pages. To really get to any websites, you've gotta go through google--google has a WAP proxy server that operates behind the scenes to ensure that when you click on a google search result, you actually get a page back.

      I was on my phone and yahoo messenger was working earlier this evening. Whatever att and cingular did, the "phone net" appears to still be functional.

      --
      Furry cows moo and decompress.
    3. Re:I'm using AT&T Wireless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use my ATTWS with my bluetooth T616 phone with my PowerBook. It uses GPRS quite flawlessly to grab the internet. Just don't browse heavy graphics/text sites or your bill will go up like mine did, I didn't think I used more than my 4 MB limit, but holy crap I used like 12 MB... $75 in extra MB usage fees. *sigh* Looks like I need to look at their EDGE stuff for PCMCIA.

  3. AWE did it to themselves by stecoop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For some reason I just cant feel sorry for a company not being able to rally its workers and threaten the workers of off shoring their work. I believe that AWE got exactly what it deserved - number portability was nothing new and they should have been able to get the job done. Yet AWE insisted on moving towards outsourcing instead of figuring out what needed to be done. I have seen similarly situations where no matter how much cheaper labor you look for, if you can't devise the plan, no one will be able to follow it. Good riddance to AWE and I wonder if Cingular is going forward with the outsourcing.

    1. Re:AWE did it to themselves by vk2 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Don't know which world you are in when you say number portability was nothing new and they should have been able to get the job done. LNP was implemented and enforced for the first time with US carriers during the times AT & T had problems.

      I have a first hand experience of working on the LNP issues and no way its as easy as it was said in plain english. Agreed that you might think it as changing some sort of dns information - but the way its implemented and the patchy design as you go approach for the whole thing is really insane.

      The whole thing would have been better designed if the war lords at Verizon and other had not banked on getting the mandatory deadline extended. None of the carriers actually believed that the nov dead line would be final - hence none of them actually cared to the design and implementation. Resourceful and gutsy teams at big companies like Verizon and Cingular pulled it through and companies like AWE and sprint paid heavily with customer dissatisfaction.

      --
      No Sig for you.!
    2. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Zoshnell · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I call bullshit. Working at Customer Care on the front lines, we knew a long time ago about LNP. AWE drug its feet trying to get LNP extended or demolished, and when it was apparent that it wasn't going to happen, they outsourced to whoever does their vendor calls centers, I think, instead of using what EVERYONE else was using, it was almost like a deliberate thing. Then when Siebel went down they drug their feet with that too. While I am by no means a sys admin or have dealt with the computer users that AWE does for their customer care and sales, but how hard would it have been to ROLL back from Siebel 7 so it didn't piss off every person who wanted to use technology that customer care was enforced to shove down peoples throats? Feh, since my karma is teh sux now I won't be able to reply to hardly anyone who posts back to this, but this is the grave they dug to make themselves more attractive to Cingular.

      --
      "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
    3. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it wasn't easy. It was on the books for years and guess what Cingular, Verizon, Tmobile, Insert carrier here got it done.

    4. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Caeda · · Score: 0, Interesting

      To quote... "Don't know which world you are in when you say number portability was nothing new and they should have been able to get the job done. " And I don't know what world your in? Number portability is DEFINATELY nothing new. You mean to say that every time an AT&T customer decided they wanted a newer, better cell phone, they had to get a whole new number because they couldnt have the number switched over to the new phone? Never gotten a new phone and been asked if you want to check if the same 4 digits as your home phone are open? Gee, that's news to me. And its also pretty pathetic if you didnt know companies could set the number to anything the felt like in 5 minutes time and a couple phone calls. The only thing stopping the companies from doing this from the beginning is that it might mean they lose a few customers. All the hardware/software had to already be in place for keeping numbers working for their current customers.

      --
      ~~ Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times. Thank You ~~
    5. Re:AWE did it to themselves by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Certainly. Here's a quote from the article:

      Former employees say morale wasn't helped by Corrado's first presentation to the IT group, in which they say he proclaimed, "Come in every day and expect to be fired." Intended to inspire the troops to greater effort, the talk backfired, says another former employee.

      Although the quote is probably out of context, telling people they should expect to be fired at any time is probably a motivational technique learned in today's MBA environment. Force and fear doesn't even work well with prisoners. So why do MBAs and other assorted managerial parasites think they work for tech?

      Newsflash for Managers {tm}: People expecting to be fired, will make their own plans for their futures instead of working 100% at your projects. Like, duh, eh?

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    6. Re:AWE did it to themselves by H310iSe · · Score: 2, Informative

      What amazed me the most, the utter arrogance of management to think they could pull off a huge project on the backs of workers that were about to receive a choice part of management's anatomy once the project was over.

      As another poster mentioned, where was mention of D&T in the article? I can only wonder if the arrogance didn't start there and just kind of honey-coat AT&T's top management, some sort of golf course power orgy no doubt with the D&T suits out spinning tales of the far east, cheap educated unorganized labor as far as the eyes can see and, you know those indians, fertile people, there is no end to this bounty. Imagine all the fat bonuses as productivity skyrockets. You see, it will actually drop but the costs will drop even more, making the department more productive by any measure management will make...

      Purring along while back in the basement little tribes of coders were all amuk, running up against eachother while their replacements followed them around peppering questions in british-accented englindian, erm, englian? indlish? I was going to say I'm glad i wasn't there but the more I think about it, after a while it must have gotten kind of funny and surreal, mabye it was a blast, everyone fiddling away while the crm dbs burned.

      --
      closed minded is as closed minded does
    7. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      AT&T has had really bad executives and really bad leadership. When Ma Bell was broken up the current CEOs showed great ineptitude by capitulating to MCI and Bill McGowan. Whereas IBM and Microsoft have shown that you can fight Antitrust cases and settle them on your own terms Ma Bell capitulated and decided to split up on bad terms. This was the first example of bad leadership.


      AT&T bought a stake in Sun Microsystems. After which Sun mysteriously changed religions from BSD to System or SunOS to beastly Solaris.


      Robert Allen is bad executive number two. In 1991 AT&T under Robert Allen decided to buy NCR for $7.5 billion NCR and renamed it as AT&T GIS. AT&T also sold of Unix System Labs to Novell.
      NCR was later spun off at a loss of billions due to the inability to manage it. It came down to management.



      Michael Armstrong is another bad CEO. Under Armstrong TCI was purchased and so was Media one.
      Armstrong spent 100 billion buying different companies. One mistake was getting into a bidding war over Media One. Another gaffe was Excit@Home whereas Timewarner had roadrunner Excite@Home was allowed to fail under AT&Ts watch.


      After merging the company decided to demerge and spin off AT&T wireless and AT&T broadband. A stake was sold to NTT Docomo in AT&T wireless. The paradox is why would you spend billions of dollars to buy companies and then decide your corporate strategy is wrong and spin off the companies?


      AT&T wireless was a big mess. NTT Docomo purchased a stake in AT&T with strings attached. AT&T Wireless was pushed to used Docomos version of GSM e-mode. They also erred in switching wireless protocols from TDMA to GSM instead of CDMA. CDMA is better and more established in the US. Sprint activelly promotes their version of CDMA as better than AT&Ts GSM. The migration to GSM was very complex and had lots of glitches. However, when they brought in NTT Docomo as a stockholder it went with GSM. It isn't just GSM it's a variant of NTT's. NTT Docomo wouldn't even bid for AT&T wireless afterward.



      AT&T also erred in spinning off AT&T wireless as a tracking stock (A mistake Sprint has soon learned) and hiring Michael Armstrong as CEO. The company basically gave away 40 billion dollars in value including the Cable and Wireless divisions (speaking of which is another misnomer for a badly managed company). Jack Welch the CEO of GE felt that spinoffs were bad and spinoffs just spinoff cash and assets to shareholders with vary little return for the parent. It proves the old adage that your only as good as the leader. A very bad leader can destroy a company as can be seen at MCI err MCI-Worldcom.

    8. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Herschel+Cohen · · Score: 1

      One question: Why were all these wireless services collecting a number portability fee? Extra cash with no intention of meeting their obligations?

      I have stayed with Sprint, not for its great coverage, service, or competence but because if I get a message I know about it the day it is left not several days later as was my experience with Verizon. Moreover, when I was a customer of the latter they were honest enough to include the day the message was left. Now I get messages back from my son days later asking why I left an urgent message. I simply backup those messages by email, since too often his messages are out-of-date.

    9. Re:AWE did it to themselves by pyros · · Score: 4, Informative

      You appear to be confused as to what LNP really means. It's not like a DNS CNAME, it's like telling the internet that an IP address on one of IBM's class A nets should be routed to MCI instead. Each mobile carrier gets a block of phone numbers in specific exchanges. The exchanges tell the phone network which carrier to route the call to. LNP means changing the infrastructure of the mobile network to route exchanges to a different carrier.

      The carriers can't just program in the ID of your phone for a different network, because that phone doesn't connect to their network.

    10. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Good riddance to AWE and I wonder if Cingular is going forward with the outsourcing.

      I work for Cingular. I am not priivy to any information about the buyout at all, so don't sick the FTC on me. All we have really been told is that (a) it's a buyout not a merger, and (b) we have to get prepared to port their customers into our billing systems asap once the buyout goes through.

      So, from this, I can guess that (a) down the road we're getting rid of all of their employees and (b) we're getting rid of as much of their software as we can.

      Our billing/CRM system works pretty well (especially for former Bellsouth markets), so we don't expect too many issues.

      As far as outsourcing, we have a support contract with Alltel for a couple of years, but their developers all are idiots, so I hope we can convince senior management to dump them. For offshore work, there are apparently some things being outsourced to eastern Europe, but no plans to expand that or

    11. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Ironica · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Newsflash for Managers {tm}: People expecting to be fired, will make their own plans for their futures instead of working 100% at your projects. Like, duh, eh?

      That was pretty much my response. It's one thing to let people know that if they don't meet your (clearly defined and within the realm of the possible) standards, they won't be kept around for sentimental reasons. But generally, if you want loyalty you have to give it.

      I think maybe these people are operating under the false belief that, if their employees think they might be replaced, they'll work harder to try to prove themselves more valuable. But they don't realize that people are much more pessimistic these days than they were during the dot-com boom. If outsourcing is being considered, it comes across as an inevitable death-knell, not a spur to do better.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    12. Re:AWE did it to themselves by owlmon · · Score: 1

      Quote:
      Although the quote is probably out of context, telling people they should expect to be fired at any time is probably a motivational technique learned in today's MBA environment. Force and fear doesn't even work well with prisoners. So why do MBAs and other assorted managerial parasites think they work for tech?

      I don't think that this kind of arrogance is being taught at MBA schools, if that's what you mean. It's simply management trying to take advantage of the weak job market. Have you noticed what has happened to salary levels recently?

    13. Re:AWE did it to themselves by mcowger · · Score: 3, Informative

      The quote absolutely was not taken out of context. I was at AWS when this happened, and listened to this conference call just like the rest of the IT employees. It really was supposed to be a motivatioal thing, but it fell on its face. I know I and a number of others started looking for a new job that very day.

    14. Re:AWE did it to themselves by NelsChristian · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The number isn't being changed at the handset, it's being changed at the switch. Where 123-456-7890 used to connect to AT&T (or example), it could become the only number under 123-***-**** to go to Sprint.

      There is a reason that the 456 was called the exchange, the older term for a phone switch. 456 referred to a particular set of hardware. Routing was sequential. You could route the connection as the number was dialed. The number sequence was mapped to routing sequence.

      With the new LNP, you can't do that anymore.

      Like the Y2K effort, it was a lot work to find those 'you can't do this anymore' bits of code.

      Or, at least that's my understanding, not being a 5E coder.

    15. Re:AWE did it to themselves by poofmeisterp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That beats the heck out of the all-hands meeting I attended at my former employer, HP.

      The head-honcho-manager-person at my location told everyone that they were going to be doing some layoffs in the next couple of months. She then proceeded to talk down to everyone and tried to make us all feel like it was a GOOD thing!?!?

      This all came ONE WEEK (I kid you not) after we were all forced to attend a mandatory meeting with an efficiency consultant, whose job was basically to make everyone believe that customer service was top priority. We were not to adhere to the contract, but rather to do what the customer requested, no matter how ridiculous it was. This included us doing things that would directly harm the customer (if they asked us to, of course).

      The layoff meeting was preceeded by another meeting, a day before, telling everyone to basically not do "everything the customer says" and to stick to the contract as it's written.

      I'm glad I'm doing honest tech work again.

    16. Re:AWE did it to themselves by AJWM · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's one sillyass way of doing it, the way you'd expect ancient telco engineers steeped in the way of old electromechanical switches to come up with.

      Another way to handle it is, if user A at telco T switches to telco Q, set A's number in T to forward the call to some new (but unrevealed to the world at large) number in Q's domain, which broadcasts to A's phone. It's not like the phone number is actually stored in the phone.

      Okay, you chew through phone numbers faster that way, but that's a known quantity.

      Think of it as setting up a .forward in my old IBM email address to send to MCI. Phone numbers haven't mapped directly to physical wire connections in years -- and never for wireless phones.

      --
      -- Alastair
    17. Re:AWE did it to themselves by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      I agree, I have spring pcs also, not because of 100% coverage or the best price. we actually got it because many people we wanted to talk to use it and we can have free pcs -> pcs. Also free nationwide long distance. We haven't had any problems with sprint at all, although it is a little quirky now and then. Sometimes we'll get a voicemail and the phone never rang... But that's extremely rare. We have cable internet and no landline, just two sprint phones.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    18. Re:AWE did it to themselves by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      I am noticing that wages are being "adjusted" through the use of the pink slip. This is likely to happen to myself very soon. In fact, it's also likely that my bank will offload all the long-time IT workers onto an outsource company, just to reduce a 25-year man's 5 weeks of vacation to 2 weeks, to remove his profit sharing, etc. That won't affect me at all since I'm relatively young, but if my wage is dropped to what the rest of the area offers (8-10 bucks per hour) then I must leave and seek something else.

      This isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened. I arrived in Massachusetts in the early 1990s, and found myself taking software-testing jobs away from folks who were earning twice what what I was getting ... and as a single guy with few expenses, I was getting $25-$35/hr, which was a lot. So, once kicked in the balls in Toledo, I can always leave and try to get the "impossibly low" wages offered by year 2004 companies in American regions where the economy isn't dead, which as a single guy with few expenses, should be a good amount of money.

      I never expect to have a home, wife or children ... if I expect to have savings. That's a terrible state to put anyone in. Which is why I feel for the 25-year guys who are losing their benefits packages and eventually their salaries.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    19. Re:AWE did it to themselves by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 3, Funny
      There are 4 types of layoff managers:
      1. Loyal Dupe. Works to layoff others just to keep his own job; he'll lose it anyway but he doesn't know it yet.
      2. Sad Sack. Works to layoff others, but knows he's losing his own job too.
      3. Little Fucker. Works to layoff others, and knows he'll survive the cuts.
      4. Hatchet Man. Works to layoff others, and will move on to other divisions and companies doing the same thing, catching the wind with golden parachutes so often he qualifies for skydiving hours.
      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    20. Re:AWE did it to themselves by sphealey · · Score: 3, Insightful
      AT&T also erred in spinning off AT&T wireless as a tracking stock (A mistake Sprint has soon learned) and hiring Michael Armstrong as CEO
      Keep in mind though that during that entire time period Worldcom was lying about its financials to Wall Street, to the tune of $40 billion. AT&T was under tremendous pressure from the financial world to match Worldcom's performance, which of course they could never have done since Worldcom wasn't really doing it either.

      Under Armstrong, AT&T had the only large-scale telecom strategy that I thought would work: a comprehensive menu of business and high-value consumer services, all under one roof. Two problems: they never got the divisions to work together. And they way overpaid for the cable assets.

      sPh

    21. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It comes as a spur to sabotage.

    22. Re:AWE did it to themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      re: "expect to be fired".
      I think statements like this come from executives who are unable to relate to their employees. They know how being fired would affect them. (Several tens of thousands in the bank, generous severance, stock options, etc..) They don't know or don't care that many of the people they are saying that to live paycheck to paycheck. Personal anecdote: We recently had an executive tell our division that we needed to work 60 hours/week, minimum 6 days/week, on a current project. Oh and by the way, he was going on vacation next week to Switzerland for 3 weeks.

    23. Re:AWE did it to themselves by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      After having gone thru such a cycle more than once I would have started my own business by now, any kind of business so as not to be in that position ever again.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    24. Re:AWE did it to themselves by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      She was a #1. She got "moved" to a different company that HP was a contractor for.

      The company she moved to just finished laying off and outsourcing their ENTIRE IT department, save enough people to do what the Indian workers couldn't legally do due to export controls.

      Last I heard, she's still there, in charge of about 20 people as opposed to the over 150 she was responsible for before. :)

    25. Re:AWE did it to themselves by pyros · · Score: 1

      They have to do it the old way because wireless calls are only wireless to the tower, then they are routed over the PSTN just like all the land lines.

    26. Re:AWE did it to themselves by timmyf2371 · · Score: 1
      That's just how it works with traditional landlines.

      The telephone number being ported is basically setup with an advanced call divert at the switch which forwards it to an appropriate switch on the other telco's network. The telephone number is then added to the new providor's switch and assigned circuits as standard.

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  4. Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, AT&T Wireless (now part of Cingular) had its share of problems. There's no doubt about that. But at they made the right decision to choose GSM. Verizon and Sprint PCS chose wrongly, and so they are destined to fail.

    There is only room for one mobile phone technology in this world, and it's not CDMA. I know the US government is behind it, but they cannot force us all to use it.

    1. Re:Ok, look here by matth · · Score: 3, Interesting

      GSM may be superiour to CDMA in many ways but give me a non-motorola Verizon CDMA phone any day over GSM. CDMA is so nice .. I can hear the other side of the conversation... background noise, them talking.. WHILE I'm talking.. try that on GSM! Plus, CDMA runs (or can) at 800mhz.. which goes through stuff alot better then 1.9Ghz.. yup.. CDMA all the way baby.

    2. Re:Ok, look here by damiangerous · · Score: 4, Informative
      There is only room for one mobile phone technology in this world, and it's not CDMA.

      Yeah, it is. 3G is based on CDMA. GSM is evolving through EDGE into WCDMA and current CDMA systems are evolving into CDMA2000. It has absolutely nothing to do with the US, the major players in mobile phone standards are all outside the US.

    3. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      GSM runs on 800MHz too. CDMA does cut down on background noise, but the voice quality suffers because of it.

    4. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      800mhz? Hmmm...

    5. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This statement is 100% wrong.

      First, the fact that the Europeans were able to deploy GSM (which is a TDMA technology) instead of AMPS (which is an FDMA technology) shows that there is room for more than one mobile phone technology in the world.

      Second, every mobile phone network, including GSM networks, will be upgrading to CDMA over the next several years. So, when there is one mobile phone technology, it will be CDMA.

      Third, the US government is not behind CDMA. In fact, unlike almost all other countries in the world, the US government does not mandate that a specific mobile phone technology be deployed. That is why the US has operators using AMPS, TDMA (including IDEN and GSM) and CDMA technologies.

    6. Re:Ok, look here by matth · · Score: 1

      hear hear!

    7. Re:Ok, look here by matth · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Uhh that hear hear was in responce to the AC who posted:

      This statement is 100% wrong.

      First, the fact that the Europeans were able to deploy GSM (which is a TDMA technology) instead of AMPS (which is an FDMA technology) shows that there is room for more than one mobile phone technology in the world.

      Second, every mobile phone network, including GSM networks, will be upgrading to CDMA over the next several years. So, when there is one mobile phone technology, it will be CDMA.

      Third, the US government is not behind CDMA. In fact, unlike almost all other countries in the world, the US government does not mandate that a specific mobile phone technology be deployed. That is why the US has operators using AMPS, TDMA (including IDEN and GSM) and CDMA technologies.

    8. Re:Ok, look here by aclarke · · Score: 1
      I guess the fact that Qualcomm makes the chip that goes in every (?) CDMA phone and holds the basic patents on CDMA technology doesn't make them a major player in mobile phone standards?

      If I'm wrong, let me know...

    9. Re:Ok, look here by damiangerous · · Score: 2, Informative
      That's correct. It makes them a major player in mobile phone technology. They aren't part of any standards determining body to my knowledge. All the 3g standardization seems to be happening in Europe and Asia (though technically the ITU is in charge), the US will probably hop on much later.

      W-CDMA has basically been accepted as the 3g standard in Europe and Japan. W-CDMA is not owned by Qualcomm, it's the main competitor. Qualcomm has a vested interest in seeing CDMA2000 suceed, and they're struggling to make that happen. They aren't in a position to force it on anyone, especially outside the US where GSM reigns virtually universally.

    10. Re:Ok, look here by afidel · · Score: 1

      That's funny because as I mentioned the other day. I've had zero problems with ATTWS's TDMA and AMPS coverage but I hear TONS of negative comments from users of their GSM service. Now this may be an implementation problem for ATT rather than an inherent problem with GSM but it proves at least that the tech isn't foolproof.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    11. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you are not correct. Both WCDMA and CDMA2000 are ITU 3G standards, and QUALCOMM is an active member of both 3GPP (which develops the WCDMA standard) and 3GPP2 (which develops the CDMA2000 stnadard). In addition, QUALCOMM technology is in both WCDMA and CDMA2000 standards and QUALCOMM sells both WCDMA and CDMA2000 ASICs. Finally, at this time, CDMA2000 is more widely deployed throughout the world, including the Asia (Japan, South Korea, China, India, etc), Europe and the Americas than WCDMA.

    12. Re:Ok, look here by ahillen · · Score: 1

      Second, every mobile phone network, including GSM networks, will be upgrading to CDMA over the next several years. So, when there is one mobile phone technology, it will be CDMA.

      Yes, but while they are all CDMA technologies, they are (AFAIK) still incompatible. The W-CDMA (UMTS) networks deployed in Europe will not work with phones from the current US CDMA networks.

    13. Re:Ok, look here by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Yes, AT&T Wireless (now part of Cingular) had its share of problems. There's no doubt about that. But at they made the right decision to choose GSM. Verizon and Sprint PCS chose wrongly, and so they are destined to fail."

      Sprint PCS and Verizon use CDMA2000, hereby referred to as "CDMA".

      Right. CDMA must be worse because it handles more users per cell, right? Or is it because it doesn't have hard cell-size limits? Or... how about the fact that it copes with noise better. Or the fact that it uses less power to go the same distance. Or is it that the voice quality is better?

      Look, GSM has some advantages (worldwide standard, SIM, cool phones), but CDMA is fundamentally the better technology. That's why the new GSM (UMTS) system uses CDMA technology.

      Verizon Wireless is doing great. So is Sprint. Verizon is 2nd to ATT/Cingular. And most of ATT/Cingular's customers are still using IS-136 (D-AMPS). Sprint has captured a stunning market share with there relatively new network.

      "There is only room for one mobile phone technology in this world, and it's not CDMA. I know the US government is behind it, but they cannot force us all to use it."

      Right. Just like there is only room for one operating system. Just like there is only room for one political opinion.

      The US government *is* behind the usage of CDMA in the US. But it's not because they mandated CDMA. Far from it. In Europe, GSM *was* mandated. Mandating GSM had some advantages - Europe had a fully-digital system with good coverage far before the US did (part of that has to do with population density).

      But not mandating GSM also had advantages in the US. We had competition between formats. CDMA was developed and implemented because carriers had the ability to choose the best standard.

      GSM is, realistically, not the right standard for the US. GSM cells are too small for rural areas - much smaller than AMPS cells. The carriers who have deployed GSM in the US have learned the hard way that covering Wyoming or Kansas with GSM cells is extremely difficult.

    14. Re:Ok, look here by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      GSM-850 runs in the Cellular spectrum, similar to D-AMPS (IS-136) "TDMA", AMPS "Analog", and IS-95/CDMA2000 "CDMA".

      ATT and Cingular use GSM-850 frequently when upgrading old AMPS/IS-136 towers; their new network is mostly GSM-1900. T-Mobile is all GSM-1900.

      Verizon is primarily CDMA2000 800. Sprint is primarily CDMA2000 1900.

    15. Re:Ok, look here by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      You have a valid point but are anti-European. I have no problems using Airbus jets - Airbus *did* recieve no-intrest loans from European nations but Boeing is effectively subsidised by the DOD (buying unnecessary technology upgrades).

      GSM is an inferior technology:
      - Less users per cell
      - Smaller cells
      - More prone to interference

      But it also has advantages:
      - SIM
      - Global standard

    16. Re:Ok, look here by BigFire · · Score: 1

      The WCDMA intergeration was a lot more headache inducing for the GSM operate than you let on. While they upgrade from the old GSM->WCDMA, they essentially have to operate two sets of spectrum, since GSM's carrier technology is essentially incompatable with CDMA technology. Long story short, European telco company spend billions buying new spectrum at the height of tech bubble, and didn't get WCDMA working until well after the bust.

    17. Re:Ok, look here by megabeck42 · · Score: 1

      Honestly, that has very little to do with the the encoding standard and more to do with the quality of the handset. My GSM Nokia 8290 was horrible. A friend's ATT TDMA 8210 was a little better. My GSM Motorolla v60g sounds great, but is an obnoxious phone (miserable UI, otherwise, fabulous.) A friend's Qualcomm? Miserable. I'd encourage you to avoid making strong statements, because I dont think its a sound rule to follow.

      --
      fnord.
    18. Re:Ok, look here by grotgrot · · Score: 1
      Technically you are right, but there is a lot more important detail that is relevant. See this article all about the history and evolution of GSM, CDMA and what is called 3G. And Qualcomm who is the major player in CDMA standards and implementation is very much a US company (with worldwide offices).

      Especially note upgrade paths and what the original designs allowed for.

      GSM was the very best propeller-driven fighter money could buy, but CDMA was a jet engine
    19. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but Boeing is effectively subsidised by the DOD

      When is the last time you read a contract from the DOD that was free cash? Read about AIRBUS subsidy - they were physicaly funded by the Eurpoean community. Boeing has to work for its dollars; can you imagine if they didn't it would be a scandle in the DOD. No mr FUD contacts arnt free money and if the american community wakes up and sees what is going on with Airbus; I reason to say that boeing will start recieiving better tax incetives.

    20. Re:Ok, look here by lquam · · Score: 1

      W-CDMA has basically been accepted as the 3g standard in Europe and Japan.

      Gee, I suppose someone should tell all the network engineers at KDDI (who has more 3G customers than DoCoMo) they better rip out all that CDMA2000 equipment and replace it with WCDMA. Better tell the Koreans too. Oh, and the Chinese, they must be kidding with all that talk of using their own SCDMA standard.

      W-CDMA zealots drive me batty.

      --Len

    21. Re:Ok, look here by ipxodi · · Score: 1

      **GSM is, realistically, not the right standard for the US. GSM cells are too small for rural areas **

      That may be so in terms of what the "book" says, but here in southern New Hampshire -- hardly the nexus of cellular capability -- my new AT&T GSM phone (a Siemens SL56) is way better than my Sprint PCS phone was. Imagine... I can actually make and receive phone calls with it!

      --
      load "windows7" ,8,1
    22. Re:Ok, look here by Buran · · Score: 2, Interesting

      GSM phones are not hearing aid compatible. All the ones I've tried so far produce a sharp buzzing to the extent that I cannot use the phone and, if forced to borrow a phone to call someone (this has happened if I leave mine at home, intending to be unreachable for a bit, and suddenly have to make a call). If the offered phone is GSM, I have to apologize, explain, thank the person for offering, and hand the phone back.

      There is no room in this world for a single system that cannot be used by the millions of people who use hearing aids. If GSM phones can be fixed to solve this problem, then that's fine and dandy. Til the day I find a GSM phone that I like that won't cause that buzzing, I'll stick with CDMA.

      I don't have a choice.

    23. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you get anything he wrote? Your such a dork, great your phone works good in a little crapy place whooopie. In the orignal reply he said that diffrent standards are necessary. Your just confirming that sprint has expanded to your area and that your GSM works alright.

      You should imediatly throw away your phone and by AMPS service moron.

    24. Re:Ok, look here by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      Take a look at Verizon. Sprint is known for poor service; Verizon's coverage is better than either Sprint or ATT.

    25. Re:Ok, look here by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      DOD contracts effectively are free money.

      Boeing was (and is) paid obscene amounts of money to work on projects that are complete flops. It's like me saying to you:

      "I want a computer 100 times faster than anything available. Here's 100 billion dollars. Go spend ten years in research and then tell me that you need more money."

      Now, what the EU did with Airbus was wrong. But to say that Boeing isn't subsidized is wrong. They were subsidized through huge DOD projects which spent years in "development".

      Ask any DOD contractor and they will tell you that the gravy train is rolling in.

    26. Re:Ok, look here by dspyder · · Score: 1

      You don't mean "give me a non-motorola Verizon CDMA phone any day over GSM." You actually mean to say "AT&Ts implementation and maintenance of a GSM network.".

      GSM is not inherently flawed (though it does have it's fair share of gotchas). AT&T just failed to implement the network and supporting customer service products correctly.

      I was ASTONISHED (!!!!!) when I took my AT&T GSM phone to England for two weeks. No missed calls, no dropped calls, no calls going straight to voicemail, service IN THE SUBWAY, service everywhere I wanted to go!

      It was then that I was convinced that GSM (or at least universal world compatability) is the correct way to go.

      --Darren

    27. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That argument is invalid. It has been used by European companies to deny the obvious. They were directly subsidizing Airbus's entry into Boeing's market. Military programs are not direct subsidies.
      The EU was basically funding non military plane manufacturing and that is totally different. This is like the US government paying Boeing 20 Billion dollars to develop the 747 program or to build the 777 or 767. The military money went into military aircraft not civilian R and D. That is a totally ludicrous argument and anyone who know the truth knows it is a lie. If Europe wants to play this way they should let there own companies develop it. And shame on the US government for even tolerating this economic disparity.


    28. Re:Ok, look here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of these KDDI "3G" customers use a baseline CDMA that only allows 64Kbps, while NTT Docomo's W-CDMA offers data rates up to 384Kbps...
      Oh, and industry analysts expect that if and when KDDI has upgraded its user base to EVO-class 2Mbps CDMA, Docomo will have moved on to HSDPA at about 14Mbps...

      Qualcomm/CDMA zealots drive me batty.

    29. Re:Ok, look here by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      First, the fact that the Europeans were able to deploy GSM (which is a TDMA technology) instead of AMPS (which is an FDMA technology) shows that there is room for more than one mobile phone technology in the world.
      You exaggerate AMPS's adoption. At the time GSM was developed, it was intended to rectify several problems with the then status quo one of which was that every country had its own analog mobile phone system that was completely incompatable with everyone else's. AMPS was, for the most part, unique to the Americas. There were something like eight or nine standards used in the different countries in Europe, and roaming was non-existant.

      The fact Europe deployed GSM, and required every country to have at least one industry-backed (which ended up being GSM) service on the 900MHz band, proves that there isn't room for several standards, not in that way at least. GSM was absolutely necessary to ensure EU-wide roaming. The world is getting smaller, and we need common standards world wide.

      This is not to say that there shouldn't be several standards, but I do seriously believe that every country should make an effort, if it plans to be a part of the world economy, to ensure it has at least one standard UMTS (UMTS is the successor to GSM - those comparing "CDMA2000" to GSM are making the wrong comparison, like with like please) operator running nationwide.

      One thing the US cocked up, IMHO, is in regionalizing mobile phone franchises. There are always going to be giant dead-zones for each standard thanks to the idea that it isn't guaranteed that a phone operator is going to even be allowed to put up masts for its particular service in a particular region. We only got GSM here in Martin/St Lucie counties in Florida a year and a half ago, and that's only because AT&T and Cingular switched to it. That's infuriating...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    30. Re:Ok, look here by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Sprint PCS and Verizon use CDMA2000, hereby referred to as "CDMA".

      Right. CDMA must be worse because it handles more users per cell, right? Or is it because it doesn't have hard cell-size limits? Or... how about the fact that it copes with noise better. Or the fact that it uses less power to go the same distance. Or is it that the voice quality is better?

      Wow. Just wow. Some of these are flat out wrong, some are misleading, and some are correct but they hardly prove anything. "Oh sure, my electric golf cart is worse than your Mercury Grand Marquis. That's because it's quieter right? That's because it's easier to maintain? That's because it has more miles per cent paid right?"

      Voice quality is actually roughly the same on GSM and CDMA (AT&T's is the only exception, and that's because AT&T are running their "GSM" network over their old IS-136 infrastructure.) Noise handling has long been touted as a theoretical advantage of CDMA-based systems, but in practice CDMA operators tend to use the supposed capacity and noise handling features they believe their networks have to overload the networks, so it's never been a practical advantage. In any case, GSM's is fine, and is certainly superior (no inexplicable dropped calls, no conversations becoming less and less intelligable) to Sprint's, for AT&T, T-Mobile, and every European system I've ever used. Hard cell size limits is... well, GSM in practice these days happily runs to 25 miles or more. I know this because I've sat on a boat around that range out to sea, with a signal whose strength has dropped before anything about ranges has kicked in.

      What's interesting isn't what CDMA has, it's what it lacks. CDMA2000 may be an improvement on cdmaOne, but for end-users in the US it remains immensely limited. I've likened the "old" CDMA to something no more functional than an analog phone with a pager and maybe a cellular modem. CDMA2000 is an improvement on that in theory, but end-users in the US, thanks to Qualcomm's insistance on making critical parts of the standard optional, are still stuck with phones that they have to ask permission to switch, have limited position independence, and that inherit CDMA's flakey underlying network.

      I sincerely believe that nobody who advocates CDMA over GSM has ever used, for any appreciable length of time, a real GSM service. AT&T hasn't helped by trying to run their's over their old TDMA network which has resulted in bizarrely long call connection times and lower voice quality, but real services, such as Cingular's old Bellsouth DCS network, and T-Mobile's, have obvious advantages.

      You know you're using something that's actually been thought out when you look at the SIM card. When you're told the first time why you should enter your phone numbers using the "+1" format into the address book. When you find the protocols for network features are not the same ones as you use for your landline, and you find out why.

      CDMA has loud support for a number of reasons, most of which are principly illogical. Qualcomm has run a bizarre campaign trying to imply that GSM is a government standard and some product of "socialism" and seems to have recruited a lot of rednecks who like the message. Ironically, while Qualcomm has been doing this, they've also been lobbying the US government to lobby China et al to adopt CDMA instead of GSM. CDMA's limited popularity overseas was largely because of the US government's involvement, not because it was a better standard for most of the adopters.

      I'm not saying everything about CDMA is bad: there's a genuinely good technical system at the lowest levels of IS-95 which has theoretical advantages over Time Division Multiple Access, so good in fact that the successor to GSM, UMTS, has a similar system available (W-CDMA) which is providing to be the most popular form of UMTS. But CDMA's advocates seem to insist that we must adopt the entire system to be pure. cdmaOne was junk, CDMA2000 has the potential to be better but Ver

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  5. We Geeks Are Humans Too! by osewa77 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Meanwhile, rumors of layoffs and offshore outsourcing began swirling around Odyssey. "[The rumors] slowed things down," says a former employee. "When stuff like that happens, people start looking for other work. I know I was looking for other work when I should have been testing."
    It is a basic fact that most people need to be happy, content, secure to produce great work. It is another basic fact that managers will never stop lookiing for ways around that 'limitation'!
    - a young blogger
    1. Re:We Geeks Are Humans Too! by osewa77 · · Score: 1
      more supporting quotes:
      "Zeglis told analysts in a third quarter conference call that the company would lay off 1,900 workers. He did not say where the cuts would come or when."
      expected to work under tight conditions to complete a project as part of a job I might lose anytime soon. duh!
    2. Re:We Geeks Are Humans Too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It is another basic fact that managers will never stop lookiing for ways around that 'limitation'!

      Hmm, bad managers for sure, but I've worked with many managers who were well aware of the rules. They were always concerned with the team's comfort and happiness, sometimes sacrificing their own for the team's. I've worked for some PHBs, but their attitude is not universal in any way.

    3. Re:We Geeks Are Humans Too! by gurustu · · Score: 5, Insightful
      To be fair, not all managers are like this. Some managers do their best to create bubbles of sanity and stability, to allow their teams to do the very best work possible. The best of managers will recognize that the largest part of their job is to be a drama sponge ... absorb the drama radiating down, dampen the drama radiating up, and shield their team to let them get work done.

      However, what can a manager do when a project or organization starts to underperform? Too frequently, managers will attempt to improve performance by "shaking things up". They think "Okay, after one more reorganization, then things will be right." or "Well, if we put this process into place, it will be perfect."

      The problem is really that management is as much an art as writing code or designing systems. There are a lot of people out there who can do it when the problems are normal, when the future is well understood. Unfortunately, most of them respond in counterproductive ways when confronted with crisis and uncertainty.

      In short (too late!), it isn't that managers look for ways to stop people from being "happy, content, secure" out of spite. It's just that they're trying to do something, anything to make things better. They flail, and things get worse.

    4. Re:We Geeks Are Humans Too! by thisgooroo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      To be fair, not all managers are like this.

      in my experience, the majority of managers (at least those i have worked with) are ok. it's just that the jerks who give you the impression that you work under them can destroy any working relationship with a company

      The best of managers will recognize that the largest part of their job is to be a drama sponge ... absorb the drama radiating down, dampen the drama radiating up, and shield their team to let them get work done.

      you'll see that mostly with the managers you work with directly. the upper levels have more contact with those people who are only worried about the next quarterly result

      However, what can a manager do when a project or organization starts to underperform? Too frequently, managers will attempt to improve performance by "shaking things up". They think "Okay, after one more reorganization, then things will be right." or "Well, if we put this process into place, it will be perfect."

      a real solution would require an analysis of the reasons and careful planning what to do about them. in our corporate culture, this would require too much time. so even decent managers are forced to try to fix things using the "hope this will work" method

  6. Siebel strikes again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Siebel is horrible and this isnt the only company that this has happened too.

    Take a look at Telus Communications.. When they implemented a Siebel based system customer complains skyrocketed.. The system was unstable and basically useless.. You couldent get any information to people on what was happening..

    Papers had a field day on how much customer service sucked.

    God have mercy on anyone who has to implement Siebel 7 in a large enterprise enviroment.

    1. Re:Siebel strikes again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Right. And the customer service problem had nothing to do whatsoever with the CSRs who put customers on "hold" for twenty minutes, forgot to mute the audio, and customers heard those CSRs gabbing at each other during the whole time. These and numerous other problems (I'm sure Siebel played a role too) led to Telus' crappy rating.

    2. Re:Siebel strikes again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It took 20 min to query a record in that CRM nightmare.

      You dont have happy customer service representivs when you cant do anything for the customer because the "system is down"

      Ofcourse I belive alot of these problems are fixed now and TELUS had a bad time that year with the BC fires and such.

      Ohh and phones have 2 modes.. "Hold" which plays music and you cant hear anything.. which I would think would be used for 20 min.. or Mute.. which is for small pauses. But ya.. i agree with you.. alot of the CSR's i got didnt even know how to use the software that wasnt even working.

    3. Re:Siebel strikes again... by xyz2000 · · Score: 1

      I have been working with siebel software for several years. It is a very powerful software which you can customize alot, unfortunately the top manager always thinks that off the shelf software can be used without customization. So siebel implementation will be simply install and configuration which will cut down the development time alot. This eventually will lead to the failure of implementation or upgrades.

    4. Re:Siebel strikes again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I was a developer (customizer?) of Siebel from Siebel 99 on up to Siebel 7, and I can say that it is the most expensive, useless piece of software I have ever seen. Reading this article was painfully familiar. Their system is amazing for their company, but if you don't use it exactly as they do (and why would you, unless you are a company that sells CRM software), you run into one of thousands of undocumented issues. And if you need support, no problem.. after the few hundred thousand for the software, throw another $100K at em for a year of support. And the support you get is mostly bug fixes. What a great company. People are also usually a few years behind with the releases since an upgrade takes over a year to do right if you have any customizations. Oh, and the reason they changed it from Siebel 2000 to Siebel 7 was that they missed the release for Siebel 7 by like a year, so they switched to numbering so they didn't have to change the year of the product.

    5. Re:Siebel strikes again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Siebel is no worse than other large systems. I work for Siebel and I have a little perspective. The story of ATT Wireless is not uncommon in the industry when you try to implement a sweeping software upgrade with a clueless integrator, aggressive project deadlines, unrealistic integrations to legacy systems and bad planning. Throw in wild cards like management/employee communications issues, outsourcing and other madness, and you have a recipe for failure. What the article didn't say is that the ATT Wireless system right now is up. But it was hell to get there.

    6. Re:Siebel strikes again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work at AT&T Wireless in customer care. It's extremely difficult to to work there being as there's no support from management and pretty much everything coming down from them is hellish in design. Siebel is up, yessir! It works...well, twice as slow as the old CRM management software. It's buggy and strange billing issues develop over the months. It's been a growth experience for me. Siebel has taught me to never expect to have the tools available that I need to do my job. Well done Deloitte and Touche. Well done AT&T Wireless management! Well done Siebel people! You've killed a good company.

  7. Big 5 consultants by BigHungryJoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As the go-live date neared, former employees say that Deloitte and Touche project managers relaxed testing requirements for various pieces of the system.

    The Big 5 (or however many there are now - I mean Arthur Andersen, Ernst & Young, Price Waterhouse, Deloitte & Touche, etc) charge hundreds of dollars an hour for "experts" that aren't experts at all. They're usually just one page ahead of the client. They even charge over $100/hr for wet-behind-the-ears college grads.

    We've all dealt with them before, they are usually intelligent people but have no expertise or experience in the task they are being paid to complete.

    Yet again and again, despite all their failings, they are being hired by big corporations for major projects.

    I'd like to know why.

    1. Re:Big 5 consultants by Snover · · Score: 1

      I think another good question would be why these "experts" are so arrogant that they refuse to listen to the people that know and understand the system. That seems like the stupidest part of the whole thing to me. Sounds to me like these guys need a good lesson in humility. Maybe I'm just an exception but I know if I was put on a project that was way over my head like that I'd ask people that knew what was going on for help.

      --

      [insert witty comment here]
    2. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'd like to know why.

      Good wine, good cigars, excellent whores. Any other questions?

    3. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We've all dealt with them before, they are usually intelligent people but have no expertise or experience in the task they are being paid to complete.
      Yet again and again, despite all their failings, they are being hired by big corporations for major projects.
      I'd like to know why."

      So when an upper manager asks the lower manger questions about why his job failed, he has some shieding. Example:

      Upper manager: "So when you knew you were having problems did you decide to get independant review?"

      Middle manager: "No."

      Upper manager: "Oh, I guess that means you didn't consider the project important enough to warrant it? I mean, it was only millions of dollars. Nevermind, get out of my sight. You're fired."

    4. Re:Big 5 consultants by aliens · · Score: 1

      You answered it right in your title, they are the Big 5.

      They live on their names alone for the most part. An upper manager will get pats on the back and fat bonuses because he brought in such a well respected consultantn.

      --
      -- taking over the world, we are.
    5. Re:Big 5 consultants by toxic666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why? Because the audit and tax divisions sign off on the "validity" of their SEC filings. The IT divisions are just facades for shovelling money into the Final Four partnerships.

      I spent some time at a Final Four consulting division and the incompetence was astounding. People lacking experience were billed out well over the $100 you quote. Some went as high as $250 and the implementations never really ended or accomplished the goals. But it was OK, because the companies never gave them business-critical work, anyways.

      Never finishing and continuing to bill is the whole point though.

    6. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BTW, the same speech applies to QA decisions as well. Hell, it applies to any critque that an upper management may apply to lower management.

    7. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Never finishing and continuing to bill is the whole point though.

      No kidding! I worked for a large consulting company for a short period. In my first and only review, my programming efficiency was listed as a bad point. Oral explanation: we make money based on the number of hours we bill not based on the number of projects we finish.

    8. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Christ! Is this the only view of managers? That all we do is try to cover our own asses, take credit from our workers, and have tiny shrivelled balls when it comes to dealing with our seniors?

      While some managers may cover their asses with a consulting firm or the refusal of another department to pay for the firm when a project fails, most will take credit for the failure because it was *their* project. If a consulting firm isn't going to help, they won't recommend it. The reasons that consulting firms are used aren't because they shake up the workers. Its because they take away the tunnel vision that anyone who has worked on a long project faces. Thats it, nothing else. Sure they have smart guys, but they aren't going to finish the project for you by themselves.

    9. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ! Is this the only view of managers? That all we do is try to cover our own asses, take credit from our workers, and have tiny shrivelled balls when it comes to dealing with our seniors?

      If you are willing to take responsibility for your own managerial failings, then kudos to you.

      I think that people tend to put too much blame on the project manager and don't shoulder enough themselves. However, when the project manager makes unrealistic promises to upper management and then thinks that they can make you fulfill those promises through continued browbeating, the manager almost NEVER seems to suffer for it.

    10. Re:Big 5 consultants by nathanh · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'd like to know why.

      I can think of two reasons.

      First, I think there are sufficiently talented and experienced people to implement perhaps 5% of technology projects being built today. There is simply such a high demand and such a low supply of IT professionals that the market is completely off kilter. That's why salaries are so high and the average skill level is so low. The worst part about the high salaries is that they attracted terribly unskilled people who don't care about IT but only care about the money.

      Second, the IT field is so freaking complex it defies imagination. There is simply too much to know. So you have these specialists who know only their narrow field, but inevitably those fields go out of fashion and the former specialist joins another field they have no experience in. It's a vicious cycle caused by (I think) the fact that IT isn't truly a mature industry. It's a research field that has been adopted too early by other industries. So there's lots of change which leads to regular retraining and inexperienced workers.

    11. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Christ! Is this the only view of managers? That all we do is try to cover our own asses, take credit from our workers, and have tiny shrivelled balls when it comes to dealing with our seniors?

      Of course not. That view only applies to 99.5% of managers.

    12. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      dude, I'm a programmer I work in the IT department of a large bank and i really don't think that most IT work is really that complex. the hardest part of IT work is getting the business people to decide what they want, and keeping what they want the same for the rest of the project. Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of stuff in computers that is interesting/hard/whatever, but most IT work can and is done by monkeys.

      I like my job, but I don't think most IT work is as complex as you think it is.

    13. Re:Big 5 consultants by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      We've all dealt with them before, they are usually intelligent people but have no expertise or experience in the task they are being paid to complete.

      Yet again and again, despite all their failings, they are being hired by big corporations for major projects.

      I'd like to know why.

      I can think of one legitimate (if sad) reason: All too often, companies bring in consultants because it would be absolutely impossible to get anything done any other way. Their own corporate cultures are so rife with political infighting, bureacracy, and years of inertia driving legacy processes that no decisions can be made and no actions can be taken, except one: Bring in the consultants.

      Then begins the months of meetings that turn into screaming matches once the emasculated junior management at the company have a scapegoat (the consultants) upon whom to lay the blame for their own impotence. Eventually the consultants figure out who's got the most signing authority for their checks and they start telling those people what they want to hear.

      So you can only really half blame the consultants. Every few years they come up with a new little portfolio of tricks to flash around (outsourcing, for example), but your corporate execs still have to sign off on all this stuff. When a company goes down the tubes, you really can't blame anybody but its own senior management.

      Yeah, the corporate world sucks, don't it?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    14. Re:Big 5 consultants by ChilyWily · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Yet again and again, despite all their failings, they are being hired by big corporations for major projects. I'd like to know why.
      One big reason (that I've observed a 2 places where I've worked) is that upper management makes these decisions unilaterally - the subordinates (including middle management) rarely are involved at all. Upper management also tends to be clueless - especially when it comes to technical issues (which require true foresight) that these consultants boast of. I've read the comments about tunnel vision etc. but I think it is highly demotivating to ignore the opinions of the people who work for you and understand the real issues closely. If they say that the consultant is a sham, then there is good reason to depend on their judgement. Sadly, this doesn't happen very often. Why? politics :)
    15. Re:Big 5 consultants by bobwoodard · · Score: 1

      It depends on your perspective. From a coding point of view, you're correct; just throw a code jockey in place and give him the assignment to use a coding library within coding standards to produce results.

      There's a bigger picture that comes into place when you have to start thinking about how the different libraries, legacy systems, dlls, interfaces, outputs are going to be used. This is where institutional knowledge is key and just bringing in a coder or someone cheap from the outside isn't going to work too well until they build up the same institutional knowledge.

    16. Re:Big 5 consultants by Knetzar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When working as a consultant you should never admit you don't know. As one of my bosses once told me, if you seem like you know everything they'll continue to hire you, but if you're honest and ask for help from the place that hired you they'll realize that they don't need you as much as they thought they did.

    17. Re:Big 5 consultants by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      But when using even slightly popular open source software a lot of that is negated because there will be other coders on the mailing lists... While you still have a point that is very much less true than it used to be.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:Big 5 consultants by Ironica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      First, I think there are sufficiently talented and experienced people to implement perhaps 5% of technology projects being built today.

      I think that estimate is a little low. The problem is exacerbated, however, by skill misidentification. People with tons of experience and skill in designing, maintaining, or supporting systems might also be good at implementation, but it's far from given. Implementation requires a whole lot more understanding of human nature and the learning process than most people have, whatever their background. I've seen plenty of implementations go very badly because the folks who were responsible for it knew a *lot* about how the system worked, and nothing about how to pass this information on. Yet I can't tell you anything about what happens when someone who comes at it from the other side (such as a background in education or behavioral therapy) takes on a major technology implementation project, because this doesn't generally happen. It's assumed that, unless you start out knowing the system, you can't implement it.

      Second, the IT field is so freaking complex it defies imagination. There is simply too much to know. So you have these specialists who know only their narrow field, but inevitably those fields go out of fashion and the former specialist joins another field they have no experience in. It's a vicious cycle caused by (I think) the fact that IT isn't truly a mature industry. It's a research field that has been adopted too early by other industries.

      An interesting theory... I may have to bring it up to my professor in "Growth, Science and Technology" (a joint offering of the Management and Policy Studies programs).

      I think that this issue is also related to the one above, however. In addition to changing very fast (I'm not sure that it's really a matter of complexity, but simply that you never get to a point where you know enough to coast for a while... because now it's all different), it's a discipline that attracts people who are very good at concentrating on a particular linear thread, and relate very well to deterministic systems. It therefore selects for people who have a very hard time understanding and communicating with human beings. People who can translate effectively between humans and computers are fairly rare, and those that *want* to even moreso. This adds to the mystique of the discipline, meaning that plenty of people who might be just fine at technology in addition to having other useful skills are convinced that they will NEVER understand it.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    19. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, your open source zealotry doesn't apply here. In fact, you're not even close. Why don't you come back when you realize that enterprise systems consist of more than Apache and Samba? Thanks!

    20. Re:Big 5 consultants by rabel · · Score: 1

      I'd like to know why as well. I've been involved with a Deloitte & Touche project for the last 3 years, responsible for validating and verifying their work.

      This article is really creepy because they're doing the exact same things, today, that are mentioned in this article in the failing project I'm involved with now.

      Luckily, we've brought in a new set of consultants and we're preparing to clean up the mess.

    21. Re:Big 5 consultants by phasm42 · · Score: 1
      ...the hardest part of IT work is getting the business people to decide what they want, and keeping what they want the same for the rest of the project.
      In many ways, this is actually an important part of an IT job. Figuring out what people really want, and adapting as project requirements evolve. This can be abused, but it goes with the territory. If your job is a modular plug-in job that can be done by anyone, then you're not really seeing the whole picture, or you're not being used to your full capacity.
      --
      "No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
    22. Re:Big 5 consultants by psiphre · · Score: 3, Funny
    23. Re:Big 5 consultants by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      That, I think, was the most insightful thing I've ever read (or otherwise taken in) regarding IT.
      Kudos.

    24. Re:Big 5 consultants by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      I hear this over and over again from anyone that has experienced this, and I can tell you it's the god's-honest-truth!

      I worked for a company that provided services for AT&T Wireless (actually this was while it was McCaw before AT&T bought them).

      Same thing, they brought in D&T "consultants" that were little more than college grads that had been through their training camp and put in a nice suit. The guy I interacted with was bright and everything, he just didn't know shit about telecom or IT.

      I got really tired of explaining things to him

      "So, how does the system know how long the subscriber called? How does that record get to the billing system? etc, etc"

      All valid questions and I started by carefully answering each one, at first. Then I realized this guy was being billed at $100+ an hour and was basically being paid to assimilate knowledge.

      I cut him off, not because I wanted to spite the guy, but because I didn't have time (and it wasn't my job) to teach this guy about the wireless business. I did actually feel kinda sorry for him. Nice kid, wasn't his fault D&T had put him where he was.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    25. Re:Big 5 consultants by heybo · · Score: 1

      Yep!!! It not who you know, but who you blow!

    26. Re:Big 5 consultants by kelnos · · Score: 1
      They even charge over $100/hr for wet-behind-the-ears college grads.
      hmm, i gotta get me one of these jobs... ^_~
      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    27. Re:Big 5 consultants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      First, I think there are sufficiently talented and experienced people to implement perhaps 5% of technology projects being built today. There is simply such a high demand and such a low supply of IT professionals that the market is completely off kilter. That's why salaries are so high and the average skill level is so low. The worst part about the high salaries is that they attracted terribly unskilled people who don't care about IT but only care about the money.

      Did you start writing this post a few years ago and just now get around to clicking submit? I don't think it applies so well today.

  8. No credit whatsoever by and+by · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't give AT&T Wireless any credit whatsoever. For God's sake! They can't even figure out how to properl set the time on their towers.

    In the Boston area, they reset the time for their towers by setting the clocks forward one hour at Daylight Savings Time (as opposed to properly setting the "Daylight Savings Time flag). Now whenever you use Cingular's network, you get the proper settings, but as soon as you go bact to AT&T, it puts you an hour ahead on wintertime hours.

    1. Re:No credit whatsoever by and+by · · Score: 2, Funny

      Looking back at this, I really should have gone over my spelling and punctuation. I'm sorry.

    2. Re:No credit whatsoever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn it! You unintentionally prevented a witty troll! I curse your name "and by"!

    3. Re:No credit whatsoever by MushMouth · · Score: 1

      You can make calls from the cigular network? I can't

    4. Re:No credit whatsoever by OldSchoolNapster · · Score: 1

      Cingular customers can make calls from the AT&T network. I recently bought a GSM phone from Cingular (before they owned AT&T) and the guy at the store told me that Cingular's GSM network wasn't very large so it used AT&T's to make up the slack. Driving through Houston, my phone is always asking me to change the time (only a few seconds) as it goes from Cingular to AT&T and back again.

      Just as an aside, Cingular rules. No roaming + rollover minutes = not screwing over customers for $$. They may not have the best network but they know how to treat their customers so im sure they are working on improving it. I'm definately not gunna jump ship just because phone number portability means I can easily go find a slightly cheaper (if that) plan with a company that can't wait till I cross the "roaming line". Go Cingular!

    5. Re:No credit whatsoever by Herschel+Cohen · · Score: 1

      Seriously, how reliable is their messaging system?

      For quite some time, that is the only reason I am still on Sprint.

    6. Re:No credit whatsoever by OldSchoolNapster · · Score: 1

      how reliable is their messaging system?

      Their messageing system is extremely reliable. I have not once had a message "lost" in transit. Messages arrive very quickly and if you aren't connected when you recieve a message, it will arrive the instant you sign back on.

    7. Re:No credit whatsoever by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      T-Mobile customers can make calls from both ATT and Cingular networks, with no roaming charges. However the SMS is totally unreliable, I sent my girlfriend one hours ago and she never got it, sometimes they show up the next day or something.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:No credit whatsoever by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Seriously, how reliable is [Cingular's] messaging system?

      For quite some time, that is the only reason I am still on Sprint.


      I've had Cingular service since it was Pac Bell Wireless... signed up back in 1998 or so. I've had the problems you mentioned above with voice mail... once, for a couple of days, three years ago or more. My messages reliably come through within minutes of recording. (I know this because I leave my phone on silent in class a lot... so it starts buzzing, I hit "C," and then a minute later it buzzes one more time to let me know I got a message.)

      Generally I've been quite happy with my coverage, service, pricing, etc. Every 12-18 months I walk into a Cingular Authorized Dealer and get a new phone and a new contract with better rates. The phone is always free (except for sales tax). I've even called up and scaled *down* my service just months after signing a two-year contract without paying any fee or penalty. The CSR was even friendly and helpful about it. They've also been good about removing charges for SMS spam (granted, it's only 10 cents, but it's the principle of the thing).

      The only thing I really *don't* like about them is, when there's something you absolutely have to go to one of their own stores for (and there's only two of those in the entire Los Angeles area), it's a nightmare. The people are rude, the wait is 45 minutes to *find out* if they can help you, etc. Fortunately, I've only had to do this once (to inquire about repairing my phone... then found out from an Authorized Dealer that I could just replace it for free), though I'll have to do it again if I want to collect my SIM card upgrade from the Bertoldi v. Pacific Bell Wireless LLC class action settlement. The saving grace here is that there's almost nothing you have to go to them for... once in over five years ain't bad.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    9. Re:No credit whatsoever by bware · · Score: 1


      Cingular does the same thing in Los Angeles, so don't give them too much credit.

  9. How long to make back the 100 Mil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how many man-years of outsourcing it will take to make back that 100 mil AT&T lost?

    1. Re:How long to make back the 100 Mil? by fbform · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder how many man-years of outsourcing it will take to make back that 100 mil AT&T lost?

      I see your point, but I'd like to remind you that $100M is not as much as you think it is. Another proponent of outsourcing - Carly Fiorina of HP - nearly got a $115M bonus deal (to have been shared with Michael Cappelas of Compaq) for the HP-Compaq merger.

      My point is that if some companies are prepared to throw money like this at their CEOs, they probably don't really care about losing some customers.

      Then again, I could be wrong. In this particular case, AT&T Wireless lost customer goodwill more than money.

      --
      Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
    2. Re:How long to make back the 100 Mil? by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, and HP paid for that fucking bonus by firing 1000's of employees and gutting their R&D staff.

      By the time this hurts HP she will be gone and someone else will have to clean up her mess.

    3. Re:How long to make back the 100 Mil? by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      +2 Insightful

      --I wouldn't balk at buying an HP computer these days (altho I'd replace the powersupply 1st thing with at least a 300W) because they've made strides with Linux compatibility... But I really truly despise Carly F.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    4. Re:How long to make back the 100 Mil? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      HP used to make extremely well-made products. Then they shifted their focus, from serving customers to serving stockholders. Now they produce garbage. I was in Fry's today and overheard a lady returning a cheap HP printer she had foolishly spent money on. "Their customer support is horrible and they're all from India!" I almost burst out laughing. Sucker! NEVER buy anything from HP. They've been coasting on their name for years and they're slowly grinding to a halt. Soon "HP" will be synonymous with crap and they'll have to change their name to something like "Claria" the way Gator did.

      If it weren't for the printer ink racket they're running, they'd have gone under long ago. What a sad end to what used to be a great American company.

    5. Re:How long to make back the 100 Mil? by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      There was a time when HP hardware was actually more reliable than even IBM. They were the only provider who had equipment that could be dumped at a radar station in the north, never to be touched except for the guy who tops up the diesel tanks ever few weeks for the generators.

      Now?

      Lets just say it's been a long, long, long time since I've had any clients mention or ask for modern HP support. Some want updates done to old applications on old hardware, but I haven't seen any of the new HP hardware anywhere.

      Couldn't be because they abandoned their old architecture and no one wants to ride the Itanic, could it?

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    6. Re:How long to make back the 100 Mil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can never forgive HPaq for the Compaq Deskpro. That sort of evil is just too much.

  10. good read, right on the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    having worked for attws for a year now, and having been on the receving end of all the angry bitter customers when seibel 7.5 f-ed up, I can tell you that this was the very worst transition I have ever seen. 100 million dollars? between 50 and 200 thousand customers lost to curn? WTF? and it's still a joke on the inside.

    Posted ac for my job...

    1. Re:good read, right on the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ive been working for att wireless for almost a year now as a customer service rep. the whole LNP thing was such a huge mess up on their half and everyone knows this. in an effort to curb the churn of customers they made us try to get customers back on contract. aws turned their customer care department into a sales department. be aware of this when you call them for support.. they are giving csr's money to sign people up. its forcing us to not really care about the customers issue at hand but instead to try and sell them something they likely do not need. it really sucks.

      rep: "thank you for calling at&t wireless, how may i help you?"
      customer: "my phone isnt working properly"
      rep: "i can help you with that if you simply agree to a new 2 year contract"

    2. Re:good read, right on the money... by miracle69 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Posted ac for my job...

      The important question is have you taught the Indian fellow who will replace you how to post anonymously to Slashdot?

      --
      Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
    3. Re:good read, right on the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, I think that WAS the Indian fellow posting anon to Slashdot...

  11. The problems go back at least 5 years. by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I had AT&T wireless 5 years ago in college and they were no better then. Bad coverage areas, customer service people without a clue, and screwed up billing.

    Say what you like about Verizon's CDMA technology. There is more to a phone company than the technology they choose. If the company can provide robust coverage, provide wireless broadband, and treat me right - they will succeed.

    As for the CDMA detractors: Try getting 500k/sec. on ANY GSM system now....Verizon's testing it in DC and NY and will soon roll out nationwide.

    AT&T wireless didn't fall apart because of their technology choices...they fell apart because they treated their customers badly.

    -ted

    1. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find that CDMA bashers either are eurpoean or havent ever tried CDMA. I for one will never leave CDMA - i have actaully cut my POTS line in favor of the CDMA from VZW, it that good yes it sounds as good as a lan line.

    2. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You aren't actually going to be able to obtain 500k/sec on any CDMA system for quite a few years either. That bandwidth is a marketing number, you share it with others. Reality will be more like 50kb /sec.

    3. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by avdp · · Score: 1

      The problem I have with CDMA is not that it's a worse (or better) technology, it's just that it's incompatible with the rest of the world. I understand most people don't care (most people probably don't even leave their state on a regular basis) but I do. It's annoying to have to rent a crappy cell phone when arriving in Europe. I did it once, and won't do it ever again. I switched to T-Mobile.

    4. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you go to asia your going to have to rent a phone anyway; they're CDMA.

    5. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Spazzz · · Score: 1
      I've been an AT&T Wireless customer since 2000 and I've had nothing but good experiences with their customer service. One of my friends has Sprint and it's painful to hear him talk about the nightmares he's had with them. If what I've experienced over the past four years is considered "bad" customer service, then I really look forward to some "good" customer service.

      In fact, when I heard that Cingular was buying ATTWS, I thought to myself "Damn I hope Cingular's customer service don't suck, because I've kinda been spoiled."

    6. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by dre23 · · Score: 1

      I'm a huge VZ and FON fan, especially their very succesful 3 year+ 1xRTT networks (which is faster than the Cingular and AT&T EDGE networks, which just rolled out 1-2 months ago).

      The 1xEV-DO rollouts in NYC, DC, and SD sound truly amazing for VZ and FON.

      However, I see Nextel on the horizon about to kill dead the 2.5G, 3G, and maybe even 4G networks with their new technology, Mobile-Fi (IEEE 802.20). They are in beta with it in the RTP, NC area. This stuff is up to 16Mbps with an round-trip latency of 35ms (I think they are even going to put SLA's on it) and you can use it at speeds of up to 200mph. The equipment provider is Novini.

      I miss Ricochet in the SF/Bay Area, but it's never coming back at this point ;

      --
      IPv4 allocations for hobbyists? join the ipalloc-l mailing-list! www.operations.net/mailman/listinfo/ipalloc-l
    7. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by puppet10 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have to totally agree. I'm in the northeast and signed up for Suncom about 6 months before they got bought by AT&T wireless.

      The service with Suncom was quite good. There was good coverage over the entire area and the voicemail and missed call alerts worked perfectly with almost no lag between the call and the notification.

      AT&T wireless took over and service deteriorated rapidly. Coverage became spotty in the area and varied widely from day to day and the voicemail and call notification system became abysmal not noting calls that came in or voicemails for days after the original call was made.

      6 months later the plan was up and so was my patience. Now on Verizon wireless for the last year or two and they've been quite good overall.

      --
      -------- This space intentionally left blank --------
    8. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      However, I see Nextel on the horizon about to kill dead the 2.5G, 3G, and maybe even 4G networks with their new technology, Mobile-Fi (IEEE 802.20). They are in beta with it in the RTP, NC area. This stuff is up to 16Mbps with an round-trip latency of 35ms (I think they are even going to put SLA's on it) and you can use it at speeds of up to 200mph. The equipment provider is Novini.

      Back when Ricochet still looked viable, and the skies were sunny over the economy, we would've loved to have had Ricochet during our monthly business trips to NY. To have a moderately high-speed internet connection on the 3 hour train ride would've been extremely useful. (Plus the additional 90 minutes worth spent getting to our final destination in the NYC area.) Unfortunately, their product wasn't any good at speeds above 80mph (trains between Philadelphia and NYC run closer to 110-115 in spots) and they never finished build-out on the east coast.

      16Mbps sounds very intriguing, especially if they manage to allow you to access it while moving. (Got any links? Roll-out schedule?)

      However, with the explosion of WiFi hot-spots and addition of WiFi to trains/airplanes, seems like the potential market for Nextel is going to be a lot smaller then a few years ago. Four years ago, 128kbps Ricochet was barely worth the $80/mo. Today, I'd put the price limit at more like $50/mo and even then it's going to be a limited market.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    9. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem I have with CDMA is not that it's a worse (or better) technology, it's just that it's incompatible with the rest of the world.

      The problem you describe is not a problem with CDMA; it is with certain over-regulated markets that do not permit any competition between protocols. The US and Japan (et al.) are also highly regulated of course, but they have shown that allowing a little competition between protocols can spur technological progress by quite a lot.

      That said, the lack of CDMA-compatible networks in some countries is a real problem, and it is a good reason for frequent travellers to use GSM.

    10. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by j0se_p0inter0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's funny, AT&TW was so inept and screwed-up, yet I never had ANY problems with them when I had the service. I had them for about 4 years until last November when I moved to Verizon. Their coverage was great, reception was clean, customer service was good, I was pretty happy with them. Then all this stuff happened and all I hear is horror stories of mistreated customers and network problems. It's strange. I live in Texas, so maybe they were just more efficient down here for some reason.
      As for Verizon, I am VERY happy with them. They have a nice selection of phones, their Texas coverage is excellent, and their customer service reps are incredibly friendly and helpful. I once was very late on a payment due to financial problems, and after I talked to the rep about it, she removed the late fees without resistance. So, if you're on AT&TW and trying to escape, check them out.

    11. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by dre23 · · Score: 1
      I used Ricochet on the freeway once going 90mph and announced that I had just blew past a Subaru WRX (which just came out in the US) on IRC. If we went up to 95mph, the connection would drop. This was the 128Kbps Ricochet.

      Nextel claims SLA's of typical max bw at 3Mbps and RTT of under 100ms (but the technology behind Mobile-Fi, Flash-OFDM, is capable of what I described). Note: Nextel's numbers are the way they are because they probably plan on oversubcribing their network (much like Cable modem providers do). Oversubscription is the network user's (and ultimately the network provider's) worst enemy, but it makes the bean counters happy and we all know that they run the real show (the big man has got to have more green in his pocket).

      The rollout and tons of information is available here.

      Most people are willing to pay $80/month for unlimited data on 3G networks (The BEST I've received on VZ's 1xRTT network was 111Kbps and way above 200ms RTT... maybe even 250ms, but 300ms and 400ms is common). I pay $45/month for unlimited on VZ, but that requires a $30/month voice plan (but at least I get the best of both worlds since I need a cell phone anyways). So I pay $75/month and get 400 Anytime minutes + Unlimited on-net VZ, nights, and weekends *AND* unlimited 1xRTT data. I think their 1xEV-DO pricing is the same as 1xRTT, but they don't offer it yet in the Bay Area.

      I would use Mobile-Fi over WiFi anyday, and even WiMAX (out at the end of this year) may not solve the problems that Mobile-Fi does today. However, that doesn't mean I don't like 802.11g or the upcoming 802.11h and 802.16e standards. They all have their uses -- but if I had to pick one technology for personal use -- I'd choose Mobile-Fi (802.20).

      --
      IPv4 allocations for hobbyists? join the ipalloc-l mailing-list! www.operations.net/mailman/listinfo/ipalloc-l
    12. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by mcocke · · Score: 2, Informative

      At least 8 years - I bought a pair of cell phones when my wife was expecting. More than once, it was faster to just drive where I was trying to call rather than wait for a circuit. I live along the major 'drive trunk' (Route 80, 50 miles west of NYC, more or less) - you'd think they'd have sprung for some capacity THERE, but nope. When the contract expired I switched to a company that actually had some equipment. AT&T called me once to try to convince me to switch back - I laughed at them. I wondered how long they'd last with that level of "service". Now we know.

    13. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by thynk · · Score: 1

      Bad coverage areas, customer service people without a clue, and screwed up billing.

      Funny... sounds like you were talking about Verizon there. I've yet to find a cell phone company who has their act together. In just over 2 years with Verizon, I've had my call plan changed with out my knowldge, over $900 in credits from billing, plan and equipment failures. Talk to one person, get one answer, when it's wrong on your bill, call back and get another answer and see it be wrong on your bill too.

      The only good thing I can say? They are the first company I've not had receiption problems with. Works at work, at home, on the road. Everywhere I go, Yes, I can here you now. My friend has AT&T, and he's had pretty good luck with them so far.

      --

      Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
    14. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      AT&T wireless took over and service deteriorated rapidly.

      When you quit SunCom, did they give you a months-long runaround of sending you bills after your cancel date? I truly feel sorry for anyone stupid enough to sign up for automatic billing with them! SunCom are a bunch of retarded small-penised cone-headed fat-assed pimple-faced losers (in my opinion, of course).

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    15. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by ahillen · · Score: 1

      If you go to asia your going to have to rent a phone anyway; they're CDMA.

      Which Asian countries except Japan do not have at least one GSM network?

    16. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Texas is a work at will state, meaning there are no lazy union bums in the state to f'up the company.

    17. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by psiphre · · Score: 0

      I was, unfortunately, an ATT wireless customer for only six months, and I hated it. their customer support was hand-tied and unapologetic about it. Their web interface plain sucks; there's no way on ATT wireless to check the number of "anytime minutes" you have used in a month; you'd better keep a stopwatch.
      Even when they cut you a deal to not double bill minutes you spend talking to your [wife/husband/girlfriend/boyfriend], they don't honor it; ny next door neighbor (and good friend for four years) got an 800$ bill for that very reason that he's still trying to iron out with ATTW nearly two months later.
      Another friend of mine had his plan switched for him by one of the retarded sales associates at a mall kiosk when his friend signed up and listed him as the referral -- and the salesman switched my friend's phone plan to the same one (with fewer "anytime minutes") as the new customer. cue over a thousand dollars in extra charges over two months -- which he was unable to straighten out because by the time he got back from I-FUCKING-RAQ the salesman who did it had long since vacated, his buddy had left the marine corps and moved home, and nobody had receipts left anyway.

      I wouldn't have reccommended ATTW to anyone BEFORE the FCC declaration, and now I actively crusade AGAINST them.

      Worst. Celular phone company. Ever.

    18. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by psiphre · · Score: 0

      You sound like two of my best friends and me all folled up into one (using ATT though, instead of Verizon).

      I use TMobile now, and i'm happy as a pig in shit. (blame the french for that one). i switched after i saw how amazingly well my girlfriend's tmobile works -- good coverage pretty much everywhere here in socal (from LA to SSanD'oria -- er.. south san diego), lightning fast text messaging, minute usage quotes usually accurate to within an hour or so, good calling plans.

      The only disappointment I had was being unable to switch to a 1000 "anytime minute" plan without gettinga new phone number, but I figure that's not so bad now that i can keep better track of my usage.

      Cheers.

    19. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by thynk · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you've had good luck with Tmobile. I finally made the release me from my contract (back when they were voice stream). They had excellent customer service, but the freak'n phone didn't work anywhere I went. Didn't work at home or work. Hell, I was lucky if it worked in my car. I had to stand out side to get any sort of coverage.

      I hear they have better coverage now, and that's a good thing for those of you that have it.

      *sighs* I can't wait until vonage figures out a way to make cell phones... then I'll truly be happy.

      --

      Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
    20. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by avdp · · Score: 1

      I go to Asia, I don't have to rent a phone. Granted, I don't go to Japan. That's the second sore thumb in the GSM coverage (the US being the other one).

    21. Re:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the companies can exploit workers at will. Companies' well being is more important than the workers' as we all know.

  12. SILOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Read the article very carefully. You will see refrences to SILOS. This is where the current inner working people dont want to change the way they do thaing therefore, will not participate in converstions, upgrades and may do a little sabatoging. I have seen it first hand and the first thing Stan Stan Sigman said when he entered cingular was that the silos will be torn down. This probably makes the managers at att quiver (no it makes them update their resume).

    1. Re:SILOS by Snover · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I did infer the saboutaging that was probably going on from the article but there were also the comments that were "we told the project managers what didn't work before and what would work and some possibilities to look into and they didn't listen". THAT is arrogance, and regardless of the silos, ignoring advice like this is dooming your project to failure.

      --

      [insert witty comment here]
    2. Re:SILOS by Ironica · · Score: 1
      Read the article very carefully. You will see refrences to SILOS. This is where the current inner working people dont want to change the way they do thaing therefore, will not participate in converstions, upgrades and may do a little sabatoging.

      Read the article even more carefully. You will see the following quote in context:
      Coordination between the teams- the responsibility of the lead integrator on the project, Deloitte and Touche-quickly got out of hand...."Everything was siloed among the different groups, and we all worked independently of each other," says a project team member.
      Siloing is a term for when different aspects of a supposedly integrated project become isolated from each other and communcation breaks down. It can happen from the inside because of pride/stupidity/whatever, *or* from the outside because of bad planning and implementation. The latter appears to be the case here. So the original poster's complaint about the experts not listening to the team members probably still holds.
      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  13. ATT Wireless New Cust Freeze Last Fall by marktwen0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Haven't RTFA, but last week my bro mentioned that when he moved to a Virginia town an hour outside of Washington, D.C., ATT wouldn't even offer him cell service, finally saying when pressed that they had a computer meltdown that resulted in an at least month-long, nationwide freeze on signing up new cellular customers. Ouch, says the bottom line. This was in the September-November timeframe. At the time I wondered if their selling themselves to the highester bidder a few months later was related.

    1. Re:ATT Wireless New Cust Freeze Last Fall by Aexia · · Score: 1

      At the time I wondered if their selling themselves to the highester bidder a few months later was related.

      Ehhh. Not really. Everyone had known for some time that the company was going to be sold. That's partly why I left the company last summer. No use staying on a sinking ship, especially if you're going to be one of the last to be laid off, and I had better things to do.

      It's a total short-timers attitude there now. People leave the office at 5pm or earlier every day. Half of my team in HR is gone however(they'd been laid off last year).

  14. Everyone here changed to Verizon by ob1knob777 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Lots of people here in the SF Bay Area got so fed up with AT&T that they all changed over to Verizon. Unfortunately now Verizon's network is overloaded with all the new customers and it's almost impossible to get a call through around 9pm when the switch to off-peak hours occurs. Of course I didn't find this out until I already told AT&T to get lost and changed to Verizon. However, I'm gonna stick with Verizon anyway - at least they seem to be a bit more competent than AT&T so they will get these problems fixed sometime soon. The grass isn't quite as green as it looked from the other side.

  15. "Odyssey"? by r.jimenezz · · Score: 1

    I think they misnamed the project to begin with :)

    Seriously, though, it's a shame that in this time and age we still have this kind of things happening. Now I am not saying this wouldn't happen in another discipline, but I guess it goes to show that IT as a discipline (especially IT management) still has much to learn and evolve.

    --
    The revolution will not be televised.
    1. Re:"Odyssey"? by AGTiny · · Score: 1

      Heh, there's a project where I work called "Meteor". Can you guess what is going to happen with that project? ;)

    2. Re:"Odyssey"? by thisgooroo · · Score: 1
      how many big construction projects that started from scratch have been on schedule and didn't have large cost overruns?

      the problem with most large IT projects is that they tend to be quite complex and often cover new ground. it's hard to come up with precise estimates when you even don't know yet what exactly is involved. but how exactly do tell that upper management?

    3. Re:"Odyssey"? by tinnunculus · · Score: 2, Funny

      It seems rather apt actually since the "Odyssey" is about Ulysses spending 20 years going every direction but the correct one to get to his destination.

  16. RTFA? Futile by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1, Funny
    "Ironically, the scathing and sometimes highly sarcastic commentary at the end of the article from former employees makes this read even better."

    Ah Michael, your puny attempts at getting us to RTFA will fail you. It is futile, FUTILE I SAY!

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  17. You are just arrogant by BlackShirt · · Score: 1

    Managers can somehow measure how good or bad consultanst are on the current project.

    Why should you hire consultants?
    -peer review inside their organization
    -personal development. it takes training to become good in your field. they have in-the-house training.
    -they pay hard on their mistakes. Cash. When you buy outside your organization your excpectations are higher

    But well. You have to learn form one mistakes. For bad managers it is just easier to hide in the crowd. To do what everybody else does.

    1. Re:You are just arrogant by BigHungryJoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      personal development. it takes training to become good in your field. they have in-the-house training.

      Spoken like someone who has either (1) never hired or dealt with a Big 5 consulting firm, or (2) someone who works for one.

      The partners in these firms will sell anything. They will claim expertise in any thing they must in order to start billing. They send out green college recruits and charge over $100/hr for them.

      As for "in-the-house training", the only experience most of them have is a series of failed PeopleSoft deployments (or Ariba, insert your own "enterprise" software here). Many of them have degrees in something completely unrelated to the project. Yes, the English major from Duke is very intelligent, but she doesn't know anything about the project at hand.

      -they pay hard on their mistakes. Cash. When you buy outside your organization your excpectations are higher

      Well, they may pay for their mistakes, but they certainly don't pay cash. These guys will absolutely bleed a company through continued billing regardless of how successful the project is.

    2. Re:You are just arrogant by andy1307 · · Score: 1
      Where do you work? Where I work, managers don't make the decision to hire the big consulting companies for the really big projects. People higher up than the managers do that.

      Why should you hire consultants to do what you can but for more? Most consulting companies care more about their own billing. Deloitte refused to comment on the AWE problems....wonder why?

    3. Re:You are just arrogant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > -they pay hard on their mistakes. Cash. When you buy outside your organization your excpectations are higher

      Ummmm.... I'm going to have to disagree with these statements when talking about large projects. The first step in "pay hard on (sic) their mistakes" is labelling a "mistake". You don't usually find out about a botched piece of code until after the dust has settled and something happens.

      As an example, a large multi-year project that had the vendor's professional services firm involved (ie "the experts") wound up more or less six months ago. We recently found out that some of the code that creates output files (ie billing information) DOES NOT HAVE ERROR CHECKING!!!! Yep, if for whatever reason the files can't be created, you cannot tell from the output of the functions that an error occurred. Sweet, huh?

      Did I mention that we found this out during a period where we had some filesystem issues? :) It's rather depressing really, but when you have a lot of code put together by a lot of people under a deadline, you don't necessarily know WHO wrote something. And identifiying an issue is a much different political exercise than extracting cash from a vendor for said piece of code with a dubious audit trail (the "Who really wrote this?" question would keep you in court for years).

      Keep in mind that the politics are MUCH more important than what you can prove, or what you think happened. There might be absolutely no doubt in your mind about to whom responsibility for an issue belongs, but getting the other party to accept that responsibility can turn into a greek tragedy. "Truth" is important, but sometimes irrelevant in contracts. :)

    4. Re:You are just arrogant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great you have manger of managers making decicions to cover their asses. What is your point? Are you saying that your compnay magicly has enough people to do any project that comes your way. Oh too bad that the recesion came down and you had to let 20% of your staff go; if you had contracts that would take the brunt but no no, your comapny will lay off real employees. I wish i worked where you do. It would be great having massive hiring and firing sprees each other week it would be wonderful. Yeah so Deloitte refused to comment what are you gona do - stone them? If you cant handle managing consultants that do everything you tell them than how is your great comapny going to handle employees that want to take a vacation? Did i put your great company enough for you?

  18. I should not laugh w/ gleee by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 1

    but I will! HaHaHaaaaaaHa. Treat your customers like poop and this is what u get.

    When I wanted to cancel after 6 years (they started to charge roaming in an area they had never charged before) they threatened and I quote " a little knowen clause that will allow us to sue you for $15,000 dolars for breach of contract" !!!!

    HaHaHaaaaaaHa

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    1. Re:I should not laugh w/ gleee by HighOrbit · · Score: 1

      Not only did they treat their customer's like crap, but it sounds like the treated their employees with total contempt. That "buddy program" where the Indian followed an employee around so he could take his job has to be the most classic case of PHB leadership *EVER*. Message to employee - "We want you to do a great job for us, but we consider you expendable and beneath contempt and we don't even try to hide it. By the way.. meet Raji, he'll be taking your job in a few months. Have a enjoyable and productive day!".

    2. Re:I should not laugh w/ gleee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That "buddy program" where the Indian followed an employee around so he could take his job ...
      I'm in that situation right now - what do I do to get the guy off my back?
    3. Re:I should not laugh w/ gleee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm in that situation right now - what do I do to get the guy off my back?

      Nothing. Do exactly as you're expected to do.

      And, work like hell at finding another job.. Bail as soon as you get it, and don't look back.

    4. Re:I should not laugh w/ gleee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      train him really badly, make him the managers worst nightmare, teach him to steal your coworkers food and belongings to pick up exra cash, etc...

  19. Ironic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Ironically, the scathing and sometimes highly sarcastic commentary at the end of the article from former employees makes this read even better.

    How is this ironic?

  20. The Continuing Saga of the Death of Ma Bell by stuffduff · · Score: 4, Informative
    Ma's been a long time dying.

    She started out by developing the industry standards, and then learned all to quickly to play Government Fat Cat. When we look back at the contributions to science that came out of Bell Labs, both in communications and computer science; it is easy to see that this was once truly an industry giant.

    But like all giants, when you get used to playing 800 pound gorilla, you stop thinking and just keep throwing your weight around.

    Even after it became public knowledge that Ma Bell was holding back technological advancement for their own purposes and profit, as long as the lobby on the hill kept a few important palms crossed, the tyranny continued. Finally, after a couple rounds of public humilliations and rebukes, the government was forced to order the split-up.

    But very deeply imbedded in each and every part of the baby Bells was the crippling notion that they were the best and only company and that the thought of changing their behavior neven even had the slightest possibility of beginning to cross their tiny little corporate brains.

    To make a long story short, their corporate egos never evolved back to being lean mean compedetive machines. If there ever was a company that should get back to it's roots of research and innovation this would have been it; but the chance is gone.

    My local baby Bell, for example, relies on their internet customers to have their error checking turned off, when they visit the customer service website. As a developer I keep mine turned on and get about a half-dozen errors when each page loads, and a few more with each and every control encountered. Why is it that they still behave like the customer doesn't matter? Because in each division there is at least 1 fat cat who is more concerned with their own well being than anything else; and someone who profits by their actions does their level headed best to keep them there.

    Whatever happened to quality of service?

    --
    "Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
    1. Re:The Continuing Saga of the Death of Ma Bell by fatman22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What ever happened to quality of service? It's dead my friend. As the AT&T CIO put it so clearly "we work to achieve best-in-class margins." Quality be damned, he's going for maximum profit. That attitude is epidemic these days and I blame its existence on the CEO/CIO/C-whatever management model. Their pay and bonuses depend more on happy shareholders than happy customers and when they finish running off all the customers and employees at one place they just move on.

  21. Yup... by mistermund · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (Rant Mode On)

    After going through 5 SonyEricsson T68i's in 3.5 mo, only to have each successive one start refusing to make outgoing calls, and juggling many hours and dropped calls with AT&T customer service only willing to send me another T68i, I just decided to ditch AT&T and go to T-Mobile. I found a Nokia 3650 on Amazon for $250 w/ 2-$150 rebates - one from T-Mobile and the other from Amazon.

    The new phone, and T-Mobile service have been perfect here in Pittsburgh, and I'm enjoying the nationwide unlimited GPRS with bluetooth from my iBook, but AT&T screwups still continue. Three weeks after I switched I receive a spankin' new T226 in the mail. Phone works much better than the T68i, but no bluetooth, and a crappy screen. But hey, free phone I'll never use.

    Unfortunately I still had 5 mo on my contract. Canceling stiffs me with a $180 charge, so I called AT&T 6 weeks ago to switch to the $20 plan. (a $100 loss, cheaper than $180). Well, yesterday I get my bill and find out that they never processed my request. Call customer service and finally get a rep who tries to be helpful, but can't figure out why the logged plan switch wasn't carried out. Supposedly I'll be reimbursed, but I'm not holding my breath. The rep didn't seem surprised when I explained I'd switched because of all the previous cockups.

    I could go on and on with AT&T screwup stories, but you get the idea. I think the biggest pain is that those still in contracts have few or no options other than biting the bullet and switching.

    (Rant Mode Off)

    1. Re:Yup... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the problem is that the cell phone tower's were changed to a different frequency. The t68i's don't support that. I had the same thing happen to me and had to purchase a new phone, only to find out a few months later a letter went out to all owners of the 'old' equipment offering them a el-cheapo phone as a free replacement.

  22. ATTWS - Tell me about it. by sirReal.83. · · Score: 1

    I don't think this is fully off-topic.

    I've been looking into switching from Cingular just to get a better phone. Mine's a piece of crap, and I don't want to pay. No, I don't really need all the fancy functions of these newer phones, but if they come with it I won't refuse them. I want something small and with a non-tiny screen.

    AT&T seems to be the most generous in terms of phones, of providers I've looked at so far... but all the customers I know absolutely hate the coverage they get - I live in Boston - and there seems to be none at all in my hometown, Ithaca, NY. I'll be on a national plan so I can move between the two places without hassle, as I do now.

    My question is this: is it now, or will it be soon, safe to move to AT&T, or will they fully merge into Cingular, or what? I just want a decent phone guys, help me out! ;)

    OK, proceed to mod me down.

    1. Re:ATTWS - Tell me about it. by ob1knob777 · · Score: 1

      I'd say go with whoever has the best coverage even if the phones aren't all that cool. I stuck with AT&T for years because of the cool little gadget phones they kept giving me, but after having dropped calls in the middle of job interviews I decided it was time to switch to Verizon. They don't have the latest, smallest phones, but at least my calls get through most of the time(although the network is now a bit overloaded from all the former AT&T customers switching over - it's still better than what I had.) As for the Cingular/AT&T merger - I'd wait to see how it all pans out before making a choice. They can promise you that things will get better, but if it doesn't then you're still stuck with crappy service and a 1-2 yr contract.

    2. Re:ATTWS - Tell me about it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw the phone, use scotch tape to hold your old one together before switching to them, if it wasn't for the steep cancelation fee I would have already switched to tmobile, EVERYTHING about them sucks, and about the only thing cingular could actually do to solve it would be to send new Cingular phones to all the ATT subscribers and deep six everything ATT.....everything.....all employees, all call centers, billing, down to the shitty towers

    3. Re:ATTWS - Tell me about it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like Cingular. Cingular customers already have access to AT&T's network and don't ever have to pay roaming. Plus no other carrier (that i know of) lets you rollover minutes. The phones are pretty good too. I've had quite a few cellular companies and this is the one I'll keep.

  23. hygiene consulting company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that Deloitte & Touche is often referred to as Toilet & Douche in the industry, I'm not surprised that they screwed up the implementation.

  24. RTFA? by andy1307 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Meanwhile, rumors of layoffs and offshore outsourcing began swirling around Odyssey.

    We'd see whiteboards that had questions like, 'What opportunity do we have to offshore/outsource?'"

    On Nov. 19, The Wall Street Journal ran a story on planned layoffs and outsourcing at AT&T Wireless

    Did you RTFA? I did...WLNP went live on Nov 24th. Offshoring hadn't begun by then. Blame this on the 200$/hr consultants from D&T.
    1. Re:RTFA? by Ironica · · Score: 4, Insightful
      For some reason I just cant feel sorry for a company not being able to rally its workers and threaten the workers of off shoring their work. ... AWE insisted on moving towards outsourcing instead of figuring out what needed to be done. I have seen similarly situations where no matter how much cheaper labor you look for, if you can't devise the plan, no one will be able to follow it.
      Did you RTFA? I did...WLNP went live on Nov 24th. Offshoring hadn't begun by then. Blame this on the 200$/hr consultants from D&T.

      Did you read the quote you posted? The planning had begun, and people saw the signs... while they were up against an immovable deadline on number portability. No doubt D&T can share the blame generously, but frankly, when you're counting on your employees to complete a very difficult job is not the time to be plotting to fire them all and replace them with cheap knock-offs.
      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  25. AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by John+Murdoch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While this is a sad story--especially about the poor guys with Indian "consultants" following them around asking a zillion questions about how to do their jobs--it's worthwhile to remember where the article appears: CIO magazine. CIO is focused on the needs/wants/interests of the guys in ties in a corporate IT environment--and in general a lot of CIOs think that outsourcing/offshoring is a hell of a good idea. The general tone of this article is "look at how these yobbos bungled the implementation of Siebel CRM." What they didn't mention at all is, "look at how these geniuses totally misunderstood their business, and pissed away roughly $40 billion in stock capitalization in just three years. And therefore died the death that they so richly deserved."

    It's the technology, stupid...
    There are companies, even in the 21st century, that can ignore cutting-edge technology. You don't need to be e-commerce enabled to be a plumber. But if you're in the wireless telephony business, in the midst of a headlong rush into a blizzard of new technologies, the core focus of your business isn't marketing or sales or re-carpeting the executive suite. Your core focus MUST be on the technology--and as soon as you lose sight of that focus, your competitors will consume you.

    And these geniuses decided to offshore 3,000 jobs. And were doubtless shocked--shocked, I tell you!--to hear that employee morale about the developers was down.

    I'm no techno-protectionist
    I remember discussing the inevitable introduction of competition from overseas back in the late 1980s, and debating the possibility endlessly while working in Japan in the mid-90s. There will be companies that decide that, in their businesses, in their business models, IT work is a cost, not an investment. They will decide that they want to minimize that cost. They will focus on maintaining existing systems (with marginal, incremental improvements) and eschew major new developments. They will find that that approach may make it feasible to hire developers in the Third World. But those businesses that do so are making a conscious, deliberate decision: we're not going to focus the company on technology. We're going to try to minimize the company's dependence on technology. IT is a cost--it does not contribute to revenue.

    For a wireless telephone company to take this position is simply insane: they are in the technology business. They are smack in the middle of a global technology race--one of the few technology races with competitors from practically every part of the northern hemisphere. They need to be faster to market with new products; the new products must be faster, better, more efficient, and more effective; and they have to have a world-beating customer service experience. Instead of fleeing from technology, they should be driven by it. They should be absolutely focused on it. They should be actively recruiting talent to build their strengths....

    Because that's what every other company that's focused on technology is doing. Subcontracting out your technology--in a technology business--is sort of like farming, but buying all your crops at the supermarket.

    I am not a lawyer...
    But I am an engineering team leader at a U.S. electronics company that leads the world in our industry: lighting controls. We export electrical and electronic equipment to countries around the world--including Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan, Singapore, Australia, and every country in Europe--because we focus on five core principles. And Principle #4 is "Innovate with high-quality products." In other words, we're in the technology business, so we focus--relentlessly--on the technology.

    Once upon a time, AT&T did too...
    AT&T Wireless was spun off from AT&T--but the corporate heritage is obviously there. And AT&T, once upon a time, ruled the world--literally chan

    1. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by andy1307 · · Score: 3, Informative
      While this is a sad story--especially about the poor guys with Indian "consultants" following them around asking a zillion questions about how to do their jobs-
      The offshoring started AFTER the WLNP fuckup.
    2. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can still offshore some of your IT and keep existing personnel. If you calm your rank and file and assure them that they will have a future, then why should they be looking for new work?

    3. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You said: What they didn't mention at all is, "look at how these geniuses totally misunderstood their business, and pissed away roughly $40 billion in stock capitalization in just three years. And therefore died the death that they so richly deserved."
      The article said: "The failure so damaged AT&T Wireless's reputation that many analysts believe it hastened its sale to Cingular in February for $41 billion, or $15 per share, which was just under half the value of AT&T Wireless's shares when it went public in April 2000."
    4. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by stefanb · · Score: 3, Informative
      For a wireless telephone company to take this position is simply insane: they are in the technology business.

      Uh, oh. I'm working as a consultant on a project at a major mobile telecom company in Europe, helping them to update their intranet.

      The intranet contents is instrumental to the call centers, which I believe are profit centers, which in turn means that the intranet must be "always" available to the call center agents, while the intranet budget is quite limited (i.e. have to re-use old hardware).

      Here's the bummer: they have a couple of call centers strewn all over the place, and they want the contents replicated as static HTML files to each call center location, because they can't keep up the network connections between the remote offices and headquarters. At the same time, all call center calls are obviously routed through their own network, as well. So why can they keep voice going, but not data over the same fiber links they're running?

      Essentially, because internal IT is a cost center.

    5. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by RickHunter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Essentially, because internal IT is a cost center.

      But you said it yourself - internal IT is fundamental to their business. Internal IT is what makes them money. Why? Because internal IT is what lets the things that make them money (the call centers) make money. And before you say that that means its not important - that's exactly the same function that marketing and management both serve.

      Internal IT for these people isn't a cost center. Its a piece of critical infrastructure, one that has to be carefully tied and responsive to their core business.

    6. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your a freaking troll and how do you get Informaitive everytime you spew offshoring after WLNP? Do you think rummors weren't floating prior? What about all the calls to india? It aint hard to figure out when someone is fucking you without vaseline.

    7. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by thisgooroo · · Score: 3, Informative

      idiot. do you really think they conceived the offshoring plan after the fuckup and implemented it within days? didn't you read that some CxO publically announced the outsourcing in the middle of the project?

    8. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Sanga · · Score: 1

      (Expanding on) The real story here...
      To be outsourced to a low-cost, low-contribute maintenance outfit 14 hours away, you must thoroughly understand what you are doing and how to train others to do it for you cheaply. If you scarcely understand it, there is no hope that newbies will be able to get it!

    9. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by r7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      > I'm no techno-protectionist I remember discussing the inevitable introduction of competition from overseas back in the late 1980s

      Outsourcing is in the news today but it's been around for many, many years. The difference here has nothing to do with WHERE outsourcing was going to, it could just have easily been IBM or EDS. The issue is HOW the outsourcing was handled.

      I was at one of Cringley's speeches (which was even better than his films or articles!) when he was taking Q&A from the audience. Outsourcing came up and his first example was AWE and how they announced the plan and the next day the CIO drove to work in a Ferrari! I sold my stock the next day (all the sorrier I held it long).

      R7

    10. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Risk management depends on ones ability to tell the open and candid truth across the enterprise. Sideline, or muzzle key players, pay the price.
      Bullshit costs, and yes persons amplify current woes.
      You can outsoure a project, but you cannot outsource risk.

    11. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by kent_eh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Internal IT for these people isn't a cost center. Its a piece of critical infrastructure, one that has to be carefully tied and responsive to their core business.

      Of course that's obvious to us, but have you ever tried explaining it to someone who only believes what he sees on a spreadsheet?

      I maintain cellular telephone switches (not for ATTWS, or even in the USA) and sit in front of 3 486s and a 386 most days. The top 2 layers of our corperate structure are populated by people who rose through the ranks of the accounting department.

      The network is held together by shoestrings, yet the sales department gives away BMWs to sales people who meet 100% of their quarterly targets - that's right, a bonus for just completing their assigned tasks. (what, me bitter?)

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    12. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a former AWS employee I can assure you that the offshoring started LONG BEFORE the WLNP fuckup. There were extensive discussions of outsourcing in early 2003 and perhaps earlier. The IT department there has been a place to avoid like the plague for at least that long.

    13. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Poppa · · Score: 1

      No, there were pilot projects before that, and interviews to see whether current projects would be candidates for outsourcing. This has been going on for awhile.

    14. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Trejus · · Score: 1

      Did we read the same article? I thought it was all about how much money they lost. Plus a lot of it was on how bad outsourcing was.

      They did very little in-house. Instead of creating custom software to handle thier complicated system, they bought "off-the-shelf" software that didn't meet their needs. They hired consultants who were clueless and a CIO who was primarily interested in negociated a good outsourcing contract to his former(!) firm. In the process, they pissed off the people that could have saved the system. The article even went as far as to call the CIO Carrada an "arrogant jerk."

      If anything, it was a critique of outsourcing as the golden panacea of big business. Had they relied more on thier interal staff, those that knew the old system and how it worked the best, they might have avoided becoming irrelevant, as well as avoided losing all that money.

      --
      "To save the planet, I had to go to the worst spot on Earth, and that was Philadelphia." -- Sun Ra
    15. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So who is the big dummy here? ATT sold it fo 30 dollars a share while cingular bought a 5 dollar a share company for 15 dollars. ATT is the big winner or is it weiner?

    16. Re:AT&T Wireless didn't just execute poorly... by RickHunter · · Score: 1

      An excellent point. I think that is, however, symptomatic of a host of other problems with modern corporate structure. Sales and management are seen as being all that matters - the purpose of the business, rather than something to further its goals. Why? Because they're what make the short-term company reports look good, which is what makes the short-term stock price good. And since that's all most companies care about...

  26. Ahh Axys, NeXTSTEP and Openstep by tyrione · · Score: 1

    I remember contracting at Wireless and watching all the drones. Just recently relocating from Cupertino (in hindsight a big mistake) had me soon discovering that most people got payed way too much money to develop beastly systems and countless levels of B.S. along the way.

    Hell if it weren't for The Omnigroup, Platinum Systems/PLATINUM Technologies Inc., architecting the original system I doubt McCaw would have ever been able to make the billions he did selling it to AT&T back in the mid 1990s.

    I'm quite pleased to see it fail. NeXT were leaders in designing highy distributed systems. Hopefully the Apple Enterprise push will reignite an Enterprise Consulting Division, once more. I know I'd reapply if they did.

    1. Re:Ahh Axys, NeXTSTEP and Openstep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember contracting at Wireless and watching all the drones. Just recently relocating from Cupertino (in hindsight a big mistake) had me soon discovering that most people got payed way too much money to develop beastly systems and countless levels of B.S. along the way.

      Bet they got paid well enough to know how to spell!

  27. CIO deserves to be fired by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am the CTO for a large enterprise software company (>$1B).

    I spend about 30% of my time in front of the IT departments of the largest companies in the world, all of which are household names. They almost all tell me two things about our software:

    1. It is heavily modified (they all have source)
    2. They wish it was not

    The fact is that these large customization projects, particularly ones which involve the Big 5, are over budget and late by factors that would boggle the minds of most mortals. It is not uncommon for these companies to spend >$100M for a software upgrade ON A SINGLE SITE. These companies have hundreds of sites.

    As a contrast, another $9B electronics company I met with a few weeks ago can install a complete factory, including financials, manufacturing, logistics, scheduling, human resources, and reporting, all in less than 6 weeks. They have done it over 100 times. How do they do it? They have the entire cookie-cutter system burned on a DVD. Literally no customization is allowed at the plant level.

    The only way to be successful at these kind of projects is to use an axe, not a scalpel. AT&T Wireless tried to use a scalpel. They should have thrown out all that junk and started over.

    I would also point out that if you read the CIO's biography, he is an advisor to HP. Notice that they also chose HP as their outsourcing partner!

    Can you say "conflict of interest"?

    1. Re:CIO deserves to be fired by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      +1 Mod parent UP

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  28. That's your opinion by ThisIsFred · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Ironically, the scathing and sometimes highly sarcastic commentary at the end of the article from former employees makes this read even better."

    Speak for yourself. This is not good news for me, as I'm a long time AT&T Wireless Services customer. I chose them because they offered the best service, and now they're being bought out by the company I was trying to get away from.

    --
    Fred

    "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
    -RMS
  29. I worked there once... by jcr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    About six years ago, I was a contractor at ATTWS in Paramus, NJ, working on the deployment of their point-of-sale cell phone activation app.

    Without a doubt, it was the most dysfunctional office of a fortune 500 company I had ever seen, and I've seen a few. There were about six absolutely brilliant people there, who I would be glad to work with anywhere else, and a few hundred that I wouldn't trust to flip the proverbial burgers without putting someone's eye out.

    Just one example: there was a pointy-haired middle manager there who liked to gather about $2k/hour worth of consultants into a conference room twice a week and just expound at length upon his management philosophy.

    I was required to attend meetings on "planning my career path at ATTWS". I was a *contractor*, and I had work to do that didn't include making busy work for HR drones who didn't grok that ATT was a CUSTOMER, not a CAREER for me.

    I even went to a meeting (again, mandatory), to hear some blithering bureaucrat tell us about ATTWS's process for developing processes. (I swear, I'm not making this up.)

    Thank Judge Bell for opening those clowns up to competition. Somebody had to eat their lunch, and I wish every other cell phone company the best of luck.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:I worked there once... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --I know it was a while ago, but I sincerely hope that you've since altered your contract -- so you can get out of those stupid-ass meetings--!

      --I mean really, what would they *do* if you simply refused to attend?? (Hmm, shades of "Office Space"...)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    2. Re:I worked there once... by jcr · · Score: 1

      Hey, they paid my rate for the time I was in the meetings! No skin off my nose..

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    3. Re:I worked there once... by rodgerd · · Score: 2, Funny

      You fail to understand the nature of contracting. As long as they pay, who gives a fuck? I've billed a customer upwards of a hundred bucks one week for the time I spent on my rostered kitchen duty. I may have been the highest paid dishwasher in New Zealand, on an hourly basis. I don't care; I show up, I do what the client asks to the best of my ability.

    4. Re:I worked there once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting



      Sad to say ATTWS is not the only "bell" that needs help. I worked as contractor for another ma bell and it was a horrible expirence.

      From my expirence all of the employees (except a couple) were lazy, after 5 o'clock I had to become an Oracle DBA because they all left.

      I could spend 4 hours a day on conference calls just listening to various corporate mgmt people argue over things such as why the latest security patches can not be installed at this time. (trying to get 4 different managers to agree on a date was like pulling teeth).

      I am personally surprised that we have a phone system that works in the US after everything I saw.

    5. Re:I worked there once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing that Orcle dosnt run the switches. When you get maangment out of the way you'll see that the inner network operations arn't that complex; you were just in front of the FUD managers.

  30. Should have used eXtreme Programming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    If ony they had written the unit test for number portability prior to the original coding, everything would have been fine.

  31. Does Siebel Ever Deliver? by occamboy · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I've been close to several Siebel installs. Every one was an astoundingly-expensive catastophe - sort of like outsourcing to India, but it costs a lot more and the salesweasels wear nicer clothes.

    Are ther any good Siebel stories? I'm curious!

    1. Re:Does Siebel Ever Deliver? by Astaroth33 · · Score: 1

      Are ther any good Siebel stories? I'm curious!

      I don't think so. I use Siebel 7 where I work, and it's the biggest pile of poop that's ever been passed of as "enterprise class" software that I've ever seen.

    2. Re:Does Siebel Ever Deliver? by MegaFur · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Gateway uses Siebel for all their "customer care" and sales. No, that's *not* a *good* Siebel story. :-) Only thing I can say in Siebel's favor here, is it's probably not the factor causing Gateway to suck horribly in the market right now. But, as a former part-time Gateway "tech support professional", I can tell you Siebel certainly doesn't help things there any.

      --
      Furry cows moo and decompress.
    3. Re:Does Siebel Ever Deliver? by mveloso · · Score: 2, Informative

      From what I've heard, it's a great sales automation tool. For CRM, though, it "needs a lot of maturing."

  32. better wait by CresentCityRon · · Score: 1

    I dumped Sprint for the free phone and regret it. I have another six months on the contract but then I'm gone. EVERY MONTH THEY SCREW UP MY BILL. And it takes about an hour of waiting to get someone.

    Don't go there. All that glitters is not gold.

  33. AT&T Coverage map foolery by SQLz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Has anyone ever checked out the AT&T wireless coverage maps? Your 'local calling area' (the places where you don't roam') are like a shade of orange lighter than the 'roaming' area. So to many males and people with less than good eyesight, it all looks the same.

    Check it out on your own at http://www.mlife.com

  34. The End of AT&T by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Everything, and I mean everything AT&T has done since they spun off their operating companies has turned to shit. Computers. exchange equipment, long distance service, broadband, and of course cellular service. The final humiliation was when they were booted from the DJIA to make a place for one of their own spinoffs!

    I'm convinced that some companies just have a dysfunctional corporate culture that's immune to real reform. Their only hope is that things get so bad that all the top idiots lose their jobs -- and they're very, very lucky in choosing their new management. (That's basically what saved IBM.) But AT&T's so far gone, not even a total shakeout can save them.

    1. Re:The End of AT&T by ebh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree. I was at AT&T in 1984, just after divestiture, and most of the company was wandering around in a daze trying to figure out how to operate as anything but a regulated monopoly. It took many years for the old "phone company" monoculture to fade, but there was never anything dynamic to take its place. Every time they'd get into some new business, it was always to grab a piece of an existing pie, never to actually create something new that peple would pay money for.

      Bellcore-later-Telcordia was even worse. Because of legacy contracts with the Baby Bells, they were able to hold on to their biggest cash cows longer than AT&T was. Think about it: Which came first, intense competition in the long-distance market, or intense competition in local service billing software? They were as dead as AT&T, but it took them several more years to fall over. And I won't even get into the cultural train wreck that occurred when SAIC bought Telcordia.

      And people wonder why I took a job with a Big Evil Defense Contractor.

    2. Re:The End of AT&T by Servo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I work for a partner of AT&T, and I can say that they are so disorganized the left foot doesn't know wht the right foot is doing. There are good people there, but more often than not, those are the people that get screwed by upper management, which ends up screwing the service they are offering.

      --
      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
    3. Re:The End of AT&T by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 1

      Verizon and SBC aren't much better than AT&T from a service standpoint.

      There just simply aren't alternatives in a lot of areas.

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    4. Re:The End of AT&T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Their only hope is that things get so bad that all the top idiots lose their jobs

      I'll bet they're fine golfers, though...

    5. Re:The End of AT&T by LinuxHam · · Score: 1

      But AT&T's so far gone, not even a total shakeout can save them.

      I'd like to see IBM pick up the stinky, fly-ridden roadkill shell of a carcass that is AT&T, and rebuild it over 5 years as a massive showcase for On Demand, and then divest it as the world's largest, well 2nd largest, On Demand business. I'd definitely ask to work on that project. That would be HUGE.

      --
      Intelligent Life on Earth
    6. Re:The End of AT&T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot Lucent - which I firmly believe was
      supposed to be spelt "LooScent."

      The dumbass former AT&T execs who ran it into
      the ground (along with Bell Labs) couldn't even
      spell properly.

    7. Re:The End of AT&T by fm6 · · Score: 1
      But why should they go to the trouble? All AT&T has left is a not terribly competitive long distance business and a thoroughly discredited brand.

      If they wanted to go on that kind of crusade, they could buy Sun, kick out all the prima donas, and spin off SPARC and other vanity ventures. What would be left would be server, workstation, and software businesses that they could integrate with their own operation.

      But why bother? That sort of missionary work is driven by ego, and IBM seems to have outgrown crap like that.

    8. Re:The End of AT&T by LinuxHam · · Score: 1

      For one, to save the 100,000 (well 50,000) thousand jobs left there, and to make them competitive again, all while bringing credit back to the brand. Non-techies or Wall St-watchers (and that's still a huge population) have an old-fashioned respect for Ma Bell. A total ressurection could bring it back from the brink, the way it did for IBM, as you originally mentioned.

      And what did we do different? We kept the mainframe business, kept the research. We added Global Services and became the world's larget IT consulting firm overnight. What core business could AT&T focus on and still compete in today's marketplace? Don't they still own most of the copper that nearly all the other long distance carriers lease from? And what about nationwide and global networking? Their primary competitor is MCI Worldcom. Ewwwww. Just about the only thing that survived the dotbomb era is that we will still need ever more bandwidth, every year, forever, and ever, Amen.

      Valid point about Sun, and I had a conversation with IBM's Executive Vice President of Communications last September. I told him how we in the trenches are a little nervous about actions Sun may take while teetering on the edge of failure since they own Java, and our entire Websphere line depends on it. One wrong move with Java, and we stand to get into some serious hot water with our entire web application server line. Not good. I think high up, IBM is nervous about facing anti-competitive regulatory actions again, and I think that would be triggered much more quickly if we snatched up Sun than if we snatched up what's left of AT&T. All that aside, being 2004, we would partner long before picking *anyone* up. And I would venture a bet that a massive project with AT&T would get into trouble (re: unpaid bills) before it ever got off the ground. Still think it would be fun to be tasked with "saving AT&T", though. Now, its 84 degrees and sunny out. I'm going back outside!! :)

      --
      Intelligent Life on Earth
    9. Re:The End of AT&T by fm6 · · Score: 1
      For one, to save the 100,000 (well 50,000) thousand jobs left there, and to make them competitive again, all while bringing credit back to the brand.
      That's a social reason to buy AT&T. Give me a business reason. If somebody has the cash to buy AT&T and the skill to turn the company around, they can certainly find better places to invest these resources.
    10. Re:The End of AT&T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, what people should be looking at is comparisons with similar situations.

      Railroads - Notice that ***even today*** there is no single, complete rail carrier from coast to coast? We essentially have 4 regional carriers with overlap: two in the West (UP/SP and BNSF), and two in the East (CSX, NS). This means any national traffic must be originated and terminated by different carriers. It also means for lots of regional traffic, origination/destination pairs are on the same carrier.
      ==> Point one here is MA Bell was devided into Long-Lines (AT&T) and the Baby Bells (the RBOCs). The alternative treatment - each of the Baby Bells would get their part of the long-distance network - might have seemed impractical, but as the RBOCs have merged together into maxi-RBOCs (just like the railroads did), the amount of calls left to AT&T as the maxi-RBOCs were allowed to do intra-regional long distance has declined greatly. Thus the revenue needed to get into new businesses wasn't there. We /. folks may not like people that milk one cash cow to create new ones, but that's often how business works at big companies. A look at wireless services in other countries (even close by Canada) might give you some insight into this. In Canada, two national wireless carriers are owned by maxi-RBOC equivalents (Bell in the Ontario/Quebec, and Telus in the West), one by a Cable & Media company (Rogers) and one is a stand-alone (Fido). Which one has the bleakest long-term outlook? Take a guess.
      ==> Point two - At the time I remember AT&T indicating keeping the local services (which were being subsidized by Long Lines) was to be avoided. By this choice, they were later (a) subjected to strong competition from other long-distance carriers like MCI, and (b) not able to control things driven by new technology, like wireless. Both of these issues IMHO have contributed to their declining financial picture. The railroad analogy here was the advent of trucking, and the combination of trucking and the national interstate construction which changed the basis for freight traffic nationally (especially in terms of the more expensive, time-sensitive freight - which was very profitable).

      Airlines - Remember Pan-Am? They were once THE name for international travel for Americans. Not only is the original company now long-gone, but essentially the innovator responsible for some forms of long-distance foreign travel (Pan-Am clipper service to Asia in the 30's) and Jumbo Jets (at least based on the PBS documentary I watched; founder of Pan-Am encouraged the creation of the 747) has been relegated to distant memory.
      ==> What happened to Pan-Am? Something similar to AT&T (at least in my opinion). They were a franchised international-only carrier, but when their fundamental business environment was changed (again for competitive reasons), they found themselves competing with the same airlines (United, American) that used to feed them passengers. Pan-Am tried to take over its own feeder airline to do international+domestic, but it was easier for United and American to add international to their domestic networks than for Pan-Am to add domestic (lots of reasons, but "regulated" versus "competitive" mindset is likely the root cause). Sort of reminds me of AT&T and its wireless divsion. When the big, old, struggling company starts spinning off or selling off part of its core capabilities (in Pan-Am's case, hotels and even profitable routes to competitors), look out.

      So all the complaining about AT&T has a point, but the context must also be examined. On the one hand, a big old utility is hard to convert into an enterprenurial competitor. On the other hand, our fear of Ma Bell and the need to break it up now seems less of a good idea, unless you agree that Verizon, BellSouth, SBC, etc. are better for us. In that case, then the original split-up was flawed. At any rate, AT&T wireless is now part of Cingular Wireless - jointly owned by two maxi-RBOCs (SBC and

    11. Re:The End of AT&T by Cearbhallain · · Score: 1

      I know about Wireless and in our center management doesn't have a clue as to what's gone down since the horror in November. They are all good buddies that network and claim that they didn't realize what was going on or that we (didn't do their job for them) and didn't present the information in a way that they could use it...blah blah blan The old saying about a camel being a horse designed by a commitee was outdone by AT&T Wireless...though it's more like an octopus being a horse designed by a commitee perhaps. Any constructive criticism is "negativity." There's no one being objective and giving good feedback because they know that the unofficial policy at AT&T Wireless is to kill the messenger for the message. It's the negativity thing. Management in my call center has been using the "your job could disapear next" motivational jargon on us. They have completely demoralized the center, along with the customers who have reason to be angry, but hell, not at us, we just answer the phone and try to deal with things as best as we can. It's pathetic when you can't get anything done because management hasn't provided you with the basic tools to do the job. The feeling of powerlessness is demoralizing and on top of that you have management complaining that we aren't doing enough to keep the customers (meanwhile their policies, their systems are chasing the customer base away). Screwing with the employees, sending their jobs overseas was a prime reason that AT&T Wireless is in the pits.

  35. Verizon Wireless (CDMA) superior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on the east coast, at least.

  36. Re:That's your opinion. Yes, we have no signal by Whumpsnatz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ditto. Although in my case, I wasn't trying to get away from any other company, I was consolidating and getting national coverage. I'm just sorry I wasn't aware of this in January. I got some song-and-dance when I said I wanted to switch my phone number. I decided, to hell with it, and just dropped the old number.

    In any case, the quality of signal is abominable. I think that's because it's GSM. I can use the phone OK in Ohio, or Wisconsin, or Georgia, but I get unbelievably bad reception in MY OWN HOUSE here in Florida, and it doesn't work at all in my mother-in-law's house in Mississippi (oh, wait. Is that a bad thing?).

    I think enough time has passed for me to drop this junk for Verizon (or even Sprint) - I _like_ CDMA.

  37. 1 more month! by AGTiny · · Score: 1

    Woo, only 1 more month to go until my ATTWS contract is up and I can finally leave this sad excuse for a company. My wife is going to Verizon and I'm going with Virgin's prepaid plan since I hardly ever use my phone. Can't wait. :)

    1. Re:1 more month! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell me again whos network does Virgin Mobile resale?

    2. Re:1 more month! by dspyder · · Score: 1

      Consider T-Mobile's prepaid service. They're running a current promotion where your purchased minutes (maybe on the >$25 cards) will expire 1 year out. That makes it a cheaper per month cost to you if you never use your phone.

      Also, T-Mobile prepaid SIMs get free WAP access (port restricted, but still useful). Makes it a cheap way to get free surfing on your laptop if you already have a bluetooth or IR phone.

      Also, the T-Mo starter kits can be found at Target occasionally on sale for around $50.

      Hate to be a T-Mobile fanboy, but their offering certainly has some benefits you might want to investigate. Check Howard Forums for details.

      --D

  38. Open Source to the rescue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's assume the average developer costs a company $200,000 per year worth of salary, benefits, overhead, support staff, equipment, travel, etc. So $100M equals only 500 developers worth for a year. Not too bad!

    So here's what AT&T can do to recover that. Fire 500 developers and replace their previous projects with open source versions. After all, open source developers are willing to work for free anyways. AT&T can even donate a few hundred bucks every month to their project and they'll be deliriously happy that they've proven that open source can be profitable! It's a win for those open source developers (some of whom may even be the ones fired from AT&T) and it's a win for AT&T as they can make a profit from the hard work of others.

    And it's also a win for AT&T customers as open source projects are superior to closed source implementations, right? So it's win/win/win all around!

  39. ATT is a river by swschrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    namely, denial. the only piece that works is the old long lines department, now ATT business data. everything else with the "death star" logo is useless. outsourcing the people who are supposed to save you is the latest ATT lunacy, capping a string of them all the way back to divestiture.

    thank god the baby bells got freed from that mess. all the folks vying to lead ATT in the 90s -- joe nacchio, mike annunziata, leo hindery, c. michael armstrong -- turned out to be a shitspread at their respective next stop in employment at the top of the tower. "little mikey" in particular broke up and sold his company down the river in several stages, then left it to hide out at comcast and count his money. "joey nachos" almost killed qwest, a fiber startup, and USWest together after he merged them to bleed the treasury at USWest. annunziata and hindery rode Global Crossing into the toilet, and hindery got into another telco startup and crashed with it.

    moral: if you want to invest, check for former ATT execs on the board of a company. if you find any, flee in terror.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  40. Agreed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to agree with you here. I've worked for some of the largest firms in the US inclusing cisco, apple and other firms and dealt with the "Big 5". You're completely and totally on-target. The marketers of these firms will sell ANYTHING. They will bill, they will deliver next to nothing, over and over again.

    I still haven't heard one good explanation for this. I'm just waiting for all the idiot old school managers to retire so that people of our generation (I'm talking people in their 30s and 40s) to take the game over.

    Fuck these managers.

  41. Some things never change ... by rlp · · Score: 1

    Worked for AT&T Bell Labs in the mid-80's including a project developing voice recognition dialing for wireless telephony. Project was canned after a new VP decided that there was no future in wireless telephony! AT&T got out of the business, only to have to pay billions for McCaw to get back in years later. I see that after all these years, the quality of management has not changed much.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  42. AT&T Enterprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I am a customer of AT&T Enterprise Hosting. They have some great data centers and they run them with no single point of failure. The same can not be said for their business process. I tried to renew my contract with AT&T for a $1500/month rack cabnet. This renewal was for one year. I has taken two months and about 30 emails and another 40 phone calls to get everything worked out. I guess my stupid account has taken up about 80 man hours to renew a contract. This does not include my own time, which is better spent running my company. If the rest of the company is run the same way, then run away. I am now planning a move of my servers from AT&T to any one else.

  43. Development what? by cswiii · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Say all you want, that this was mismanaged, bureaucratic, a case of piss-poor consulting decisions, etc... but in my opinion, this is a textbook case of simply not following any sort of software development lifecycle method.... and yeah, I suppose management is part of that, but I simply don't think looking at this as merely a "poorly managed project" gets at the heart of it.

    Any technology company needs to adopt and follow some sort of SDLC, and this is an obvious case where this has never been done. Criticising them for bungling this is all well and good, but I feel this article would've been better off talking about the real meat of "why" it failed.

    1. Re:Development what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what you are saying is that they should concentrate on improving their software development processes? I hope their process for improving processes is up to scratch... or rather, from the looks of it, it isn't. So, they had better improve their process improvement process first, so that they can really get the ball rolling with their process improvement.

  44. CDMA bandwidth by SuperBanana · · Score: 1
    Try getting 500k/sec. on ANY GSM system now

    FYI, that would be 500kbit, not "500k", and that is the theoretical, absolute, maximum. Expect that to drop significantly once everyone figures out they can do it. It will be like cablemodems all over again.

    Oh, and you have to pay about $80/month to get that. I will never understand why cell companies don't embrace data more- it's far less of a headache for them to handle(no QoS needed, for one). I get GPRS service, but it's incredibly expensive, so I have never bothered to do anything more than load my webmail page once by linking the powerbook to the phone via bluetooth. Whee.

    1. Re:CDMA bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, that would be 500kbit, not "500k", and that is the theoretical, absolute, maximum.

      Theoretical maximum of EV-DO is upwards of 2gbit/s.

      Walt Mossberg tested the service in DC and reported "In my tests, the service did even better. Over several days, I averaged 585 kilobits per second. In fact, much of the time I was connected at over 700 kbps. The service can achieve peak speeds of more than two megabits a second, but I never saw that."

      See his Wall Street Journal Article for more info.

  45. The CIO That Can Say No by The+Gline · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm waiting for a new book along the lines of "The Japan That Can Say No" (sans the jingoism) -- about a new breed of CIO and IT manager that can push back when told to accomplish the impossible within an unrealistic timeframe.

    Part of the problem is, I think, the New Success Story psychology. CEOs are so brainwashed into thinking that accomplishing the impossible is what defines you as a successful CEO, that they push their people to do absurdly difficult things in the most miniscume timespans. It's not doing the impossible that's a hallmark of a good CEO, it's doing the possible well and doing the impossible when you HAVE to -- not because it'll win you bragging rights.

    (Of course, the whole question of what constitutes a "have to" in this case is probably open-ended.)

    --
    Honorary Member of Jackie Chan's Kung Fu Process Servers
    1. Re:The CIO That Can Say No by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      You do got a great point there. When was the last time CEOs sat down and PLANNED anything with all the players then did it? At my last job it seemed the companies owner prided himself on giving the least possible notice...and wondered why stuff didn't work out. He actually mocked me in front of the whole office for "planning" too much ahead unlike my boss who simply worked 80 hour weeks to please his whims...

      I think i was gone a week after that comment!

  46. Denial... by fm6 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...would seem to be a major survival skill at many corporate offices.

  47. Political Cliche time by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is why it is better for corporations to fail than for governments to fail.
    That only works if, when it fails, the company goes out of business. Doesn't always work that way. AT&T has been failing, over and over, for 20 years! Not only is it still there, but nobody seems to have lost their job over it. I don't mean the peons who can downsized because of other people's decisions -- I mean the people who made the decisions.
    This is why November 2004 is going to be so hard a choice. Who do vote for? Oh dear oh dear, two choices and two paths to bigger government.
    Oops, didn't realize you were simply setting us up for an anti-beltway rant. Which means we're already way offtopic. But before the moderators attack, let me respond.

    "Big government" is one of the political cliches I get really tired of. Anything you dislike about what the government does you can conveniently label as "big government". If the government won't let you burn your leaves, and you think that's dumb, it's "big government". But if you care about air pollution, it's government doing it's job. Your necessary program is my "big government".

    You're entitled to criticize what the government does (indeed, it's more or less your obligation as a citizen!). But if you hope to actually accomplish anything, try to make your criticisms based on specifics, not vague, subjective terms that mean whatever you chose them to mean.

    1. Re:Political Cliche time by wheresdrew · · Score: 1
      "AT&T has been failing, over and over, for 20 years!"

      Just like Apple! ;o)

    2. Re:Political Cliche time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but has Netcraft confirmed the demise?

  48. AWE tanked long before WLNP by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

    Look at AWE's price. They tanked long before this particular problem hit, in fact long before anything mentioned in this article happened.

    --
    Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    1. Re:AWE tanked long before WLNP by Poppa · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should compare it to NASDAQ: AWE with NASDAQ We IPO'd at a high rate like most others, but it was oversold; and the whole tech industry took a nose dive. The stock price had nothing to do with our performance, and we in fact became profitable earlier than planned.

      Things were going well until Corrado and his henchmen took over, and there was talk about outsourcing.

      I knew things were going downhill when the management style started feeling like I was back at Boeing ....

  49. Body shops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes, it's a matter of the "Mythical Man Month" syndrome. There are X many man-months of work to do, where X is a huge number. For the sake of argument, say you need to hire 100 developers to meet your deadline. It takes a *LOT* of time to do a decent job of hiring people with the right skills, attitude and aptitude. When you have a deadline for a humungous project, going through the hiring process is a project in itself.

    So, the question becomes, how do you get these 100 developers that you'll need for a three year project within two months? The usual answer is that you go to the vendor or a huge consulting company, because they've already got the bodies. You'll get a mix of people from them -- ranging from dangerous to (maybe) brilliant and everything in-between (just like the company that you're in, there are hits and misses :).

    You do have to be careful when you hire a consultant or an employee, so that the person fits the culture and the issues. But sometimes, the perception (rightly or wrongly) is that you don't have the time to go through the process to find 100 people. When you hire a large consulting company, you should be able to get the number of bodies to fill your requirement, and in the timeline that you need to start getting them working.

    When I first heard this explanation, I was a little dismayed as I'm a big fan of getting the right person for the right job. But I have to concede that it's an administrative nightmare to try to get that many people. And sometimes deadlines cannot be changed.... :)

  50. Cant motivate people who cant count on their jobs by JonnyRo88 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been in the situation before where you are fairly sure that things are going downhill in the company and that layoffs are already starting to sprout up.

    It is an absolutly horrible environment to work in, to the point where you feel physically sick when you wake up in the morning to get ready to go to work. That being said i've seen some people in this situation fight to the last breath to try and prop the company back up. The difference in the AT&T wireless situation is that these employees knew that even if they did get the system up, they were going to get the shaft. I couldnt even imagine how horrible it would be to have people tag around with you to be your replacements.

    In general I stick with small companies that cant afford the logistics of outsourcing. The apparent security of working for a big company is just an illusion if you have any morals and dont step on other people to keep your job.

    --
    The Ro Factor - Jeep/Linux Weblog
  51. Training your replacement by phasm42 · · Score: 1

    Having the IT staff train their own out-sourced replacements -- you gotta hand it to them, that's gotta be one of the most bone-headed moves I've heard of. Training your replacement if you're planning on leaving is one thing; training the person who would enable them to lay you off is just plain stupid.

    --
    "No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
    1. Re:Training your replacement by xyz2000 · · Score: 1

      I just go through this process. India guys just came to USA for 3 months training. After training, all new software development request will go to India. Internet changes the way company operates. You will see more and more these trainings.This is just the begining of outsource. Nothing we can do about it at USA.

    2. Re:Training your replacement by The+Toad · · Score: 1

      I just go through this process

      It looks like you've outsourced posting to Slashdot.

    3. Re:Training your replacement by sulli · · Score: 1

      No, he outsourced grammar to the Indian guy, and he's not working right now.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
  52. Amazing! by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    I have AT&T Wireless prepaid cellular service. I led it slide for six months and they canceled my account. I re-activated my account (getting a new number) around the end of last year.

    So I guess I missed all the porting problems. I was barely aware that they were sold to Cingular. In fact, every time I connect to the service to check my account balance or whatever, it still says "AT&T Wireless" on everything.

    Hope this doesn't completely fall apart, as I am depending on that phone and number for my tech support business at the moment.

    As an example of how company management is completely clueless, it doesn't get more obvious than this.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  53. Re:Hewlett Puckered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Carly Fiorina's tenure at HP is proof positive that women are capable of rape.

  54. I interviewed at ATTWS in January 2003 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was interviewing for an architect position. They wanted me to design monitoring for the Siebel system.

    I asked a standard interview question of everyone (mostly architects who had been with the company many years) - "What do you worry about?"

    I normally expect to hear some tech babble back. Not at ATTWS. "More layoffs" was the quick and uniform response. At least they were honest.

    Being a performance expert for other tier 1 internet companies, I focused on gathering info on the state of their performance management practice. Non-existent. They did not even know who was responsible for system performance. So you have a company with huge performance problems but no performance group.

    The director I interviewed with had the most obfuscated communication style I had ever encountered in my 16 year career.

    In a very clumsy fashion, they gave me a lowball offer of $80K without even asking my salary history. Mind you, these guys are right up the road from Microsoft (whom I would never work for) and were currently paying DBAs $100-$150/hour.

    They also did not want to let me review the non-compete and other forms and contracts I would be required to sign until after accepting the position.

    I think they were using me as a justification for another H1B.

    I ran away from that imminent train wreck as fast as I could..

    1. Re:I interviewed at ATTWS in January 2003 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $150 an hour for DBA work? In Seattle? Nowadays there are plenty of folks would be willing to swallow for that.

  55. Re: Number portability not so new by atomico · · Score: 1

    In other parts of the world, wireless carriers had been forced to implement number portability, years before it was decided in the US.

    Telecom equipment vendors have been offering standardized solution packages to allow number portability. Some examples: Ericsson, Alcatel, Siemens.

  56. Go to your local Better Business Burea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We got fucked around by AT&T up here in Canada. We ended up going to the BBB because the phone (a motorolla) refused to recharge, wouldn't hold any call more than 20 seconds, and AT&T were rounding up to the minute on calls that dropped the instant someone on the other end picked up. Yes AT&T were happy to continue OVERcharging us for service we couldn't even use!

    After BBB had a word with them, they backed off and let us out of the contract without the horrible penalty ($200 here in Canada, PER PHONE). Before that I must have spent at least 50 hours on the phone with those bastards, trying to get them to let me off, pointing out time and time again that they were charnging me for a system that I couldn't even access because of the shit they'd sent me.

    Get your local Ombudsman in on it ASAP. They will brush off anyone who can't damage their reputation. They'll listen to your local rep, though, and begin to kiss your ass.

  57. You missed some vital observations though by buss_error · · Score: 1
    While I agree with you on much of your post, I feel that you've left out some vital points.

    Technology management did not understand that which they managed. There is some evidence that they actually avoided it.

    Technology management did not listen to those that ran the technology, did not want to listen, and did not make them stakeholders in the process.

    Technology management did not communicate unrealistic expectations to the rest of the management team.

    Technology management trew a buch of people at a problem not just ill defined, but not really defined at all.

    There were no mile post checks in the project.

    I think the single most critical flaw in the plan was the refusal to deal with the possibillity of failure at any point in a very complex task. What threw even more sand in the gears was to expect miricle workers from a work force demoralized and denigrated to "tech monkeys". Not stated in the article or any comments was the fact that the CIO and his managers activaly insulted the people actually doing the work, and missed few changes to tell them just how worthless they (the workers) really were.

    In any team effort, you have the 1-5% of the workforce that are star preformers, and it sounds like they managed to tick them all off.

    --
    Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
  58. Re: Number portability not so new by vk2 · · Score: 1

    And in "the land of the free" its telcordia to name one. I know at least 2 of the 3 biggest providers use them.

    --
    No Sig for you.!
  59. Somewhat OT:The problems go back at least 5 years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking as a former employee of a Verizon Wireless indirect reseller, I have many funny stories about their much touted "Wireless Boradband". One of them includes their indirect sales rep who oversaw training and kept us in brochures and such.

    This poor rep spent most of his time begging, pleading, burning a candle in a skull and swearing at his VZW wireless aircard to work. He could connect, but it was NEVER faster than 1 mbps, and it constantly dropped him from the network at random. This was less than six months ago, shortly before I changed jobs.

    And it wasn't just at our location, it was everywhere he went. I've sen the numbers that VZW is posting online, and I can't say I'm not impressed, but from what I saw then, they had a hell of a long way to go with implementation, and generally ironing it all out. And that's without taking into consideration the whopping 79.99-99.99 a month that they want for service. Corporates may not care so much if it works, but at that rate, if they want average consumers on the bandwagon, it better vacuum the house, take the dog for a walk, and make them a bagel in the morning.

    Consumers don't care about what it says it can do, they care about results. I speak from experience, as I work in customer relations. You can lay it on as thick as you want, but if it doesn't perform as promised by marketing, not even sales, technical support and the almighty hand of God can save you. AT&T suffered that fate with LNP and their "system upgrade".

    Let's hope the decision makers at VZW don't suffer the same fate. VZW has always been a fairly smart company, I say that as someone who used to use and sell their product, they are not to be udnerestimated. Let's just hope they don't get as arrogant as AT&T and assume that shareholders take prescendence over consumers in decision making.

  60. you don't know anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's all i have to say.

    1. Re:you don't know anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what do i not know? sf.

  61. AT&T in breach of Consumer Code for Wireless S by scooby007 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I would like to get some feedback from other AT&T customers about an idea I had to get out of my 2 year agreement without paying the early termination fee, start a class action lawsuit, or just be a pain in the ass to AT&T on a larger scale. : )

    This is in response to the OBSCENE wait times for customer service. Yesterday, I had a 2:11:03 call in to customer service (my 611 records will prove the call times), and the issue is still not resolved.

    AT&T is a voluntary signatory on September 9, 2003 to the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association's Consumer Code for Wireless Service.

    Section 8 of the Consumer Code for Wireless Services states that the signatories will:
    PROVIDE READY ACCESS TO CUSTOMER SERVICE
    Customers will be provided a toll-free telephone number to access a carrier's customer service during normal business hours. Customer service contact information will be provided to customers online and on billing statements. Each wireless carrier will provide information about how customers can contact the carrier in writing, by toll-free telephone number, via the Internet or otherwise with any inquiries or complaints, and this information will be included, at a minimum, on all billing statements, in written responses to customer inquiries and on carriers' web sites. Each carrier will also make such contact information available, upon request, to any customer calling the carrier's customer service departments.
    "Ready Access" to solve account issues is not being provided by AT&T customer service.

    Though AT&T is clearly in breach of at least one section of the Consumer Code for Wireless Service, they are still using the seal to advertise their adherence to the contract. I believe falsely advertising adherence to the Consumer Code warrants service agreements signed under this false pretense null and void.


    -extremely dissatisfied customer
  62. Another former employee of AWS by ZiggyPiggy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a former member of the Odyssey II Environment Support team I had to live through this hell. As the article mentioned each "environment" consisted of somewhere between 12-16 individual systems. The team consisted of a dozen employees/contractors that had to install and maintain each system. Each employee was assigned two or three systems which they had to become the "experts." Because of the complicity and vast number of changes to each system it was difficult to become proficient in more then two or three. This approach sounds okay until you factor in all the development and testing environments required and the long hours of testing.

    At the time I there were 18 different environments that were up and running during the day. By day, I mean expected to be up and running between the hours of 7:00am until 10:00pm. The major enviorments (Siebel Dev, System Test, Integration, etc...) ran until midnight. Any changes to the environment had to take place after hours. With the average "kit" install taking between four to six hours it meant the we were running a 24-hour shop.

    They tried to split the 12 members of the team into three 8-hour shifts. With each member only trained three systems that meant we could only cover 12 of the 16 systems with four employees. Multiply that by the 18 environments and you can see where the troubles begun. Those 8-hour days turn to 10 and then 12. None of the environment were stable and consistently were down during testing due to bad code. Emergency kits were commonplace and since installation were so long (due to Siebel's shitty product) testing was always behind requiring weekends as well. All this added up to 70+ hours of work, 0 sleep (had a newborn at the time), and one VERY pissed off wife.

    I was lucky enough to have left to get another job just before the system went live. It was obvious that it was going to fail and I had a huge shit-eating grin on my face when I heard of all their troubles.

  63. Standalone or Front-End? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I won't comment on Siebel's quality here, but I will point out the article mentioned AT&T wanted to use Siebel as a 'front-end' to their collection of current platforms. At this point, I don't care what the brand is. We're talking about a full-blown, multi-tier (web-contained in recent releases) CRM that depends on existing systems to fetch/post most or all pertinent data. What the hell is this CRM doing that a JSP/Servlet webapp can't?

  64. The lesson: Don't user Odyssey as a project name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was also deeply involved in a project with a code name of Odyssey. It was the most spectactular failure I've ever been associated with or even heard of until this article. It sounds a lot like my old management and AT&T's advisors were the same group of idiots!