Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service

g0dsp33d writes "Fake Steve Jobs, the alter-alias of Newsweek's Dan Lyons, is calling disgruntled AT&T users to protest comments from AT&T’s Ralph de la Vega that smart phone (specifically iPhone) usage is responsible for their network issues and his plan to end unlimited data plans. The post, dubbed 'Operation Chokehold,' wants AT&T customers to use as much data service as they can on Friday, December 18th at noon. While Fake Steve Jobs is notable for its satire, many Twitter and Facebook users seem to be rallying to its cry. It is unclear if there will be enough support to cause a DDOS."

Comments

I read this as

[Anonymous Coward]

"Internet braces for even higher levels of smug Apple douchebags"

Re:I read this as

[Lumpy]

Um no, I use the unlimited data plan to afford it. it's $15.00 a month on my Nokia 5800 I use it for 90% email and 10% other. If they drop the unlimited plan then they will lose me as a customer.

The douchebags are the AT&T executives. I'm tired of them trying like hell to screw the customer.

Re:I read this as

[CharlyFoxtrot]

From the Fake Steve website : "On Friday, December 18, at noon Pacific time, we will attempt to overwhelm the AT&T data network and bring it to its knees." Also every other site has managed to correctly report the date. You might want to check little facts like that before assigning blame.

Re:I read this as

[bsDaemon]

You forgot to note that he said "join their clause", rather than "join their cause", thus making himself just as guilty of typo's as the submitter of the article. And at any rate, the 19th was a Friday last year. Close enough for Zune timestamps.

Re:I read this as

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Except the iPhone get blamed for the wrong things. Does it have problems, sure, but don't blame the phone for problems on the network. I'm on an iphone in Europe and 99% of the criticism out there doesn't apply to me because I'm on a decent network. Most of the "problems" are pretty minor though so why do people feel the need to talk thrash about the iPhone instead of just accepting they don't like some aspects of it and getting another damn phone ?

Re:I read this as

[jitterman]

I actually do have an iPhone, purchased about 6 months ago (and while I like it, it's far from perfect - overall I dislike Apple as a company). Before that, my service was still AT&T using a Motorola handset. They both drop(ped) calls at about the same rate. I'm all for AT&T users demanding that the company provide service for ALL of its customers via a reliable, properly scaled network. If they're willing to sell the hardware that consumes the services, they need to buck up and provide the infrastructure to support those customers.

I really don't care WHICH phone Mr. Asshat Bossman of AT&T thinks is the main cause of his company's illness. Point is, they constantly rate dead last for reliability AND customer service among all national carriers. I can tell you this - ATT doesn't fix their problems in a fair (to the consumer) manner, when my contract is up I'll sell this little bugger to a "fanboi" and get a Droid phone, or even just a fucking regular handset, to get away from these clowns.

Re:I read this as

[Albanach]

If they drop the unlimited plan then they will lose me as a customer.

Really? What if the new plan offers more data than you currently still use in a month?

If you do leave, where will you go to? You realise other networks are likely to follow suit?

The problem in the US isn't the proposal to cap data. It's the complete and utter lack of affordable data in the sort of quantities the mass market needs to encourage mobile internet use to take off.

Re:I read this as

[NikLinna]

Perhaps because the closer something is to what a person wants, the more they're likely to notice and bitch about what's missing. Why bother bitching about the crappy products, after all? You know their makers aren't even trying.

Re:I read this as

[DJRumpy]

Mod this guy up. It's insightful on a few different levels. One for noting that AT&T had these issues before the iPhone came along and the other for noting that the problem is with the network and not the phone. You don't oversell your capacity. I was with AT&T and have been for about 8 years. The network hasn't changed. It was spotty then and it's spotty now. The last I heard most businesses don't complain when they have too many customers. They don't blame their problems on their customers either.

It just seems insane to me that a company would make their customers out to be problems.

On a personal note, I think this is just bait that AT&T is hoping will take, so that they can get on metered plans, just like Comcast threatened to do earlier this year.

Re:I read this as

[kailSD]

That's Muphry's law for you.

Re:I read this as

[Pojut]

Again, I don't think the iPhone is crappy, I just think it is ludicrous to act like there is nothing wrong with it.

yes, yes, I know...that's what fanboys do...but this trait seems to be exacerbated by Apple fanboys moreso than other groups.

Oh, except for Browncoats. Try telling one of them that Firefly is nonsense...it will likely be the last thing you ever say, lulz

Re:I read this as

[sonnejw0]

So, the retaliation against the AT&T CEO saying that iPhone users use too much data ... is for iPhone users to use too much data? How is that going to ensure that the unlimited pricing stays in affect? There's a clause in the terms of service that allows them to cut you off at any time if they deem you've used too much data... I hope these 14 year olds with iPhones are willing to become martyrs ... of course, it's the parents that are paying the bill, anyway. Hell if I've ever known a 14 year old that earned $150 a month.

Re:I read this as

[novastar123]

What did you say?

  Mal: "I just wanted you to face me so she could get behind you." (Zoe punches the thug out) "Drunks are so cute."

Re:I read this as

[timepilot]

* Tethering
* Voice Dial

My Fricken Razr can do these things.

And please don't tell me that you don't need tethering because the iPhone is such an awesome web client, because I DO need tethering since the iPhone has no good keyboard options.

Re:I read this as

[BuckaBooBob]

There is something seriously wrong with the contracts your signing if you need to wait untill your contract is up to switch carriers.. If you are paying for a service they cannot provide you should not be bound by the contract.. If they also change the terms (Eg get rid on unlimited data) that should also void the contract you signed and you should be able to switch providers without termination fees. There are laws that are put in place to prevent companies to abuse contacts in manners like this... Or are Carriers exempt in the US from these types of laws?

Re:I read this as

[jimbolauski]

The best part of you leaving is if you signed a contract and still are serving time you can get out, since ATT changed the terms you can break contract with out penality, then just jail break your iphone and go to tmobile for much cheaper unlimited spotty service.

Re:I read this as

[timepilot]

Yes, geeks are supposed to be knowledgable and have a penchant for solving perceived problems through creative methods:

Is spending $300 to update my 1yo phone to get voice dialing that already works on my 4yo razr "creative" or "stupid?"

Jailbreaking an iPhone may be considered creative to some. To me, needing to jailbreak an iPhone to get basic functionality is flawed, not creative. Really, are people still patting themselves on the back for jailbreaking?

Re:I read this as

[thrawn_aj]

You forgot to note that he said "join their clause", rather than "join their cause", thus making himself just as guilty of typo's as the submitter of the article.

*cough* =)

Re:I read this as

[jo_ham]

I'll just shoot you..... politely.

Re:I read this as

[r_jensen11]

If they drop the unlimited plan then they will lose me as a customer.

Really? What if the new plan offers more data than you currently still use in a month?

Good question. I switched from T-Mobile to AT&T because I didn't perform enough homework and got shafted by T-Mobile's 3G network frequency. Apparently, T-Mobile decided they wanted to use 1700/1900MHz for 3G whilst AT&T went the more standard (for the Americas) 850/1900MHz. I, being the not-educated-enough consumer, purchased the 5800 whilst still a T-Mobile customer because I figured "It has a SIM card and is for North America, I should be good!"

Wrong.

If you only use WLAN and are fine with Edge, you can move your phone to T-Mobile. Otherwise, you're either stuck with AT&T or a regional GSM carrier.

Re:I read this as

[Penguinoflight]

3. Realize that you're still making bucketloads of money due to the overpriced nature of cellular and broadband services in general and stop whining.

Should be

[Yvan256]

This thing isn't only for iPhone users. It's for every user of the AT&T network with a 3G device. And if AT&T had trouble with casual usage, wait until a lot of users try to bring the network down.

Can't wait to hear how the whole thing went for both sides of this story.

At least you guys have a choice of providers. Here in Canada, we almost have government-backed monopolies with even higher monthly bills.

Re:Should be

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry we have cable companies for that.

Re:Should be

[NotBornYesterday]

Great. If this guy goes and speaks truth to power with a "digital flash mob", I can picture two outcomes. One: AT&T's digital network is brought to its knees, normal customers who are not part of the flash mob are pissed off, and AT&T issues a press release saying that unlimited data plans are obviously having a negative impact on the network and will therefore be terminated. Two: AT&T's network sees little or no disruption, and therefore they realize they have nothing to fear from angry customers. Unlimited data plans are terminated anyway.

Re:Should be

[Yvan256]

If they change the terms of the contract then those contracts are no longer valid, allowing customers to cancel them prematurely.

Given that those contracts are used to subsidize the cost of the phones, I don't think it's going to happen.

Re:Should be

[Shakrai]

At least you guys have a choice of providers. Here in Canada, we almost have government-backed monopolies with even higher monthly bills.

What do you think we have here in the US? Three of the four big providers have very little difference between them. They all have the exact same price plan for minutes. The only difference is the extra features offered. T-Mobile is the only one that actually offers more minutes/cheaper plans.

They are all government-backed too. Think you or I could start a cell phone plan? Think again. The spectrum is auctioned off the highest bidder. For a few billion dollars the entrenched interests can just gobble it all up regardless of whether or not they need it or intend to deploy on it.

Re:Should be

[sexconker]

Don't forget option 3:

AT&T's network is fucked over more than usual, and some people die because they couldn't make 911 calls. What, you thought taking down the data connection would have no effect on voice? HA!

Re:Should be

[Mister Whirly]

I thought Time Warner was bad until they were bought up by Comcast in my area. Comcast reduced the amount of channels I get, raised the price of cable by about 30%, and raised the cost of internet services by about 40%. I would kill to have Time Warner again.

Re:Should be

[ElectricTurtle]

If doing nothing will produce a negative outcome, and doing something will produce the same negative outcome, then why not do SOMETHING especially if it could at least shake some people out of AT&T's grasp through dissatisfaction?

Re:Should be

[bmearns]

I really want to reiterate the point of your first case, because I haven't heard enough people catching on to this: AT&T is blaming network issues on what they consider to be the high bandwidth that smart phones use. To protest this, smart phone users are going to try to bring down the network by hogging as much bandwidth as possible. With their smart phones.

Just wanted to make sure everyone understood exactly what's going on here...

Re:Should be

[maxume]

The plans aren't unlimited (at least as far as I understand reality), they are just unmetered. If the end game results in ATT charging people for what they use, who exactly suffers?

(I don't expect ATT to actually charge people what I see as reasonable prices relative to their costs for providing services, but that's just smart business on their part, there are many people who are willing to far more than what I see as reasonable, to the point that they pay large amounts to use a congested network)

Re:Should be

[canajin56]

Are you kidding? It's not like we're limited to the big 3 (Rogers, Telus, Bell), we have all sorts of other providers! There's KOODO, their ads lead me to believe they don't do all that nasty hidden fee stuff. Oh, rebranded TELUS to seem less evil? Oh, well, there's always FIDO, they make the same claims about being not as evil as Rogers in all their ads! Oh...they're owned by Rogers, to rebrand and seem less evil, too? Well, there's always Solo Mobile. Oh...same deal with Bell? Virgin Mobile? Oh, Bell again? Why do they need TWO sham fronts? My favorite customer gouging one was the guy who ran up the $60,000 monthly bill, because they sold him an "Unlimited* Data** Plan!" that didn't cover any data usage other than the phones built in browser, so all that smartphone shit that also used data was billed at dollars on the kilobyte. The best part of that was the way Telus or whoever it was was unrepentant "It's not our fault he did not fully read the contract, but out of sheer generosity we will reduce the bill to a mere 6 grand!" A close runner up is KOODO/Telus's promise of "No activation fee", while there is a cancellation fee that is due in advanced when you sign up! Sort of like Blockbusters "No late fee *cough*but-there's-a-restocking-fee-if-you-return-it-late*cough*"

Re:Should be

[Hynee]

If they change the terms of the contract then those contracts are no longer valid, allowing customers to cancel them prematurely.
Given that those contracts are used to subsidize the cost of the phones, I don't think it's going to happen.

Not really, there is always force majeur. They could use this "digital flashmob" to change their plans permanently, and carriers and ISP's in the US have been wanting to introduce bandwidth caps for a while now...

Either Dan Lyons is a complete fool, or is a man on the inside trying to change the attitude to bandwidth permanently. So who is Newsweek owned by?

I strongly suspect this is a stunt for the corporations, not to humiliate them.

Re:Should be

[i_ate_god]

This thing isn't only for iPhone users. It's for every user of the AT&T network with a 3G device. And if AT&T had trouble with casual usage, wait until a lot of users try to bring the network down.

Can't wait to hear how the whole thing went for both sides of this story.

At least you guys have a choice of providers. Here in Canada, we almost have government-backed monopolies with even higher monthly bills.

In Montreal, I can get mobile service from Videotron, Rogers, Fido, Telus, Bell, Virgin Mobile, and their discount spinoffs like Koodo. There are plenty of companies to compete against each other.

The problem isn't the lack of companies to compete, it's the fact that there is very little motivation to compete HARD when every customer is locked into 2-3 year long contracts. I have 2 years left on my Fido contract, so why would Bell or Telus try to woo me away from Fido when I simply can't do it.

You want competition to explode in Canada? Remove these long term contracts or, remove the penalty for cancelling them ahead of schedule. Do that, and suddenly customers are as mobile as their phones and can move around to different companies, especially now that we can keep our phone numbers regardless of the company we sign up to.

Re:Should be

[Sylver Dragon]

The spectrum is auctioned off the highest bidder. For a few billion dollars the entrenched interests can just gobble it all up regardless of whether or not they need it or intend to deploy on it.

This has always been one of my biggest complaints about the FCC's wireless spectrum auctions. There really needs to be a use requirement attached to the sale. For example, anytime a company/individual purchases a chunk of spectrum, there are required to put it to use. If they don't utilize it or under-utilize* it it gets taken back from them (no refunds) and then re-auctioned.

* - Under utilization would cover buying a chunk of spectrum which can carry far more information on it than a company does regularly. In which case, that chunk should be stripped from them and a less valuable one given for their current use. This is to avoid the purchase of a valuable chunk and then using it to send control messages or the like to avoid it appearing unused.

Re:Should be

[Yvan256]

I can get mobile service from Videotron, Rogers, Fido, Telus, Bell, Virgin Mobile, and their discount spinoffs like Koodo. There are plenty of companies to compete against each other.

Multiple choices doesn't mean there is any actual competition...

Fido = Rogers.
Koodo = Telus.
Virgin Mobile Canada = Bell Mobility.

And thanks to the CRTC, companies such as Globalive had a hard time coming to Canada. And no thanks to Videotron, they won't be available in Quebec.

The only question is, which of the three big companies, Rogers, Telus and Bell, will buy the other two. The way things are going, it seems to only be a matter of time.

Friday, December 19?

[Vrallis]

Obviously they aren't doing it in 2009, since Friday is December 18th, so they're going to do this in 2014?

Re:Friday, December 19?

[jasonwc]

The article says the 18th. The summary is incorrect - or the article has been edited:

"Subject: Operation Chokehold
On Friday, December 18, at noon Pacific time, we will attempt to overwhelm the AT&T data network and bring it to its knees. The goal is to have every iPhone user (or as many as we can) turn on a data intensive app and run that app for one solid hour. Send the message to AT&T that we are sick of their substandard network and sick of their abusive comments. THe idea is we’ll create a digital flash mob. We’re calling it in Operation Chokehold. Join us and speak truth to power!"

Counter-Productive

[Akido37]

And if they can, AT&T will just say "I Told you So", and continue their plans to gouge iPhone users anyways.

The only way this can go well for AT&T customers is if a large, well-documented group gets together, attempts a DDOS, and fails. Then what can AT&T say? "Well it's not THOSE iPhone users, it's the ones who live in their parents' basements..."

Re:Counter-Productive

[jellomizer]

Protesters are STUPID. We are protesting against AT&T response that their infrastructure can't handle the load By DDOSing them. Isn't that like beating the crap out of person who says you are too violent.

Pirates

[Krneki]

At least for once the P2P users are not blamed for excessive network usage.

Of course when we pointed out that the pirates were only the first one to encounter network bandwidth limitations we were told to buzz off and the whole net neutrality debate was pointless too. :/

Clogging the bandwidth

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Don't fall for the crap that network bandwidth is somehow limited because of usage problems. That's never been the issue with AT&T's network. The problem is simply that they don't have enough cell tower capacity to handle that many simultaneous users. This is why your phone service cuts out in very crowded areas.

So if a bunch of people simultaneously try to use the network, the cells will max out and a lot of people will be out of coverage, but the network as a whole will continue to run just fine.

Getting AT&T to increase cell density is a nice goal, but so is getting cells to remote areas. It's a matter of priorities, but a covered area that has insufficient capacity is better than an uncovered area with zero capacity.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[TheSeventh]

This is already happening anywhere you get a bunch of them in the same area, like a stadium or arena. At the University stadium here, a connection with an iPhone during the game was just about impossible, and they blamed it on the fact that they didn't know so many students would bring iPhones to school with them ?!

But they just put up a new tower about 5-6 miles away, so that should help . . .

I'm so glad I bought a g1 instead.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[0100010001010011]

I just got back from a trip to India. In terms of mobiles, the US is lightyears behind them.

I went out to Sikkim for the first week, closer in geography to Colorado than NYC (or the rest of India). I don't think I ever lost cell reception once. We're talking about an area that is about as densely populated as farm towns in the Midwest. I was standing on top of a mountain and could get 4 networks. 4. Vodaphone, Airtel, Aircel and some other local one. I got better reception at the top of the mountain that I can get at my own house in a subdivision (I don't live in the sticks).

Not only that EVERYONE had a cell phone. Some of the monks, every farm we were on, etc. Everything was prepaid and the SIM cards 'never' expired (They had an expiration sometime in 2025). Meaning I could add $1-2 and it would never expire. Compare that to the US where if I want to get the cheap $10 prepaid plan I have 30 days to use that before it expires. Calls were around $.01/minute anywhere.

Then they had the 'data' plans. Stuff for $10-20 a month with unlimited 3G. I had an 'unlimited' GPRS plan that cost me $0.20 a day. Not only that I could turn it on and off at will. Going to not need it: *567#, going to use it: *567#. No locked in plans, no monthly fees, nothing.

It's depressing coming back to the US and realize how much we're getting screwed by the phone companies compared to else where.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[g0dsp33d]

I was standing on top of a mountain and could get 4 networks.

That is not necessarily a meaningful metric. Mountains tend to be the highest point in the area so you get bonus distance due to a clear line of sight.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[ptbarnett]

I just got back from a trip to India. In terms of mobiles, the US is lightyears behind them.

That's because in terms of landlines, India is light years behind the US.

In the developing world, landline phone systems are in shambles. Many of them are state-run monopolies, and quality and availability is non-existent. People had to literally wait months or years to get new phone service.

Mobile phone services were a way around that: private companies could build out a cellular network without running wires. Once the price of cell phones came down, it was affordable for almost anyone. For those that still can't afford it, "renting" a handset for a few minutes at a time has become a cottage industry.

In the US, cell phone networks were developed for a completely different market: the businessman (or woman) that needs a phone during the working day. That market still exists, and is lucrative for the cell phone providers. All the alternatives are designed to avoid cannibalizing that market.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[Bengie]

I just got back from a trip to India. Calls were around $.01/minute anywhere. Then they had the 'data' plans. Stuff for $10-20 a month with unlimited 3G.

Yeah, doctors in India make about $6000 a year and the common man much less. I would hope things are cheaper there.

That still doesn't explain why India has 4 carriers with clear signal in the middle of no where and the US can't even get near that. The technology behind the towers/3G network is the same as over here, the only difference is how much they pay their admins to monitor their networks.

If a country that can afford to pay doctors $6k per year can afford to spam cell towers everywhere, even locations that have almost no users, then the USA where a doctor makes $200k+ per year can afford at least 10xs as many towers and 10xs the coverage in remote areas.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Really? Because I have stood on the top of Half Dome in Yosemite in California once a year for the past seven years and my phone has literally no service save 911. I can climb to the top of Bishop's Peak, one of the highest points in San Luis Obispo County, and still get no reception until I get back down to my car, where I get a whopping 1 bar of service from Verizon. Oh, there were also all those times that I went snowboarding in the Sierra Nevada on the California side and never got any reception at the top of the mountain. No reception going over the I-80 pass when I visited my g/f for Christmas last year up near Truckee.....

...The list goes on. I was born and raised in the mountains. I visit the mountains regularly. I climb to the top of mountains regularly. I do this all in America, in fact, in California, one to the most developed and populated states in the country. I almost never get decent reception in the mountains.

There most certainly is something wrong with America's wireless communications infrastructure.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth

[TheEvilOverlord]

As various people here keep saying, you have to consider the whole lifecycle.

I'm not defending the entrenched oligarchy of providers in the US, as they probably are gouging customers to an extent and not being as flexible as they could be. However when quoting all the amazing price deals available there, you have to consider how this is linked to pay levels, because to a certain extent the amount you pay is going to be affected by how much it costs to run the infrastructure, and paying people is a large part of that.

There are also probably far fewer regulations on cell tower placement and power. Building anything probably costs less because labour is again cheap and there are fewer building regulations, environmental regulations and labour laws to comply with. It all costs money.

Not the best idea

[ezberry]

How could anyone really think this is a good idea? AT&T has effectively admitted that the data usage growth for smartphones is above the rate that their data network will be able to grow. Using more data intensive applications will only show them how correct they are ("Look how much data will be used in the future when more people are streaming data")

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

Sorry that this might not be anti-corporate enough, but Operation Chokehold really isn't a great idea.

Re:Not the best idea

[PKFC]

If emergency calls cannot go through under "100%" usage of the tower, something is seriously wrong. There needs to be bandwidth provisioned and reserved for emergency calls for every tower and trunk.

If this does affect emergency calls, AT&T really does need to get their shit together. I assume there are laws in place to enforce the transmission of emergency calls. Hell AT&T gets a free stress test of their network which is something they should be doing anyway. Real world data of extreme usage. Study, learn and yes: build a better network because of it.

Re:Not the best idea

[chew8bitsperbyte]

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

Data and voice operate independently of one another. While 3G/EDGE service may be disrupted it won't affect end-users' abilities to make calls over GPRS. And while it may further reinforce AT&T's point that their end-users gobble "too much" bandwidth, the publicity that it could generate would be a nice way of sticking it to yet another corporation that enjoys selling "limited-unlimited".

Re:Not the best idea

[harmonise]

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

People don't place emergency calls over 3G data connections. Those are voice calls.

Re:Not the best idea

[PaulMeigh]

True but I may need to make an emergency Scrabble move.

Angry Slashdotters May Disrupt Service

[Yvan256]

www.fakesteve.net

Error 500 - Internal server error

An internal server error has occured!
Please try again later.

some of the usage is ridiculous

[alen]

i have an iphone 3gs and i max out at 2GB per month if i stream pandora almost all day for a month. the 3% AT&T is talking about use 20GB or more and reading some forums people brag how they did it by jailbreaking and tethering or using some banned apps.

the unlimited data plan is if you follow the TOS. jailbreaking and tethering is against the TOS so expect almost everyone not to care when AT&T implements a 5GB or 10GB max data per month and charges you a lot of money for anything above that. my wife uses less than 100MB per month on her iphone and most people are less than 500MB per month

the only people the new charges will hurt are a small minority who aren't playing by the contract anyway

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous

[Just Some Guy]

i have an iphone 3gs and i max out at 2GB per month if i stream pandora almost all day for a month.

2*1024*1024*1024/(8*3600*30)*8 = 20Kbps. That's some darn good compression they're using.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous

[SatanicPuppy]

I agree, and yet I don't. Unlimited means unlimited, it doesn't mean "Within reason."

AT&T needs to get it's shit together.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous

[alen]

at least during the workday. i checked my usage on my account page and it averaged 100MB per day

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous

[Amouth]

0% of iPhone users on AT&T can get a tethering plan from AT&T.

the crying to pay is crap - what your hearing is the bait and switch complaints.

they sell it as unlimited - and are now using their lack of network growth to justify changing contracts to 5gb max meaning unlimited while pocketing the money.

As far as i'm concerned the tethering iPhone users can be cut off - they knew when they bought the phone that it wasn't allowed. In fact that is the chief reason i don't have one, because i do tether a lot.

AT&T justs wants to continue over selling their network and charge more for it too - all to fund the top people and not actual network expansion.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous

[Amouth]

why? when i bought the router it said on the box 100Mbps Ethernet. And thats what i got. they don't say unlimited.

whats happening is they are saying Unlimited for X and then charging you X+Y where Y is usage over 5gb.

if they want to do that then they need to state that and remove the word Unlimited as that is false advertising.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous

[greyhueofdoubt]

When I stream from pandora or last.fm, the rate is indeed between 12-20 Kbps. I'm listening right now and since I started paying attention a few minutes ago, the speed has never exceeded 22.0 Kbps.

-b

So...

[awyeah]

So I can go ahead and expect to stop receiving e-mails on my BlackBerry on Friday? Great, yeah, sweet. Thanks guys!

Re:Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service

[Culture20]

...and "noon" should be tied to a timezone, otherwise it's several smaller spikes.

How mature.

[demonlapin]

You know, it's times like this that I'm glad I have Verizon.

Seriously, folks, this is like crazy Berkeley behavior. All you're going to do is make sure that every other AT&T customer - like the ones whose family members are sick in the hospital, or who just got in a massive wreck, or who just got carjacked, or maybe are waiting to hear from a family member overseas - can't get service. All so you can point out that AT&T has a grossly inadequate network, which is something that everyone knows already. The completely nontechnical people I know at work all complain about AT&T service even when they don't have 3G service at all. What's your point?

Uh oh!

[Ambiguous Coward]

Pretend-inciting a virtual cyber riot? Why, that hypothetically violates some possible public safety laws! This guy had better watch out, he might go to meta-jail for his semi-crimes!

But seriously, AT&T is going to try to sue him. :(

Bait and swtich?

[nurb432]

Selling us all unlimited *contracts* that they know they cant deliver, then later switching it to limited while we are still stuck with the contract should be something the FCC should look into.

Missing Option

[grolaw]

I'm changing my plan to the lowest pricing structure possible. I am going to log every dropped call and file a FCC complaint as it will have "stolen" minutes from me.

I have two iPhones with 3000 min day & 3000 min night + rollover, unlimited texting and the required data plan.

I'll send letters off to the AT&T consumer oversight about the obvious overselling of the data//cell service by AT&T - much like the old airlines used to do with seats and overbooking - betting that the no-shows will prevent bumping. Here, we have virtual bumping from saturated networks.

Frankly, AT&T ought to be dissolved - the Corporate Death Penalty and give the shareholders not a dime. The company has, through several iterations, demonstrated its gross incompetence too many times to exist. It is a monopoly and all monopolies must die. Let's kill AT&T - screw the shareholders. Time for "too big to fail" to take a nosedive into history.

Re:Missing Option

[castironpigeon]

First - no, you won't.
Second - even if you did, why should the FCC care? No, really, think about it. Do you think any government agency is going to purposely put thousands of people out of jobs, cause stocks to drop even lower, and send a great big Fuck You to the corporate bosses who pay their paychecks all to make a couple thousand disgruntled geeks happy? When those disgruntled geeks are just going to go away if they're ignored for a while?

I feel your pain. I don't have a smart phone, but broadband is in the same boat. Just bend over and take it like a good consumer whore. The only people who can change this system are the people running it and I don't think they have any intention of changing it in our favor.

Re:Missing Option

[grolaw]

Oh, status quo.

The FCC doesn't have the power to nullify the corporate charter of AT&T and its affiliates.

The DOJ does.

In the past we have rarely used the Corporate Death Penalty - and your argument is AT&T is too big to fail - or be killed off?

I'm for thousands of managers out of work - and out of the industry as a criminal sanction. The rest of the workers will find jobs with the competition.

We are the people who control our government. Time to make a stand. Burn AT&T - twice is twice too often.

Liability for missed 911 call?

[jestill]

If this works and someone can not get through for a 911 call, is fake Steve Jobs going to real jail?

Re:Liability for missed 911 call?

[Amouth]

if AT&T's tower switches fail to prioritize a 911 call ahead of generic data traffic then AT&T should be liable for not providing the required 911 service.

some funny things happen with cell phones when you dial 911 - they are not treated as a general phone call.

Fastest way to solve it?

[MikeRT]

Disconnect those users. The iPhone zealots have nowhere else to go. Telling them to go for the Droid is like telling a crack addict to drop their habit by smoking pot and slurping vodka. Take down a few thousand users, and the majority will quickly stop complaining.

Huh?

[BlindSpot]

Okay so let me get this straight... show a company you hate their product by creating more demand for it? Does nobody participating understand economics?!? Well don't be surprised when they jack up your rates again and cite "increased network demand" as the reason. Keep at it at you might get to have the same high rates we have here in Canada.

Cutoff sentence

[93 Escort Wagon]

It is unclear if there will be enough support to cause a DDOS...

... or, if they're successful, whether AT&T wireless customers will notice anything has changed.

DDoS......

[Shakrai]

.... there's an app for that ;)

DDOS, served!

[Caradoc]

Slashdot has done to Fake Steve Jobs what Fake Steve Jobs was trying to do to AT&T.

Awesome.

proof

[Elwar123]

By everyone using as much bandwidth as they can, they can demonstrate to AT&T how much money they could have made if they had a cost per bandwidth setup going. The accounting guys are foaming at the mouth for this to happen.

I just want to make sure I understand.

[buelba]

They are protesting AT&T's announcement that smartphones are disrupting its network. By using smartphones. To disrupt AT&T's network?

Re:Why does everyone hate to pay for what they use

[gregthebunny]

As long as the price for byte was fair I would have no problem not having an unlimited plan. Based on the above post, maybe charging $10-$20 per GB downloaded might be fair. Everyone seems to want unlimited access, but the only people who benefit from that are a) the people who use a lot of bandwidth, and b) ATT who gets lots of money from low usage users.

Amen. I've been avoiding 3G phones like the plague because I simply cannot justify the $30/mo "data tax" that comes with them. If I check my e-mail and look up map directions a few times a day, I'm gonna use maybe a few hundred MB per month. I would gladly welcome $10 per gigabyte or $1 per 100 MB, etc. since that's all I'd ever use. I'm pretty sure AT&T would draw in more customers who, like me, can't justify adding nearly 50% to their monthly bill.

Maybe it's the phone

[Mr_Silver]

For an alternative point of view, this article is interesting because it claims that the iPhone design isn't very good and that is what is causing the problems.

I don't live in the USA so I have no idea how good or bad AT&T is, but what I do know is that the RF sensitivity of the iPhone isn't very good. I can think of plenty of times (and places) where my iPhone (and not just my iPhone) will disconnect and then can't get a signal again - yet friends on the same network with other phones do just fine.

Hell there are large periods of time on my morning train commute where the iPhone claims "No Service" yet my Blackberry (on the same network) is downloading emails and browsing the web just fine.

It was terrible on the original iPhone and the 3GS is better, but like the camera quality, I do think they need to work at it quite a bit more.

Re:Maybe it's the phone

[ktappe]

For an alternative point of view, this article is interesting because it claims that the iPhone design isn't very good and that is what is causing the problems.

That's like blaming Airbus for Sully's ditching in the Hudson. The A320 hasn't had to ditch anywhere else in the world but somehow it's still Airbus' fault?

To point: The iPhone would only be at fault if it were dropping calls worldwide. It's not, so very basic troubleshooting tells you to look elsewhere...specifically at something unique to the U.S. where that problem is occurring.

I have read that AT&T is mounting a rather significant lobbying effort to try to throw suspicions off of their network. Thus this NYT article and Erin Burnett's ludicrous statements on Jim Kramer. And why would they be doing that? It wouldn't have anything to do with groundswells of user uprising like this would it? Noooo.....

Satire or irresponsible?

[goombah99]

Some kinds of jokes, like yelling fire in a theater, are irresponsible. I'm sure there will be many emergency 911 calls at noon that day and some of them will be on AT&T networks. Blocking those deliberately is irresponsible.

     

Re:Satire or irresponsible?

[Xeno man]

If a few users could actually bring the network down with high usage, then the network itself is shit and can't support the product they are selling. During an actual unplanned event like the balloon boy or 9/11 or anything that gathers national attention thousands of people take and upload photos, video and text to website as the events unfold in addition to making actual phone calls about said events. If an actual emergency can prompt the fall of a network preventing me from calling 911 about an emergency, then the said company is endangering lives just to not spend money on network upgrades. This protest won't even be noticed by the network admins let alone be a fraction of a real peak of data usage.

Legality?

[thedbp]

Is it legal to publicly co-ordinate a DDOS attack on a major US telecom?

Tracfone

[IANAAC]

Everything was prepaid and the SIM cards 'never' expired (They had an expiration sometime in 2025). Meaning I could add $1-2 and it would never expire. Compare that to the US where if I want to get the cheap $10 prepaid plan I have 30 days to use that before it expires.

Tracfone offers what you describe in the US. I used one all summer/fall in a fairly remote area of northern Wisconsin because my ATT Blackberry got no coverage there - the remaining minutes and number are good for another two years without having to purchase any more minutes.

Re:. . .and the issues are?

[navyjeff]

I can't answer my iPhone while wearing gloves. That's a glaring deficiency in my book because I wear gloves about 4 months of the year. Even then, I missed a week's worth of calls because the screen didn't register my swipe-to-answer. I'd be happy if I could just double-click the menu button to answer.

Re:. . .and the issues are?

[fear025]

I can't answer my iPhone while wearing gloves. That's a glaring deficiency in my book because I wear gloves about 4 months of the year. Even then, I missed a week's worth of calls because the screen didn't register my swipe-to-answer. I'd be happy if I could just double-click the menu button to answer.

Have you looked at these gloves? http://www.180s.com/glovesforaddicts/ They've got a little nub that lets you actually use your phone while wearing them.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:. . .and the issues are?

[Pojut]

First of all, these two statements are completely incompatible

Not necessarily. Best example: The xbox 360 is an awesome gaming console, but the older versions still had horrendous reliability. Hence, it did its job as a gaming console well, but that doesn't make it a well designed piece of hardware.

Second, what are the iPhone's glaringly bad issues?

To name a few of the more obvious ones...

Sync issues (admittedly, this is more due to iTunes being bad software rather than the iPhone being bad hardware, but still...), problems with many new firmware rollouts (for example the random shutdowns and decreased battery life of 3.1), no MMS until just a couple of short months ago, Appstore approval inconsistencies (again, not an issue with the phone itself, but I doubt you could convince anyone the iPhone would be the success it is without the Appstore)...oh, and that little problem with randomly catching fire.

Dan Lyons?

[dwiget001]

Nothing to see here, move along, move along.

Re:Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service

[NevarMore]

Doesn't matter. The chokepoint is at the local tower not at the backhaul. So doing this at noon in your timezone should be adequate.

Now if their network is so janky that New York is still seeing problems at 3PM when LA starts in...

Re:. . .and the issues are?

[Pojut]

Just for your own information...

sync issues:

http://mashable.com/2009/11/09/iphone-windows-7-sync/
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13727_7-10330485-263.html
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/intel-responds-on-iphone-sync-issues/
http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/ipod-iphone-software-apps/139937-i-have-mind-boggling-iphone-3g-sync-problem.html
http://www.iphonefaq.org/archives/97665

Random shutdowns/decreased battery life:

http://www.iphonehacks.com/2009/09/iphone-os-31-problems-random-shutdown-poor-battery-life-bricked-iphone-slow-performance.html
http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/09/16/iphone-31-bugs-random-freeze-shut/
http://iphone-chat.org/31-random-shutdown-and-battery-death-iphone-3g-65401/
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/iphone-therefore-iblog/2009/09/iphone-shutdown.html

As far as overheating/burning/asploading, it isn't a widespread problem...but...well...I'll just let the 103 million results speek for themselves:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS354US354&q=iphone+fire

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Really?

[Torodung]

The post, dubbed 'Operation Chokehold,' wants AT&T customers to use as much data service as they can on Friday, December 18th at noon. While Fake Steve Jobs is notable for its satire, many Twitter and Facebook users seem to be rallying to its cry. It is unclear if there will be enough support to cause a DDOS.

So basically, he's incited the deliberate sabotage of a public communications network. Really?

I get the feeling "Fake Steve Jobs" is going to be hearing from "Real Homeland Security" soon. :^/

--
Toro