Slashdot Mirror
AT&T Repeats As Lowest-Rated Wireless Carrier
redletterdave writes "Consumer Reports' latest ratings survey of cell phone carriers revealed that Verizon Wireless scored the highest satisfaction score out of the four major U.S. service providers, earning particularly high grades for texting and data service. Verizon was followed closely by Sprint and T-Mobile USA, but all three companies earned scores lower overall than their figures from last year. AT&T was at the very bottom of the list for the second year in a row. While AT&T's satisfaction score in 2011 wasn't as bad as its score from 2010, the Dallas-based cell phone provider, which recently discontinued its bid to acquire its better rival T-Mobile, still ranked at the bottom of the pack. Last year, AT&T was the only carrier for the Apple iPhone, but still managed to receive the lowest scores."
Just get an AT&T e-mail address (ala MyName@att.net), "serviced by Yahoo", if you want to find out why AT&T services are so hated.
No bars in more places...
"We're the Phone Company. We don't care, we don't have to" - Lily Tomlin
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
After working for AT&T, it is no surprise to me that they rate so lowly. Their employees often find their hands tied when they want to help a customer. They also have a 0-5 score that all accounts are given. This score is one of the first things an agent sees when the customer's account comes up. Customers whose accounts rate a 0 or 1 (either due to being on the cheapest plan or due to poor credit/payment history) find themselves treated like a red-headed step child. AT&T's policies actually state that any customer threatening to disconnect their service due to a dispute should be transferred to a senior representative UNLESS they are a 0 or a 1. 0's and 1's should instead be disconnected immediately and have their Early Termination Fee waived. Essentially, AT&T doesn't want them as customers and will drop them the instant they have an excuse.
'cause chances are you're not going to be able to do it on our network."
What was tha.. again? Sorr....... hear you.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
I know how bad they are. Cingular was great but when they changed their name to AT&T their service dropped accordingly. They claim they didn't turn down the towers but everyone's service got worse.
I still use them because no one else has service within 4 miles of where I live. It is funny seeing people with other carriers try to use their phones in my area. They always say they always have service.
Star Trek, there maybe hope.
Yes it is.
AT&T was broken up into AT&T (The long distance carrier), Bell Labs (relabeled Lucent), and regional Bell Operating Companies.
AT&T of today is Southwestern Bell (SBC) + Pac Bell + Bell South + Ameritech
Verizon is NYNEX + Bell Atlantic + GTE
CenturyLink is USWest + CenturyTel (not a Bell company)
Cingular was a joint venture between SBC and Bell South and was renamed when those two entities merged and acquired AT&T.
The Modern day AT&T is a reformation of the bulk of the old AT&T, albeit with management lead by one of the more ethically challenged corners rather than from the original top.
Service quality is not so bad where I live. I can talk and surf at the same time. And there is no way, I repeat no way to have two iPhones under one plan for less than $100/month in the USA other than AT&T. Would I prefer to have Verizon? Sure, but not $50 extra per month sure.
The AT&T which was broken up by the Feds was a monopoly that wouldn't let you plug your own phone into the wall. What we have now isn't so great, but lets not imagine that AT&T from the days before was cream and lollipops.
Also if you really want service from AT&T, go into the store. That's been my experience.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
They're all evil for pushing a mandatory data plan on smartphones despite these phones generally having wi-fi already built in.
I know this spoils the Slashdot anti-corporate groupthink storyline, but the cellular carriers don't just do this stuff for the sake of being evil. The fact is that telcos pay a lot more for smartphones than they do for dumb phones, but customers generally still want "a phone" to cost anywhere between $0 and $200. So the telcos lose more money on every smartphone sale and in order to make that money back they make sure you are forced to have a data plan. The majority - although clearly not you - of cellular customers with smartphones want that anyway, so not a big deal. If they weren't charging you for a data plan they would be extending the length of the contract or something else... it's not being evil just for fun, it's making sure they get their money back on subsidizing your new shiny toy.
Here's a hint - if you want a smartphone and no data plan, buy a non-carrier-branded version unlocked at full price, then take it to one of the US GSM carriers and away you go. (With most GSM carriers, the smartphone plan automatic enforcement is based on serial numbers of subsidized phone models so if you buy some unlocked GSM smartphone that carrier doesn't sell, you should be fine.) Just don't expect the carrier to sell you a $700 phone for $100 and not charge you for a data plan and a two-year contract to make that money back for them plus interest.
"95% of all Slashdot
We find the conclusions reached by Consumer Reports to be not only ridiculous but completely baseless as well. Our company would like to believe that it's service would be given a fair and unbalanced evaluation in the market but that is apparently too much to ask. Below we have chosen to refute a few of the more egregious claims leveled by so-called Consumer Reports.
Consumer Reports asserts that AT&T's customer service is below average. This is completely untrue. Not a single member of our executive board had trouble reaching a service representative. All of our executive board member's questions were answered politely and completely. They were even told to have a nice day as they disconnected.
As to the statements that our system coverage is sub-par; they have obviously failed to take note of our previously stated plans to at some undefined point in the future to potentially undertake some form of consideration on the concept of improving coverage and building out our meaninglessly named 4G network. We are truly serious about thinking about these things and we believe that we should be given extra credit for taking the time out of our very busy day to contemplate things of this ilk.
We support our troops, orphans, nuns and puppies.
To the assertion that our customer satisfaction ranks at the bottom of the list. Completely untrue! Our internally generated satisfaction matrices inform us that customer satisfaction has never been higher. Our P.R. Department confirms that they believe our internal numbers to be accurate and will sign sworn statements to this effect. In short, we believe our customers love us.
In conclusion, we feel that this is yet another attempt by our enemies in the FCC, the Obama administration, Sprint and the Society for Creative Anachronism to slander our company's good name and prevent our monopoly from succeeding as planned.
Sincerely,
Your AT&T Overlords
Not so with ATT. According to some forum, people who did that were getting notified that they were getting a 20 or 30 dollar data plan smacked onto their account. Regardless if the phone is unlocked or not.
Besides, as I said earlier, I've offered to buy the phone outright (full price) and I've been told by several salesmen as well as customer services online that the data plan is still required. See link -> http://mobile.engadget.com/2010/02/11/atandt-forcing-smartphones-even-unlocked-ones-onto-smartphone-da/
According to them, the phone just won't work "right" without a data plan.
The Modern day AT&T is a reformation of the bulk of the old AT&T, albeit with management lead by one of the more ethically challenged corners rather than from the original top.
Sorta like the T-1000 in Terminator II.
The courts smashed AT&T into a bunch of little pieces, which rolled around like big balls of mercury each doing their own thing. Once the antitrust restrictions timed out, the balls began to merge. When enough of them had merged the resulting blob reshaped itself into something resembling (but somewhat different from) the original structure.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Verizon is no better. When the Motorola Razor was a big deal, it had a bug which would keep the data connection open upon receiving a picture message. Countless customers had data usage charges tacked onto their monthly bill because of this. I did. I called Verizon several times, at 40 minutes plus per call. They customer service representative told me I must have been surfing the web. I told him I was at work (at an ISP), in front of a computer, and was not surfing the web during those hours. Each time coincided with when I received a picture message. They had hundreds of dollars tacked onto my bill. I told one rep to do a simple Google search for the bug in the Razor. He said they would credit my account. He didn't. He left bad notes in whatever call logging system they had. Finally, about 1 month later, I got someone with brains. This rep said they were aware of the problem and applied a credit immediately.
Long hold times. Poor customer services. Lies. Getting hung up on. I've had the same issues with Verizon, ATT, and the latest venture Simple Mobile.
I swore I'd never go back to Verizon, but they are the only one with any service near my house.
Customer service sucks with all cell phone carriers. I've tried them all and have stories for each.