Slashdot Mirror


Should T-Mobile Stop Claiming It Has 'Best Unlimited Network'? (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Speed isn't everything, or is it? According to a report from Ars Technica, the National Advertising Division (NAD) says T-Mobile should stop claiming that is has "America's Best Unlimited Network" because it needs to prove it also has the widest geographic coverage and best reliability. T-Mobile is saying that speed outweighs all other factors.

"T-Mobile's claim is based on data from Ookla and OpenSignal, which offer speed-testing apps that let consumers test their wireless data speeds," reports Ars Technica. "Both Ookla and OpenSignal have issued reports saying that T-Mobile's speeds were higher than Verizon's, AT&T's, and Sprint's. The OpenSignal tests also gave T-Mobile an edge over rivals in latency and 4G signal availability." T-Mobile "did not provide evidence that its network is superior in providing talk and text mobile services or in providing high-speed data more reliably or to a greater coverage area," the industry group's announcement said.

55 comments

  1. best unlimited network in limited areas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure having an unlimited(in terms of data transfers) is nice, but it sure isn't helpful when its limited to three acres of a major city and not in a decent sized office building. In that case, you can suck it, it's 2G speeds for you!

    1. Re:best unlimited network in limited areas by sh00z · · Score: 1

      I can't decide if this is good or bad. On my vacation in Yosemite last week, it was "No Service" pretty much everywhere in the park. My daughter on AT&T had 4G coverage. Not that I would have been posting to social media like she was, but it would have been reassuring to know that I'd be able to make a call in case of emergency. (*somebody* must have called the rangers when that bear meandered into Half Dome Village...)

  2. English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Words apparently mean whatever we want them to mean. Now waiting for the ACs that'll somehow read something political out of that statement, or some perceived slight against their progenitors.

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

      Words apparently mean whatever we want them to mean.

      Covfefe!

    2. Re:English by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Words apparently mean whatever we want them to mean.

      That depends on the word. Claims to be "fastest" and "most reliable" have specific meanings, and should be backed by evidence. But "best" is subjective, and thus mostly meaningless.

      Disclaimer: I am a T-Mobile customer. T-Mobile is "best" for me despite their sucky coverage, because they are cheaper than the alternatives.

    3. Re: English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has it occurred to you that, to most people, you have more of a mental problem than trump?

    4. Re: English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course it appears that way. I'm simply trying to make him look good by comparison. MAGA motherfucker!

    5. Re: English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like saying MAGA just to watch people lose their fucking minds.

    6. Re:English by mysidia · · Score: 1

      That depends on the word. Claims to be "fastest" and "most reliable" have specific meanings, and should be backed by evidence. But "best" is subjective, and thus mostly meaningless.

      Actually... "Fastest" and "Most Reliable" network don't really mean anything specific; what they mean depends on what you care about... RTT Latency and Low loss for VoIP or gaming? Throughput for browsing/downloads/streaming ? Dropped call rates VS Dropped Packet rates VS Latency variability? ---- even Reliability has many potential working definitions

      There are a variety of different ways any network could claim "fastest" or "most reliable", and there's such a huge element of subjectivity regarding what criteria makes an overall NETWORK the Fastest or Most Reliable, That it's entirely possible TWO or THREE networks could all claim to be fastest and most reliable network, and none of them wrong in their claim.

      For one thing: Most networks are huge, And the coverage, interference, propagation, connectivity, and congestion levels vary from place to place. Therefore the "fastest" network at Location A could have extremely poor performance at Locations B, C, and D.

      In this case Network A is the Fastest at Location B, but not C and D.

      So then HOW do you generalize a "Fastest" or "Most Reliable" claim to an entire coverage footprint?

      I would personally argue you have to look at EVERY location within your coverage, And if Not a single location exists where a competitor's performance is better than yours according to your Speed or Reliability metric, THEN and only then are you the fastest or most reliable.

      But in reality, there's no way the carriers are doing that.... they will be taking some statistical sample mainly from locations "deemed important" or likely to favor them or some average.

      Also, for marketing purposes they'll pick the metric for Speed that they're best at, AND the metric for Reliability that they're best at ---- regardless of the relevance of that metric on its own to consumers: In other words, they'll probably do all testing and measurement gathering for Speed at off-peak times to avoid congestion, and the reliability metric will be something like Dropped Calls rate, not Packet loss%.

  3. T-Mobile by DaMattster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're going to target T-Mobile for false advertising, you might as well go after a whole lot of other corporations as well. Advertisements are well known to stretch the truth. I have T-Mobile and it is the best bang for your buck, by far. It's not the best unlimited network and it's not the worst either. If Ookla and OpenSignal consistently report higher speeds than the others, I would call that a pretty resounding endorsement.

    1. Re:T-Mobile by youngone · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Maybe I'm just a grumpy old bastard, but all advertising seems like a total pack of lies to me.

      The older I get, the more I see it as propaganda, designed to manipulate people into doing things that are bad for them.

      I am not American, but the ISP's and mobile providers where I live are no different.
      Also we have a whole lot of fishing industry propaganda on TV at the moment, as they have been getting bad press because they continue to destroy fish stocks and lie about it, then get caught.
      People seem to just shrug it off as "just a PR campaign" as if PR and Propaganda are not exactly the same thing.

      BRB, just off to get the revolution started.

    2. Re:T-Mobile by movdqa · · Score: 2

      Best bang for your buck depends on what you do. My total bill last month was $7.44 for four phones or less than $2/phone/month and this on Verizon's network.

    3. Re:T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, I get annoyed with the Sprint commercials that advertise how they are "within 1% of Verizon's reliability" but conveniently leave out the part about the difference in coverage. Sprint doesn't work where I live so as far as I'm concerned their reliability is zero.

    4. Re:T-Mobile by mysidia · · Score: 1

      less than $2/phone/month and this on Verizon's network.

      What the heck? Did you put your phones on Data-ONLY service with 1GB total shared between them, or something?

    5. Re:T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Xfinity Mobile which is an MVNO using Verizon's network. They give you unlimited voice and text and 100 MB shared for free. Beyond that, it's $12/GB. The $7.44 that we paid last month is taxes and fees. The service costs were $0. You also get access to 18 million mobile hotspots and we mainly use those and work or home WiFi - we use very little mobile data.

    6. Re:T-Mobile by tepples · · Score: 1

      I use Xfinity Mobile which is an MVNO using Verizon's network.

      How much does the required TV subscription cost per month?

  4. I personally think by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    If it is truly the best LTE coverage the claim is good enough for advertising as long as it's footnoted how they determined "best". I'm skeptical that they truly have the best LTE coverage, as both a customer, and the fact that the summary implies they don't have the best high-speed coverage.

    I think exempting voice and text coverage is fair when talking about data, and am not outright offended that 3g (and slower) isn't being considered.

    Of course, Verizon can also claim they have the best network (and it'd be a truer statement IMO).

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  5. In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Local burger stand can't claim "World's Best Burger!" because they only use two pickles instead of three and don't evaluate claims that swiss cheese is better than cheddar on a burger.

    1. Re:In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But 2 pickles instead of 3 would be worse

  6. How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about any time any ad makes a qualitative or quantitative statement it is backed up and substantiated by data right then and there? They're welcome to say whatever they want as long as they qualify it in a straightforward manner in context.

    1. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and no small print. All text should be the same size, including the brands and logos.

  7. Coverage.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    T-mobile can fuck off..

    On vacation and got a sim card and in most of the Raleigh, NC area there was barely coverage.
    Ended up snapping after 3 days and getting an ATT card and had near-perfect coverage for the rest of the 3 weeks.

    1. Re:Coverage.... by segin · · Score: 1

      Stop going to places where incest is a common practice.

    2. Re:Coverage.... by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      Sadly, these areas and "areas where the air is breathable and you don't feel claustrophobic and anxious" are a 100% overlap.

  8. Puffery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a simple case of puffery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffery

    The claim is subjective and therefore cannot be held to the traditional advertising standards of a subjective claim.

  9. Worlds Best Coffee also under dispute. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My local coffee shop has a similar claim with this big poster that says "Worlds best coffee". Yet they haven't proven this claim. I demand they take this sign down!

    (Seriously though... isn't "best" something nobody really agrees on, and that's why anyone can claim anything is "the best"). As a consumer I don't consider "best", without some further adjective to be much of a claim for.. anything.

  10. The Hayward black hole. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Until I actually get a solid connection on my hour long commute to SF on BART, I don't care what their promises are.
    After 5 years I am not holding my breath.

  11. I'm the best guy ever by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Prove I'm not the best guy ever. Or prove who is.
    "Best" doesn't mean anything unless you define the criteria. T-Mobile did define the criteria. Any ad that doesn't define the criteria, the word "best" should be ignored as meaningless, and where the criteria is defined consumers should either pay attention to the criteria or ignore the word.

    1. Re:I'm the best guy ever by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Prove I'm not the best guy ever. Or prove who is.

      I am.

      (the proof is left as an exercise for the reader)

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:I'm the best guy ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're Slashdot readers; we don't exercise.

    3. Re:I'm the best guy ever by avandesande · · Score: 2

      I've avoided a lot of trouble referring to my first son as 'favorite oldest son' and the other as 'favorite youngest son'

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    4. Re:I'm the best guy ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      should be "so far"...

  12. People should stop listening to marketing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And perhaps we should modify the old trope âoefirst kill the marketing expertsâ

  13. It's the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because it makes me feel good when I use the amazing services of T-mobile.

    (best is subjective. courts have ruled on this many many times)

  14. T-unlimited mobile is all good all right by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've used ATT, Verizon, CellularONE and it's T-mobile that have the best mix of price, availability and coverage here in CALIFORNIA. Rarely and I do mean rare is the case that I can't get signal. AND if I don't my partner's Verizon doesn't either; most of the time along the Pacific Coast.

    Gone are the ATT node management, compression and dropped calls. Gone is the less than friendlies at Verizon and its hostile billing practices that would add charges without notice. T-mobile really does have unlimited, great call clarity and coverage that equals or betters its competition.

    1. Re:T-unlimited mobile is all good all right by danlor · · Score: 1

      Totally agree. Former verizon and att customer. Not regrets, never want to go back. We have a large family with mostly teenagers and college students. I fucking love tmoble's services. Their coverage is spectacular, plenty of bandwidth, superb call clarity, lowest prices I have ever seen. 13 devices, all unlimited, including tablets for less than 200 a month. I dread the future where things change, but for now its perfect.

    2. Re:T-unlimited mobile is all good all right by el_smurfo · · Score: 1

      Pacific coast checking in...yup, no signal here.

  15. How can you tell when marketing is lying to you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... their lips are moving.

    If consumers don't understand that advertisements are designed to spin the truth, then perhaps they do deserve to be parted from their money.

  16. Nebulous claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are companies allowed to make such nebulous claims about their products in the first place?

    If truth in advertising laws actually lived up to their name they wouldn't just ban claims which had been demonstrated to be false, they would also ban claims which have no objective definition (claims which can never be proven true).

  17. There is no universal "best" by Solandri · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I help people buy computers (for home and business), and frequently get asked what's the best laptop. I have to explain that there's a "best laptop" for me, and a "best laptop" for you, and a "best laptop" for George in your book club. But they will be three different laptops. i.e The "best" of anything depends on the individual asking.

    In that respect I can agree that nobody should be advertising that they're the unconditional "best" at something. But the NAD laying out their own criteria for determining what's "best" is just as asinine as T-Mobile advertising that they're "best." The criteria which will determine the "best" cellular service provider varies with each individual.

    1. Re:There is no universal "best" by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Untrue. T-Mobile is the best network in the US.

    2. Re:There is no universal "best" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I help people buy computers (for home and business), and frequently get asked what's the best laptop. I have to explain that there's a "best laptop" for me, and a "best laptop" for you, and a "best laptop" for George in your book club. But they will be three different laptops. i.e The "best" of anything depends on the individual asking.

      In that respect I can agree that nobody should be advertising that they're the unconditional "best" at something. But the NAD laying out their own criteria for determining what's "best" is just as asinine as T-Mobile advertising that they're "best." The criteria which will determine the "best" cellular service provider varies with each individual.

      Oh for mod points. Thank you.

  18. Now that I'm on 4G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can say I frequently get better speeds with T-Mo than my Spectrum Time Warner cable connection. Jesus this is dire. Then again, if T-Mo offered a truly unlimited data tethering plan at a competitive price with Spectrum, I'd consider it.

    1. Re: Now that I'm on 4G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the average home user a cellular hot spot would probably be plenty for day to day needs about the only thing holding back cellular adoption to replace the cable company Monopoly would be the caps in effect. I think at this point TMobile still has the highest cap somewhere in the 50gb per month range before you are throttled. An average user would probably burn through that after a few days binge watching Netflix. The plus side if you can bear tmobiles throttling to 480p with the binge on option you could stream as much Netflix as you wanted all month

  19. Throughput != Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All Cellular networks are the same "speed" - Light speed.

    It's the throughput that they are measuring - so many fucking idiots.

    1. Re:Throughput != Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spotted the assburger. The rest of us knew what was fucking meant. Enjoy being a lonely loser.

  20. Zero coverage at work or home by el_smurfo · · Score: 1

    I've had T-Mobile for over a decade and keep them because i have 2 unlimited lines at $80 a month total. That said, the coverage in my town is pretty terrible just a few miles from the freeway. Sure, I can get 30-50mbps, but what good does that do me when I can't get make a call at work.

  21. Love T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love T-Mobile's unlimited internet! Get upwards of 100Mb downloads in my area on my Pixel 2.
    And when I go overseas I get free data and texting, just a bit slower.

    Verizon, ATT and Sprint can't hold a candle to it.

  22. "Better Ingredients, Better Pizza" lawsuit by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

    Pizza Hut won the initial round claiming Papa John's didn't prove their claim that their ingredients made their pizza better, but Papa John's appealed and prevailed in the long run.

    The Battle Between Papa John's and Pizza Hut

    The "better-best" argument also had a lasting impression on advertising.

    You've seen commercials where a company claims to have the "best" thingamajig. "Best" can be used without having to back up your statement. However, when you use "better," you "better" have proof to substantiate your claim, or risk getting into another heated lawsuit.

    Now, almost 20 years after the lawsuits began, Papa John's adamantly denies Pizza Hut's false advertising charges. The company's lawyers maintain the statements made in the ad campaign aren't false but were merely statements of personal taste.

    Lawyers for Pizza Hut said Papa John's ads violated federal law. They claimed, even without evidence, that customers relied on the "better ingredients, better pizza" slogan on which to base their pizza-buying decision; thus, Papa John's ad campaign is deceptive in their eyes.

    1. Re:"Better Ingredients, Better Pizza" lawsuit by jjbenz · · Score: 1

      Pizza Hut is garbage, and Papa Johns is only slightly better.

  23. T-mobile's network is a joke in the Tampa Bay area by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look at their coverage map then it should be the absolute best carrier....

    The coverage and speed is no where near what they claim - actually it's at the verge of being useless at times.

    Also I dare you taking your phone to Europe. With two T-Mobile phones being within 4ft with full bars on a roaming network the calls will go to voicemail.

    Have fun with T-Mobile - we had them for 4 months until we bailed and ran back to AT&T (which I by no means are a complete fan of either - but it's at LEAST 4x as reliable as T-Mobile)

    PROS: It's cheap and not the worst service - if you can live with that then stick with them.

  24. AT&T faking 4G network? by bjoeg · · Score: 1

    Who is going after AT&T for what looks like faking a great LTE coverage.

    As a user of the Samsung S7 Active (which is a Samsung exclusively sold through AT&T) phone has no indicator for 3G/UMTS coverage. When connected to a 3G/UMTS cell it will show 4G in network indicator, 4G/LTE when connected to a true 4G cell and EDGE when connected on 2G.

    What differs on these Samsung Sx Active phones is that since they are only sold through AT&T, AT&T also controls the firmware releases, and they can only be OTA updated on their network.

  25. Don't call Saul by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    It's fine as long as they define what it means. I don't want lawyers gumming things up by bald, loud assertion.

    In fact, if I am looking for best unlimited, I think in my area. Perhaps Jesse and Walt are a little more concerned with coverage range.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  26. Re:T-mobile's network is a joke in the Tampa Bay a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also I dare you taking your phone to Europe. With two T-Mobile phones being within 4ft with full bars on a roaming network the calls will go to voicemail.

    I live in Europe and I have been using T-Mobile for at least ten years. Never had this problem.

  27. Speed was useless for me by westphal · · Score: 1

    After having AT&T service for many years, I opted to switch the family to T-Mobile last year. It only lasted three months. It's true that their network is blazing fast when you have a good connection to it. Unfortunately, their network was extremely spotty on coverage. We have three locations where we regularly need reliable indoor service. T-Mobile failed at all of them. Calls would drop or service was completely unavailable. These aren't rural locations. We're talking Detroit and Ann Arbor, Michigan. Since none of our phones were under contract, I switched back to AT&T. It's more expensive and not quite as fast, but it's worth it because it actually works.