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.
"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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Stop going to places where incest is a common practice.
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.
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.
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...)
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.
Sadly, these areas and "areas where the air is breathable and you don't feel claustrophobic and anxious" are a 100% overlap.
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.