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.
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.
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
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.
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.