"AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business...

Seth Weintraub
|
November 16, 2009
|
Share

... and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly."

Those harsh words are the rebuttal by Verizon to AT&T's lawsuit that was seeking to stop those now infamous "Map for that" ads (below).  As Engadget says, those words were made for the public forum not just some 50 page rebuttal (PDF).  Incredibly, Verizon says in the introduction:

AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon's "There's A Map For That" advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts.

Ziiiing! 

Verizon also called AT&T CEO Randall Stevenson a hick and made fun of Wireless CEO, Ralph de la Vega's hair plugs.  They concluded that AT&T's orange and blue colors were dumb and clashed with each other.

Comments (22)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 7:32pm

Ok I'm not an American but it sounds like Verizon is being a jealous bitch. AT&T makes too much money from iPhone contracts and Verizon has to cope up with other bullshit like Droid and Samsung crap. Yes ? (I may be wrong).

ObamaPacman (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 9:03pm

Yeah they are losing the top subscribers to iPhone / AT&T. To prevent the outflow of smartphone users, Verizon just increased their termination fee to $350.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 10:36pm

Verizon has to lock in everyone they can at this point.  I suspect that the Judge in the suit against Verizon isn't going to be too keen on Verizon using the courts for marketing.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 4:17am

It has explicitly said on the Verizon web site that they don't guarantee the accuracy of their coverage maps. I bet they promise accuracy in court and their 80 million subscribers, or they lose this case. But to do that would appear to lose Verizon every subscriber arbitration case - all a subscriber need do is say the coverage map as contracted was inaccurate... And $350 or whatever gets saved on early termination fees. Whoops. And if you don't get the term fee back, I'm sure AT&T would like to know for this case. Verizon seems scared of the courts on this one - it seems like they want to win public opinion despite what appears to me an already lost case. Regardless, this campaign just might slow Verizons bleed. The 80 million AT&T customers already know what they have for service. I imagine Verizon is most worried about people deciding to try AT&T. A large termination fee supports that argument.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 10:55am

You moron, the new fee instituted is due to the fact that VZW has been offering great BOGO deals on smartphones. And what do people do? They take advantage of an otherwise great offer by adding another line, getting a phone for free, canceling that line, paying the $175 ETF, and then selling the smartphone on eBay for hundreds more. The newly raised ETF fee is just on smartphones and to prevent this kind of scamming from happening. Now, if we were talking about the precious network your iPhone was on, I'm sure you'd be all for it. And by the way, last quarter ATT added 2 million subs, and VZW, w/o the iPhone still managed to add 1.2 million subs. ATT is going to die once their iPhone exclusive ends my friend!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 4:28am

You are absolutely right!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 7:33pm

I dont think Mr. i don't people will ever buy a iPhone should talk!

SKK (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 7:49pm

Verizon is absolutely right to point out AT&T 3G coverage is poor.  They would be equally right to point out that even where there is "supposed" coverage, it is of such poor quality and so overloaded that calls are routinely dropped and/or don't go (or come) through.

Verizon however has atrocious customer service and is the Darth Vader of networks.  They have tried to squelch Wi-Fi, foist V-Cast on customers in place of better products (e.g. iTunes), and prevent people using their networks from accessing phone-providers applications - restricting them to just the lame Verizon applications.

 

Verizon has tried at every leap forward in phone technology to hamstring the offering with their inferior products.  They have the better network, but that is all they have.  Any other services they offer are only there to the extent they have to compete with what competitors have forced Verizon to provide.

AT&T may be an inferior network (and it is), but Verizon is just down-right evil as far as a company goes.  A major reason Apple did not go with Verizon is because Verizon was unwilling to allow all of the things that we now take for granted because the deal with AT&T forced them to.

In the end it comes down to pick your poison...and just hope none of the network providers win - or we're all dead.

 

 

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 8:19pm

You dont need Verizon to tell you that at&t has a poor network, just get a two year contract with at&t and you will see for yourself.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 9:25pm

Verizon is right. ATT is the worst wireless company in existence. Let's hope Apple switches.

ikir (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 5:55am

Probably you are not italian then :-)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 16, 2009 - 10:50pm

Name calling Really????? This is not 2nd grade and I can see the jealousy in Verizon's eyes....

"Verizon also called AT&T CEO Randall Stevenson a hick and made fun of Wireless CEO, Ralph de la Vega's hair plugs.  They concluded that AT&T's orange and blue colors were dumb and clashed with each other."

Come on, we have established that Verizon has a better overall network.  Get off of at&t is you don't like the service and go get a droid.  Seriously go do it, I am tired of people that have an iPhone bashing AT&T.  Been with AT&T for 10 years now and have not had a problem in the general Phoenix Area.  It works for me and I love my iPhone.  Until the Iphone goes to another carrier this is what you get, don't like then too bad.  Time to jump ship, I am sure my speeds will pick up too if the "whiners" get off the network.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 6:56am

You do understand sarcasm dont you?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 6:56am

You do understand sarcasm dont you?

9to5Mac boon (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 12:02am

AT&T is not standing still. They are improving their network at a good pace. Although AT&T has fewer overall subscribers than Verizon, they handle twice as much data on their network as Verizon does. That says a lot about what AT&T offers its customers vs. what Verizon does. The availability of att wifi sites to iPhone customers is another good feature.

Now once AT&T brings their level of wireless data infrastructure up to date, which will happen in the next couple of tears, Verizon will have no advantage. 

Many people would rather go with AT&T to get the best smartphone experience available than get stuck with a two year contract with Verizon and having to put up with less useful phone for two years.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 2:43am

At&t is not the only one improving.  As they build out the 3G, verizon has completed initial testing for LTE in 2 cities (Boston, Seattle).  I'm not a big fan of verizon, but at&t is skating to the puck, not where the puck will be.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 2:45am

At&t is not the only one improving.  As they build out the 3G, verizon has completed initial testing for LTE in 2 cities (Boston, Seattle).  I'm not a big fan of verizon, but at&t is skating to the puck, not where the puck will be.

ggore (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 4:24am

This whole hoohaa makes you want to cry if you live as I do, in an area not covered by EITHER carrier's 3G, let alone EDGE.  And I'm only 50 miles from a Top 40 metro area.   AT&T has not extended their 3G coverage one bit in this state in the past year, just four small blue dots in four cities.  Verizon only has coverage along and 10 miles either side of one interstate highway, covering only 10% of the state.  And no plans to expand, according to a Verizon store employee.  They're leaving expansion to the smaller regional carriers, even though Verizon holds licenses for the entire state. 

iPhone (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 4:45am

Here is my humble opinion:

I have been on both networks here in SoCal and they both dropped calls.  Neither is perfect.  AT&T definately drops more but I also understand how why.  As Verizon simply upgraded an existing network to what they call "3G", they gained one significant advantage.  They did not have to build out a new network.  They also inherited many disadvantages which they experience now:  Their old CDMA technology as well as their upgraded version isn't really 3G, it is a patch to offer faster data speeds than before.  These speeds are barely faster than EDGE.  IT is also the reason they DO NOT have the capability to run simultaneous voice and data (and anyone who has a smartphone (especially iPhone) knows that this is mandatory).  They also do not have a clear path to next gen technology.  The chip(s) they will use in the future will still need to contain both 4G and CDMA capabilities.  

In AT&T's defense, they chose true 3G technology and the world standard.  It has a clear path to 4G and most importantly when 4G is the standard, your overflow is to a solid 3G network.  The biggest problem I have with AT&T is that they have not built that new network out fast enough.  

 

In summary, I believe since Verizon has CDMA technology as the backbone, it still poses a problem for Apple to ever go their network because they would still have to produce an iPhone exclusively for Verizon (the only CDMA version).  Even if they get it for their new LTE network, the growing pains will be exactly what AT&T's conversion to 3G is right now and maybe worse!  As I said earlier, neither is perfect, but I am confident that Apple made the right choice because the one phone they build is what the world uses and is today's and the near futures technology.  It has a clear path to 4G technology and most important, during LTE build out it will be supported by what will then be a solid, stable 3G network possibly with data speeds greater than 7.2mps.  At that speed we may not be very satisfied with AT&T!  None-the-less, 2010-2012 for Verizon's 4G build out will be challenging service years as 2008-2010 are for AT&T.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 6:37am

AT&T coverage stinks and the truth hurts. Verizon's ads are in no way misleading. AT&T has brought a frivolous lawsuit which will be thrown out after getting tons of publicity which will help Verizon and hurt AT&T.

 

Overall this is a win for iPhone users and AT&T customers. It will finally force AT&T to listen to its customers and improve coverage.

Whats not to like?

Robert (not verified) | November 17, 2009 - 6:49am

As most 1st year art students know from Color Theory 101 (if not from High School), orange and blue are complementary colors (not that it has to do with anything important about AT&T). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementary_color#Art_and_design