OK first off you are an ignorant philistine.
Secondly you think (I should be careful with that concept) that
because a landline phone company had coverage in this area that they
had a good cell coverage at the same time.
Actually they did not have good coverage down here for
landline. This is not a former Bell South area. We had smaller
private phone companies in this area. (Co-ops etc.) Therefore Bell
South had no coverage here. (but the good thing was all landline
companies were linked so you always had phone service. Chalk one up
to landline.)
Secondly one of the problems with ATT today is that they are the
product of mergers and acquisitions of incompatible technologies that
they have just in the last few years smoothed over. (read their
history of acquisitions and you will see what I am talking about Bell
South and ATT Mobility had incompatible services)and you will see
where some of the problem comes in.
Add into this Southwestern Bell (SBC Corp) who was part of all this.
Verizon as I said has been shedding it's landline business to
concentrate on its wireless and FIOS services.
Not saying one is better, but the reason Verizon is so good down here
is that it sold off its landline business down here and bought out a
Cell companies's coverage. They decided to pick one area to be best
in and not try and span too big an area.
Also playing in the sandbox down here is Southern Link which is a
part of the Southern Companies which is called a regional iDEN
carrier. They have all the public service covered (police, cities,
states, counties etc.) as they have a great network that includes push to talk.
One of the biggest problems is that you guys have a tendency not to
see beyond your own traffic loop and realize that the US is one big
ass country and has a lot of spots that are just way out there.
There are some areas in the west where I would not want to be a
Verizon customer as they have lousy coverage.
With the tightening of the Cell markets (fewer and fewer big players)
we will see better coverage. However until some federal laws come
about (I understand that there are a few now) that allow the cell
companies to put up their towers to effect coverage.
If Apple wants to sell a product they need to make sure they have the
backbone to support that product. It does not make sense to roll out
a product and 2 years later say we are still building out the support
for that product.
It seems to me that you have railed against a company that has played
that game before whose name begins with M and ends with t.
Oh by the way what does Apple have to do with this. They signed the
agreement with ATT to sell their product and if they did not do their
due diligence to make sure the network would handle their product
they bear some responsibility for it. Unless you are saying they did
this all for money? Naw Steve Jobs would not do that would he?
Stewart
At 08:33 AM 10/28/2009, you wrote:
You need to take that up wit the FCC. Coverage is not Apple's
responsibility. Wasn't ATT formerly called Bell South? I'm surprised
that they did not take better care of you backwoods droids.
I think the FCC is working hard to reverse the the predatory practices
nurtured by the Bush FCC, but clearly the FCC is working too slowly
for you. There will be some big battles with very rich corporations to
fight. Maybe you should promote iPhone access as a basic human right?
Rev. Stewart A. Marshall
mailto:[email protected]
Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org
Ozark, AL SL 82
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
