Verizon's audacious marketing campaign will only get aggressive as we move towards the holiday season and lawsuits might not help AT&T in time to compete fairly against Verizon this season.
Probably realizing just this, AT&T has launched a counter campaign to educate their customers about the misleading Verizon ad campaign.
Taking a swipe at Verizon's 'There's a map for that' campaign (which itself mocks iPhone's ad campaign), AT&T has launched an ad titled 'There's a misrepresentation for that' where it explains what the 3G coverage maps on Verizon's ads actually mean.
In their ad, AT&T compares their own data coverage against the population density across the various regions in US and explains
"A comparison of US population density explains why AT&T hasn't focused its 3G deployment on Nevada and rural areas of the Mountain Time Zone"
However, what AT&T did not emphasize is the fact that in the areas where data coverage is actually available, the AT&T network is faster than that of Verizon's. Verizon's '5X More 3G Coverage' might be misread as five times faster connectivity while in actuality it only means the 3G coverage area in square miles.
Folks at AppleInsider do a good job in explaining why wireless broadband on AT&T network is better than that on Verizon's CDMA network. As they note, in the regions AT&T offers 3G connectivity, the speed provided is close to 3.4 Mbit which is way higher than the maximum speed provided by Verizon's own EVDO Rev A 3G service that can only offer between 0.6 Mbit to 1.4 Mbit. In fact, the other areas where AT&T do not have 3G connectivity, their 2.5G connectivity offers 0.4 Mbit that is still pretty much a respectable service.
AppleInsider also notes that Verizon's upcoming state of the art LTE network is expected to be operational from 2011 by which time, AT&T would have itself moved to a much better HSPA 7.2 3G service that will offer speeds of up to 7.4 Mbit.
Does this then mean that AT&T users have all along had a better 3G service than Verizon? Not necessarily. AT&T's exclusive partnership with Apple has essentially been a double edged sword. While the iPhone has single-handedly driven AT&T's revenue figures up in the past few months, the unprecedented spike in wireless data usage has also meant that their network is much more clogged than the networks of other carriers in USA, including Verizon's.
Smartphones offered with Verizon Wireless have not particularly taken off so far and while this has meant increasing pressure on their top line, it has given Verizon the license to go all-out against AT&T in their advertising campaigns since their network is still not as clogged as AT&T's.
So where is all this heading to? As of now, AT&T is in a better position considering that the challenges that the company is going through because of increased user activity is only a good problem to have. That cannot be said for Verizon though, since their marketing campaigns have not really been backed by strong sales numbers. Until the time Apple keeps the iPhone locked to AT&T, the carrier will have to live with the ignominy of being seen as an inferior network. Opening up the iPhone to other carriers might then only do more good to AT&T than harm.
[via AppleInsider]
Notice how they don't say "AT&T's own 3G coverage map". They can't make the claim that all those data areas are 3G, which means the map is a combination of 3G and EDGE speeds. You can get on AT&Ts data network in all the areas labeled in AT&Ts map, but you'll only be able to access AT&Ts 3G service in Verizon's map.
It seems rather like AT&T is the one misrepresenting itself.
I alreaady had 2nd thoughts about appple and att…with the droid out there's something else to choose from
Seems you like twisting words when you have no idea what you are talking about.
Well cause i drive thru those places and it sucks not to have a good 3g speeds when im on the road.
Wait, what? There are two data networks: EDGE and 3G. Verizon's map shows only 3G coverage. AT&T's map shows both. What are you getting at?
O.k., here's the deal:
Verizon's maps show ONLY 3G Network (on both their map and on AT&T's map), this is done to show the 3G coverage, not the Edge coverage, which is a lot slower.
AT&T look like clowns. Verizon didn't misrepresent anything. The ad was about 3G coverage. AT&T has a pretty terrible network. What is worse than their lack of 3G coverage in rural areas is how bad their 3G coverage is in densely populated like NYC and San Francisco.
I live in NYC and AT&T is pretty unusable and battling it out for third place with T-Mobile. This is why I had to give up my beloved iphone for a Pre.
Basically what AT&T is saying here is that consumers are too stupid to understand what Verizon is saying and they may mistake 3G for *any* coverage. The truth is, if AT&T were in the same league, this wouldn't be up for discussion at all. Too bad AT&T.
what you people aren't getting is that ATT's edge coverage is still faster than Verizon's 3g!!!! Read the whole article please!
hey if you like Verizon go try their new phone…..
I'm so pleased I live on an insignificant lump of mostly wet rock (UK)
With an official O2 unlock happening, I can pick & choose my carrier, and they all offer a 3G service
2nd
AT&T's 2G is still faster than Verizons 3G!
what are you driving and using the internet? idiot
I've gotta go with AT&T in this dispute. The Verizon map of AT&T coverage shows no 3g in my area even though we have had 3g here for years. The map of Verizon 3g coverage also looks quite exaggerated in this area.
nice presentation…….
Good 3g speeds? I hope you don't mean verizon's .4mbps – 1.4mbps speeds (averaging 700kbps)? ATT's edge is about .4mbps – .7mbps. For those who don't seem to understand, verizon is comparing an old technology, which is still considered 3g but not all 3g is created equal. ATT's 3g is 3.6mbps – 7.2mbps; that's speed. Verizon doesn't have a 3g only map. Go to their website and see for yourself. All of their maps are combinations of more than one type of available network.
ATT's edge speeds (.4mbps – .7mbps) are very close to verizon's 3g speeds (.4mbps – 1.4mbps). On the other hand, ATT areas that does have 3g are at 3.6mbps (twice verizon's 3g speeds) and in some populated markets are 7.2mbps (4 times as fast as verizon's 3g). Verizon's slogan should be "5x the 3g coverage area, but 4 times slower."
Where in NYC are you? I just spent a week down there and had no issues at all with my iPhone aside from GPS. I didn't have a single time where I didn't have phone or 3G available.
Who's the idiot that hasn't heard of
Hands free kits
Streaming Audio of too Many varieties to mention
Skype over 3G unrestrictor
…etc, etc.
As I listen to Windows Weekly STREAMED to my hands free kit thru the radio…
YOU R NUTS A PRE IN PLACE OF AN IPHONE THATS LIKES SPAM IN PLACE OF A PORTERHOUSE STEAK THE SPAM WILL FEED YOU BUT ITS STILL NOT A STEAK!!!! GOOD LUCK ON THAT I'VE HAD ALL THESE PHONES CAUSE I TEST THEM FOR COMPANIES IPHONES ALWAYS IS THE ALL AROUND WINNER
Ps: all caps cause i'm just that outraged
droid is very nice not even close to an iphone its just another mock up thats says its an iphone killer
if the iphone was all that bad why is it that every cellphone company is trying to copy the iphone also every company including VERIZON is begging apple please build a phone for us please cause we suck we weren't even think about do all this blackberry storm and droid until after the iphone killed us in everything
well said booya I figin love my iPhone comand and concer is awsome along with my other 100 awsome apps
I roam mostly through the villages, soho and tribeca on the island of Manhattan.
The best is the horrible quality right on the side street (Greene) by the soho apple store. Its a place where my 3G/3Gs would always drop coverage and often not return. Its funny to see the apple store employees all frustrated on their smoke break ("hello? HELLO?").
Everyone I know in manhattan is at their wit's end with AT&T. We all love the phone, but AT&T cannot keep up with the demand. In my apartment (east village), I get quality throughput (600K or so) in the mornings, but once the evening hits and everyone is out at the local bars using their iphone, I cannot connect at all.
I certainly won't argue that the Pre is a higher quality device than the iphone. I tried the blackberry storm and returned it. The Pre did give me a good enough alternative that I could ditch AT&T/iPhone. Its no slouch. I'll have to admit though, now that I have solid, always-on IM built into the OS and multi tasking, I will think twice about returning to the iphone even if it is on another network. I'll probably be heading to android next if webos doesn't get more compelling. I experienced push when the 3GS came out, but it was very unreliable. AT&T may be to blame for this as well.
this is absolutely ridiculous. For starters you are talking theoretical speeds when comparing 3G. In actual real world qualitative comparisons, there, well, isn't a comparison. Neither AT&T 3G nor EDGE come close to EVDO on verizon.
If you are at all unbiased, this is pretty simple to see. There are many different things to look at besides theoretical speeds for the protocol such as bandwidth to the towers and spectrum.
Since AT&T is touting that they have 3G "where 75% of the population is," look at the results of testing in the places where most people live:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/167391/a_day_in_the_life_of_3g.html
Everyone seems to be missing the point. The Verizon ads say nothing about speed, only coverage, and specifically 3G coverage. The basic point of the Verizon ad is that they have 5x as much 3G coverage. There's nothing about speed, type of 3G or availability of smartphones.