Neven Mrgan writes:
Regardless of what you think about the most rant-inspiring bit of AT&T news – no upgrade pricing for iPhone owners who bought 3Gs and have been sending a lot of money AT&T’s way – they’re dropping the ball here. Apple has brought them many, many new customers; excited, upgrade-happy customers with expensive plans. It’s disingenuous for AT&T to argue that their network is so overloaded they’re struggling to support MMS & tethering. (n.b. these are features long in the tooth and they’re available, like, everywhere else, including my birth country of Croatia – you know, the place that went through a war not long ago?)
What the heck has AT&T been doing with their earnings, if not putting them into maintaining and upgrading the network?
AT&T has stated that the average iPhone customer pays an average of $90 every month. With all that moolah, you would think that AT&T would want to lock in as many iPhone customers as possible before Apple jumps ship to another carrier in 2010.
June 16th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Well, with my contract up, and my 1st gen iPhone feeling quite out of date, I want to upgrade. However, if Apple is moving to other carriers in 2010 I might just wait.
Sad that for $90 i get a phone, text, and a slow data plan. For $110 i get a phone, high speed internet that is able to be routed to hundreds of computers, and hundreds of tv channels.
Sure, the cell is mobile. So I will swap the tv for the mobility. Now give me the unlimited high speed internet i can route (tether) to hundreds of computers (my notebook), and a phone with text and MMS.
How is it that FiOS and Comcast can handle this amount of traffic, but the cell companies can’t? Both have infrastructure such as cell towers or COAX/optics, servers, routers, support, etc. There has to be a much bigger cost in providing cable to each house than a tower serving who knows how many. Servicing the two have to be hugely different also.
Thoughts?