> Because if all of us move to T-Mobile, the other carriers will have no choice to join them in being customer friendly.
No, if all people move to T-Mobile, they will just start behaving like the other carriers. The only reasons they're customer friendly is because they have a low market share and try to win customers, not because it's their company culture. Just look at their German parent company, Deutsche Telekom is the German AT&T.
The purpose isn't to pledge loyalty to one company forever - it's to vote with your dollars to encourage the type of behavior you'd like to see.
If enough people switch - the others will have to make some changes in order to stay competitive. He's not suggesting that we all pledge loyalty to t-mobile until the end of time.
I used a tethered unlimited data iphone 4 as my only internet for 18 months after I got my first job (and thus treated myself to a smartphone). Three (UK Carrier) never complained - even when I was downloading seasons of shows or 20gb games from steam. My usage was hundreds of GB.
As far as I am concerned that is worthy of loyalty, and I intend to remain with them unless they change their behaviour - even if not the absolute cheapest.
Bizarre that them doing what they said they would should surprise me and engender loyalty ofc, but it did. Just my 2 cents.
Though T-Mobile seems to have adopted an interesting strategy in the US - as a European customer I find their proposition not to be notably better than that of other carriers. Here, it takes European commissioners to lower international roaming charges. T-Mobile doesn't rock across the globe.
The commisioners only lowered the charges for users in the EU roaming in other EU-countries.
For example, if you bought your contract in Germany, you'll have to pay only 0.10 € / minute while you're in Denmark.
(Which is quite funny, 'cause I have to pay 0.11€ / minute for calling to other german carriers.)
I am so tired of two year contracts, but I have a list of 'approved' carriers I can choose from and have my phone partially paid for. Until recently T-Mobile was not on the list. Now all I need to do if wait out my current two year with the other guys.
There is certainly nothing smart about paying seventy, eighty, or more, per month for a smart phone. If anyone is smart its the guys charging for it and getting it.
Two year contracts are a lie, a prop, an illusion. If you break it, you basically pay back the prorated part of the phone discount you got. If you go to a carrier without phone subsidies, they'll charge you less month-to-month an amount equal to the monthly prorated phone discount.
This was my realization when pricing out basic phone service with T-Mobile, ATT, etc. You have to really work hard to pay different. Just don't be afraid to break the contract, it's not a real penalty.
I think this is quite incorrect. I've recently got the new iPhone and looked at the possible options across AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile (I haven't included Sprint for a reason I cannot recall right now).
I made a spreadsheet for my girlfriend when she bought the iPhone 5s. She was debating between AT&T, StraightTalk, and AIO wireless. On AIO, you're still better off on AT&T over the course of a 2 year contract by $90. If you choose StraightTalk, you'll save $174 over 2 years. (That savings goes up to $299 if you buy an AT&T phone and then immediately cancel and pay the ETF; both prices combined are less than the $749 sticker price.)
The trick is that most people don't replace their phones on a schedule. Some phones don't hold enough of a charge after 18 months and get replaced early; some people are still happy with their 4 year old phone. If you are on a pay-as-you-go plan and hold onto a phone for longer than 2 years, the savings start to really add up.
The other trick is that many people can get pay-as-you-go prices on contract, through their corporation, credit union, or university. When I was on AT&T in 2009, I used my university's alumni association to bring my cost down to $55 per month.
Crikey. They must have the patience of a saint! Ended up having to use a 3GS when my 4 failed, and the number of times I wanted to throw it against a wall while trying to browse the web on it...
And what did I get for my $900 difference? (That is $37.50/mo BTW) A big "Verizon" label on my phone, and a two year contract.
You could get two plans and phones from PagePlus and still pay less.
I realize that there are other factors like level of customer service, and no roaming charges that VZW and ATT die-hards will tell you about. Well, in my experience, the service is no better and most people almost never use roaming service while using a Verizon MVNO. I would say that i have only spent around $20 in the last two years from roaming.
Other factiods:
Have Verizon or ATT and want to change your plan options (Minutes, Data amount ETC)? Sure - that will require a new two year contract. Don't want a new phone. Well you will still be paying the same regardless. Break the contract and you will still pay the same penalty. This seems to refute your claim that you are just paying back a subsidy.
Want a new phone with your new contract? OK, choose a "free" one from a list whose retail prices have a $150-$200 difference in price. Are you going to pay less per month if you opt for the cheaper (3g) free one? If your statement was true you should.
Generally, MVNO customers have lowest priority on a network. I know AT&T, for example, gives network priority to Postpaid first, then Prepaid, then MVNOs. So on a congested network, you'd be the first to be kicked off.
Generally speaking, I don't think the experience would be as bad as you say. Yes they get the lowest priority but given how good AT&T's network is, you generally won't be kicked off and would probably incur a reduction in speed. The reality is, you aren't going to need (insert super fast speed here) on a day to day basis. There are exceptions of course, such as tethering or streaming content, but really, how often would you be doing that and need it? This is why I don't buy the 4G argument, especially when there're carriers that ask us to pay more simply to be on 4G.
I think that's going to depend heavily on where you are. I was in Chicago last week for work and found out the hard way that VZW LTE is severely over capacity inside the Loop. I'm a postpaid customer and had to force my phone to CDMA data on a few occasions just to get a usable connection.
Knowing that I'm going to be travelling a fair amount in the near future on business, I'm not sure if it'd be worth gambling that the host network for my MVNO wouldn't be similarly over capacity elsewhere resulting in me getting lower priority.
Until they get big enough to put them in. I've run through this cycle before with ISPs here in New Zealand - they're great while they're small, then once they hit a double digit percentage of the market, they shit all over you - raise fees, cut service centres (or outsource them), and add fixed term contracts and other bollocks.
The usa was 5 years behind the eu in forcing contracts, so yes this is just another marketing gimmick. classic bait & switch tactic. all of the carriers forced contracts after they bought out the regional mobile providers during the decade 1995-2005.
Then you move to the "next" T-mobile. The point is to encourage this behavior, and punish the bad one by leaving as soon as it happens (same goes for Verizon/AT&T) now.
T-Mobile in the US is a separate company. The German parent has tried to sell it in the past, and no doubt would gladly sell it in the future should a willing suitor come along and the regulators okay it (that caused the last sale to fail).
To elaborate, Sprint and T-Mobile have been trying to merge, arguing that scale is fundamental in competing in the market. Regulators have argued that 4 carriers are essential to keeping parity and competition in the market.
Actually Sprint and T-Mobile have never officially tried to merge. So far all the executives have done is deny that such talks are in progress.
At one point AT&T tried to buy T-Mobile, citing Verizon being bigger as why it was okay. They even put a bunch of money on the line if it fell through. Regulators decided that either they wanted 4 parties, or that Verizon would be forced to buy Sprint to compete, leaving 2 parties. (I am not 100% certain which they said was the reason)
Actually, Sprint and T-Mobile are both on-record as planning on merging. They aren't planning to do so in the immediate future, but they both see the long-term end game being just three carriers in the entire US.
All they are waiting for is the DOJ to make a mistake and let it slip through.
Yeah, the goal is to have a marketplace where market pressures lead to all competitors being incentivized to behave like T-Mobile does currently. I’m just not sure whether that’s possible.
And I agree, Deutsche Telekom in Germany is awful and incompetent when it comes to customer service. If only their network weren’t so goddamn great … (It feels like a reversal of the situation in the US: Their technology is great and they are very competent at building their infrastructure – but how they treat customers is the exact opposite of that. And when I say technology I mean the network, not the technology they use to interface with customers. Stupid story time: Recently, after changing some notification SMS setting online, I got an e-mail thanking me for my change in contract and telling me that my monthly fee is €50, not the €50 minus €10 online ordering discount I knew I got when I entered into the contract. When calling their support hotline I was told that their system is apparently unable to display individual discounts on any and all communication with the customer except the monthly bill. The support agent also told me that I wasn’t the first person to call him because of that …)
>And I agree, Deutsche Telekom in Germany is awful and incompetent when it comes to customer service. If only their network weren’t so goddamn great … (It feels like a reversal of the situation in the US: Their technology is great and they are very competent at building their infrastructure – but how they treat customers is the exact opposite of that. And when I say technology I mean the network, not the technology they use to interface with customers.
Amusingly, you just described VZW in the United States. Fantastic network, absolutely awful at dealing with their customers.
Did you ever try D2/Vodafone? Not that they are significantly better - after all and as you know they are the other big one - but their prices are more competitive in my opinion and more importantly in my experience their network/infrastructure is far ahead. I'm always surprised by the weak reception some of my friends that actually use t-mobile suffer from - and this is not limited to certain areas, but more of a general impression I got.
In Croatia, T-Mobile is absolutely the worst carrier. Highest fees, worst customer support. They can get away with it because they have the most customers and it's just too much of a hassle to change providers.
At least that's how it was around 3 years ago. I don't live there anymore so maybe something changed (I doubt it).
I was just going to say the same thing - here in Germany Deutsche Telekom is at the very opposite end of the spectrum: expensive plans, premium prices, no innovations to be found anywhere.
It is interesting how even huge corporations like Telekom adjust their marketing and overall strategy depending on their market position. I like how they handle their role as an underdog in the US, but I'm not under any illusions. This isn't a grand gesture of goodwill, but a necessary evil in their eyes, I guess.
Good point. I've been trumpeting T-mobile lately for all the reasons cited in the article, but you're correct the real problem is a lack of regulation. T-mobile is the underdog only because they haven't had the benefit of decades of scheming and lobbying.
I would be shocked if this is not some intricate PR gimmick blog. Not saying T-mobile is bad or AtnT is bad or good. Just the article is shallow and nothing interesting.
I'm glad that T-Mobile has become a customer focused company in recent months, but let's not forget that just a short while ago, they were just like all of the other major carriers.
T-Mobile had a sudden change of heart not because they give a shit about their customers, its because their network wasn't good enough for people to put up with typical carrier bullshit. As a normal carrier, they were losing money and customers so fast that they had to either change or go out of business.
I highly doubt they would have made the same philosophical changes if they had been successful doing things the scummy way.
I've always had really good customer service with T-mobile. I remember once time almost 5-10 years ago when I needed help getting the right AT commands to connect to GPRS using Linux. The help desk heard me use the appropriate technical terms (AT commands, chat script, GPRS, etc.) and immediately forwarded me to the level 3 help desk folks who actually could handle technical questions, and they helped me even when I told them I was using Linux and could set up my own chat/expect script once I knew the required parameteres for their GPRS network.
Compare and contrast that with my previous experience with AT&T, and there was absolutely no comparison.
Yes, disagree with the parent for this reason. I've been with T-Mobile since 1999/2000-ish when they were known as VoiceStream (they renamed it T-Mobile in July 2002). That was my personal phone. When I used company-issued phones on AT&T, Sprint and Verizon, the difference was readily apparent: T-Mobile always had better quality customer service than the other carriers, more appealing plans, easier to change plans when you wanted, &c.
T-Mobile had a sudden change of heart because they had a sudden change in CEO in 2012. He's the one that's been pushing the 'uncarrier' movement within the company.
"Carriers are really nice to you... once every 23 months.
This is the biggest crock of shit I've ever heard in my
entire life. Do you have any idea how much you're paying?"
This is not a quote from an angry blog commenter. This the CEO of the United States' fourth largest mobile service provider speaking at a press conference.
It is refreshing to see a telecom executive make a statement like that, but its hard not to feel as if it might just be a clever marketing tactic.
Apparently he used to be the Chief Executive of AT&T Asia. I wonder how cellular service plans are structured there. I know that Europe has traditionally favored the no-contract plans that are just now starting to get attention in the U.S., I wonder if perhaps Asia does too.
> I'm glad that T-Mobile has become a customer focused company in recent months, but let's not forget that just a short while ago, they were just like all of the other major carriers.
Not just that, but in other countries (not the US) where they have the dominant market position, they seem just as despised as Verizon and AT&T are in the US.
Not that I'm complaining; I enjoy the consumer-side benefits of competition as much as the next guy - it's just good to remember exactly where things stand.
Same as Apple - when they were almost dead they had to use and contribute to open source projects and treat the customer fair. Nowadays they are making it clear all iThings out there belong to Apple and working hard to wall Mac OSX as well.
Barely. OpenDarwin is dead. WebKit was stolen from KHTML. CUPS has barely any development anymore. Apart from LLVM, what have they really contributed to OSS? Okay, it's more than Microsoft, but net contribution is still nothing compared to Google or Sun (when they were still alive).
KHTML was not stolen - it was used as the basis for Webkit in compliance with its licence, which is exactly how Open Source is supposed to work.
Have a look at http://www.apple.com/opensource/ - which outlines the Open Source components that Apple use and contribute to. You're right - it might not be as much as some other companies (though I don't know if it's practically less than Google or Sun) but they are consistently among the largest participants in Open Source among large tech companies.
I think my biggest beef with them is that they tend to make up for their small amount of OSS in a negative way by being such patent trolls. This is more true of their presence in the hardware world.
WebKit is itself open source, so you can't discount that just because it was derived from another open source project.
Aside from LLVM/clang and WebKit (both of which are significant enough to deserve massive accolades all by themselves), you also have stuff like launchd (which didn't catch on outside Apple, but hardly their fault), libdispatch, and mDNS.
But apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
Historical note: Launchd might have caught on if Apple had open-sourced it sooner.
The author of the Upstart init system, Scott James Remnant, wrote in 2006,
"How does [Upstart] differ from launchd?
launchd is the replacement init system used in MacOS X developed as an “Open Source” project by Apple. For much of its life so far, the licence has actually been entirely non-free and thus it has only become recently interesting with the licence change.
[...]
Had the licence been sufficiently free at the point we began development of our own system, we would probably have extended launchd rather than implement our own. At the point Apple changed the licence, our own system was already more suitable for our purposes."
So what's the contribution of Google, Sun and MS? It's you who should show example if you want to claim.
Do you have any access to Google Search API? Or BigTable source? How about Google Maps? Google Apps? What Google is releasing is "Chrome" which stole(as like your word) from WebKit, and Android. (which actually stolen from Sun, so still in lawsuit)
Well there's more. V8, Dart and Go. Maybe bunch of funny dead projects can be included. But I don't see much difference with LLVM/Clang case. Let's treat them just apart.
IMO, Google is worse than Facebook or Twitter in perspective of server-side software contribution.
Google is a major committer to Linux and to Java Guava, the premier general purpose library (standard library extension/replacement).
And they paid Guido to work on Python for years.
Oh wow you capitalized "A LOT". I am sure you'll be able to list at least 30 large known open source projects actively maintained or contributed to by Apple.
>I'm glad that T-Mobile has become a customer focused company in recent months
I was a T-Mobile customer until the first iPhone came out, and they were fantastic back then. I'd switch back now if it weren't for the fact that they have lousy coverage in Vermont.
Interestingly, just a couple of months ago T-Mobile had great online customer service -- you could log into your account and open a chat with a customer support person. They removed that in favour of a generic "support community" based on Jive. So now you have to "start a discussion" if you have a problem, or, annoyingly, call their support line.
Why T-Mobile made the change is unimportant to me. I care that they made the change, and that they committed to it via zero lock-in contracts. If I feel that I'm not getting sufficient value at some point in the future, I can simply walk away from T-Mobile without spending $325/line in termination fees.
And as for the network, I'm fortunate that it's not a trade-off for me. T-Mobile's coverage has proven superior to AT&T's for my precise work/home/travel combination.
I ended up switching to T-Mobile for their $30 prepaid plan - 5GB of data (not at reduced 2G speeds either, actual data) a month, plus a reasonable amount of voice minutes and the ability to text. Way cheaper than what I'd pay on AT&T or other carriers, really simple to set up.
I was using that plan, but I was finding that I didn't really have enough voice minutes (100 was less than I'd need). T-Mobile does throttle after 2GB on that plan, though that wasn't a big deal for me. The big problem for me was that T-Mobile's coverage area sucks; there were whole areas of Boston and Cambridge where I got absolutely no signal.
I recently moved to the $45 unlimited-everything plan on Straight Talk, which uses AT&T SIMs, and I'm pretty happy with it. (I don't know if they too throttle over 2GB, but I rarely hit it anyway.)
T-Mobile throttles after 5GB on that plan, not 2. Straight Talk straight up terminates your data connection after 2 GB. They claim that they throttle, but they effectively terminate it - the throttled connection is so slow and has so many packets dropped that I couldn't use a single app on my 'throttled' phone without it timing out and giving up.
I've read that elsewhere, but that doesn't match my experience in the New England area on TMO. I had my connection completely croak after my phone read 2GB of data usage. Maybe the behavior is different in different geographic areas?
(The last time I went over 2GB was a year ago on TMO when my home internet wasn't yet installed, so for me it's basically academic.)
Yeah, I've seen that. I don't really care, though - my real number is on Google Voice, so if I get tossed I'll just put my TMO SIM back in my phone. In the meantime, I get way better coverage.
Scroll down and you'll see '100 minutes talk | Unlimited text | First 5 GB at up to 4G speeds'
You have to buy the SIM card online and have them ship it to you; then you open it up and use the activation info in the box to set up the $30 plan and pay for your first month. It's pretty straightforward. When I did it the SIM only cost like a buck so it's pretty much as advertised - no hidden costs.
I love the service I get from T-mobile, as far as the human element goes. I've been with them for a long time and they treat me very well when I need them to.
Unfortunately, I can't tolerate the service the network itself provides anymore. It used to be fairly functional inside city limits here (Chicago), but now it works poorly downtown, often shows max signal on HSPA+ but doesn't actually have a data connection, and if I leave city limits to go for a drive, I'm looking at probably 20 minutes outside the city before I'm on a non-data or roaming connection.
I just started a new job that provides smartphone service, so I'll probably move my t-mobile account to a minimum amount per month and get a little nokia flip phone for when I'm not doing work related things. - Another big plus for t-mobile is they'll be happy to change my monthly plan without some badgering renewal bit, I've done it twice and they always accommodate me.
When I visit the US from the UK I use T-Mobile pay-as-you-go SIM cards to get data on my iPhone. It works great - you go in to a T-Mobile store, pay for the SIM and $3/day of credit (I normally spend about $25), they set up the phone and profile for you and you walk out within a few minutes with a working iPhone.
I used to use AT&T GoPhone for this, until they sold me a "special deal for SXSW" in Austin that would keep my number and data working for multiple trips three years for $100. A few months later they cancelled the data portion of the plan (naturally refusing to refund my $100 since voice still works) and made it impossible to get pay-as-you-go data on an iPhone no matter how much money you give them.
They might have fixed that now, but they've lost me to T-Mobile.
I used T-Mobile too - the trick I wish I'd known about is it'll allow free (?) roaming on to AT&T in very select areas. Your non-US credit card may not work on the website either, I just preloaded the amount I needed while at the store.
I'm really confused when reading articles like this because it sounds like a different company to the one I know which was formed out of "Deutsche Post" during the 90ies and patronizing and shitting on its customers ever since, at least in Germany.
The biggest thing with them this year was their 384kbps Speed Throttle[1], where after your family consumed 75GB of data (download and upload) the speed of your DSL (flatrate) will go down to 384kbps for the rest of the month.
Ok you could say "this is Deutsche Telekom, the parent company, but T-Mobile is very different!" but sorry, that is not the case.
I wanted to buy a Alcatel One Touch Fire with Firefox OS when I was on holidays in Poland this year so I went to a T-Mobile store and well, there was advertising and everything and they even sold them there. But only together with a contract, which I didn't want (because I can't use it in Sweden where I live). They send me to another store so I went there, they told me the same and send me to a third store where they told me that they only sell a couple of them without a contract and only in the main cities.
I mean wtf? They have been doing advertisement all over the place that they sell it for 404 zl without a contract, even in those shops, but they wouldn't sell them to me, or they would but only with a two years contract which ended up costing around 1200 zl. So I gave up.
At home again I checked their website[2] again, and yep, there they still (and to this day) advertise it for 404 zl.
I later found out that if you have a polish ID you can order one for 404 zl from their website which I did with help of my fathers ID.
So they were just fucking with me, again, and yeah, this was not the first time. I had big time problems back then when I still lived in Germany and chose a different DSL provider after being very disappointed with T-Online. Basically they didn't send a technician for two months who would fix the tech so the new provider could provide me with internet so I was without internet for two months. That is kind of a big thing if you're working from home.
T-mobile in the US has basically nothing to do with T-mobile in Europe. You can't even use a European T-mobile Wifi hotspot if you are a US T-mobile customer.
It's not profitable for T-Mobile to sell you that device at $404 if they can get someone else to pay $1200. Yes, that's shitty, but from an economic perspective it doesn't make sense for them to sell that equipment to you. The equipment, even unsubsidized, is a loss leader for the service.
In short, it would be a good customer experience if they should you the phone, but it doesn't make economic sense.
Also, sort of unrelated, but I really don't understand all this T-Mobile love. The carriers went from eating a $400+ subsidy on every phone to eating $50 or less to acquire a new subscriber. The plans aren't THAT much cheaper, and they're still a joke compared to the cost of delivery (but I digress!).
I think T-Mobile is pro-consumer the same way AT&T is pro-consumer. They just happen to do a better job marketing it.
I bought a 1 month unlimited plan the last time I was in Germany, but went through 100MB in less than 3 days (and I was trying to be fairly conservative with my usage); the remainder of my trip had speeds so slow I could basically only use e-mail.
I just switched to T-Mobile with my iPhone 5S, largely on principle. My monthly bill won't go down much and my service has gotten worse, but I'm so happy to leave AT&T and support what T-Mobile is doing. The new international roaming policy is icing on the cake.
Really? I did the same, my bill went down 50% (this is on top of a sweet discount I had on AT&T). But I see your point, I'd switch even if the savings weren't as good, they treat you like real customers, not sheep.
5GB of 4g internet with 3g speeds after that, unlimited texting, and 100 minutes of non-wifi talk (unlimited on wifi) per month is only $30 flat on T-Mobile if you buy the start-up kit at Walmart.
If you need more minutes than that you can either call over wifi, pay $0.10/minute or talk all you want for free over Wifi/3g/4g using a VoIP app like GrooveIP.
"$2000 a month for a family plan"
How is this possible? I've never heard of such an expensive monthly cost. Perhaps they're paying for several iPhones on contacts?
T-Mobile has to do this because their network is the worst. For a lot of people, that's more important than device availability, customer service, data limits, international roaming and contract terms. I say this as a T-Mo customer.
My experience is that T-Mobile's 4G is the best. It beats Time Warner's cable modem. I'm able to stream HD Youtube without stalling on my phone but not at home.
Yeah, I went to Tmob a few months after their big relaunch/remodeling/whatever that made quite a splash in nearly every blog as the "end of bullshit"
The results? well the plans were just as expensive as those from AT&T, Verizon and Sprint, except that Tmobile had by far the worst coverage of all, I didn't get any signal inside my office.
The plan mobility was crap as well, with some plans you were stuck and couldn't move, they wanted me to buy a new SIMcard to change plans and I had to get the new one from one of their stores in particular else it wouldn't work. Why do that if not to keep me locked in a crap plan?
They said it was the end of carrier trickery but they forced me get a ridiculously expensive plan in order to be able to pay for an additional international calling service, meaning that I had to pay for a bunch of crap I did not need just to be able to qualify for that small extra feature.
Overall my experience was pretty bad and Tmob's new strategy can be summed as much ado about nothing with a lot of fine print in the middle.
I'm usually not one to complain about what hits #1 spot on Hacker News, but this boils down to "I like T-Mobile, their customer service is good and I have a good plan with them" but not much else. Would it have been so highly upvoted if it wasn't from the "A VC" blog? I suspect not.
Tesco. I'm telling you, man, Tesco's customer service is so badass. Never had a problem with them. They also piggy-back off of O2's network, so I never have coverage problems unless I'm out in the sticks.
My experience with tmobile and Att is probably reversed: tmobile found ways to add hidden or mysterious charges that others couldn't (I.e. $10 / month android charge). Most of the customer service reps in recent years got worse and worse.
I finally switched to Att about 2 years ago and I have to admit: every time I called, everyone was friendly and helpful. Nothing was hidden: they laid out their charges and I agreed to them. They may have even slightly higher ($10 a month), but I have excellent nationwide coverage and very good internet speeds when I need it.
This was just my experience, and it may be different for others.
I would definitely not want to be a new AT&T customer today as they've phased out nearly every part of my current grandfathered plan, but I've had nothing but good experiences with support.
Even last year, when they somehow lost my old messaging plan in a phone upgrade, the rep (who I didn't even have to wait long to speak with) quickly switched me back.
The moment they require me to switch to a Mobile Share plan I'm out, but until then I'm continually surprised to be such a happy customer.
I just switched off of tmobile to verizon b/c I thought it incredibly unfriendly. They said I'd get 4g in Atlanta. But I didn't on 3 separate devices. I couldn't get service at all at my intown house which seems insane for a major city. When I tried to get out of my contract because they'd said I'd get service and I didn't they pulled up a map of their service area and said I was mistaken. I wrote letters I tweeted etc. They basically told me to fuck off.
Interesting. I've never been treated badly by any of their support staff, but I definitely have the "doesn't work in my own home" problem with them, as many other friends do. It perplexes me because AT&T works just fine inside my apartment, and I believe they are on close to the same frequency. Weaker signals perhaps?
AT&T has HSPA+ on 850MHz and 1900MHz, T-Mobile uses 1700MHz and 1900MHz, so the building penetration is significantly worse. However, due to the failed AT&T acquisition, T-Mobile phones can now roam on AT&T's 850MHz 3G spectrum, so most of the coverage issues indoors should disappear soon if they haven't already.
I didn't realize the frequencies were so dramatically different. If I remember my basic electronics, that's double the wavelength for the AT&T signals and that makes complete sense. Thanks.
I think Fred might be disappointed when he switches back to t-mobile. I was a t-mobile customer for years and I agree they have awesome customer service. The big problem for me was the terrible cell reception in many buildings in NYC.
That said, I hear there are many areas in the US where t-mobile provides decent service. For people considering switching if t-mobile's international data deal isn't that important to you, you may want to check out http://www.solavei.com first. They are a t-mobile reseller (MVNO) and you may be able to save some money compared to going through t-mobile directly. Their prices are similar to straight talk (mentioned in some of the other comments) and they also allow you to refer customers to reduce your monthly bill.
Best cell phone service for the price IMO is http://www.pagepluscellular.com/ (a verizon reseller). $55 / month (including taxes and fees) for unlimited calling, unlimited texts, and 2 gigs of data. I have been a customer of theirs for a year and a half. Their customer service is pretty good, but more importantly their signal strength (coming from verizon's towers) is the best out of all the carriers in NYC.
The one big caveat with the MVNO resellers is that they don't offer LTE data and some don't support LTE phones (ie iphone 5, 5c, 5s, etc).
TL;DR - if you're down to use an iPhone 4S or other 3G smartphone you can save some serious money per month going through an MVNO reseller.
As far as I know, the signal strength for voice calls and the data speed are different issues. Many T-mobile towers only support edge (1x) speeds on non-LTE GSM phones. Some towers have been refarmed to support the 3G hspa+ frequencies. Here is an unofficial coverage map:
http://www.airportal.de/
In my apartment in the Upper West Side, I was getting a 3G data on an unlocked AT&T iphone 4S with a t-mobile sim, but only 2 bars of voice service. I'm tempted to try t-mobile's $30 / month 5Gig data + 100 minutes plan to use with my iphone 5s.
If their LTE service has decent coverage I may be able to get away with using facetime audio + google voice + talkatone.
This is such an obvious puff piece. Has T-Mobile been paying these people to write these things for them? I'm still awaiting a response from T-Mobiles legal department after I threatened to sue of their refusal to release me from my contract without the $300 fee http://www.scribd.com/doc/169303371/Demand-Letter-T-Mobile
T-Mobile simply doesn't have any data coverage outside of major metropolitan areas. If you're someone that travels outside these areas, you will be unable to use your devices for anything but calls and texts.
That's a big caveat that should be mentioned.
(If you never leave the Bay Area, for example, then T-Mobile is a logical choice. It works well for me 98% of the time here.)
Yes, there is free UMTS/HSPA/EDGE roaming on AT&T for post-paid plans (aka not the $30 100 minute/5gb plan) and there is a data limit. For my plan, its 50 megabytes, which doesn't seem like much, but AT&T throttles you to 128kbit/s, so you really have to work hard to get to that 50 megs.
I recently wrote a piece on how I'm using T-Mobile and TalkaTone on my iPhone 5 and only paying $30 a month for unlimited talk, text, and data. That's why I love T-Mobile.
"companies sit around trying to figure out what customer charges they can get away with"
That is so true! I used to work for a US telco and I've read all the stories about the "mystery charges".
Also, I must say that telcos, and even banks, in India are to an extent like this. Had one bank put a 1.5$ on my credit card statement for an analysis that they did on my spend the previous month - which indicated that 100% of my card spend was towards airfare. I used the card only once, EVER, and I did not ask for that analysis! I ended up spending 3$ (counting just travel cost) fighting the 1.5$ charge, but I absolutely wasn't going to let them have it!
Imagine telcos making an extra 1$ on some random charge on some 10 million customers. Even that is a lot of money!
I don't think you actually save any money on Ting. Their biggest data plan is 3000M for $55 (with no text messages and no phone service), compared with T-mobile's unlimited everything for $70. The innovation they offer is that if you don't use anything and know you never will, you only pay $6 a month. But then again, I could get you the complete lack of calling, data, and text for $0 a month. You don't even have to buy a phone.
Another very happy Ting.com customer here. We paid $150 a month for our 2 smartphones on Sprint. Now we pay $50 a month for both on Ting. Sure, we use wi-fi as much as possible. Our data use is 1gb per month. Could not be happier saving $100 a month!
I save a significant amount of money, but you're right that if you're a heavy mobile data user other plans might make more sense. I am not: less than 1K voice minutes, 1K texts, and 250MB data between 2 lines (~$800 up-front for pretty decent smartphones). I pay $35-50/month. And not having a contract is nice.
I would be remiss not to give them a huge amount of credit for their support staff. They really care about that. The only time I called in, a live person answered the phone after 1 or 2 rings and then proceeded to solve a somewhat technical problem without transferring me.
Anyway, I don't want to sound like a paid plug for them. But I like them a lot.
Disclaimer: I liked Ting enough to buy Tucows stock.
My experience with Ting as a customer has been excellent. Rates are great, flexible, and sensible. Customer service has been good. Flexibility with onboarding used and refurbished phones has been easy.
For about what I paid for voice and SMS on Verizon a year ago, we have two smartphones and a hotspot running both a person and some hardware across the country. My tightwad father's adopted the service (his first cell phone), and has since added another line.
T-mobile is starting to do the right things, but Ting already is.
I don't understand how they're paying $2000 a month to AT&T. We have 5 iPhones and 1 AT&T iPad on a family plan with unlimited text and very high number of minutes (can't remember exactly) and pay not more than $450.
"I was a T-Mobile customer for more than a decade from the late 90s until a year or two ago."
Unless he was a T-Mobile customer in Europe, I don't see how this is possible. T-Mobile in the US was formed circa 2001 with the purchase of Voicestream Wireless. I remember because I've been a customer since 2002, and all their equipment was tagged with Voicestream logos.
Unless of course he was a Voicestream customer first, who was then rolled into T-Mobile. Who am I to say, I just pay attention to details.
It's weird how different the are across the pond. Here in the UK the old TMobile (now EE) was absolutely terrible. I took out a new contract for the iPhone 5 on Preorder. They never delivered it and started harrasing me to pay my contract that was due to start when the phone arrived (which it didn't.)
It took me 25+ hours on hold and in the end I ended up tweeting them. Their twitter support team was a billion times better than anyone on the phone and the guy got it resolved for me.
I love T-mobile whenever I am in the US. Coupled with Google Voice and Nexus 4 (LTE works!), I pay way less than an AT&T contract + phone. The only time I was unhappy with their coverage was in my apartment in Mountain View this fall. Apart from that, I've never had to call their customer service. Every time I come back to US, I simply recharge my account online and get going in minutes.
I am curious to try out the Walmart plan (refer comments) next time and cut my costs by half.
I moved from T-Mobile from AT&T because AT&T started demanding I buy a data plan if I were to have a smart phone, and automatically signed me up for one and billing me for it.
T-Mobile's network is worse. Really, it's worse. I'm considering going back to AT&T despite all the crap because I'm sick of picking up my phone and seeing "no coverage available" in places where I had five bars yesterday.
Completely off topic but I am truly amazed by how good that spoken article was at the bottom of the post. I expected some Microsoft Sam voice, but it was actually a good clever sound with near-perfect emotional context switches in tone use.
Is that a plug and play solution or does the author have to do manual fine tuning? In both cases it is amazing how far we are with text-to-speech compared to only a few years ago.
I'll like them more when they offer their pre-paid customers the same benefits they have on their post-paid plans. They got a lot of good will because of their recently announced reduced international roaming charges, but "post paid plan" was peppered on every article about that. Give me a break.
My company uses ATT and Ive switched to using my company phone 100% of the time. However, I still have my TMobile sim pard sitting around and I'm still paying monthly payments even I don't use my TMobile plan at all. Had it been any other carrier, I would have cancelled in a heartbeat.
Here on the Western slope they have the worst service of the big four. Here, only people shopping strictly on price choose T-Mobile. They want your business, they just don't want to spend any money on the infrastructure to make it even marginally acceptable.
That being said, Speedtest reported Hong Kong 3G speeds on my (recently unlocked) iPhone 4 that are better than any of the reported 4G LTE speeds of any carrier in the US (7-9 mbps download...it was great!)
I think the two thing that matter are reception and price. T-mobile clearly wins on price, but in many areas its reception is not as good as AT&T or Verizon.
Let's not discount what Apple pulled off. Before the iPhone, carriers ruled handsets with an iron fist, dictating what features they would have and what apps would be available.
Apple completely smashed that. Carriers now, for the most part, accept that they don't get to decide what your phone does, only how you use your connection with them. The carriers used to do things like disable Bluetooth and charge you extra to turn it back on, or force all apps to go through their own internal approval process and purchasing.
I'm not terribly happy with the status quo Apple has left us with. Rather than place control with us where it belongs, they've just moved control to Apple. Apple is a far better overlord to have than the carriers, but it's still not great. However, we should still recognize that Apple pulled off a massive change that nobody really thought could be done.
Keep in mind when the first iPhone released, there was no App Store. And no plan for one, supposedly [1]. Apple had as much control over your phone as the other carriers did. And much more than it does now.
My comment was more about the leverage it had over the carriers and completely squandered. IIRC, AT&T was paying Apple $10 or so per user per month. A carrier paying a handset manufacturer a fee seems like a lot of leverage. At this point, Apple had the potential to turn the industry away from fleecing customers. Instead, in 2013, we're lauding an upstart-ish company for contract-free smartphones. Great progress, but its taken far far too long.
To be fair this seems to be a US-exclusive experience. Things like these were unheard of in Europe. I feel that some european carriers just rather recently learned a thing or two from the US-carrier playbook, like charging for tethering, approving/delaying software updates, etc.
Still, I'm glad that the invention carrier-approved and net-locked phones never/rarely made it across the ocean.
and they have IPv6 across their entire network. As someone who does research in this space, and advocates for it as a matter of religion^W principle, this alone makes me want to give them money.
If you are going back and forth often and end up spending more time than half the time south of the border, it might just work for you :)
Here is a quote from their fine print
> Not for extended international use; you must reside in the U.S. and primary usage must occur on our U.S. network. Device must register on our U.S. network before international use. Service may be terminated or restricted for excessive roaming or misuse.
I understand that Fred Wilson is an important voice in the startup / ycombinator world... But is this really the quality of content that really deserves to be on the front page here?
Nothing. I switched from Virgin to T-Mobile when it looked like I may be traveling internationally so I wanted a phone that would work in Europe. My coverage is a little better with T-Mobile and the ability to roam to other carriers in the event I am out of T-Mobile's coverage areas is nice. They had a better choice of phones too.
The only bad thing I would say with Virgin Mobile is about the roaming, but if you are sure you say in Sprints coverage area (in the US) then you probably won't have a problem. Other than that, I'll still recommend people look at Virgin when they are looking for new plans.
I have Virgin and agree with the points here. Basically roaming on the $35/mo plan is non-existent but I have never had an issue with my phone not working in the areas I live and visit (unless there was a tower down). Sprint's 4G coverage is very poor so if you expect that then good luck but my phone is not so I don't mind yet and can easily switch to another carrier like T-Mobile when I do.
No, if all people move to T-Mobile, they will just start behaving like the other carriers. The only reasons they're customer friendly is because they have a low market share and try to win customers, not because it's their company culture. Just look at their German parent company, Deutsche Telekom is the German AT&T.