You are currently browsing the daily archive for July 16, 2010.
I’ve owned an I-Phone for over a year, and had to switch from Verizon to AT&T to do so. AT&T seems to work fine in Chicago, but in Southern Wisconsin, where I spend lots of time, it doesn’t. I enjoyed loading down lots of apps but have found I use them less and less because of the bad reception on AT&T here in Wisconsin. Verizon, which doesn’t currently offer an I-Phone, seems to work well everywhere I go.
Then I happened to notice reference to something called a Microcell which AT&T offers to help fix reception, at least at home. I looked on AT&T’s website and found nothing, so sent them a message and then got some info. Found out it’s a device that can bring an AT&T signal over high-speed internet, but can only be purchased in some AT&T stores, and not ordered online. The nearest store offering it is 50 miles away.
Next I Googled it and found that AT&T had sent letters to “some of their best customers” and others who had complained about bad reception, offering the device, which sells for $150 or so much per month, for free. I didn’t get such a letter. Guess I am neither a particularly good customer, or I have not complained loudly enough. One blogger observed, “why should one have to pay $150 to receive the service I paid for in the first place.” I might have added, “and then only get that service at home — I might as well use a landline, except for those cute apps.” Rumor has it that Verizon may offer an I-Phone next year.
If Apple manages to make the I-Phone 4 work right by then, and if AT&T doesn’t improve their service reach without the need to beg or buy an expensive Microcell, Verizon might be looking good.