The Underground iPhone Users Of Vermont Trying To Hide From AT&T

from the how-dare-these-people-want-to-give-us-money dept

It’s no secret that Apple’s new iPhone is quite popular across the nation, with competitors everywhere trying to figure out how to respond. There certainly have been some complaints about some of the limitations imposed by the iPhone, but people everywhere are trying to find workarounds. Tech.Blorge alerts us to the fact that a bunch of iPhone users in Vermont have had to go virtually underground to get and use iPhones. The problem, apparently, is that since AT&T has an exclusive deal to offer the iPhone, they don’t want people using it primarily on roaming networks. Right now, you cannot get AT&T wireless service in Vermont — and AT&T’s contract threatens to cut off anyone who buys or uses an iPhone there. Of course, that’s not going to stop some people, who are ordering iPhones from elsewhere and even setting up P.O. Boxes out of state where the 300 page iPhone bills can be sent. They know that they’re risking being cut off but they just can’t help it. For their part, AT&T insists that they will cut off anyone they find who lives in an area not served by AT&T wireless (which is actually a fairly large area), or anyone who uses more than 40% of their iPhone time on roaming networks. This, of course, is a bit ridiculous. These people want to pay money. They’re happy customers or both Apple and AT&T — and the company wants to cut them off. If expense is the problem, they should just charge them more for roaming, but cutting them off completely in the name of an exclusivity contract doesn’t make any sense. It makes the iPhone and wireless service from AT&T less valuable, which is exactly the opposite of what the exclusivity clause was supposed to do.

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: apple

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “The Underground iPhone Users Of Vermont Trying To Hide From AT&T”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
97 Comments (user link) says:

Underground iPhone Users Of Vermont

This bumbling aged giant seems not get the fact that the customers’ needs come first because without the customers they would be out of business. If they continue being unreasonable, people should boycott all their products and services and send them to where they belong: the gulag of Siberia

Avatar28 says:

Re: Seems like a good time

Even better than the HTC Touch, check out this project.

It’s still technically in alpha state but even for that it works extremely well. I’ve been a member of the community and using it since the first alpha release. We just voted on a name for it. Looks like the new name will be “FreeStyl” (as in stylus free interface). I expect a possible beta release soon too. The nice thing about it is that it should work on ANY Windows Mobile 5 or 6 device.

Gai-jin says:

You've missed the point.

The point is, AT&T Plans are national plans, that don’t charge roaming at all. The cost absolutely the issue. When you use your phone on someone else’s network, AT&T has to pay for those minutes, and it’s much more costly to them than when you’re on their network. Since the user doesn’t pay anything for roaming, they are costing AT&T more than they are worth as customers.

Perhaps a better solution would be to offer a roaming plan, and let these users pay your typical $.45/min rate or so that roaming minutes typically cost. Either way, it’s not at all about keeping the iPhone exclusive.

Mark says:

Re: You've missed the point.

It’s been going on for a while. I worked in Tech support for OmniSky a few years back (lasted 4 years, was one of the last to be laid off :). Anyhow, we had agreements w/ the major players of that time for CDPD access. NY was split between Ameritech/GTE and ATT, as was a lot of other NE cities. We routinely saw 500$/month invoices per IP from ATT for roaming fees – while the customer paid a flat $59/month. Keep in mind that CDPD was only 19.2k, but much lower after forward encryption and such.

We dropped many customers for abnormal usage patterns.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: You've missed the point.

“Perhaps a better solution would be to offer a roaming plan, and let these users pay your typical $.45/min rate or so…”

so you punish the 95% of ATT customers who RARELY roam with a $.45/min rate because 5% of them want to use ATT services in an area that ATT does not yet provide their own towers to service to? interesting indeed.

Gai-jin says:

Re: Re: You've missed the point.

No, I think the current plans work great for most customers. However, if someone REALLY wants to use an iPhone, on an AT&T account, but with all of their usage off AT&T network, let them. But make them pay for the roaming they use.

If someone uses 50% or more of their minutes on the AT&T network in a given month, then they get to stay on the regular plan.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: You've missed the point.

The point is, AT&T Plans are national plans, that don’t charge roaming at all. The cost absolutely the issue. When you use your phone on someone else’s network, AT&T has to pay for those minutes, and it’s much more costly to them than when you’re on their network. Since the user doesn’t pay anything for roaming, they are costing AT&T more than they are worth as customers.

Which is why I said: “If expense is the problem, they should just charge them more for roaming,”

Not sure how I issed the point, since that’s exactly what I said. However, since AT&T isn’t doing this, it seems like it really is about exclusivity.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: You've missed the point.

AT&T is offering free roaming to anyone, if they do this, they should expect that people are going to take advantage of that and roam as they will since they aren’t getting penalized with the fees, that is one of the major attractors to the AT&T service plans over many others for lots of people. Instead of charging everyone the flat $.45/minute for roaming, why not put a cap on roaming minutes, much like they do for free night and weekend minutes on some plans. Say, their 400min/month plan gets 1500 night and weekend minutes, 400 regular peak minutes and 300 text messages (I think, might double check) per month standard. Well, why not change that to have a cap on roaming minutes that is

Shane C (user link) says:

Unlock phones

How would this differ from “unlocking” the phone to be used on another network?

If unlocking the phone is now legal, then the cell phone network can no longer dictate how, and where the phone will be used. If they can’t dictate that usage then how can they “disconnect” someone for doing something they have no control over?

Or is my logic broken here?


Gai-jin says:

Re: Unlock phones

Shane —
It is quite different from unlocking the phone. If you unlock the phone and sign up for service with T-Mobile instead of AT&T, then you’re paying T-Mobile, and using T-Mobile’s network. This usage doesn’t cost T-mobile much, so they are making money off of having your account. The phone doesn’t matter.

If you sign up for AT&T service, but use only T-Mobile’s network, AT&T has to pay relatively high rates for every minute you use on T-Mobile’s network. So, anyone who’s doing this is COSTING AT&T money, instead of making them money.

Kris says:

Re: Re: Re: Unlock phones

T-Mobile is not an MVNO. It’s actually a network which was VoiceStream Wireless, which was a part of Western Wireless, then bought by a group of people including the T-Mobile group.

VoiceStream – GSM – became T-Mobile
WesternWireless – CDMA – became part of Alltel

I wish I was the guy running WesternWireless, he’s gotta made a ton off the sales.

inc says:

I heard that the iPhone only works on the AT&T’s Edge network as opposed to their 3G. I have an HTC8525 and while calls suck on 3G and I force my phone to use edge for calls, when I need to connect to the internet the 3G network is so much faster. I would hate to pay through the nose for shittier and shittier service. If the HTC can be hacked to work with other service providers I don’t see why the iPhone can’t. After all the end user can do whatever they want with it, even put it in a blender. So screw AT&T, I’m tired of companies acting like they own paying customers especially with the have a use monopoly on something.

Brock says:


GPRS is the original at&t data network. EDGE is the current data network. UMTS is the high speed data network, not yet available in all markets.

3G is a generic term used for the collective voice and data networks.

So you don’t actually make phone calls on the EDGE or UMTS network…only the data uses those.

The only thing generally associated with the voice side of wireless that’s actually the data side for an iPhone, is the Visual Voicemail

Charlie says:

Re: Re: EDGE/3G

You are right on some points, but not all. GPRS and EDGE are data only technologies that overlay the traditional GSM network, which uses TDMA as an underlying technology (but NOT the TDMA protocol that AT&T used prior to GSM).

UMTS is a new standard that replaces GSM, Universal Mobile Telecommunications System. It uses W-CDMA as the underlying protocol and supports voice and data.

So what the user should have said is that the 3G network sucks for voice and that he uses the 2G/GSM network, but we all got the right idea. For the record I prefer voice calls on the UMTS network with my 8525. Of course something is wrong with the phone and I can faintly hear TDMA interference when using the GSM network for voice or data (and since GPRS and EDGE use GSM that is correct).

:HAn. says:

I have been ticked off about Apple not supporting DUN on the iPhone. However, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if it’s even necessary. Everything I would want to do on my laptop while n the road, I can do on the iPhone directly anyway. Maps, email, web… thats about it. I can live without DUN easily if I use an iPhone. In fact, I will be happy not to have to carry my laptop around with me anymore, as it just isnt as important for me to have during travel anymore.

krum303 says:

Roaming rates and MVNO's

First off, as stated above, T-Mobile isn’t an MVNO. They own tons of their own towers/spectrum and proved that even more so a year ago when they outbid every U.S. carrier for 3G spectrum. (although they haven’t launched it yet.) AT&T does have to pay them for roaming on T-Mobile towers.
Plus, with T-Mobile, 100% of your usage can be on a roaming partner’s network and they will never cut you off. My brother-in-law knows this from experience as it is one reason he signed up for T-Mobile with a Seattle number and has used it for almost seven years in Alaska with no problems at all. What’s confusing is that I read that AT&T recently purchased the remnants of Cell-One and Dobson Wireless which I thought provided service in the North East including Vermont. I may be wrong on this but that would give them towers/spectrum rights in that state and the whole point would be moot. I still believe Apple would make much more of a profit making unlocked CDMA and GSM versions of the iPhone opening up their possible purchase base to over 194 million in the U.S. alone and over 2 billion worldwide according to Seems like less of a headache than providing the device to an exclusive carrier. Just my 2 cents. =)

AskTheAdmin (profile) says:

@#2 Touch is cool but its no iphone

First of all… WHAT? Why would ATT be so stupid as to alienate customers instead of making a premium customer out of them charging more as the artile suggested? Something else has to be going on here. Has anyone gotten the ax for roaming more than 20 percent of the time yet??

Inquiring minds would like to know! Thanks from your friends over @ AskTheAdmin

Happymellon says:

Biting them in the ass...

This sounds like something that was going to be a problem at some point anyway. If people that roam pay less than the operator for them roaming, then it would only be a matter time time before something comes along and offsets the cost making it unworkable. One other thing not mentioned is that they also have the choice to renegotiate the contracts on roaming with the other operators, I’m assuming it would only be T-Mobile since they are the only other GSM operator(?).
I guess they’ll have to wait until T-Mobile offers their “iPhone Killer” before they’ll both be in a situation that makes sense to bring the cross charges closer to the real world charges.

Come on miniOne/p168/open moko

Derek Kerton (profile) says:

Some Finer Points

Well, you (commenters) all seem to have some decent insights, but many of you miss some important finer points about the industry, so here’s a relevant primer:

– Apple’s Exclusive: Anyone who says Apple is nuts to offer an exclusive to AT&T is right only on the most superficial level. I mean, duh, it’s better to have more carrier partners, more distribution, more customers. So if that’s the depth of your thinking, it should have occurred to you that you’re missing something. That something is: Apple got a HELL of a deal from AT&T. They got CONTROL, they got to use their iTunes store to move content to a phone, they get a share of recurring revenues. If you know the industry, you would know that this is unprecedented, and it’s something that Nokia, Motorola, or Samsung have NEVER gotten. But you don’t get something for nothing, so Apple had to offer the exclusive to AT&T in return for a boatload of benefits. All in all, it is a great deal for Apple. Without that level of control, the iPhone would have ended up looking like…the Motorola ROKR. That is precisely what happens to a good idea in the era before the iPhone. I’m not sure why 95% of the bloggers and fanboys out there don’t get this.

– AT&T exclusive: it’s funny but while the fanboys wonder why Apple agreed to an exclusive, the telco-heads wonder exactly the opposite: “Why did AT&T give Apple so much control?” And the reason is: this is the first device (ever) that will actually make a customer quit VZW, T-Mo, or Sprint, to move to AT&T. AT&T gave up control in order to compete with the market. I love it. Finally some gutsy competition in the industry. And it’s working.

– Roaming: True that T-Mo runs its own network, as do most of the national cellcos. But that doesn’t mean they run their ‘entire’ network. For example, T-Mobile is relatively weak in California, so they use AT&T towers and base stations for much of their coverage here. Turns out, AT&T uses T-Mo in other places, making a reciprocal deal. The deals these carriers make are not at the 45 cent a minute mark, but much lower…and confidential. In high-density urban areas, carriers will steadily be deploying their own equipment to reduce the roaming usage. So while the concept of MVNO is relatively new, many carriers have been partially MVNOs for some time.

– More Roaming: now, in more rural markets, like Vermont, it doesn’t really make sense for 5 carriers to each deploy a network to cover some farms. Especially in hilly areas where it is more expensive to deploy. Thus, these areas frequently have fewer networks, which then provide roaming to the national carriers. Dobson, mentioned already in the comments, was one of the ‘bigger small’ GSM carriers in the US. Because of a specialized roaming deal, AT&T customers would invisibly shift over to Dobson when in their coverage area, and AT&T would absorb the costs for their nationwide customers. This was an uncomfortable expense national carriers needed to absorb if they wanted to claim national coverage, and put a lot of ink on the coverage map. But companies like Dobson have always known their value in filling out the map, so they charged a relatively high inbound roaming rate – and were also charged the same high rate by AT&T for their regional customers who roamed into the city. This turns out better for small carriers since they end up getting way more inbound roaming revenue than they spent in outbound roaming. What’s more, unlike nationals, regionals often pass their high roaming fees on to the customer, so it doesn’t cost them at all. Sick and tired of these expenses, wealthy nationals are slowly buying up the regional carriers. Dobson just got bought, but you can see Sprint has been buying their affiliates for years.

– More Roaming: There’s roaming, and then there’s roaming. If you take your AT&T phone to Canada, it will likely tell you that you are roaming, and your phone will display “Rogers”, a Canadian GSM carrier. That’s full on roaming, and the charges will show on your bill as roaming use while on the Rogers network. But these US rural roaming deals don’t look that way. The carriers “virtualize” it. For example, an AT&T user roaming onto the Dobson GSM network would never see Dobson on the phone, nor on the bill.

– So it turns out, in the dog eat dog world of business, the regional companies are actually sticking it to the nationals. There is little competition in the markets they serve. They can say to AT&T, “There’s only one GSM network deployed in my region, and I own it. So either you pay me a high roaming rate (expensive), or you can try to build your own (very expensive). could also pay me a Billion to sell (not cheap).” Now, I’m not expecting you readers to feel sorry for AT&T, but now at least you can understand why they don’t sell their service in stores in these regions, and don’t want you to buy an iPhone, and take it to these regions.

And, no, Mike didn’t miss the point, he just wasn’t as verbose as I.

proto says:

Re: Some Finer Points

“Apple got a HELL of a deal from AT&T. They got CONTROL, they got this, they got that, blah, blah, blah. . .

The important point is that they DIDN’T get my business. I will never again be a customer of AT&T. And I will warn all of you: sign up with AT&T and you will be sorry! You are far better off with ANYBODY else as a provider. Hell, you’re better off to build your own phone company than to try to get any kind of reasonable service out of AT&T.

Charlie says:

Re: Re: Some Finer Points

Unless its Verizon. I left them for AT&T and have a phone that isn’t locked down and does what I want. AT&T has some crazy terms of service, but they generally don’t enforce them. Beyond that, so did Verizon. Of course I was an early owner of a Motorola V710.

Verizon would never allow the iPhone. They want control, control, control. If you transfer a ringtone or music to your phone without using their network (and paying $3) your not a customer they want.

Ted says:

Re: Re: Some Finer Points

So you hate AT&T. Big deal. Most people have a bias for/against a carrier, so it comes out as a wash. I hate Verizon & T-Mobile. I’ve had all three as my carrier, and I can tell you, at least here in Atlanta, AT&T is better than the others in customer service and coverage. Your mileage will vary, of course.

NOIZ says:


You have all missed the gorilla in the room, the FCC. I believe tariffs prevent carriers from selling service to customers unless their billing/service address is within the carriers coverage area.

Carriers expand their non-roaming coverage area beyond their own infrastructure via reciprocal agreements with other providers so they can cover metropolitan areas and major interstates.

VT is hardly the only rural area of the country with this issue.

I’ve never heard of any specific roaming usage rate that would cause a carrier to drop a customer. It’s certainly plausible that a consistently high roaming percentage +50% indicates the user does not actually live in the coverage area.

I also don’t remember hearing such hue and cry over previous cellular exclusivity agreements.

Apple has always been about exclusivity, they have never licensed any of their products/technology to other manufacturers. It’s how they protect quality and price point.

Mark Buckman (user link) says:

Oh, how the mighty molest adn abuse their customer

I am honestly amazed that AT&T still lurks in America’s business culture. Why Apple would choose to partner with this dinosaur is beyond me. I am a fan of the iPhone, but would never enter into one of their masochistic contracts to save my life.
Now the NEO1973, with OpenMoko, shows much promise; I just hope the consumers will give it a well deserved chance.

PNess says:


this is stupid since there is multiple roaming agreements betweent the carriers.

i am sure they hardly pay that much per minute, plus for every minute ATT roams on XX-Network someone roams on their network from XX-Network. so its not even that big off a loss for ATT since i am sure they have more roaming fees coming in then going out

Brad says:

Same in North Dakota

North Dakota also doesn’t recieve AT&T service. But when talking to a radio service owner (also sells Verizon) he explained to me that since the State of North Dakota is not very populated that the Public Service Commission refuses to let more that two carriers into the state at a time. Reason: As I understand, If one carrier does not service the state properly they can revoke it’s license and bring in another one. Maybe other states have the same issue’s.
In the state of North Dakota Verizon and Alltel have agreement to use each others towers.

GFahey says:

FCC needs to do something

Am I the only one who thinks the whole cell phone service/phones exclusive to only certain providers is almost criminal?

I am sooo tired of seeing endless iPhone news/articles/reviews dangled in front of me! Sure, I want one but, to me it’s like saying only people in certain areas can buy a Mac! Every freakin’ bill by every freakin’ provider looks like an IRS audit. It takes hours to go through. I mean, why can’t we jut have it like we do with computers and ISP’s?

You buy a certain computer and then can choose whoever offers the best deal around. Buy an iPhone and all providers have the same coverage but, compete by offering better deals. I know, I know, it’s not that simple but, really, isn;t that the whole point? Isn’t technology supposed to makes our lives simpler? I’m in Maine and can’t get an iPhone. Because of where I live I have to choose between fair and good cell phones. They all suck too. Yet, I pay the same as someone who uses ATT and has an iPhone. I hate it. I for one think the only hope is Google. They will offer free phones to use their air. EVERYWHERE!

As it is now, the ridiculous plans/coverage/phone deals in rural areas suck big time. Meanwhile, Google sees this and is getting it’s camel nose under the tent while ATT and others insert their thumbs into warm, moist places. They are not innovating anymore and someone (Google?) will capitalize (literally)on this complacency and overtake them all like coy fox who waits patiently and makes his move. I’ve had it with all the absolute lunacy that the cell phone era has brought upon us. Ugh. Time for the FCC to make some big noise and fix the mess that companies like ATT have squeezed out of their collective rectums. How’s that! 😉

Derek Kerton (profile) says:

Re: Re: FCC needs to do something

Misplaced anger:

RE: “You know this is the only country in the world where people pay for incoming calls and text messages on their mobile phones? How’s that feel?”

It feels good, because did YOU know that the US is the only country in the world where people pay (on average) 7 cents per minute of mobile use? It’s roughly double that in other developed countries.

Furthermore, the “free” incoming minutes in other countries are not so free. The caller pays between 15 and 30 cents per minute for the priviledge of calling a mobile phone.

Nobody has cheaper cell phone voice use than USA customers. Hate the telcos if you must, but know your facts too.

Volker says:

You know what’s funny. I cancelled my ATT (Cingular) service about 7 months ago. In part because of this, and what strikes me as surprising is the fact that when i cancelled, i told them that i was willing to pay a larger monthly fee (for 2 contracts), if they gave me the phone at the new customer price (100 dollars cheaper). I WAS WILLING TO PAY 60 BUCKS MORE A MONTH! and let this be a note, i used to work for Cingular, in their Top Tier Data department. And these assholes are just plain stupid. They’re customer retention department sux. I threatened to take my business elsewhere even by canceling my two current lines prematurely (paying 150 for each), and they still didn’t give a shit. The funny thing is, after canceling my lines and going to verizon, i got a better deal in the long run.


Timtimes (user link) says:

AT&T Works for Bush Administration

From installing complicated and illegal spying apparatus in San Francisco (at a minimum), censoring Bush critical lyrics on a streaming video concert (Pearl Jam?) it would appear that AT&T are adopting an e coli conservative approach to their business. If a majority of people don’t like it, then too bad. They’re enough of a monopoly that they know WE THE PEOPLE won’t be able to do squat about it. They’ve always had poor customer service and predatory practices. Don’t believe that? Who could morally continue charging ‘grandma’ five bucks a month (or whatever) ‘rent’ on a phone for DECADES?

As an aside, I think the Iphone is sweet. My Yuppie kids have two of them, so I’ve gotten a good “hands on”. While my kids may be politically deaf, I am not and I will not buy an Iphone until I have the option of using a different carrier than AT&T.



chu says:

other GSM networks

Don’t forget Rural Cellular, soon to be a part of Verizon. Their GSM network earns roaming $$$ from AT&T in Maine (and elsewhere).

And you guys are wrong about plan designs in the US. One carrier – US Cellular (small market CDMA only, rural provider, 5-6 million subscribers) offers free incoming text, pic messages and a plans with that have the option for free incoming calls.

Vermont is living in the 1600s says:

VT deserves it

This is laughable and I don’t feel bad. All the environmentalists, tree-huggers and progress obstructionists can thank their cell tower hating ways for this one.
The iPhone is just the beginning of what you will lose access to. Next is electricity, clean water and gas. Vermont is living in the 1600s and doesn’t deserve the iPhone.

VT phone home says:

Re: VT deserves it

@Vermont is living in the 1600s –

Yet, this is why people love Vermont. It is one of the only “unspoiled” states in the country. Burlington happens to be an amazing city that mixes this Vermont charm with a thriving business scene. Some of the best things (and people) come from Vermont.

It is not that Vermont does not have cell coverage. Just about everywhere there are people in Vermont, there is coverage (even for AT&T phones). So, there really is no reason why AT&T cannot expand their network to Vermont.

Anonymous Coward says:

Wow, all these comments and not one from Vermont yet… well, I guess that makes me the first.

First off many people have incorrectly stated that T-Mo is the only other GSM provider in the US. They are the only other “nation wide” GSM provider in the US. There are quite a number of much smaller “local” cell phone co’s in the US who also use GSM. For example I’m quite happily using my GSM Cell here in Vermont, sold to me by my local Cell Provider RCC Wireless (under the business name Unicell).

It looks like Verizon is going to be buying RCC at some point this year, which should result in an interesting shake up of the local cell market as Verizon is NOT a GSM provider and reports indicate that they’ll be forcing all RCC customers on to their network, which almost assuredly means that they’ll be selling the GSM network to one of the nationwide majors which uses GSM. In other words it’s looking like in a somewhat short time frame either AT&T or T-Mo will be up and running in Vermont.

As to why AT&T isn’t here yet… it’s a long and involved story that has much to do with an partnership/no-compete agreement that RCC and Cell-One (which begat Cingular, which begat AT&T) signed in the ancient days of the cutting edge StarTac. AT&T’s current coverage in Vermont is all provided through RCC’s network already. I’m pretty sure that AT&T has significantly cheaper roaming rate here than say T-Mo does because of the terms of the old partnership contract.

Vermonter says:

Re: Re:

I’m a Vermonter and we can’t even get a cell phone signal at the house. We laugh at the iPhone commercials. My stepdaughter lives in California and when she comes home to visit, her AT&T phone is useless anywhere in the state. It won’t even pick up a roaming signal. She whines and we chuckle to ourselves.

Now when we go to the big city, Burlington, our RCC cell phones mostly work. Mine sits in my car turned off 99% of the time. I turn it on if I’m in the car and need to call someone, which is rare.

Yeah, it may be the 1600s here. We can’t get cable or DSL at the house either (thank god for DirecTV). And you can forget about even getting a pizza delivered. Turns out we like it this way.

mo sikka says:

Breaking the Vampire AT&T's stanglehold on the iPh

Anything to remove AT&T’s stranglehold on the iPhone! I recently had a horrible experience trying to get ATT wireless service. The telesales person took down the wrong mailing address, the phone got returned, and they didn’t even bother calling me to see if I still wanted it (or, God forbid, to apologize). I had to speak to 7 (I kid you not!) customer service/sales/telesales reps before I could even get the money for the phone back. Some of them couldn’t even find my order, event though it was open in front of me on my computer screen and I kept hollering the order number to them. I immediately went over to Verizon, where ordering online was a cinch, and no problems with service so far. ATT sucks as far as I am concerned, and I WILL NEVER BUY THE IPHONE AS LONG AS THE EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT WITH ATT REMAINS. Anyone agree with me on this?

mo sikka says:

Breaking the Vampire AT&T's stanglehold on the iPh

Anything to remove AT&T’s stranglehold on the iPhone! I recently had a horrible experience trying to get ATT wireless service. The telesales person took down the wrong mailing address, the phone got returned, and they didn’t even bother calling me to see if I still wanted it (or, God forbid, to apologize). I had to speak to 7 (I kid you not!) customer service/sales/telesales reps before I could even get the money for the phone back. Some of them couldn’t even find my order, event though it was open in front of me on my computer screen and I kept hollering the order number to them. I immediately went over to Verizon, where ordering online was a cinch, and no problems with service so far. ATT sucks as far as I am concerned, and I WILL NEVER BUY THE IPHONE AS LONG AS THE EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT WITH ATT REMAINS. Anyone agree with me on this?

vermonter says:

I live in central vermont and there is zero at&t coverage for about a 45 minute drive in any direction. as much as i would an iphone i dread the days when people are driving around causing accidents while talking on the phone, if you held a phone to your head while driving in my town i think everyone would stare at you with a curious expression.

Renee (user link) says:

I have an iPhone in Vermont

I have and use an iPhone in Vermont. I have not been threatened, or cut off by AT&T. I have not been charged extra, and nothing has changed. My bills come to my home address, which they know is not in their coverage area. They have not hassled me at all. It should be noted that I was a good customer in Illinois for a decade, where I initiated my iPhone contract, but I figured that when I moved here that my roaming would kick me off. It hasn’t. It doesn’t even show up as roaming. It shows up as in contract minutes. 6 months and running now.

Ted says:


Sorry to be blunt, but who cares? Vermont is a tiny little socialist enclave of New England that would be better served if we sold it to Canada, or better yet, granted them their “independence” to become a sovereign nation.

AT&T hasn’t bothered to set up shop until now because it hasn’t been cost effective to do so. From the Vermont posters, it sounds like the coverage they do have sucks ass anyway.

lipikabri (user link) says:

body to body massage spa near me tarnaka

The woman to man body massage is a popular trend in young people. Most middle-aged people also look for it. The soft gesture and body touch is the ultimate way to avail the fun. Females are good at massage and blessed with soft hands. Our girls are also a great way to get the high-grade female to male massage in Hyderabad . Some of the reasons to connect with our service are as follows:

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...