My AT&T rant

[paul253]

Once again, you continue to try to shrug off all responsibility.

I'll tell you what Straw. If you can find a general consensus on the phone, or even a few examples, of this particular phone having the same problem that I had with it, then I will take all responsibility. Even if I did do research on it, I wouldn't have found something like this. An LG Vu may not be an Apple Iphone, but it should work. Plain and simple, it should work. Like I've pointed out numerous times, this isn't some minor flaw. I don't care how cheap the tv is that you buy from Best Buy, you should still be able to work the volume control and change the channel. If this phone is known to be such a piece of crap, why is AT&T selling it? But maybe Gifted is right, maybe it's just bad luck. But to constantly suggest this is my fault for not doing my research on this particular phones leads me to believe you can provide me with some reviews of it saying that the touch screen calibration will be so screwed up that it's unusable within a year. I don't care that the keyboard is a little too small. I don't care that it may be a little hard to navigate. I don't even care if it shuts off on it's own a few times. Those are the type of things you'll find when you look it up.

 

I also don't agree with your attitude that the more money you spend on a product the fewer problems you will automatically have. Doesn't the Iphone have all sorts of problems? I paid $5500 for my car back in 2004 and I've had little to no problems with it. That goes against what you are saying.

 

A more expensive phone is going to have more features but will not necessarily be more durable.

That's what I've been trying to say.

[strawbossisevil]

My point has been simply this: Typically, in most cases, the phones that cost more are the phones that carry with them a certain amount of reliability, that is part of the reason why the are more expensive, they are well built and have gained a good reputation for being solid phones.

 

Is it possible that in some cases a person can buy a cheaper phone/tv/car and everything works out just as well? Certainly. But, to an extent, it is a gamble. Sometimes the shottey piece of equipment will hold up just as well as the better engineered piece of equipment. But, as is usually the case you are more likely to have to deal with problems with the cheaply made knock off then the high quality respected brand. So, pointing to your car as proof that taking price over quality is a good modus operandi isn't a valid argument.

 

Yes, in some cases I'll admit you may not get burned by going with the cheaper, less reputable option. Your car may be one example. But in the long run, if you continue to buy cheaper less reputable products, you are going to face more product failures than if you buy the slightly more expensive, more reputable brands. That's just common sense.

 

As far as the Iphone having problems, I have the newest one and haven't had a single issue. It is a beautiful phone that I can be fairly certain will work for the next 2+ years as long as I take decent care of it (not dropping it on the ground, etc), because Apple is reputed as having quality craftsmanship in their phones. There has been some negative press given about the phone with call strength going down if the phone is held a certain way, but quite honestly I find the Iphone "death grip" nearly impossible to replicate, no one I know holds their phone that way, and that issue would never effect me as I keep my phone in a nice leather case (protecting my investment).

 

As far as LG phones, I think the fact that I mentioned LG as a poorly designed brand before you even mentioned that your phone was an LG would suggest that I've done quite a bit of reading on the quality of the cell phones they produce. I did a lot of research on phones before I went ahead and bought my iphone, and I was very unimpressed with the reviews that LG phones were getting. The OS on their phones are not nearly as fine tuned as Apple's or Google's and can lead to all sorts of problems. To look at it another way, Apple spends a whole year designing their phone and testing it to make sure that it functions correctly. It's why the market isn't flooded with 20 different apple phones, they do one at a time, but they do it well. Now look at LG, they have a whole smörgåsbord of phones, it is clear that they have put no where near the same amount of thought into the engineering of their phones. And it shows in the quality and design of their phones.

 

Keeping up to date on electronics is a hobby of mine, and I have never walked away from demoing an LG phone thinking that it was anything more than a poorly constructed piece of junk. I think the $50 price tag would only raise more suspicions that maybe, just maybe, this "smart" phone might not have the quality engineering that other more expensive phones might have.

 

I do agree that price doesn't tell a person everything about a phone. There can be expensive junk phones as well. This is where a consumer has to do their homework. That said, paying $50 for a touchscreen phone would certainly raise a lot of red flags for me....the first question that would come to my mind would be, "how can they possibly offer me a technological feature (a touchscreen) that generally is very pricey, for such a small amount of money...hmmm......"

 

By the way, the story about the Symphonic TV from Best Buy was something that happened to me in college a number of years ago. The TV stopped working about 11 months after I purchased it. Needless to say, I walked away from that TV with a lesson learned, namely, getting the 'cheap option' is probably not the wisest way to go, especially with electronics. I purchased another TV shortly thereafter, a more expensive, but reputable brand (Samsung), and haven't had a single problem in what has been nearly a decade now.

[TracyThom]

Getting back on topic... I've had AT&T for almost 4 years, but have not had any problems whatsoever with their phones. My latest phone is a touch screen LG Vu. I've dropped it numerous times. The screen is scratched, but that's because I don't take care of it.

 

I hate AT&T because of their coverage. Their coverage maps are an absolute joke. I supposedly live in the "best" coverage area, yet my calls are dropped all the time. I usually get only 2-3 bars, and often have to go outside to get reception. My full-time job is in their "moderate" coverage area, which must mean no reception at all. Finally, one of my part-time jobs is in their "good" coverage area, which also means anywhere from 0-2 bars.

[Invader3K]

Getting back on topic... I've had AT&T for almost 4 years, but have not had any problems whatsoever with their phones. My latest phone is a touch screen LG Vu. I've dropped it numerous times. The screen is scratched, but that's because I don't take care of it.

 

I hate AT&T because of their coverage. Their coverage maps are an absolute joke. I supposedly live in the "best" coverage area, yet my calls are dropped all the time. I usually get only 2-3 bars, and often have to go outside to get reception. My full-time job is in their "moderate" coverage area, which must mean no reception at all. Finally, one of my part-time jobs is in their "good" coverage area, which also means anywhere from 0-2 bars.

I am fortunate that my phone is paid for as a business expense. My sister and I run a business together, and considered switching from US Cellular to AT&T when our last contract was coming up. We decided to stay with US Cellular because the coverage here in Wisconsin is so much better, and also the fact that they have more retail stores in the area (easier to get help if needed). Just my two cents.

One thing to look at in online reviews is that some phones seem to get better reception than others. The "bars" you see on your phone don't necessarily mean much though. My Blackberry Tour almost never has full bars shown, but I can't remember the last time I had a call drop.

 

[DuWayne Steurer]

I have US Cellular, and I'm all over southern wisconsin, and I NEVER lose signal. Their coverage is so much better than AT n T's that it's not even a comparison.

 

I also really like the flexibility on the US Cell contract. I can add, remove, or change just about anything, even the minutes. I can take everything down to a bare bones number of minutes, with no features, without messing up my contract. I have the family plan with 2 additional lines, and even those can be dropped without messing up the contract. The only 'contract' line is the first one I had.

 

I have the data plan on 2 of the 3 phones, and that can also be dropped, as it's not part of the contract stipulation.

[SquirrelMaster]

AT&T service is not the greatest, however the customer service is absolutely outstanding. When I wanted to cancel my contract earlier this year, I was told instead of doing that I should go on a 50 minute a month plan, for 19.99, for the remaining 2 months of my contract to avoid my early termination fee. I did that, and now that I have Sprint, I couldn't be happier. The reception I get with Sprint is PHENOMENAL. Whenever I switch companies I ALWAYS lean towards getting the most, or, near the most expensive phones. Learned my lesson 6 years ago when I was with Verizon. Buying the cheapest of something usually never goes my way.

[paul253]

When I wanted to cancel my contract earlier this year, I was told

instead of doing that I should go on a 50 minute a month plan, for

19.99, for the remaining 2 months of my contract to avoid my early

termination fee.

They have a 50 minute plan? The reason I switched to AT&T originally was because of their rollover minutes. I work third shift and the vast majority of my phone usuage is at night when I get like 3000 night/weekend minutes. Because of that, I have 1900 rollover minutes right now (to compare I have a 450 minute per month plan, so I could live on rollover minutes alone for probably 4 months). I occasionally ask AT&T reps on the phone whether or not they have a plan with fewer minutes and they have always said no. I'll have to look into that. Just by chance, are you in the Milwaukee area? Is it possibly a local thing that is not offered by me?

 

Edit: I just checked out the rate plans online again and it didn't say anything about a 50 minute plan. I did see that the plan I was currently enrolled in went down by $10 a month though. I called their customer service line and they said they price didn't automatically go down, that I had to basically re-enroll in the plan to get the $10 a month off. I did that, but by doing so I am going to lose like 1500 rollover minutes at the end of the month for some reason. I also asked her if she had any plans with fewer than 450 minutes a month and she said no. Although I suppose it's probably a better deal to get 400 more minutes a month for only $10, especially when changing my plan requires me to lose most of my rollover minutes.

[theavrock]

Well the only problem with that is that if you go to a lower plan you lose your rollover minutes. That is an ATT thing and that is totally dumb if you ask me.

[paul253]

Well the only problem with that is that if you go to a lower
plan you lose your rollover minutes. That is an ATT thing and that is
totally dumb if you ask me.

Yeah I noticed that. When I updated my plan, even though I technically kept the same plan, I lost almost 1500 rollover minutes. I had 1918 and I have to go down to the number of minutes that the plan includes i.e. 450. So to save $10 a month, I lost all those rollover minutes even though I didn't even technically change plans. Kinda sucks.