“A 5000 percent increase in 3G data traffic,” Paczkowski reports. “That’s an astonishing figure. Seems to me it’s entirely likely that any carrier that had been first with the iPhone — including catcalling rival Verizon — would have suffered similar network troubles to those that plague AT&T today.”
MacDailyNews Take: For the umpteenth time: Take those 15+ million U.S. iPhones off AT&T and plop them on Verizon and watch AT&T satisfaction soar (especially in metro areas) and Verizon come to a grinding halt. No carrier, including Verizon, is ready for 15+ million devices that are actually used for serious data consumption. Verizon’s network accommodates inferior devices that only sip data in comparison to iPhone due to their unusable web browsers (if they even have them) and generally indecipherable user interfaces which, only benefits the carrier as they get to sell phones on features that most people will never use. Verizon’s “3G” network doesn’t even allow users to talk while surfing the Web and/or emailing! The iPhone’s ease-of-use (snap a photo or even shoot a video and send it over AT&T’s network to wherever; robust, real Web Browsing; data-consuming apps which include streaming video over 3G, etc.) combined with the vast, rapidly-growing number of iPhones would cripple any carrier. If AT&T can’t get a handle on it, Apple would do well to reconsider their exclusive U.S. arrangement and spread the wealth – and the data consumption – to other carriers, as soon as (technically and legally) possible.
Paczkowski continues, “No other US carrier offers a super-smartphone that has sold as well as the iPhone, and which people use much like a laptop… So, really, any carrier that had been first to market with the iPhone would have seen its network overtaxed — especially after Apple launched the iPhone 3G and the iTunes App Store. Those events effectively upended traditional planning models for network capacity in a way that no one was prepared for.”
Paczkowski writes, “It will be interesting, then, to see how Verizon’s network holds up in comparison if and when it gets the iPhone.”
MacDailyNews Take: It would only be interesting if AT&T lost the iPhone deal all at once (won’t happen, as the contracts run over 24-month periods) and all iPhones were then quickly switched from AT&T to Verizon. Splitting the iPhone load wouldn’t test Verizon anywhere near the same way AT&T is being tested right now by having to carry the full brunt of 15+ million U.S. iPhones. Verizon has no right to catcall since the vast majority of their users can’t even find the Web browser, if it even exists, on the shitastic devices Verizon inflicts upon them.
Full article here.
I bet AT&T;isn’t say “thanks to Apple’s iPhone.”
For the umpteenth time, Verizon is NOT getting the iPhone. This, and many other articles, make it clear that substantial iPhone sales into Verizon’s piss CDMA network would cause it to collapse faster than a house of cards.
Verizon might have said no to Apple’s demands, but Apple wasn’t keen on CDMA to begin with Only ATT had what Apple wanted, size and GSM, and they were prepared to do anything to get the iPhone, WITHOUT EVEN SEEING IT.
One more time: Verizon isn’t getting an iPhone of any kind until at least 2013 (and most likely not then either).
So 3G stopped working on my iPhone the other day. After numerous resets I finally gave up, backed up the phone and set it back to factory settings.
Still didn’t work. I was really annoyed because I use 3G often when I’m out and about.
Finally I gave up. Last night I went to the Apple Store and showed it to one of the guys confident in my technical prowess that they wouldn’t be able to fix it either.
Guy takes one look at the phone, dials 611, and the message plays…
Your services has been disconnected. Please pay your bill immediately to get services restored.
After paying my bill, my 3G came right back up!
So embarrassing.
Verzion would have been sooooo screwed. They could not upgrade there system since it is scheduled for replacement starting in a year or two. Plus, they would have to build out a GSM system from nothing.
Verizon would have collapsed under the strain or delayed the GSM to shore up the CDMA system.
15 million iPhones on Verzion- it would go nuclear in days.
Boooooooooooooooom!
theloniousMac: Thank you for sharing your embarrassing moment with us all and putting a smile on many a face!
You MDN guys are pathetic. I’m a loyal reader and total Mac fanboy too, but even I always had to laugh at the blind faith with which you throw your support anything Apple says or does. Even though, yes, it’s usually awesome.
But why in the hell are you such staunch defenders of AT&T;??? Yes, the iPhone is awesome, and is by far the best phone out there. No question.
But you have got to be kidding me with the “how dare anyone attach AT&T;?!?!” bull****. It’s ridiculous. While yes, it’s certainly possible that other networks, even VZW would have the same issues, it doesn’t excuse the fact that AT&T;signed up for this and it’s their fault for not foreseeing and preparing for the surge in network traffic. It’s a joke at this point.
Even with a fanboy, you guys lose what little credibility you still had with these ridiculous defenses of AT&T;. At least when you do it with Apple, that goes along with the whole reason the site exists.
My 3g on AT&T;is awesome. Great Internet speeds and call reception here in dfw. Can’t remember the last time I dropped a call either.
However for competions sake I would be happy to see the iPhone available on more than one carrier.
@CS:
Geez, wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
Nobody is defending anybody. We’re all just able to understand what the problem is and that it was impossible for them (or anyone) to predict how much bandwidth the average iPhone user would use. Even if they doubled or tripled what normal smart phones used, it still wouldn’t have come close.
@ CS
” .. ATT signed up for this and it’s their fault for not foreseeing and preparing for the surge in network traffic.”
Don’t agree. I don’t think that anybody in the world foresaw the impact that the iPhone would have on mobile data usage. That’s why every carrier is desperately trying to duplicate the iPhone’s success. Even Steve Jobs said that the app store explosion was unlike anything he’s experienced in his career. Vast majority of those apps are being downloaded directly to the phone. Couple that with the millions of songs, web browsing and MMS and one can understand why ATT had no idea this was coming.
That being said: ATT put some more freakin towers in Colorado already!!
It’s astouding how MDN continues to apologize for this inept corporation.
If ATT can’t handle these iPhone users then ATT never should’ve sold the iPhone in the first place. They knew the repercussions of exclusively selling millions of phones with a full web browser. They knew what Steve Jobs wanted to accomplish.
But hey, let’s say they were caught off guard!
So tell me, why didn’t they leave the iPhone at $399 and $499? That certainly would’ve stemmed the rising tide.
Why did they subsidize the iPhone 3G to $199 and substantially increase sales when they knew they had a fledgling network that couldn’t handle them?
Why was the iPhone 3G then dropped to $99, the outcome of which can only further exacerbate their network problems?
Because ATT’s only concern is keeping up with Verizon rather than providing excellent service to their customers!!
The idea that the network overload is due to such a wonderfully designed product might make for a good source of pride to MDN and us fanboys, but it’s inconsequential to the average iPhone user who either can’t get a signal or has just experienced a dropped call. Nobody cares how nice a pen may look if it doesn’t have any ink inside.
The same reason you post your comment. The manner that will rise interest and comment so your “market share” of comment will rise.
So, ATT has lower the price so they can get the high end of the market share in money each month. The more they have, the more profit, the more they can build out with the extra money.
Even a simple 5 th grader can figure that out. They want customers and you want people to read and comment on your remarks. Duh!
Now I now why Verzion has to lauch a campain in deperation as they lose all the money and get the droids like R2.
@ theloniousMac – there’s an AT+T app for paying your bill from the iPhone.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
OK, hate to be a geek, but just how much traffic is it? Quarter 2 2006 was normalized to 100, so it’s a 50x increase in traffic. What was the 3g map 3 years ago? Were they selling any 3g phones? If they only had 2 3G models, then I;m shocked it’s only 50x increase, it should have been more. Let’s see some numbers instead of one pretty chart and saying hey, we’re trying. If I lost one pound last year, and then lost ten pounds this year, I’ve lost 1000% more weight this year. Wahoo, where are the crispy creme donuts!! Without number, the article is trash.
I support the moving of the iPhone to multiple networks. its not because AT&T;is all that bad (they have put up with the heat surprisingly well with respect to the fact that they were completely unprepared…
What i really want to see is wireless carriers putting everything under “DATA” and charging a flat rate for a certain amount. Say, $30 for 250MB $50 for 500 MB and $75 for 1GB. then, put everything under this, so you can call and talk for as long as you want, unless you go over the limit. Finally, texting will also be near-free.
It would take but ONE wireless carrier to do this with the iPhone, and virtually everyone would switch over, forcing the other carriers to do the same.
This “race” to the bottom would be great, and would create a wireless world that would be versatile and affordable.
THAT is why the iPhone needs to leave the hands of AT&T;. To create competition and lower prices, and possibly to start a mobile revolution.
I was thinking, for a moment, that with the new Android on Verizon that we’d see how their network held up. Then I realized that Verizon won’t have 15 million Androids on their network anytime soon.
MDN’s take is spot on! 100% agree…
All I know is that there is no way in hell that Steve Jobs would have given AT&T;an exclusive iPhone contract without assurances that AT&T;’s network would be able to handle the tremendous surge in network usage that Steve undoubtedly believed would follow the iPhone’s introduction.
I must be one of the few lucky ATandT customers as my coverage in South Florida and in Puerto Rico is much much much better than it was with Sprint and I rarely hit any dead zones.
Granted on the Florida’s Turnpike from Fort Lauderdale to Disney there is a good 60 mile chunk that is Edge and not 3G.
No carrier, including Verizon, is ready for 15+ million devices that are actually used for serious data consumption
Well… they’ve had 12 quarters to get up to speed… are they there yet ? I bet their profits are up big time too.
If you know you can’t support the traffic with your infrastructure, why sell the phones?
Hey… we don’t supply service, we provide PROFITS.
Who cares if iPhone uses get disgusted with our service? We’ve got ’em locked into 2 year contracts, they aren’t going anywhere, we’re making tons of money, soooo we’ll put up a few new towers and look like we’re spending money, but really… we’re only interested in MAKING PROFITS.
I have had a very good experience with ATT. Everyone in my office that has ATT can use their phones inside. Everyone who doesn’t has to walk outside the building to even get a phone call most of the time, let alone talk. They often discover that they have several voicemails when they do. Service got spotty, thought still useable, around my house a couple of weeks ago. I called ATT and the operator told me that they had a tower go down and that they were working on it. Service was back to normal two days later. ATT has never screwed up my bill, and their customer service has been very good. I switched from Sprint because the service was bad and getting worse. They screwed up my bill 6 months in a row, and the customer service was terrible. My parents are on Verizon, and my home phone is Verizon. Their billing is arcane, their phones are crippled, and their customer service is almost as bad as Sprint’s. My parents both want iPhones and they are about to switch. I live in a rural area, so I’m stuck with them for landline.
@ all the geniuses who think ATnT and Apple should have forseen the iPhone’s impact on data networks…
Let’s put this 5,000% surge in data traffic into perspective:
100% surge would have resulted in the new traffic being double the old…
200% surge would have resulted in the new traffic being triple the old traffic….
500% would have resulted in 6x the traffic (5x + the old at 1x)….
1000% would have been 11x the traffic…
At 5000% surge, ATnT is experiencing, overall as a network, a traffic volume that is now 51 times what they had for traffic pre-iPhone. And that’s just for the overall network. Some network areas with a high density of users (New York for ex.) are much greater than that. No one could have predicted a surge like this. No one. Remember that when the iPhone first came out, there was no apps store. ATnT couldn’t have possibly predicted this would happen when they first got it, and even with the apps store, no one could have foreseen THIS much more traffic. If Verizon had gotten the iPhone (LOL… as if!), their much slower 3G network would have been brought to its knees sooo much completely.
ATnT will have to rethink how their network does data, at least for high density areas. Their service is great where I live, but I suspect we’re in the mid to low range of additional impact on their network (3G is blessedly awesome!). In NY, it simply isn’t practical, if even possible, to simply throw up 50x more towers (if not 100x more) to increase their throughput, even if it were that simple.
Verizon isn’t getting an iPhone until at least 2013, and most likely not then either.
You can’t think that way. Maybe it’s the engineering major in me, but the percentages are not that good of an indicator. You need traffic numbers like an earlier poster said. You need to know how much 3G traffic there was 3 years ago. How many users. Then how much traffic now and how many users. Until you see the numbers, you have no idea what it is based on. It could just be plain old users. If Baltimore had 10000 3G users before and they have 500000 now, then the traffic increased 50 times. Calls and surfing, it’s all traffic. None of them might be surfing, but if everyone makes one call, they can claim a 50x increase. I need to see numbers.
What also hurts ATT is GSM does not cover distance very well. You need at least 2 towers for every one of cdma. That alone have helped verizon color the map. It should get better with the 850MHz 3G ATT is doing and Verizon’s 700MHz LTE they are doing now.