AT&T Wireless Phone "Upgrades" Aren't

An anonymous reader writes "AT&T Wireless is requiring customers in parts of California and New York and elsewhere to "upgrade" their phones and offering free replacements. The catch? In most cases the upgrades have worse features than the phones they're replacing."

No Bluetooth

[BWJones]

Yeah, there is no Bluetooth on the new phones which is proving to be quite a hassle. It is amazing how ones life becomes adapted to a technology like Bluetooth that truly works, and then to have AT&T Wireless simply say, "sorry, you have to upgrade" simply sucks.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:No Bluetooth

[LostCluster]

You own your phone, but in this case AT&T is telling these customers that if they don't trade in the phone, it won't work with AT&T anymore because the customer has a non-GSM phone, and AT&T is switching to GSM-only in their area.

Re:No Bluetooth

[jlaxson]

RTFA. The phones being "upgraded" all use GSM in only one of AT&T's two GSM frequency bands. They want you to upgrade to phones that support both of the bands, for purposes of coverage. (if you can only use one of the bands, all the cell towers in the other band are off-limits to you.)

Re:No Bluetooth-Lost and Found.

[Mindtoy]

Actually, on T-Mobile after you've had the phone for a while you can send an email requesting the unlock code to [e-mail] I had no problems getting my Nokia 3390 unlock code from them.

Unlocking your T-Mobile phone

[exhilaration]

They don't do the e-mail thing anymore, use the form [custhelp.com] on their website to request your unlock code.

Use the following topic and sub-topic to make sure it gets routed to the right people:
Topic: Products and Services
Sub-topic: GSM & Smart Card Technology

I had two earlier phones (Nokia & Motorola) unlocked via the e-mail, and I recently had my Nokia 3650 unlocked via the above form.

Just make sure you've been a customer for at least 6 months, and that you are STILL a customer.

Re:No Bluetooth

[ankit]

Wrong. ALL GSM phones use SIM cards. And since this upgrade is only for GSM phones operating at 1900MHz, all affected phones use SIM cards.

Re:No Bluetooth

[ankit]

Dude, all GSM phones need a SIM card to identify themselves to the network. There is no way a GSM phone can work without one. As another poster posted, there are probably very few (maybe just one or two) phones that have SIM cards non-replacable by the user. But even these phones do infact have sim cards!

Your friends probably use phones that work on CDMA/TDMA.

Re:No Bluetooth

[ankit]

Yes, I am in the US, and I continue to stick with what I said. SIM cards are a requirement for GSM, and this is the reason why you can eaily switch between providers and phone morels on GSM. Not so on TDMA (the old AT&T system that still has many, many subscribers), or CDMS (sprint).

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:No Bluetooth

[EchoMirage]

Ok, you win. This has to be a terminology problem Let's reformulate: There is no GSM network in the US, because according to your specs they would have to provide SIMS, and none of them does. So those AT&T phones we're talking about are not GSMs. End of argument.

You're either incredibly foolish or a troll (my money is on the latter), but I'll reply anyway: YES there ARE GSM networks in the U.S.A. and YES every single one of them sells phones that require SIM (subscriber identity module) cards. As other posters who are actually clued in have noted, it's part of the GSM spec for a phone to have a SIM card.

There were two types of SIM cards: the original, old Type I cards, which looked like a credit card, and the newer Type II cards, which are the thumbnail-sized cards. You can see pretty pictures here [geocities.com]. Type I cards haven't been used since the mid-90s. The last Type I-accepting phone I remember seeing was (IIRC) a GSM Motorola StarTac.

The only major GSM carrier in the U.S.A. until 3 or 4 years ago was Voicestream (Western Wireless), which became T-Mobile after the Deutsche Telekom buyout [crn.com]. As part of the upstart of 2.5G services here in the U.S., other companies such as AT&T and BellSouth started building up GSM networks.

You can see the "proof" that they're GSM networks by Googling for "BellSouth GSM [google.com]" or "AT&T GSM [google.com]." Other proof that there are GSM phones: I just took the battery off my Sony Ericsson T68i and...suprise! A GSM SIM card! Just like the ones I used to put in the back of every customer's phone back when I was a VoiceStream dealer. Just like the GSM SIM cards inside every single "next generation" AT&T phone, and every single T-Mobile phone. So forth and so on ad nauseum.

In related news, I've blacklisted you for making repeated stupid statements without taking 10 seconds to STFG.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:No Bluetooth

[drinkypoo]

Negative. As the sibling to your comment says, all GSM phones require a SIM card. I use T-Mobile, which uses 1900MHz GSM; AT&T and Cingular also both provide 1900MHz GSM service (my phone can see them both, never tried to hop on those networks though, if I succeeded I would almost certainly pay a mint for roaming.) The difference in the US market is that the phones are "locked" to a specific provider so you can't swap sim cards, and you have to get your data cable and an unlock utility, or pay someone to unlock your phone. These days people do remote unlocking, which means you buy the cable and plug your phone in, then you run some little program which lets them reprogram your phone over the 'net, or you can buy a "dongle" which you plug the phone into and it unlocks. These so-called computerless phone hacking tools of course have a microcontroller in 'em, so they're a computer anyway... But that's the story.

Re:No Bluetooth

[frdmfghtr]

my phone can see them both, never tried to hop on those networks though, if I succeeded I would almost certainly pay a mint for roaming.

No you won't, unless there is a T-Mobile plan that doesn't include nationwide roaming, which I have never seen. I have T-Mobile, and whenever I go down to North Carolina, I am roaming on Cingular's GSM network and have never paid a single red cent for roaming.

The only roaming I have ever paid is when I roam internationally. Then I pay many red cents.

Re:No Bluetooth

[JiggsJedi]

I used to work for AT&T Wireless. ALL GSM phones require a SIM card (Contains your Home SID, ICCID, MDN aka your phone#). TDMA phones require no SIM as they have an EEPROM built-in to store the NAM - Numerically Assigned Module (containg Home SID, ESN, MDN).

One multi-band phone (that is TDMA/GSM capable) actually requires a special SIM card for the dual functionality. This SIM module contains the EEPROM equivalent for the TDMA programming of the phone separate from the GSM side of the SIM. This is the Sony T26U (it also utilizes Analog towers too). This a true GSM phone with a TDMA overlay. The Siemans S46 has a built in ROM and uses a SIM, this is a TDMA phone with a GSM overlay.

But all GSM phones require a SIM card, this is not only a spec for the GSM network, but if a GSM phone (assuming multi-band, ie. Siemans S46) is running without a SIM, it would only run in TDMA mode, and if not a multi-band, it would not complete its "power up" to an operational state; it would error and demand a SIM to be entered. The Sony T62U will not function without a SIM.

Most GSM phones are NOT multi-band. They would therefor require a SIM. Multi-band phones generally don't come with the "eye candy" that other phones do (ie. Cam, Colour, Blue Tooth). These are more for people who need a phone to be a phone all the time (best coverage over multiple networks) and not a toy.

For a little insight... Thanks to LNP or line number portability there is now an MIN/MDN combination within the HLR (Home Location Registry). The MDN is your Mobile Dialable Number but you also have a MIN which is the Mobile Identification Number (or Routing Number). Some of you AT&T customers may have seen on your TDMA phones you manually programmed a number into your phone that was not your wireless number. This is what allows the porting. People dial your "phone #" which goes to the company who owns your number range (from 0000-9999), who have that number cross referenced with the your current carrier. They then send your call to the carrier your are currently with and your carrier then address' your phone by an assigned routing number (and it is a number in a range they currently own!).

Example: You are with Sprint from 555-0000 and move to AT&T. Your phone is programmed with your ROUTING# 555-1234. You can place calls, but not receive them. Your old phone is still fully functional, so you can RECEIVE/PLACE calls there). AT&T initiates a port request to Sprint. They send Sprint a request with your Name/Addr/Cell#/Acct#/. Sprint setups the link in their systems to Switch/Forward your calls to AT&T. Once the link on Sprints end is completed that allows INCOMING calls to move from Sprint to AT&T and through their switches and to your cell phone via a cross reference to your assigned routing#. Your Sprint account is also closed at this point and your old phone stops working. But ALL your incoming calls go to the carrier who owns your number, and is then sent to your current carrier. This is transparent with GSM as all programming is done Over the Air.

If you have a routing number in your phone, and you call it; you will get someone else as routing numbers are actual phone numbers, but are internal only. All numbers are now used twice. Once as a link from phone to network (routing#, internal, dynamic), and once as a link between network and the world (dialable#, external, static). With the way this system works, they all started with your MIN==MDN, but when you change carriers and as more and more inter/intra-company ports are setup, your routing# will be given to someone else, and will most likely never be a match to your dialable# again.

Your phone# only goes as far as the company who owns it.

Just my 0.02. Jiggs

Re:No Bluetooth

[arivanov]

WTF/RTFA: all phones listed in the article are bog standard GMS phones which use bog standard GSM SIMs. Actually AFAIK there is only one phone - Siemens Xelibri (which is a prototype, not a manufactured model) which has the SIM built in.

Re:No Bluetooth

[BrookHarty]

AT&T took their time, continuing to offer popular new models that were missing the 850 MHz band, and thus wouldn't work with that part of their network.

Really blame the vendors, Nokia, Sony and Motorola. They took off blue tooth, didnt offer phones with 850. Even blackberry didnt have 850 when first out, they do now.

The phone vendors new for years that 850 was going to be used. The whole TDMA->GSM upgrade path was known years ago.

The article is total fluff, if a phone had 850 it was offered. Ci

Re:No Bluetooth

[arivanov]

Place the blame on the correct group. You mean the FCC, right? After all it could have thought of a transition path that will move US to use the same frequencies as the rest of the world, but did not. I would not be amused if there was some Qualcom money behind this as well.

Re:No Bluetooth

[BWJones]

Lets see: Bluetooth headset for hands-free calling, Bluetooth for automatic hands-free talk within my Bluetooth supported car, Bluetooth for wirelessly synching my phone and Palmpilot with my G5s at work, and at home and my Powerbook when I travel.

Once you have used it, Bluetooth is hard to give up.

Bluetooth data connection

[SuperKendall]

I can use my bluetooth phone as a data connection for my laptop, or for something like the Palm Tungsten with a bluetooth connection. Then I don't have to rely on having a wireless or dialup connection wherever I go.

It's not the speediest thing, but it's far nicer browsing on a laptop than a phone and is faster than dialup.

And of course you can use the bluetooth phone as a controller for various apps on the laptop - most useful for presentations, but it has a few other cool uses as well.

Re:No Bluetooth

[Rick the Red]

This is a GSM provider doing this to their customers. It's a switch to change frequencies (specifically, to add 850 MHz to the existing 1900 MHz). Apparantly phones with those features aren't available with 850 MHz.

Just switch to Cingular; you're all gonna be Cingular customers soon anyway.

Re:No Bluetooth

[Mattcelt]

AT&T sent me a SMS telling me they were offering a Sony Ericsson T226 to replace my T68i.

I called the 800 number and was told that I could either use the new phone when it was sent to me (and send my t68i back), or return the new one and continue using my current one.

I am opting to continue using my T68i since the T226 doesn't have Bluetooth, a very important feature to me.

I don't know if users of other phones are being required to upgrade. The T68i is a tri-band phone (800, 900, and 1900Mhz), which

Mmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say getting a phone that will be able to work is a pretty big upgrade.

Re:Mmmm

[Jeff DeMaagd]

The problem is that AT&T sold defective phones. And there's any surprise that the fix eliminates features people paid money for?

How would you like it if Ford sold Mustangs that performed much worse than expected, and as a fix, gave you a Pinto as a replacement?

"Free upgrades"

[KD5UZZ]

In my area AT&T wants me to update my (TDMA) phone to a GSM phone...and in the proccess I loose about 60% of my home coverage area. Sound good to you? I don't think so. I switched from SprintPCS to AT&T BECAUSE of AT&T's coverage. I fear the day my phone dies, maybe by then the GSM coverage will be better in my area.

Re:"Free upgrades"

[moderators_are_w*nke]

I live in the UK. GSM has been pretty much all there is for years now, which is great, as it works pretty well. A new provider, 3 has come along and setup a new network offering football highlights and video conferencing and next to zero coverage. However, all their phones are backwards compatible with GSM. Why can't AT&T offer you a GSM phone that falls back to TDMA (whatever that is?). To everyone out there who's being forced into geting a new phone, get a Nokia 7250i. They're great (but no bluetoot

Re:"Free upgrades"

[Neophytus]

i have a 3310

it has 3 main features
1) sends and recieves phone calls/texts
2) stores names of people whom i contact using feature 1
3) game of snake for when i'm not using 1) or 2) and am bored

Re:"Free upgrades"

[moderators_are_w*nke]

I used to have one just like it, a 3210. IMHO, the 3210 is the best phone Nokia have ever made. Mark

Re:"Free upgrades"

[man_ls]

TDMA is time division multiplex architecture (I think.)

It's a 2.5G technology allowing for some serious latency and correction for doppler shift and almost 1.2 seconds of delay between packets, fairly well.

Re:"Free upgrades"

[doormat]

TDMA = Time Division Multiple Access

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/T/TDMA.html

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:"Free upgrades"

[Daniel_Staal]

The problem, at least from my reading of the article, isn't that they can't offer phones that use both, but that they haven't. Even while they have been transitioning their connections on their end...

(Of course, there are other problems too, but this is the one relevant to this question.)

Re:"Free upgrades"

[BrookHarty]

Why can't AT&T offer you a GSM phone that falls back to TDMA

Because AT&TWS doesnt make phones. ;)

Same reason Verizon doesnt have GSM phones, different technology, and phone vendors dont make them.

Re:"Free upgrades"

[EchoMirage]

Why can't AT&T offer you a GSM phone that falls back to TDMA (whatever that is?).

They do. [attwireless.com] The Siemens S46. Great phones! Major travellers carry them (the editor of a major magazine's international bureau, for one example that I know off the top of my head).

BTW To pick nits, GSM doesn't fall back to TDMA. GSM is a TDMA-based network. TDMA is an architecture, and GSM is a specification.

Re:Is the S46 really the best for coverage?

[Daniel Boisvert]

Your phone may have the same problem mine did. I have the S46 as well, and found that it will grab the strongest signal available, sometimes grabbing TDMA/D-AMPS in areas where it should have been getting GSM coverage from AT&T towers. This resulted in some weird 'not able to call' errors, and the tech support folks suggested switching the phone to GSM only when in highly-covered areas (this problem was occurring in Hartford, CT). That resolved the issues. Now I generally leave it on GSM-only all th

Re:"Free upgrades"

[NDeans]

WRONG! There are three phones currently available that have BOTH GSM and TDMA! Actually two of them even include analog AMPS. They are: The Sony-Ericsson T62u - GSM 850/1900 w/GPRS TDMA 800/1900 AMPS 800 The Nokia 6340i - GSM 850/1900 TDMA 800/1900 AMPS 800 and The Siemens S46 - GSM 900/1900 w/GRPS TDMA 800/1900 So yes, there are ways to have your cake and eat it too, with GSM and TDMA. These phones are known as GAIT phones, and will give you the best coverage possible. Currently AT&T Wireless only sells the SOny t62u and the Siemens s46. Cingular sells the 6340i. If there are any more questions feel free to ask.

Re:"Free upgrades"

[po8]

My Siemens S46 [my-siemens.com] does both GSM bands and both TDMA bands. It gets pretty good AT&T coverage in rural Oregon, which is saying something. Cheap, too, and works as a dataphone and web browser. Unfortunately, no high-end functionality: camera, etc. are lacking, and it's monochrome.

My favourite AT&T Phone feature

[hendersj]

Is the one where it disconnects randomly in supposedly good-coverage areas.

No Camera!?

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG! They want me to use a phone with no camera! How can that be? How does a phone even work if it doesn't have a camera? Next thing they'll want me to buy a refrigerator with no DSL or a car with no DVD player!

I like the car DVD with windshield projection

[AtariAmarok]

I like the car DVD system that includes the windshield video projector, so I can watch movies like "Along Came Polly" while driving. It sure beats anything I'd see on the road in front of me.

Re:No Camera!?

[GeorgeH]

For anyone who thinks that camera phones are useless, my anectdote is being able to email pictures of my car's accident to my insurance agent while still at the scene of the accident. She then changed her mind and decided that I really couldn't drive a car with that front end and they sent a tow truck.

so where is the catch???

[stonebeat.org]

The catch? In most cases the upgrades have worse features than the phones they're replacing."

That is no catch. Heck some software vendors force you to upgrade, force you to pay for the upgrade, and upgrades have worse features than the original software. ;)

Free replace?

[Maljin Jolt]

I think all you customers should pay some money for those downgrades. Replacing process surely have some administrative costs, taken from pockets of poor shareholders.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery.

[JessLeah]

Downgrades are upgrades.

(On a more serious note-- hey, if Microsoft can define 'repackaging old Apple, Xerox and Unix tech for the masses' as 'innovation', then sure, a downgrade can be an 'upgrade'. Businesses lying is nothing new.)

Of course, the worst part of all of this?

[JessLeah]

The public will believe that the new phones are indeed 'upgrades'... since, you know, a Big Reputable Company told them so...

Seen this

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got the Nokia 6340i and it's tri-band and has an IR modem for my laptop. Never dops a call and I can surf the web with my laptop while I'm driving. It's not color, it's a good size to use as a phone, and I don't have it internet enabled. Going forward, I see no replacement - I'd really like to keep the IR coupling and maybe add a camera. This is it for me. Not because AT&T goofed, just because the features that I want will no longer be produced in a single unit without paying out the ass.

Re:Seen this

[Zeppelingb]

and I can surf the web with my laptop while I'm driving

So you're the guy who almost hit me today!

This happened to me

[GeorgeH]

I'm in Ann Arbor Michigan and had AT&T service with my T68i. Last year I had problems with dropped calls and my service meter would go from 5 bars to 0 when I would try to make a call. I got my handset replaced twice and it seemed to more or less alleviate the problem. This winter things got worse and worse.

Finally I got fed up and switched to T-Mobile. I got a nice phone for $0, and get unlimited wireless web usage for $10/mo (which got me 4 megs on AT&T). Getting my number transfered from AT&T to the new account took an 11 minute phone call and 6 hours to process.

Most importantly my calls aren't having the same problems, and I can actually use my phone again.

The irony is that between the time I called to switch my number and the time that the number switched I got an SMS saying that they were sending me a new (bluetoothless, underfeatured) phone for free. Now I'll have two to put up on eBay :)

Upgrades = downgrades

[AtariAmarok]

Too often, upgrades really mean downgrades. I was recently forced to "upgrade" my Nokia cell phone to a "newer better" model.

The newer model as the number keys laid out in converging diagonal lines, instead of straight up and down like the old one, so I have to think about and hunt for each number key. I guess the standard phone-button layout was just not good enough for Nokia.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Upgrades = downgrades

[NeMon'ess]

answered my own question thanks to google. see here [blauwefeniks.nl]

Not so bad

[PtM2300]

AT&T is attempting to do good with this. I believe the "upgrade" phones run at 850mhz, providing better service to the areas the "upgrades" are offered. They're trying to offer better service to their customers without losing a lot of money on giving away expensive phones.

Not as good as the old

[Prof. Pi]

I believe the "upgrade" phones run at 850mhz, providing better service to the areas the "upgrades" are offered.

The old phones ran at 1900mhz. So the new phones are, what, like less than half as good as the old ones?

standardization

[yulek]

well, the way at&t is doing it definitely sucks (i guess i'm glad i switched to Sprint last year when LNP kicked in but i'm about to be meta-hypocritical). but their reason for forcing these changes is a good one: standardization, something the cel phone industry has been terrible at (at least in the U.S.).

Nokia 5165.

[Jason1729]

The article lists a lot of nokia models including the 3650 which is a minor improvement on the 5100 series, but it doesn't mention the 5100 as being replaced. I have a 5165 on an AT&T plan in Seattle (one of the affected areas).

Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]

AT&T Wireless?

[Cyno01]

Weren't they bought by SBC not too long ago? Is this "upgrade" because they're becoming Cingular, which is GSM?

Re:AT&T Wireless?

[LostCluster]

The reason why AT&T Wireless was so attractive to SBC/Cingular is because AT&T already started building out a GSM network and were already comitted to converting their customers too.

This is retirement point for the non-GSM AT&T networks in the areas where the customers are getting these notices. They have to get a new phone from somebody, because their old phone is about to become obsolete.

Great

[Realistic_Dragon]

Shame the feature they remove is the Bluetooth and the serial connection, rather than the phone, sucky non-regular keypad or the colour screen.

I'm sticking with my 6310i until it dies, then I'll buy another one off eBay.

This doesn't sound like a bad thing

[jovian_]

According to the article, "The now obsolete phones will still work on the AT&T network, howeverthey will continue to have poor reception. Use them at your own risk."

So you can still keep your old phone, and it'll still work as it has in the past -- somewhat poorly, but not differently. Or, AT&T is offering free replacement phones that have improved reception but may not have all the features of your old phone. I don't see the problem here. If you want to stick with what you have, nothing is stopping you. AT&T is giving you a choice, which is more than most companies would do.

Just my two cents.

But they didn't give a choice.

[phillymjs]

The first I heard of this "upgrade" program was a card I got in the mail a week ago last Friday. It doesn't say, "Hey, if you want, you can switch to this phone," it says, "We're giving you this phone in exchange for yours."

When I saw what a feature-lacking piece of shit the T226 is compared to my T68i, [sonyericss...pgrade.com] I called the number on the card to see if I had an option of declining this allegedly-generous gesture. When they told me I could refuse the T226, they took my name and checked to see if my T226 had already been shipped out, and it had-- via UPS, according to the CSR, who told me to just refuse the package.

I am in complete agreement that the T616 should have been the replacement phone for the T68i. Not everyone is purely interested in stupid-ass ringtones and games. Every feature I bought the T68i for is missing in the T226, so I don't see how anyone can call that an upgrade with a straight face.

~Philly

Re:But they didn't give a choice.

[Boogaroo]

Interesting bit of postal law is that: If a company ships you something that you did not request, they cannot bill you for it. It is considered a gift at that point. This law was put into place to prevent companies from scamming folks by sending you a $1 product and claiming you owe them $20.

Now, UPS is NOT the US Postal Service so I'm wondering if this law applies to them. If so, then nobody HAS to send in the old phone. They can keep it and do whatever they want. If the law does not apply then I don't k

Who's laughing now?

[Anonymous Coward]

They all laughed at my refusal to join the club and my incredibly long cords, but I'll be proven right in the end. I'm staying in control of my phone destiny.

0xdeadbeef

[mrsam]

Up until November of last year me and my SO were att wireless subscribers. It was rather obvious that at&t wireless service couldn't really get any worse than it already was. Phone call quality always sucked unless the signal strength is at least at the halfway mark. That is if you were lucky to be in an area with any reception whatsoever. Their local calling areas were piss poor, and we got hit with roaming charges every month.

As soon as number portability kicked in, we bailed out for t-mobile GSM. The difference was like night and day. at&t wireless showed no signal in my home. The new phones (free t610 camera phones, by the way, with bluetooth, infrared, etc...) now show a good signal. No roaming charges, the call quality is now much better, and there are hardly any dropouts even if the phone shows only a single blip on the signal strength meter.

When I called to cancel at&t they lamely offered an upgrade to gsm. No thanks. Even if gsm is supposedly a better technology, I'm sure that at&t would find a way to screw it up, somehow.

Cingular wants to swallow up at&t? I hope they choke.

So? And Request for Opinions on AT&T Wireless

[MBCook]

On topic, DUH. They aren't saying you HAVE to switch, they are just strongly suggesting it because it will improve your reception. And you forked out all that extra cash for a smart phone, you should be prepared to do it again. If AT&T was going to disable your phone, then it would be reasonable to make them replace it with the same thing. But as it is they are just offering you one of their standard phones free. If you still want all those extra features, you can pay again.

It's not extra nice, but it makes perfect sense to me. I don't think you can really falt AT&T for this. Sorry.

The OT part: I am seroiusly thinking about switching carries for my phone (I don't care about my current number, so that hassle doesn't factor in), and I'm seriously looking at AT&T. I was thinking of getting a Sony-Ericsson T610 (or T616, whatever they want to sell me) for it's bluetooth and java (and looks).

Is AT&T a very nice provider? How hard is it to use a bluetooth phone as a modem (you know, connect to the internet through it)? Where can I find directions on that?

But overall, how are people's expiriances with it?

PS: I'm in eastern Kansas if you know what the reception is like there

Re:So? And Request for Opinions on AT&T Wirele

[Jhon]

Is AT&T a very nice provider? How hard is it to use a bluetooth phone as a modem (you know, connect to the internet through it)? Where can I find directions on that?

I've been using ATT for over a year. While I'm not 100% pleased as punch with them, they offer one feature I've come to rely on: unlimited free incoming text messages. I've got scripts and alerts set up at my work that lets me know useful and immediate information. Further, it allows the personnel I support to "page" me without them e

Re:So? And Request for Opinions on AT&T Wirele

[WhoDaresWins]

I don't know about Kansas, but at least in California AT&T GSM is one of the worse choices you could make -
http://nordicgroup.us/ssub/sfbaratings.htm [nordicgroup.us]
http://nordicgroup.us/ssub/scaratings.htm [nordicgroup.us]
(look at the overall coverage numbers in that table)
Generally Verizon is considered to have the best coverage and service. SprintPCS would be second and they have much cooler phones (but only one BlueTooth phone). Overall CDMA has a technical edge over GSM in terms of spectral efficiency and the carriers abil

Re:So? And Request for Opinions on AT&T Wirele

[kongjie]

I think you're missing the point.

The phone for which I paid extra money to AT&T has now been shown to have substandard reception due to the way they have built their network. This rather extraordinary step of offering a free phone pretty much acknowledges that they screwed up by selling me a 68i since it is now obsolete viz-a-vis their network.

The only reason I chose AT&T as a provider was because at the time I got my phone and plan they were the only company in my area offering a bluetooth-capable

Heh heh heh

[mbourgon]

These are the models once carried by AT&T that are affected:
[...]
Nokia N-Gage
[...]

Aside from the inevitable N-Gage jokes, what gives? Considering the N-Gage just came out the past few months, you'd think it wouldn't have shipped with the old configuration.

Almost switched to AT&T a little bit ago

[onyxruby]

Almost switched to AT&T a little bit ago, but then found out that all of their modem capable cell phones can only use that capability on their digital network. I explained I was wanting to use my cell phone as a regular analog modem, and was told it didn't matter. It was charged by the MB regardless, and to get more than 4 MB a month was extroidnarily expensive. Can you imagine you land line provider telling you that you would have to pay extra for using your line for a modem instead of voice? This wasn't a case of minutes or the like either.

Re:Almost switched to AT&T a little bit ago

[SharpFang]

Can you imagine you land line provider telling you that you would have to pay extra for using your line for a modem instead of voice?
Actually, I can. TPSA Poland, installing special dampeners on their lines to prevent people from using modems faster than 12Kbps, so they could rip them off with their own Internet packages (ADSL) instead of using the lines to connect to cheaper ISPs.

Re:Almost switched to AT&T a little bit ago

[H8X55]

um, how would they know if you were using it for voice or data? dialing is dialing. connected calls are connected calls. i can understand them charging for bandwidth if you're connected to them, downloading their content, but if you call someone else, and get their data, you should only pay for the minutes used to do so. that had to have been a salesman talking out of his ass. if not, you're right, that's the stupidest thing i've heard mobile service providers do in a long time.

Re:Almost switched to AT&T a little bit ago

[digitalvengeance]

Yes, I can imagine landline providers doing just that, because they do. Most of the "unlimited long distance" plans offered by the large phone companies come with the "voice calls only" restriction. They don't want someone in a rural area connecting to AOL 16 hours a day for one flat rate.

Do I agree with the policy? No. The only way it could be enforced is to listen in on a call from time to time to ensure that it is human voice rather than modem chatter... and that opens up a whole new can of worms.

Treo 600 is an 850 mhz phone

[davidm25]

I think even the old 270 was. Makes you wonder how much fact checking was done before posting the article.

It's really not that bad

[sjhwilkes]

Only a small percentage of users use bluetooth or international roaming, for those that don't a T226 is going to be fine. GSM850 penetrates buildings much better than GSM1900, so I for one would like to have it.

AT&T have just mishandled things by not conducting a survey first to figure out who really needed bluetooth/non US frequencies. Before all this publicity they could have made the survey ambiguous enough that everyone didn't claim to be using every T68 feature.

I just got the mail saying they'r

'Dupgrades' is the word you're looking for

[Anonymous Coward]

Example: I just dupgraded my computer to Windows XP over the weekend.

I got one of the "free" phones...

[rampant mac]

...and I threw it in the trash upon receiving it. I paid $120+ for my T68i, which syncs perfectly with my PowerBook's iCal and Address Book. The "free" phone doesn't have Bluetooth and feels insanely cheap compared to the T68i.

I'll keep using my T68i, and when they cut my service off, I'll demand a refund for my original phone. Then I'll take my business elsewhere.

AT&T shouldn't be forcing their customers to "upgrade" to anything. I smell a class-action lawsuit coming.

Just complain

[tedshultz]

This is how companies save money. They give the cheapos to most people, and only give the more expensive items to people who complain. With most companies, complaining can get you some crazy good deals. If you are a 'good' customer, phone companies will go out of there way to serve you.

Scam

[zachlipton]

ATT Wireless is really running a scam with this "upgrade" arrangement. See this post [mozillazine.org] for more information. The real catch is that to get the "free" phone, you have to sign a new contract with them. Worse yet, it's not just a new contract, it's a two year contract (basically forever as far as I am concerned). The free phones they offer are of course pretty terrible (far more annoying than the free phone I got from them getting their service in the first place) and more importantly, their network is practically useless in many places unless you upgrade (since they rolled out the upgrade, I've had no service (GSM) throughout much of San Francisco). I would even be willing to just purchase a new cell phone, but they have made it impossible to purchase a phone at retail without a contract, and it would cost way too much (price gouging to force people to sign a contract basically).

I'm currently shopping around for a new provider, though the crazy set of plans and prices that all the firms offer makes it impossible to compare plans or even figure out how much the service will cost.

Got one.. and returned in less than a day!

[JGski]

Their update concept is very good concept, if and only if what you're offering for the upgrade is any good.

Where does one begin?

1. Current T68 is curvy, stylish and ergonomic in the hand, upgrade T226 phone is an ugly box, light and cheap feeling
2. Only apparent "new feature": MMS - major yawn for anyone over the age of, I don't know, 14 years of age? On top of that doing anything with MMS deathly slow and cumbersome to use. As usually for tech marketing - forgot to ask customer what they actually wanted - this wasn't it!
3. Oh yeah, polyphonic ring tones, too. BFD!
4. More crap crammed into a too small space: joystick is usable on the T68; new phone it's nearly impossible to use. Just too small, and no actual "joystick", just 5 button placed inconveniently close in a cross.
5. T68 keypad numbers are well illuminated for dialing in the dark; on the T226 they are utterly illegibly dim
6. The screen seems to be a bit bigger on the T226 phone, but is actually worse readability than the T68 - presumably lower resolution.
7. No bluetooth - from one of companies that invented no less; current T68 has bluetooth (complete with alternating, if silly, activity lights - online & bluetooth - it's inane but strangely comforting)
8. Did mention the T226 is just d*mn ugly! It looks and feels like something you'd get out of a Crackjack box

Tried the phone for a couple of hours and just gave up on it. Sent it back. Thankfully you can switch the SIM card back to the old phone so easily. If you have a T68, you are stepping way down with this phone! BMW to Yugo. You're a fool if you keep it. And now, of course, it'll be a case of once bitten, twice shy if they try it again.

I don't know who to blame more: AT&T or Sony-Ericson. For AT&T, this will go down as one the stupidest tech marketing blunders in a while! For Sony-Ericson, well, the engineering team that designed the T226 should be taken out and shot. At the very least they should barred from designing any consumer electronic product - for life!

When the T68 came out I thought maybe Ericson might finally have figured out what Nokia does right - with this phone it's apparent the T68 was just a lucky, but utterly random accident. :-p

Nokia 8260 affected?

[Saint Stephen]

I'm the Bay Area, Northern California, on AT&T with a non-GSM Nokia 8260.

Three years ago I used to get dropped calls a lot but for the last two years, and currently, I am quite satisified with the reception, the price, and the features. I'm entirely satisfied with AT&T and worried about what I should do, since apparently no one else is.

Am I affected by this?

Just like...

[xeon4life]

...the way Windows "upgrades" aren't. :)

ah Buetooth hackable duh!

[linuxislandsucks]

Ah how /.'s forget..most Buetooth implementatiosn currently are hackable..ie insecure..

maybe AT&T got security minded? :)

Also in Portland Oregon

[Sloth503]

I got the letter on Friday from ATTWS, saying that they were sending me a new phone. They are supposedly providing return shipping for the old phone but the letter didn't say anything about HAVING to return the old phone to get the new phone. I'll be interested in reading the fine print when the new phone shows up but I'm not worried. I have no interest in downgrading from my T68i to this lesser phone, and I have no interest in returning either my old phone or the new one they are sending to me. More information can be found at: http://sonyericssont226upgrade.com/ [sonyericss...pgrade.com]

Now, some background information on the return issue - I used to manage the returns department for a dotcom and thus I was supposed to know a bit about returns issues. I cannot name the specific regulation by name, but the FTC says that if a merchant sends you a product that you didn't order, it is your's for free. They can ask for you to pay for it, they can ask for you to return it, they can call you bad names for keeping it, but they cannot require you to return it nor can they require you to pay for it. Keep this in mind for this new phone and any future boxes that end up at your door step. Now, since we are all ATTWS subscribers and signed some contract when we got our service, they might actually be able to force us to return the new phones or pay for them, but I'm not sure.

Now here's the part about the whole deal that makes me worried. Why are they sending new phones for free to people? Why aren't they just letting us keep our outdated phones and stop selling them, and start selling the new phones? What is the benefit of sending me a new phone and asking for me to return my old phone? At first I thought they wanted to give me a new phone with more features so that I'd send more SSM messages, or download ringtones, or do something else that would generate more revenue for ATTWS, but I don't think that is the case, if it was I think they would have given out even cooler phones. Frankly I cannot use a phone without Bluetooth, I just cannot, if the new phone had all the features of my old phone and some bonuses it would be a different story but... ATTWS is doing something it doesn't have to. They are giving out free phones when they don't have to. It doesn't make any sense, they should just stop selling the old phones. I think there is more to the story unfortunately, and I think that the end effect is that sooner or later my old phone will no longer work with ATTWS.

Will someone please file a class action lawsuit. I'm already ready to sign up.

Re:Also in Portland Oregon

[wfberg]

They might be planning on "turning off" the older network as soon as the existing contracts of people with the older phones ends.


The T68 does 900/1800/1900 and the replacement does 850 and 1900. The 850 network is in addition to the 1900 one. Otherwise they wouldn't be getting any extra capacity.

As for replacing TDMA or CDMA with GSM, well that could happen, but when you hand out dual-band phones, you expand your network, not just shift it around. Otherwise the FCC might come and get those frequencies b

All I want to do is make phone calls....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a Sprint PCS customer with an ancient StarTac that is due for a replacement. I've got a great calling plan, and I'd like to keep it. I don't want a camera phone. I don't even know what Vision is or does, but I'm pretty sure I don't need it or want it. I don't want special ringers, nor do I want to email videos of relatives making cookies or taking baths to people across the country on business trips. I just want a phone that makes phone calls and doesn't drop them. I went to the Sprint store today

Re:All I want to do is make phone calls....

[TeddyR]

I asked the same questions a short while back [slashdot.org] on a different cell phone related slashdot article [slashdot.org], and mkop [slashdot.org] kindly pointed me to this site [phonescoop.com]....

Not necessarily a required upgrade

[Cyph]

I received a letter in the mail from AT&T Wireless saying that to take advantage of the updated coverage area and so on I need to upgrade my Nokia 3650 phone (which is a pretty powerful and recent phone) to one of the models offered, every single one of which was a lot worse than my 3650. I contacted AT&T Wireless over to the phone to find out why they're trying to get me to switch to a crappier phone and I was told that it was just a mass mailing and that my phone is fully capable of handling the updated network, thus, I am not required to "upgrade".

The article (I read it!) does say that to take advantage of the updated network I need to upgrade the phone, but the point is that it's not a forced upgrade and I can freely continue using my current phone. I'm going to try and get through to customer retention and get a more decent upgrade phone, though.

Low Feature Phones.

[triso]

I cannot believe AT&T are giving out simple phones. Where did they find them? All I ever see is Bluetooth, virtual laser keyboards, SMS, digital video, WiFi, 3G, a 3D video processor and flash memory.

Sales Droid: So Maam, this is our most fully-featured phone ...

Me: That's great but all I want to do is make phone calls.

Droid: Sorry! That feature was depricated last year.

Me: What! Oh well.

So who do I use instead?

[TheSHAD0W]

I travel a lot in the wilderness, and I'm often in places where the only service available is analog cellular. AT&T's One Rate service was excellent, and I still have their Panasonic Tuff phone (don't know why they ever discontinued this beast, I've dropped it so often and it still works well)...

So if I need to switch carriers, who else still offers analog service?

Who cares about the phones? TDMA is the way to go

[Anonymous Coward]

Switch carriers. TDMA is the BEST cell phone standard in the United States. You can get coverage virtually ANYWHERE. Because TDMA is so much older, it has longer range and better sound quality. Switching from a TDMA phone to a GSM phone is OF COURSE A DOWNGRADE.

I have TDMA service through Cellular One in Oregon and I LOVE it. I've made phone calls on Mt Hood, South Sister and lots of other strange, way away from civilization places you wouldn't expect a phone to work.

Plus, TDMA plans are generally cheaper because the cell companies have already paid off their investment in them.

Re:Who cares about the phones? TDMA is the way to

[cygnus]

Switch carriers. TDMA is the BEST cell phone standard in the United States. You can get coverage virtually ANYWHERE. Because TDMA is so much older, it has longer range and better sound quality. Switching from a TDMA phone to a GSM phone is OF COURSE A DOWNGRADE.

I have TDMA service through Cellular One in Oregon and I LOVE it. I've made phone calls on Mt Hood, South Sister and lots of other strange, way away from civilization places you wouldn't expect a phone to work.

newsflash: GSM uses TDMA. it's just a particular implementation of TDMA. all TDMA is is a way to multiplex calls based on a time-dependent protocol. and for long distance range (over 10 miles), CDMA actually tops TDMA/GSM.

i say all of the above being an unabashed GSM user. i just hate Verizon and like the features of GSM phones.

and a hint for at&t people getting "upgrades": you're probably eligible for a customer retention upgrade. skip all this crossgrade nonsense and call at&t and say you want a new phone for being a long-term customer. i got a T616 for my T68i for free like this. you'll end up getting whatever prices a new subscriber would get, so check on at&t's website before you call.

I had the same problem with sprint

[Tikiman]

I had a nice, top of the line Nokia - a couple years later, calls would randomly disconnect. I used equipment replacement twice and get back the same model. Finally they tell me my phone is no longer compatible with their network! I asked to be transfered to the guy who could close my account, since my phone was entirely useless. Instead they transferred me to the guy who sent me a new phone, which did turn out to be a marginal upgrade due to two years of advancement in the technology. Eventually they even gave me a nice credit on my account for the months my phone was useless. However, I had to threaten to terminate my account before getting any results.

http://www.sonyericssont226upgrade.com

[tetro]

linky [sonyericss...pgrade.com] That's the website with some info about the upgrade.

Counting the days until my contract expires

[xjerky]

I foolishly signed a 2-year contract with AT&T in 7/02 since it included a free Motorola v60 phone which I read can act as a modem. Unfortunately I did not do enough research and did not discover until I signed up that AT&T disabled data access on their model. My own fault I guess.
But now I have a 12 inch Powerbook that I'd really like to take on the road, and a bluetooth phone with data capabilities is a must. Until my contract expires in July I am stuck. I'm looking at T-Mobile with their unlimited data plan.

morons abound...

[Vegeta99]

OK, here's the deal. AT&T Wireless sends these users a card saying that they'll be getting an upgraded phone within the next couple weeks. This is ONLY in areas where a GSM850 network now exists. The T68i does NOT support GSM850. So, you've got two options - Keep using your T68i keep on whining and moaning that the service sucks, or use the T226 and use the GSM850 network and the GSM1900 network. Either way, you're not really REQUIRED to send the T68i back, it's just begged that you do so in the papers. They give you a postage-paid box to send it back in.

Yeah, the phone blows. You're the moron that bought a phone that didn't support GSM850. I've had a phone from the BEGINNING that did, and still do. A SonyEricsson T616. It's easy enough to get one cheap, too. It's called a contract extension. And don't whine about the contract either, you COULD go prepaid. ATTWS has some of the best prices in the business. Mod me troll is you like, but hey, caveat emptor. It's your own fault.

Re:morons abound...

[Jasn]

When I signed up there was no T616 available. I bought the best worldphone available, I found after best diligence that the coverage map I was counting on wasn't remotely close to half-right (I'm talking 100-mile misses), even before forming agreements with Cingular, and in response to my and others' issues with that, I get an offer that couldn't even reasonably be considered a sidegrade rather than a downgrade. [sonyericss...pgrade.com] Yeah, what a moron I am!

And the best prices in the business aren't much good if a company turns around and says "all that stuff we promised in our contract and materials? We were just kidding! Sucks to be you!" That's arguably fraudulent ... glad to see you think the customers are to blame though.

Re:morons abound...

[GeorgeH]

T68i supports 900, 1800 and 1900Mhz. And the shitty service wouldn't be a problem if they weren't phasing out 900Mhz for 850Mhz towers. My T68i worked fine 2 years ago, it's unusable now (which is why I ditched AT&T and am getting my T68i unlocked to be a T-Mobile backup)

Anyone remember Sprint Spectrum?

[no_such_user]

Sprint Spectrum, based in the DC/MD/VA area, was the first PCS license in the country, operating GSM1900 around 1995-2000. This was not, initially, the same company which is now Sprint PCS. As they were later deploying the new Sprint PCS network, using CDMA, Sprint Spectum continued to promise multi-city access, without roaming, on the Sprint network; since they were using two completely different systems, it was a very empty promise.

Eventually, other GSM providers popped up across the country, including Omnipoint (later Voicestream, now T-Mobile), PacBell (in some markets), and a few others. But Sprint Spectrum, later bought out or merged (?) with Sprint PCS, started to let their GSM network stagnate, focusing on building the CDMA network instead.

A class-action suit was brought against Sprint, charging that they promised their customers inter-city usage on the nationwide Sprint network, but never delivered. The result of the lawsuit was that Sprint was to provide their GSM customers with a PCS (CDMA) phone and a small rebate towards PCS service.

Well, it couldn't have played out better for Sprint -- they were able to move their customers to CDMA, had a legitimate reason to shut down the GSM network, and here's the best part: they provided old model, REFURBISHED phones to the customers who were being moved from GSM to CDMA. Conveniently, the slightly nicer models of the replacement phones were frequently out of stock, and if you wanted to get a brand-new model, you would be forced to sign up as a new customer.

Years later, I tried to get an old GSM phone from the Sprint Spectrum network SIM-unlocked. Trying to convince the Sprint PCS people that I had a Sprint-branded GSM phone was like trying to tell them the ocean was purple.

More about GSM networks and operating frequencies

[motown]

In Europe, the 900MHz and 1800MHz ranges have been reserved (exclusively) for GSM networks for quite a few years. No standards other than GSM are allowed on these frequencies. Countries in Asia and Africa that also adopted the GSM standard ended up licensing the same frequency bands for compatibility reasons.

In North-America, the 1900MHz range was reserved for digital cellular networks. The US chose not to define a single mandatory cellular standard for use with this frequency. As a result, there are currently three different and incompatible standards in the US that are deployed in the 1900MHz range: TDMA, CDMA and GSM. All 1900MHz digital cellular networks (using any standard) are generally referred to as "PCS". TDMA is now considered to be obsolete and is gradually being replaced by GSM.

The 850MHz band is also available for cellular communications in the US. If I remember correctly, this freqency was already used for analog networks before digital cellular technology was introduced.

Digital technology offers many advantages over analog technology (security, bandwidth utilization efficiency, data services, quality of service). Therefore, cellular network providers desired to upgrade their analog networks to digital networks as much and quickly as possible. The 850Mhz licenses were still valuable, since the companies had payed a lot of money for them, and because lower frequencies offer a greater range (with the same transmitting power) than higher frequencies. In practice that means that a 850MHz network would require less antennas than a 1900MHz network within the same area of coverage.

Because of this, the GSM850 (sub)standard was officially ratified. This allowed GSM technology to be deployed in 850MHz networks.

One thing I did notice was that the major cellular phone manufacturers have sofar been slow with introducing 850MHz-compatibility in their new models.

Of course, it took some years for triband phones (900MHz/1800MHz/1900MHz) to become generally available, providing reasonable coverage in North America and excellent coverage in most of the rest of the world.

As far as I know, there are still no quadband phones (800MHz/850MHz/1800MHz/1900MHz), although I'm sure that that will be simply a matter of time. Those would be the ultimate roaming phones for frequent transatlantic travellers. :-)

The only two countries with mobile networks that don't have any GSM coverage are South-Korea and Japan.

Re:N-Gage?

[moderators_are_w*nke]

Don't think many people bought one. As a phone, its too bulky to fit in your pocket, and as a portable games console, its not much cop because you have to dismantle the thing to play the games.

Its probably not too much of a problem.