AT&T, ATT ATT 3g is not what it seems Indiana Internet

Is ATT 3G a rip-off? Buyer be-ware! This last fall I purchased ATT's 3g service (at the outrageous sum of $60 per month) as one of two broadband alternatives in my rural area; the other being satellite. Although I signed a contract for 3g service that was riddled with disclaimers and extremely one sided to ATT, I am no less disappointed with the service. I want others to know of my experience.

The performance level varies from that which I expected at a minimum (almost DSL) to that which I find unacceptable (no better than dial-up). After numerous calls to ATT support I have concluded that I am stuck with what I have, with no hopes of any real improvement.

First, ATT does not provide 3g service to all towers. This is stated back-handedly in my 3G user guide. It is my understanding that in more rural areas, a 2g level is common (as is my case.) Having traveled into 3G areas I can tell a significant difference; 3G seems much better than 2g. This is best illustrated by You-tube the 2G level at my rural Indiana home cannot access You-Tube, with 3G in a metropolitan area I can access You-Tube.

Second, ATT offered a 30 day trail period and I did have 2G levels without experiencing any difficulties or over loads in this period; I found that while 3/2G will not perform as well as DSL, cable or other broader band devices that 2g is a big improvement over dial- up. So out the gate I accepted a less than 3g performance but had a better than dial-up expectation.

Third, I am told by the ATT customer service group (through several calls) that in addition to the lesser 2G level, the performance of 2/3G service varies with the load on the local tower, the signal strength, and the load on the bandwidth as managed by ATT for the local tower and any downstream services otherwise within ATT's control.

Fourth, though I can get no one at ATT to admit it, they appear to choke downloads over half a meg to a 20-something KBS (verses a 5 something on dial-up.) I have a meters on some downloads that tell me these speeds. This means that multi-meg down loads are measured in tens of minutes (vs. several tens of by dial up, vs. fewer minutes of by DSL.)

Now, I have spoken at length with ATT service and they are confident that ATT is in compliance with the contract. If so, then this essentially means that ATT has a very wide performance standard to meet. From my conversations with ATT service I am given no hope that my local service will be improved in my lifetime no commitment. Recently, my experience was down to a dial-up level of performance for an entire day and my current level of 2G performance while better than dialup is about 80% of what I started with. If this does not permanently improve in 18 months, I will be installing some other alternative.

To ATT's credit, my experience has been favorable during storms, a period that I was warned could be difficult (but my signal strength is usually very good. Other guys near me on satellites lose their signals with heavy clouds.

Buyers beware make sure this is the best alternative for you. From other blogs I have read, expect some lesser level of performance than you expected. (I think this is true of most broadband services, but at 3g Levels it is noticeable.) Maybe ATT should give me a $20 per month credit for every month they are not 3g at my site.

My stats are as follows:
-History: I have used the web for 25 years cable, DSL, dial-up and now air card 3g
-Web use: 6 hours per day using XP on a very adequate computer.
-Distance to main ATT tower: 2 miles direct line of site (I am elevated)
-Signal strength: -50 something dbm (strong 5 bar) to -90 something (1 bar)
-Bar performance: 75% -54 to -65 -- 15% -67 to -80 -- 5% over -80
-Line speeds: usually from 77 to 150+ kps (less with large down loads.)

ripmeoffnomore
nashville, Indiana
U.S.A.



Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on AT&T