AT&T cellular network sucks!!!!!

[cantdrv55]

I spend more time calling back because of dropped calls on AT&T than Verizon or even T-Mobile. How the heck does it keep attracting customers with their crappy service? I understand why companies choose ATT - lowest bidder. But why would anyone use them for their personal phone? My coworkers nationwide have the same complaint about ATT,

[stomachmonkey]

Yeah it’s all location location location.

Felt the same about ATT while I lived in NY.

In my current area of TX their network is as reliable as a landline.

[javadog]

I've had AT&T for more than 20 years and traveled all over the country. I cannot remember the last time I had a dropped call. I don't remember the last time I had no service. Maybe the problem is not with the AT&T network...

[Gogar]

Don’t rule out an aging phone. My iPhone 6 has been terrible for months, but I doubt it’s att’s Fault. We abuse our phones quite a bit when you think about it.

[A930Rocket]

I have a weak signal at home and various locations around town with AT&T. Dropped call are the norm.

Verizon seems to have better coverage.

[Nickshu]

I think it's regional. Around here ATT also stinks, as well as Sprint and T-Mobile. Verizon is the only good coverage in our area.

[Cooper911SC]

We had ATT for several years and the coverage was hit/miss depending on location. Overall good.

Dropped it about a year ago to save $1k per year on a family plan, yes, $1k. Went to T-Mobile, same “network” but damn the connectivity SUCKS!! Same house/location and I’m constantly dropping calls.

Very obvious that the carriers can “throttle” or give priority as they wish... very annoying for the business line. I guess pay for what you get?... 😕

[David McLaughlin]

I can’t speek for all areas, but in from what I’ve seen as a cell tower designer (like an engineer but with less pay) Verizon has, by far, more cell cites by far. They spend huge amounts of money to develop locations that no one else does. In my area, T-mobile is second or tied with AT&T for locations and technology updates. Sprint (my main client right now) is a distant 4th. They are unorganized, indecisive and unmotivated.

I’ve compared my Verizon service with T-mo and Sprint customers while on road trips. I’m not switching.

[Geary]

I'm on an AT&T family plan. Reception sucks at every ski resort I frequent ... but all my friends on Verizon get great reception.

[cabmandone]

I just switched from Verizon to AT&T and have so far been very happy with the service. I haven't done much travelling outside of Ohio since getting the new phones and service but that will soon change and we'll see if my opinion changes.

[onewhippedpuppy]

I had an ATT personal phone and Verizon work phone for years. ATT seems really solid in cities but can be hit or miss in smaller towns and rural areas. Verizon seems more consistent overall. I won’t switch my personal to Verizon because it’s a lot more money and I really don’t have many complaints about ATT. We don’t have a landline and it’s never an issue.

[MBAtarga]

Saw this on the news/web the other day. T Mobile was false ringing their customers phones to let them THINK their call was being connected....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-t-mobile-us-fcc/t-mobile-to-pay-40-million-over-false-ring-tones-on-rural-u-s-calls-idUSKBN1HN2IV

[chuckr]

In my area ,North Louisiana, AT&T has terrible service! If I go 75 miles east or west I get fantastic service. Data downloads average between 4 and 24mbps. Anywhere but here 60 to 90mbps

[McLaren-TAG]

Verizon is better in many very rural areas because they have spectrum in areas where others didn't simply because they were the legacy landline provider. AT&T is better in a great big number of markets especially ones where they are the landline provider. In markets where Verizon is the landline provider they will historically have better/more spectrum. This is a rule of thumb for those two carriers. Sprint and T mobile were never landline providers hence they'll tend to not have an advantage anywhere. So they compete on price.

Reception is all about spectrum, the amount of spectrum owned, the number of people on the network and the frequency used it. High frequency like 2100kHz and higher does horribly when penetrating structures and buildings, lower frequency like 800hz and lower does much better.

Pick the network that's right for you based on where you spend most of your time and fits your budget.

They are all great in some areas and they all suck in some areas. Choose wisely, don't be a complainer, educate yourself.

[GH85Carrera]

Around the central USA Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas and close to interstates AT&T has great coverage. I can drive the length of I-40 and have solid coverage. Up in Yankee land, not so much.

[javadog]

I don't think it matters that AT&T had a landline presence in certain markets that they are now in as a cellular provider. The Cellular portion of the business started around 35 years ago, give or take, as SW Bell Mobile Systems. It went through a name change to Cingular wireless in the 1990s, then they essentially bought AT&T and the name changed again. The FCC sold a bunch of new spectrum in the 1990s, which provided a huge amount of growth in coverage nationwide and introduced a number of new players into the business. There were originally two cellular providers in my area, then they added six more. Companies had coverage in areas where they held licenses and no coverage in areas where they didn't. Now that roaming is essentially a thing of the past, God only knows who's actual equipment you may be talking through as you traverse the country.
During the growth phase, towers were placed in a high traffic areas and then areas with low traffic were filled in later. Subsequent to that, lots of towers got effectively moved as they tweaked their coverage.

It's a complex issue and simply blaming a carrier for perceived bad performance may not be warranted .