 |
Posted Tuesday, November 03, 2009 by Aaron Baker | ||||
It was only a matter of time before AT&T got their feelings hurt and decided to sue Verizon for their "there's a map for that" comparison advertisements, seen all over television as of late due to the upcoming launch of the Motorola Droid.
Here's the real kicker: according to AT&T, Verizon is misleading the public by comparing the two 3G coverage areas. Instead, AT&T proposes that Verizon includes their EDGE coverage. Not quite sure how the nation's second largest wireless carrier justifies that request, as EDGE most definitely isn't 3G (and shouldn't be compared as such), but since it covers 1.75 million square miles, it would fill in their blue map shown in the picture above (thus making it more visually appealing to customers watching at home, pondering a switch to Big Red).
Instead of trying to sue Verizon for a claim that is largely true, I'm thinking that continuing the investment in 7.2 Mbps HSPA is a better way to spend money. What's more, it will quell complaints about coverage, thus killing two birds with one stone. What do you think?
Via: BGR
btw, having worked for vzw I know that the map doesn't tell the entire story - there are a lot of 'marginal' coverage areas where EVDO is basically useless.
Now, if and when Google rolls out Navigation for platforms other than the Droid....
Your suggestion is great. I think it would be better for everyone involved if AT&T spent their money more effectively on its 3G coverage instead of slapping VZW with a largely arbitrary lawsuit.
Guess you guess you get butt-raped for that map huh?