T-Mobile rules plus they have award winning 24/7 customer care. Check out their new service HotSpot@Home.

I bet right about now Apple is wishing they did go with AT&T.

Has anyone noticed that the AT&T logo looks like the death star, coincidence not in my paranoid mind :)
The IPhone sales etc. are handled by Max OS X while AT&T handles activation, billing etc. with Vista :D I couldn't resist.

AT&T actually uses Windows Vista on their end? I didn't think there were any large businesses (except maybe Microsoft) using Vista on production systems.

Let's see when Rogers in Canada get this phone and screw all up with the bills. They have already mis-billed me more than 6 months and counting.

Nothing new here, Cingular has always overcharged me and when I call they take it off and it takes few months for it to show up on bill and by that time you probably have forgotten about it. I think there should be a law that mandates that the bill is verified before its sent out.

I think this is an issue of people not knowing how AT&T charges your first bill. If you want details look here. http://howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=440556

From the post...
What I hate #1: Partial Service from date of activation to cycle close date.
The first day you are able to make/receive calls on your phone until that "cycle close date" will most likely not be a full cycle. You will usually have some amount less than 15 days before you start your full month. In this "partial month" you are only charged a "percentage" of your monthly service, you are also given that same "percentage" of your monthly minutes. So lets say your on a plan for $60/month with 1000 minutes. If you have exactly 15 days (IE: activated on the 4th with a cycle close date of the 19th) then you will be charged $30 (monthly cost of plan divided by 30 day billing cycle, times the days you are on it) and given 500 minutes (minutes in a billing cycle divided by 30 days in a month times the number of days you are on it). So from the time you walk out of the store until your first new cycle you are on a "prorated" amount of minutes.
If you exceed this "prorated" amount of minutes, you will be charged the overage rate, but if you stay below that overage rate, Cingulars rollover minutes will not go into effect until the first full 30 day billing cycle.
So the customer who goes over loses.
The customer who goes under loses.
How to protect yourself: When you first sign up, ask if you can have your close day be as soon as possible (preferably before the end of your buyers remourse period). If they are not able to change it, ask what day your billing cycle will stop at, and just keep in mind what I said about the prorated minutes so you don't go over.
Hopefully the billing system will be updated so that whatever prorated minutes you don't use will roll over. -or- You are given the full month of minutes but only charged the prorated amount for date of activation until first close day.

What I hate #2: First Bill
Remeber me going on about how you would get charged a month of service on the first day of a new cycle? And that you get charged a partial month from date of activation until cycle close date? That, and the activation fee, all show up on the first bill. So your first bill is higher than what you would be charged for a normal 30 day billing cycle.
How to protect yourself: Call up after you have activated and ask what you will be charged with activation fee and partial monthly charge, they can give you a close estimate + sales tax, but it won't include the "fees" like Federal Universal Service and 911 charges, and you can make a payment over the phone or over the website for that amount, and have the first statement that is mailed to you look approximately like it would every month. You will sometimes receive this within your 15 days to give you a better idea of what your monthly bill will look like.

"as the company only has support staff working 7am to 9pm during the week"

This is one of the reason I hate AT&T, there is no one available to help when you need them. Their customer services sux too.

this is odd cause i work sundays and till midnight sometimes and still get tons of calls so it might be a reigonal thing.

AT&T routes people to customer service based on their phone number, I believe. It's possible in some regions they have hours different than others. Here, they have limited service hours like those noted above.

tends to happen with the activation process needing to be done through itunes. because apple wanted complete control of the activation process as well as the ability to lock the phone to a specific sim card which at&t doesn't do with any other phone caused this issue. in at&ts system the 'iphone' feature plans cannot be added if another data or messaging plan exists on the mobile, yet if done through itunes it doesn't auto remove them and succesfully adds the iphone feats. this is definatly at&ts issue as they print the bill and cash the checks but the issue exists solely because of the forced itunes activation. another example of how apple's proprietorship is not consumer friendly.

so you are saying it is Apple's fault that AT&T's systems don't work right?

Can you explain it again as to how it is Apple's fault that AT&T does not have a proper back end system?

is itunes an at&t system? if itunes haden't been used to add features and choose rate plans this wouldn't have been a issue.

iTunes banks off the AT&T system for the iPhone. Since Apple isn't the one making the bills, this is an AT&T problem. Their system wasn't built right.

It wouldn't be an issue if they hadn't bought the phone, either.

iTunes can submit new records to AT&T. It cannot remove existing plans. This is no fault of iTunes.

AT&T's backend should be able to flag existing records that have been added to by the iTunes software.

i don't believe it's itunes fault but at&t did not develop a component of its system to work with itunes (it developped the visual vociemail for apple but thats another issue), itunes developped a component to work with the at&t systems much like a another verision of the billing systems found in corp stores.

poor foresight on at&ts part to not have the itunes changes to auto remove the older plans but again it isn't a 'well if they didn't buy the phone' situation as they could purchase the phone just fine, and the credit checks and rateplan changes that were done in store worked just fine, it was the requirement of the itunes activation with rateplan changes that caused issues.

their system was built a long time before the iphone came around. it was built back in old at&t wireless days and since simply improved upon. it was built correctly, you get billed for the packages on your account, you get access to the features on your account. the modification to the standard system found in stores was not built correctly, and i doubt it was at&t systems programmers that were coding the itunes update.

s*** key borked?

it was the requirement of the itunes activation with rateplan changes that caused issues.

No. No. And, no.

*shakes head*

iTunes had nothing to do with it. Look, regardless of what application was used to activate the connection, the AT&T backend failed to properly update the records.

Yes, iTunes was involved, but only inasmuch as "the tube" is to blame when the drive-through teller at a bank forgets to take my withdrawal off of my account balance.

iTunes was merely the tube.

their system was built a long time before the iphone came around. it was built back in old at&t wireless days and since simply improved upon. it was [b]built correctly,[/i]

...and they utterly failed to update the system properly when faced with a new method and model for subscription.

completely true. but it was built correctly.

Your user name is appropriate, you are such a TOOL! You have the correct answer for almost everything.

Apple and iTunes had a hand in this as well. If you had bothered to actually think when you read diab21's post, you would see he wasn't absolving ATT from blame, but he was pointing out the truth that if Apple hadn't insisted on doing the activation through iTunes, this wouldn't have been a problem. Whether the ATT backend failed is irrelevant. So,

Yes. Yes. And yes.

*gags in disgust*

If the activation was allowed to go through ATT in the first place the problem wouldn't have arisen.

That being the entire point of the original poster. AT&T failed to update their backend properly to account for this new method of subscription.

Sure, it was built correctly. But it wasn't updated properly. Tehy failed at some point to get it working. This is entirely on AT&T and *not* iTunes.

I am by far not an Apple fanboy, but blaming the car for the failure of the service center to be able to service it is just too ridiculous.

Your user name is appropriate, you are such a TOOL!

*laughs*

Gee, never heard that one before... You're so very clever.

but he was pointing out the truth that if Apple hadn't insisted on doing the activation through iTunes, this wouldn't have been a problem.

You emphatically defend the same straw-man argument that he did.

Excuse my lack of surprise...

If you take that exact argument to the next level, you can *easily* see it's irrelevance, which I tried to pointing out in my post, but you completely missed (again, excuse my lack of surprise): IF they hadn't released the phone, this wouldn't have happened either.

Sorry, iTunes activation is part of the product. AT&T was well aware of this from teh beginning. They failed to properly test the system end to end with the new method of subscription.

Whether the ATT backend failed is irrelevant.

*laughs*

Excuse me? That's the *entire* point! AT&T's backend failed and thus people are getting double-billed. That's kind of the *entire* friggin' reason for the article, genius.

It is *not* Apple's fault AT&T didn't bother to properly update and test their system for the method of subscription they knew about well in advance.

the itunes activation was not widely known until 2 weeks prior to the release, yes it was know by the individuals who needed to know to make adjustments and they failed to properly test the system on a wide scale and yes in a fair variety of circumstances (you'd think they'd make sure it would be able to removed features instead of just add). but the itunes update failed widely inregards to this product as well, the activation delays that lasted from 24-72 hours for impacted customers was solely due to the inclusion of itunes in the activation process, that it why the phone was to stay connected with itunes during the entire time.

It's pointless to reason with PC_Tool. His post are all the same. Same tone, same sarcasm, same condescension. It doesn't matter what the topic is either or your expertise. He's right no matter what.

It's both companies' fault.

When two (or more) companies come together to release a product, there is supposed to be THROUGH end to end testing of all the shared software resources before the product launches. End of story. That obviously didn't happen here.

Long story short, both companies are to blame for this one as it was both of their responsibilities to perform very through, end to end tests. That step was obviously skipped (as so often happens with rushed product launches). Had both of them done the appropriate testing, this would be a non-issue.

Except in this case he's actually right. Apple is not responsible for the shortcomings of AT&T. AT&T agreed to the iTunes activation procedure, and have known about it for a LONG time. The fact they couldn't adequately accommodate iTunes is no fault of Apple's - it's AT&T's sheer incompetence only.

(you'd think they'd make sure it would be able to removed features instead of just add).

Good to see you've come 'round a bit. Logic, at least, is not lost on everyone.

but the itunes update failed widely inregards to this product as well, the activation delays that lasted from 24-72 hours for impacted customers was solely due to the inclusion of itunes in the activation process, that it why the phone was to stay connected with itunes during the entire time.

That's great and all, as I am no great fan of iTunes either, but that's not what the article was about, now was it?

Sarcasm? Condescension? Yes, I give as well as I get.

Your user name is appropriate, you are such a TOOL! ...

...If you had bothered to actually think when you read diab21's post...

...*gags in disgust*

Let me guess, *you're* the only one allowed to be sarcastic and condescending?

It's pointless to reason with PC_Tool

Translation: I can't argue his logic, my views have no basis in reality, so I'll just claim it's pointless and try to damage his credibility.

You *must* be a liberal. You've got their template down perfectly.

I would assume, if you actually *had* a valid argument, you would have posted that instead.

Perhaps, someday, you'll be able to debate the facts in question instead of pandering to your obviously over-developed and unwarranted sense of self-righteousness.

Hey, we can all dream, can't we?

Put that way, I'd have to agree. Both failed to test.

However, the OP tried to lay the actual point of failure at the feet of iTunes. That was obviously not the case.

You are right, both should have tested much more thoroughly so they could have found the issue on AT&T's end.

My post was a parody of yours, but I guess that is beyond your ability to comprehend.

Life long constructionist conservative, so you are wrong again.

You are not interested in debating, you are interested in speaking through your nose at people.

Look at the tone of your postings, who's self-righteous?

Wrong, Do you think ATT had any choice as to how the phone would be activated? And, if you had read any of the other post in this thread, you would have seen that the activation procedure was not known for a LONG time.

No one is absolving ATT from any blame here or even most of the blame, but Apple is not innocent either.

Biggest product launch in the last decade? What about the Nintendo Wii or the DS? Those are still difficult to find in stores and had equal amount of hype, at least for me.

only stats google pulled right away were uk #s, so im not sure of u.s. sales but uk were wii: 100,000 first weekend and ds: 87,000

600,000 for the iphone. it doesn't matter how much hype or how hard they might be to find still, it matters how many units were sold at time of launch.

How difficult it is to find a product in stores means nothing to how good it's selling.

Not without additional information, such as how fast they're flying off the shelves, the numbers produced, and how many the store got to begin with.

Of course, as far as anecdotal evidence goes, it's just as meaningful and relevant as any other such evidence. (meaning, not really)

Watch within a few months there will be a class action suite against Apple and AT&T for billing them to much.

Of course it will only be an attempt to get more money out of the suite since AT&T really would only one at fault.

Not sure why people don't mind what it says in their ToS about selling your information to anyone.

that sucks after you have paid $600 for a phone and get screwed on the bill.

Another good example of why I'll never go back to Cingular.

My bill was like it should have been, I'll keep an eye on them in the coming months though.

iamtux you are one smart consumer :)