|
|
|
|
|
by tinotopia
5841 days ago
|
|
A large part of AT&T's perception problem seems to have to do with their congestion, not their RF performance, in a few places. This might be one of those situations where more information would be useful. The ideal solution would be to charge a higher price (e.g. a 'minute multiplier' — show this next to the signal strength indicator) for traffic in congested conditions — but this would present marketing problems, Mobile-phone pricing is already opaque enough, and people would rightly be suspicious that the introduction of such a congestion charge would soon result in interesting re-defintions of 'congestion'. You might be able to get much the same effect by simply showing the user the current local network condition, by turning the signal indicator into a signal-and-congestion indicator. You'd see the signal strength as a measure of the radio conditions, and some kind of indicator that reflected the ability of the network to handle calls at that moment. I'm assuming, with no particular knowledge of the matter, that the congestion problems with mobile-phone networks are like nearly all other such problems: extremely fleeting. You might be unable to make a call for about five minutes out of an hour; but if that's the five minutes during which you want to make a call, not only are you frustrated because you can only discover the situation through what amounts to black-box analysis, but the phone company gets no goodwill from you for the performance of the network during the other fifty-five minutes. |
|
Congestion means they have lots of paying customers in the area -- so even without congestion pricing, they ought to be able to plan and maintain capacity here. That they have not is evidence of the lack of proper competition, aggravated by Apple's exclusive deal.