Goodbye Cingular, Hello AT&T

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Wade - 21 Nov 2005 17:34 GMT

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-11-20-cingular-att_x.
htm?csp=34

Reply to this Message

Dylan - 21 Nov 2005 18:13 GMT

> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-11-20-cingular-att_x.
htm?csp=34

I wonder how many people who were originally AT&T Wireless customers who
had to go out and get a new phone with the Cingular brand, will now have
to go and get another new branded phone to look cool ;-0

Hope we can get back some of the AT&T customer relations like service
and plans..

D

Reply to this Message

Jeremy - 21 Nov 2005 19:13 GMT

"Dylan" <NoSPAM@cox.net> wrote in message news:T5ogf.5117

> I wonder how many people who were originally AT&T Wireless customers who
> had to go out and get a new phone with the Cingular brand, will now have
> to go and get another new branded phone to look cool ;-0

I just reactivated my old Ericsson T19LX, which I used on ATTWS, and the
display changed from reading "AT&T" to "CINGULAR."

I wonder how long it will take before they change it yet again, to "at&t?"
(Note that the new AT&T Logo has switched to all lower-case letters.

http://www.sbc.com/gen/press-room?pid=7521#color

Reply to this Message

Wade - 21 Nov 2005 19:17 GMT

Well, looks like they won't . I guess Ed's comments were misquoted in
the USA today article.
Still is't going to be confusing.
http://www.rcrnews.com/news.cms?newsId=24896

Reply to this Message

Jeffrey Kaplan - 21 Nov 2005 19:52 GMT

It is alleged that Wade claimed:

> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-11-20-cingular-att_x.
htm?csp=34

WTF? After all the time, money and effort they went through to kill
the AT&T Wireless name/service?

Signature

Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"Interesting. Do you know that the odds of this particular combination
are five thousand to one against?" "Lennier." "Yes Londo?" "Stop
that." "Does that mean I've won again?" (Lennier and Amb. Mollari, B5
"The Quality of Mercy")

Reply to this Message

Jeremy - 22 Nov 2005 14:20 GMT

> WTF? After all the time, money and effort they went through to kill
> the AT&T Wireless name/service?

The name "AT&T" was probably THE most valuable component of the buyout for
SBC. Remember that the reason that they retained the name Cingular when the
two wireless companies merged was that they were required to surrender the
AT&T name back to its owner, AT&T. Now that SBC IS AT&T, they can do what
they probably wished they could do all along--sell everything under one
brand.

Reply to this Message

TerryS - 23 Nov 2005 00:43 GMT

>> WTF? After all the time, money and effort they went through to kill
>> the AT&T Wireless name/service?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> what they probably wished they could do all along--sell everything under
> one brand.

its at&t

TerryS

Reply to this Message

larry - 23 Nov 2005 04:51 GMT

>>WTF? After all the time, money and effort they went through to kill
>>the AT&T Wireless name/service?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> they probably wished they could do all along--sell everything under one
> brand.

Wait til they tear down all the GSM towers and replace them
with TDMA! And you have to buy a new TDMA phone when your
GSM coverage gets worse than it already is ;-)

-larry / dallas

(and I told you it would become ATT a month ago right here!)

Reply to this Message

JohnF - 23 Nov 2005 13:54 GMT

> Wait til they tear down all the GSM towers and replace them with TDMA!
> And you have to buy a new TDMA phone when your GSM coverage gets worse
> than it already is ;-)

This is about the dumbest post I've read. Even if the name change rumer were
true why would they go backwards in technology?

Reply to this Message

John Navas - 23 Nov 2005 15:26 GMT

>> Wait til they tear down all the GSM towers and replace them with TDMA!
>> And you have to buy a new TDMA phone when your GSM coverage gets worse
>> than it already is ;-)
>
>This is about the dumbest post I've read. Even if the name change rumer were
>true why would they go backwards in technology?

Kickstart your humor mode! ;)

Signature

Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Reply to this Message

larry - 23 Nov 2005 16:02 GMT

>>Wait til they tear down all the GSM towers and replace them with TDMA!
>>And you have to buy a new TDMA phone when your GSM coverage gets worse
>>than it already is ;-)
>
> This is about the dumbest post I've read. Even if the name change rumer were
> true why would they go backwards in technology?

It's what cingular did to us attws customers.

I believe in fairness both ways ;-)

Go look at some of my other posts, I try to accommodate
everyone. Your plonk or kill file is just only keystroke away.

-larry / dallas

Everyone have a great Thanksgiving!

I'm thankful for all the nice folks on the news-groups, that
have shared the good -and- bad things in life.

Reply to this Message

SMS - 23 Nov 2005 17:22 GMT

>>> Wait til they tear down all the GSM towers and replace them with
>>> TDMA! And you have to buy a new TDMA phone when your GSM coverage
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> It's what cingular did to us attws customers.

Well look at what AT&T did to some of their own customers when they
began the GSM conversion. They sold 1900 Mhz GSM phones, then built a
bunch of GSM cells that were 800 Mhz only.

Reply to this Message

Jeremy - 23 Nov 2005 20:12 GMT

>> Wait til they tear down all the GSM towers and replace them with TDMA!
>> And you have to buy a new TDMA phone when your GSM coverage gets worse
>> than it already is ;-)
>
> This is about the dumbest post I've read. Even if the name change rumer
> were true why would they go backwards in technology?

I believe that the post may have contained a hint of sarcasm . . .

Reply to this Message

SMS - 23 Nov 2005 23:15 GMT

>>WTF? After all the time, money and effort they went through to kill
>>the AT&T Wireless name/service?
>
> The name "AT&T" was probably THE most valuable component of the buyout for
> SBC.

It would have been, but they didn't get the name. Now that they are
buying AT&T they do get it.

Reply to this Message

Jeremy - 24 Nov 2005 02:38 GMT

>>>WTF? After all the time, money and effort they went through to kill
>>>the AT&T Wireless name/service?
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> It would have been, but they didn't get the name. Now that they are buying
> AT&T they do get it.

I was referring to the SBC Buyout of AT&T, not to the Cingular buyout of
ATTWS.

Reply to this Message

John Navas - 21 Nov 2005 21:49 GMT

>http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-11-20-cingular-att_x.
htm?csp=34

Never, ever take something in USA Today at face value without checking other,
more serious, sources.

While SBC is assuming the AT&T name, AT&T Wireless may refer only to wireless
service sold by "the new AT&T" -- see "AT&T To Sell Branded Wireless"
<http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/CA6285901.html>

"This is not a surprise, because when the Cingular joint venture was
created, we anticipated (our parents) might want to offer wireless
services under their own brands," says Cingular Wireless spokesman
Mark Siegel. Cingular is a joint venture of AT&T (formerly SBC) and
BellSouth Corporation. Cingular acquired AT&T Wireless last year.

"Mr. Whitacre's comments changes in no way how we will market
Cingular. Our size and national presence is an advantage for our
parents," Siegel says.

[MORE]

BellSouth could continue to use the Cingular name, or switch to its own
branding.

Signature

Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Reply to this Message