|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cingular cell phone service > June 2007 > Cingular now "Wireless from AT&T"
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Cingular now "Wireless from AT&T"
|
|
| xx-google@telefog.com 2007-06-02, 3:33 pm |
| The Cingular rebranding has advanced from
"The New AT&T" to "Wireless from AT&T,"
according to:
http://www.wireless.att.com/about
I expect that this is an interim name, and
that by November, the company will
adopt its likely long-term name, AT&T
Wireless.
Cybersquatting oppportunity: the domain name
WIRELESSFROMATT.COM is apparently available.
However, registering it might be a federal
crime or an invitation for a letter from AT&T.
**********
1366294709
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2007-06-02, 3:33 pm |
| In article <1180811915.341226.171550@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
xx-google@telefog.com wrote:
> The Cingular rebranding has advanced from
> "The New AT&T" to "Wireless from AT&T,"
> according to:
>
> http://www.wireless.att.com/about
>
> I expect that this is an interim name, and
> that by November, the company will
> adopt its likely long-term name, AT&T
> Wireless.
Probably not.
Therefore, it's time for John Navass to start up alt.cellular.wfatt.
(Oooo, how appropriate. He'll definitely be able to remember that name;
it'll remind him of his prom date. That guy was wide and fatt, too.)
| |
| Robert A. Fink, M. D. 2007-06-02, 10:33 pm |
| On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:40:26 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>Therefore, it's time for John Navass to start up alt.cellular.wfatt.
>(Oooo, how appropriate. He'll definitely be able to remember that name;
>it'll remind him of his prom date. That guy was wide and fatt, too.)
What do a few people have against John Navas? I have found his posts
to be helpful and generally correct.
Best,
Bob
Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C.
Neurological Surgery
2500 Milvia Street Suite 222
Berkeley, CA 94704-2636 USA
510-849-2555
"Ex Tristitia Virtus"
| |
|
| xx-google@telefog.com wrote:
> The Cingular rebranding has advanced from
> "The New AT&T" to "Wireless from AT&T,"
> according to:
>
> http://www.wireless.att.com/about
>
> I expect that this is an interim name, and
> that by November, the company will
> adopt its likely long-term name, AT&T
> Wireless.
>
> Cybersquatting oppportunity: the domain name
> WIRELESSFROMATT.COM is apparently available.
> However, registering it might be a federal
> crime or an invitation for a letter from AT&T.
>
>
> **********
> 1366294709
>
The only reason that domain name is still available is because at&t has
no intention of using it. If they did, they would already own it.
How bout at&t Mobility?
--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
| |
| karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net 2007-06-02, 10:33 pm |
| On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 13:55:41 -0700, "Robert A. Fink, M. D."
<lynxer@comcast.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:40:26 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
><elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>What do a few people have against John Navas? I have found his posts
>to be helpful and generally correct.
For every helpful post he has an arrogant, rude, insulting post. And
when proven wrong he has never apologized.
| |
| xx-google@telefog.com 2007-06-02, 10:33 pm |
| --- Jer wrote:
> How [a]bout [AT&T] Mobility?
I think that the "mobile" and its derivatives
died out in US cellular marketing when GTE
Mobilenet became GTE Wireless.
In much of Europe, "mobile" is the prevailing
term for "cellular telephone." Even in Canada,
"mobil*" persists:
http://www.telusmobility.com
http://www.bell.ca/home/Home_Personal.page
Given the passage of time, "AT&T Mobile" might now
sound fresh enough to work. "Mobility," at four
syllables, seems longish.
We could start a pool: As of noon PST on
on February 1, 2008, what will be the prevailing
brand name for the operation known until recently
as Cingular Wireless?
To judge such a competition, we'd need a
Cingular maven.
| |
| Scott 2007-06-02, 10:33 pm |
| karlkrandall@sbcglob
al.net wrote in
news:8tu3639tl7i3vjs
c86uh6dhcm5qcbivgfh@
4ax.com:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 13:55:41 -0700, "Robert A. Fink, M. D."
> <lynxer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> For every helpful post he has an arrogant, rude, insulting post. And
> when proven wrong he has never apologized.
>
Physician, heal thyself.
| |
| Todd H. 2007-06-03, 4:33 am |
| "Robert A. Fink, M. D." <lynxer@comcast.net> writes:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:40:26 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> What do a few people have against John Navas? I have found his posts
> to be helpful and generally correct.
Yeah, me too.
Maybe the under 16 year old crowd that frequents the wireless groups
doesn't like him? Dunno.
--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/
| |
| Michael Paris 2007-06-03, 4:33 am |
| Yes and the carrier on my phone changed from Cingular to AT&T on June 1st.
My wife's still says Cingular though.
| |
| Michael Paris 2007-06-03, 4:33 am |
| I agree, OK he's opinionated but I enjoy reading his posts and find them
helpful, I've seen this from many people but here and on the irc. And
he's pretty tame compared to most.
"> What do a few people have against John Navas? I have found his posts
> to be helpful and generally correct.
>
> Best,
>
> Bob
>
> Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C.
> Neurological Surgery
> 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222
> Berkeley, CA 94704-2636 USA
> 510-849-2555
>
> "Ex Tristitia Virtus"
| |
| Michael Paris 2007-06-03, 4:33 am |
|
> The only reason that domain name is still available is because at&t has
> no intention of using it. If they did, they would already own it.
Besides its easier to type www.cingular.com then www.wireless.att.com.
| |
|
| On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 12:18:35 -0700, xx-google@telefog.com wrote:
>The Cingular rebranding has advanced from
>"The New AT&T" to "Wireless from AT&T,"
>according to:
>
> http://www.wireless.att.com/about
>
>I expect that this is an interim name, and
>that by November, the company will
>adopt its likely long-term name, AT&T
>Wireless.
>
>Cybersquatting oppportunity: the domain name
>WIRELESSFROMATT.COM is apparently available.
>However, registering it might be a federal
>crime or an invitation for a letter from AT&T.
>
>
>**********
>1366294709
Is the word "wireless" really necessary anymore?
| |
| Jeffrey Kaplan 2007-06-03, 4:33 am |
| It is alleged that Michael Paris claimed:
> Yes and the carrier on my phone changed from Cingular to AT&T on June 1st.
> My wife's still says Cingular though.
The carrier banner on my Treo still says Cingular. The Treo itself is
not locked to any carrier and never was.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"You cannot be president of the United States if you don't have faith.
Remember Lincoln, going to his knees in times of trial and the Civil
War and all that stuff. You can't be. And we are blessed. So don't
feel sorry for George W. Bush, don't cry for me, Argentina." - George
W. Bush
| |
|
| xx-google@telefog.com wrote:
> --- Jer wrote:
>
> I think that the "mobile" and its derivatives
> died out in US cellular marketing when GTE
> Mobilenet became GTE Wireless.
>
> In much of Europe, "mobile" is the prevailing
> term for "cellular telephone." Even in Canada,
> "mobil*" persists:
>
> http://www.telusmobility.com
>
> http://www.bell.ca/home/Home_Personal.page
>
> Given the passage of time, "AT&T Mobile" might now
> sound fresh enough to work. "Mobility," at four
> syllables, seems longish.
>
> We could start a pool: As of noon PST on
> on February 1, 2008, what will be the prevailing
> brand name for the operation known until recently
> as Cingular Wireless?
>
> To judge such a competition, we'd need a
> Cingular maven.
My own maven has already informed me the official name for at&t's
wireless operations unit is, in fact, "AT&T Mobility". Hope that don't
bust anybody's bubble.
--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2007-06-03, 12:33 pm |
| In article < 1365jfscpkou058@corp
.supernews.com>,
Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
> My own maven has already informed me the official name for at&t's
> wireless operations unit is, in fact, "AT&T Mobility". Hope that don't
> bust anybody's bubble.
Check it out:
http://mobility.att.com
hehehehehe SOMEONE'S bubble is going to burst.
| |
| xx-google@telefog.com 2007-06-03, 3:33 pm |
| --- Someone wrote:
> Check it out:
>
> http://mobility.att.com
Interesting: That URL generates an internal att.com page
that fronts for Inphonic/Wirefly.
This domain is registered:
-Domain Name: ATTMOBILITY.COM
-Registrant: AT&T Corp.
-Created on: 25-Aug-02
-Expires on: 25-Aug-09
AT&T also owns the .net, .org, .us, .biz, and
..info version of the name.
There is no site at www.attmobility.com and that
URL doesn't resolve to an IP address.
It seems that "mobility" is a more favored word
than I would have guessed:
http://www.business.att.com/service...mobilit
y
| |
| dold@85.usenet.us.com 2007-06-03, 3:33 pm |
| Jeffrey Kaplan <nomail@gordol.org> wrote:
> It is alleged that Michael Paris claimed:
[color=darkred]
> The carrier banner on my Treo still says Cingular. The Treo itself is
> not locked to any carrier and never was.
I think the 3G SIMs will change to AT&T, and some, maybe all, older SIMs
will stay at Cingular.
It has nothing to do with the phone, since the phone has no subscription,
per se, locked or not.
My unlocked V551 shows "Cingular" with a 64K SIM in it, AT&T with a 3G SIM
in it.
That 3G SIM showed Cingular in the past, and changed to AT&T during May.
The phones also display Cingular/AT&T in areas that do not have Cingular
coverage, but there is coverage from another carrier listed as an AT&T
partner in advertisements, which is different from the other carrier in the
same area. Sometimes the display says AT&T, but dialing a bogus number
gets a message from Edge Wireless. Sometimes the display shows no carrier
information, and the message is from US Cellular.
--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
| |
|
| Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <1180811915.341226.171550@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
> xx-google@telefog.com wrote:
>
>
> Probably not.
>
> Therefore, it's time for John Navass to start up alt.cellular.wfatt.
alt.cellular.attws is a good match for "Wireless from AT&T," and it
already exists.
[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
non-spam posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going
away, and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding
AT&T's Wireless Service.]
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2007-06-03, 10:33 pm |
| In article < 466326f7$0$27164$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> alt.cellular.attws is a good match for "Wireless from AT&T," and it
> already exists.
no, it's not.
| |
| Robert A. Fink, M. D. 2007-06-04, 10:33 pm |
| On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:00:33 -0500, Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>Physician, heal thyself.
And just what do you think that I need to be "healed" of?
Best,
Bob
Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C.
Neurological Surgery
2500 Milvia Street Suite 222
Berkeley, CA 94704-2636 USA
510-849-2555
"Ex Tristitia Virtus"
| |
| Scott 2007-06-04, 10:33 pm |
| "Robert A. Fink, M. D." <lynxer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:4o6963l4kfvab5i
8rjlaaoumqv2h9duuk6@
4ax.com:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:00:33 -0500, Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>
>
> And just what do you think that I need to be "healed" of?
>
> Best,
>
> Bob
>
> Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C.
> Neurological Surgery
> 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222
> Berkeley, CA 94704-2636 USA
> 510-849-2555
>
> "Ex Tristitia Virtus"
Apparently how to follow a thread- I did not respond to your post.
| |
| Todd Allcock 2007-06-05, 4:33 am |
| At 03 Jun 2007 09:19:50 -0500 Jer wrote:
> My own maven has already informed me the official name for at&t's
> wireless operations unit is, in fact, "AT&T Mobility". Hope that
> don't bust anybody's bubble.
RCR Wireless News, a wireless trade pub, started referring to Cingular as
AT&T Mobility several weeks ago, citing internal documents that showed
AT&T refers to the wireless division internally as such. They weren't
clear, however, if AT&T intends to use the name publicly or not- perhaps
your maven knows?
| |
|
| Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 03 Jun 2007 09:19:50 -0500 Jer wrote:
>
>
> RCR Wireless News, a wireless trade pub, started referring to Cingular as
> AT&T Mobility several weeks ago, citing internal documents that showed
> AT&T refers to the wireless division internally as such. They weren't
> clear, however, if AT&T intends to use the name publicly or not- perhaps
> your maven knows?
>
>
>
Lemme see what that little filly is doing for lunch sometime this week.
--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
| |
| John Navas 2007-06-13, 12:33 pm |
| On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 20:24:51 -0600, Todd Allcock
< elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in <f42rj5$vb3$3@aioe.org>:
>At 03 Jun 2007 09:19:50 -0500 Jer wrote:
>
>
>RCR Wireless News, a wireless trade pub, started referring to Cingular as
>AT&T Mobility several weeks ago, citing internal documents that showed
>AT&T refers to the wireless division internally as such.
Here's the proof:
<http://cobrands.hoovers.com/global/...tml?COID=102492>
>They weren't
>clear, however, if AT&T intends to use the name publicly or not- perhaps
>your maven knows?
Looks like the maven may be right, with the iPhone being the standard
bearer:
<http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2007/...mobility-brand/>
<http://gigaom.com/2007/05/07/att-ip...ile-rebranding/>
<http://www.investors.com/editorial/...&issue=20070611>
<http://www.phonescoop.com/carriers/carrier.php?c=4>
<http://www.business.att.com/service...F0-DBA456EBCEA8>
<http://www.business.att.com/nx_cate...526653B538874S2>
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| John Navas 2007-06-13, 12:33 pm |
| On Sun, 3 Jun 2007 00:06:32 -0400, "Michael Paris"
<mparis27@comcast.net> wrote in
< AdCdnZaBr8LQo__bnZ2d
nUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast
.com>:
>
>Besides its easier to type www.cingular.com then www.wireless.att.com.
You can skip the "www." part in both cases -- that's an anachronism
that's now largely obsolete.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| John Navas 2007-06-13, 12:33 pm |
| On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 12:18:35 -0700, xx-google@telefog.com wrote in
<1180811915.341226.171550@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>:
>The Cingular rebranding has advanced from
>"The New AT&T" to "Wireless from AT&T,"
>according to:
>
> http://www.wireless.att.com/about
>
>I expect that this is an interim name, and
>that by November, the company will
>adopt its likely long-term name, AT&T
>Wireless.
The long-term name is "AT&T Mobility".
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
|
| In article < k8a073tg6nf22oac6apn
lvgbukge2g3he1@4ax.com>,
John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 12:18:35 -0700, xx-google@telefog.com wrote in
> <1180811915.341226.171550@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>:
>
>
> The long-term name is "AT&T Mobility".
Sounds like a disabled persons organization.
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
| |
| John Navas 2007-06-13, 10:33 pm |
| On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:21:40 -0700, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote
in <labolide-F695B6.14214013062007@news.giganews.com>:
>In article < k8a073tg6nf22oac6apn
lvgbukge2g3he1@4ax.com>,
> John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
>Sounds like a disabled persons organization.
Time will tell. "Cingular" didn't get much respect either in the
beginning, but was nonetheless built into a strong brand.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
|
| Kurt wrote:
> In article < k8a073tg6nf22oac6apn
lvgbukge2g3he1@4ax.com>,
> John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
> Sounds like a disabled persons organization.
Nah, they're going to start selling those electric scooters.
"http://www.scootermobility.com/".
| |
|
| In article < 0ao0735bt37k8ejp4lg5
fu95ep0plvql4k@4ax.com>,
John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:21:40 -0700, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote
> in <labolide-F695B6.14214013062007@news.giganews.com>:
>
>
> Time will tell. "Cingular" didn't get much respect either in the
> beginning, but was nonetheless built into a strong brand.
Not the ambiguous panache of Cingular (Like they went to one of the
comnpanies that also comes up with names for prescription drugs), but I
hope they didn't pay too much for the branding consultation on this name.
Now the communications department has to make it work.
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
|
|
|
|
|