|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Verizon wireless > September 2006 > How different are AC1 and AC2 these days?
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 |
How different are AC1 and AC2 these days?
|
|
| Reid Priedhorsky 2006-09-09, 12:33 pm |
| Hi folks,
I'm currently on AC1. I called CS to inquire whether I would be required
to "upgrade" to AC2 if I took advantage of my NE2.
As Bill Radio predicted in response to my earlier query, after much
wrangling the answer seemed to be "yes". Furthermore, the rep claimed that
the *only* difference between AC1 and AC2 was the roaming charge, i.e.
there was nowhere that changed from roaming to no service.
When AC2 first came out, this claim was hogwash, most notably in the rural
West, which is important to me. Have things changed much recently? Is
there a site out there detailing differences?
I assume if I raise enough of a stink, I can keep my $35 AC1 plan, but
that's not a fight I relish getting into.
Thanks again for any help,
Reid
| |
|
| On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 12:33:00 -0500, Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm currently on AC1. I called CS to inquire whether I would be required
> to "upgrade" to AC2 if I took advantage of my NE2.
>
> As Bill Radio predicted in response to my earlier query, after much
> wrangling the answer seemed to be "yes". Furthermore, the rep claimed that
> the *only* difference between AC1 and AC2 was the roaming charge, i.e.
> there was nowhere that changed from roaming to no service.
>
> When AC2 first came out, this claim was hogwash, most notably in the rural
> West, which is important to me. Have things changed much recently? Is
> there a site out there detailing differences?
>
> I assume if I raise enough of a stink, I can keep my $35 AC1 plan, but
> that's not a fight I relish getting into.
>
FWIW, we just upgraded my wife's phone, which is the primary
phone on an AC1 Family plan, using NE2, and we still have AC1
on the account. We did it all via the net, without talking with
a rep.
- Rich
--
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam.
| |
| Jim Higgins 2006-09-09, 3:33 pm |
|
"user" <Rich@iwantnospam.com> wrote in message
news:slrneg630n.fur.Rich@zippy.mulveyfamily.com...
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 12:33:00 -0500, Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net>
> wrote:
>
> FWIW, we just upgraded my wife's phone, which is the primary
> phone on an AC1 Family plan, using NE2, and we still have AC1
> on the account. We did it all via the net, without talking with
> a rep.
>
> - Rich
>
> --
> Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum
> immane mittam.
>
Then the default is the plan, and price, you have when you use NE2 to get a
phone?
| |
| Dave Rudisill 2006-09-09, 10:33 pm |
| >Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net> wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I'm currently on AC1. I called CS to inquire whether I would be required
>to "upgrade" to AC2 if I took advantage of my NE2.
>
>As Bill Radio predicted in response to my earlier query, after much
>wrangling the answer seemed to be "yes". Furthermore, the rep claimed that
>the *only* difference between AC1 and AC2 was the roaming charge, i.e.
>there was nowhere that changed from roaming to no service.
>
>When AC2 first came out, this claim was hogwash, most notably in the rural
>West, which is important to me. Have things changed much recently? Is
>there a site out there detailing differences?
>
>I assume if I raise enough of a stink, I can keep my $35 AC1 plan, but
>that's not a fight I relish getting into.
>
>Thanks again for any help,
>
>Reid
I got a phone, using NE2, in December. I did it in a Verizon store, and
I made it clear that I wanted to keep my AC1 plan. The clerk said "No
problem," and it wasn't. I still have AC1.
To compare AC1 and AC2, look at the Verizon coverage locator page for
the area you are interested in:
<http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/...ewsearc
h>
or
http://tinyurl.com/2jez2
HTH
--
Dave
| |
|
| On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 16:10:45 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> "user" <Rich@iwantnospam.com> wrote in message
> news:slrneg630n.fur.Rich@zippy.mulveyfamily.com...
>
> Then the default is the plan, and price, you have when you use NE2 to get a
> phone?
In our case it was. Based on other comments in this group, it seems that
if you actually speak to Verizon customer service people, they will
often *insist* on making you go to an AC2 plan.
That's why we did it entirely over the website. ;-)
- Rich
| |
| Esmail Bonakdarian 2006-09-09, 10:33 pm |
| user wrote:
> In our case it was. Based on other comments in this group, it seems that
> if you actually speak to Verizon customer service people, they will
> often *insist* on making you go to an AC2 plan.
>
> That's why we did it entirely over the website. ;-)
In some cases they may not even tell you they switched you over. Such
was the case when I changed my AudioVox 8900 (capable of analog) to
a LG VX 8300 (digital only) .. I suppose since the 8300 has no analog
capability this switch didn't take anything away but added 50 minutes.
Still, they should have checked with me or at least told me ahead of
time. It may matter to some.
| |
| Teddeli 2006-09-10, 10:33 am |
| On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 12:33:00 -0500, Reid Priedhorsky
<reid@reidster.net> wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I'm currently on AC1. I called CS to inquire whether I would be required
>to "upgrade" to AC2 if I took advantage of my NE2.
>
>As Bill Radio predicted in response to my earlier query, after much
>wrangling the answer seemed to be "yes". Furthermore, the rep claimed that
>the *only* difference between AC1 and AC2 was the roaming charge, i.e.
>there was nowhere that changed from roaming to no service.
>
>When AC2 first came out, this claim was hogwash, most notably in the rural
>West, which is important to me. Have things changed much recently? Is
>there a site out there detailing differences?
>
>I assume if I raise enough of a stink, I can keep my $35 AC1 plan, but
>that's not a fight I relish getting into.
>
>Thanks again for any help,
>
>Reid
I recently upgraded all four phones on my family share plan. Did not
take advantage of NE2 but I simply stated I wanted to keep my AC1
plan. No problem keeping the AC1.
| |
| Jim Higgins 2006-09-10, 10:33 am |
|
"user" <Rich@iwantnospam.com> wrote in message
news:slrneg6orf.p4c.Rich@zippy.mulveyfamily.com...
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 16:10:45 -0400, Jim Higgins <gordian238@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> In our case it was. Based on other comments in this group, it seems
> that
> if you actually speak to Verizon customer service people, they will
> often *insist* on making you go to an AC2 plan.
>
> That's why we did it entirely over the website. ;-)
>
> - Rich
>
Since I got my AC1 (400minutes) in late 2004 I canj keep it when I use NE2
to get an LG VX8300 (comments?) to replace my A-650. I also am getting a
19% discount so would I also keep that discount?
| |
| Dave Rudisill 2006-09-10, 10:33 am |
| >Esmail Bonakdarian <ebonakDUH@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In some cases they may not even tell you they switched you over. Such
>was the case when I changed my AudioVox 8900 (capable of analog) to
>a LG VX 8300 (digital only) .. I suppose since the 8300 has no analog
>capability this switch didn't take anything away but added 50 minutes.
There is a common misconception that the difference between AC1 and AC2
is analog service. That is not the case.
Both AC1 and AC2 have analog service areas. The only difference between
the two is that AC1 incurs roaming charges in some areas in which AC2
either does not have service or has service with no roaming charges.
In other words, with AC2 you can find yourself in an area with no
service (other than 911) in which you would have service (with a roaming
charge) with AC1. On the other hand, with AC1 you may find yourself in a
roaming area in which you would not pay roaming charges with AC2.
We stayed with AC1 because we travel full time and want to maximize the
probability of having phone service in case of an emergency. If we
stayed in a single area, we would look at the coverage maps and
determine which plan gives us the best service.
--
Dave
| |
| Esmail Bonakdarian 2006-09-10, 10:33 am |
| Dave Rudisill wrote:
>
>
> There is a common misconception that the difference between AC1 and AC2
> is analog service. That is not the case.
Ah .. thanks for clarifying that, I was a bit confused about it.
Esmail
| |
| Pegleg 2006-09-10, 10:33 am |
| On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 12:33:00 -0500, Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net>
wrote:
>I assume if I raise enough of a stink, I can keep my $35 AC1 plan, but
>that's not a fight I relish getting into.
We renewed our contract last winter (two lines) which was on the old AC1
without any issues. Went to Verizon, picked out the one new phone for
my wife, told them we wanted to remain on our old plan and that was it.
Pegleg
U.S. Navy Retired
Support Our Troops,
Question The Policy!
All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words:
freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.
Sir Winston Churchill
| |
| Pegleg 2006-09-10, 10:33 am |
| On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 00:59:28 GMT, user <Rich@iwantnospam.com> wrote:
> In our case it was. Based on other comments in this group, it seems that
>if you actually speak to Verizon customer service people, they will
>often *insist* on making you go to an AC2 plan.
Not true in all cases...I talked to a CS person via phone, prior to
going to the store, to confirm we could stay on the old plan and she
just explained the differences and why the new plan came about (people
not paying attention to when they were roaming and then getting a
"surprise" bill) and said it was our choice.
YMMV depending on who you end up talking to!
Pegleg
U.S. Navy Retired
Support Our Troops,
Question The Policy!
All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words:
freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.
Sir Winston Churchill
| |
|
| Reid Priedhorsky wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm currently on AC1. I called CS to inquire whether I would be required
> to "upgrade" to AC2 if I took advantage of my NE2.
>
> As Bill Radio predicted in response to my earlier query, after much
> wrangling the answer seemed to be "yes". Furthermore, the rep claimed that
> the *only* difference between AC1 and AC2 was the roaming charge, i.e.
> there was nowhere that changed from roaming to no service.
It is not a requirement to downgrade to AC2.
The difference in coverage is actually visible on Verizon's web site
when you look at coverage.
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/...WREQUE
ST
| |
| Bill Radio 2006-09-10, 10:33 pm |
| Reidster,
Unfortunately, the Coverage Locator has not been updated for new partner
coverage. There are a number of areas added since AC II was created.
Where would you be traveling in the west? New coverage has been added for
Commnet, Union, UBET and a few others that show in the AC II PRL, but not on
the map. New Verizon coverage is added quickly, but roaming agreements are
not updated as regularly.
-Bill Radio
"Reid Priedhorsky" <reid@reidster.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.09.17.32.59.444318@reidster.net...
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm currently on AC1. I called CS to inquire whether I would be required
> to "upgrade" to AC2 if I took advantage of my NE2.
>
> As Bill Radio predicted in response to my earlier query, after much
> wrangling the answer seemed to be "yes". Furthermore, the rep claimed that
> the *only* difference between AC1 and AC2 was the roaming charge, i.e.
> there was nowhere that changed from roaming to no service.
>
> When AC2 first came out, this claim was hogwash, most notably in the rural
> West, which is important to me. Have things changed much recently? Is
> there a site out there detailing differences?
>
> I assume if I raise enough of a stink, I can keep my $35 AC1 plan, but
> that's not a fight I relish getting into.
>
> Thanks again for any help,
>
> Reid
| |
| Reid Priedhorsky 2006-09-11, 10:33 pm |
| On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:32:29 -0600, Bill Radio wrote:
> Reidster,
> Unfortunately, the Coverage Locator has not been updated for new partner
> coverage. There are a number of areas added since AC II was created.
> Where would you be traveling in the west? New coverage has been added for
> Commnet, Union, UBET and a few others that show in the AC II PRL, but not on
> the map. New Verizon coverage is added quickly, but roaming agreements are
> not updated as regularly.
Well, the place where I saw the most dramatic change important to me was
southern Utah -- huge swaths changed from "roaming/no service" to plain
"no service" (though I do wonder what that means). Another e.g. was the
recent thread regarding the South Rim of the Grand Canyon -- service
available with some voodoo under AC1, for pay, but none at all under AC2.
Now, full disclosure is that I've never actually needed to roam out there.
So, it could be my concerns are moot anyway. However, I think there is a
philosophical issue here: I resent having options taken away because
others have a hard time using them. Why not just keep the AC1 model and
ship phones with a "never roam" toggle? It could even default to on for
all I care. (Not that I expect others to have similar resentment -- this
is just how I feel.)
I did the upgrade online, and there was no mention of changing plans. So,
we will see what will happen.
Thanks again for your help, all.
Reid
| |
| Quick 2006-09-12, 10:33 pm |
| Reid Priedhorsky wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:32:29 -0600, Bill Radio wrote:
>
>
> Well, the place where I saw the most dramatic change
> important to me was southern Utah -- huge swaths changed
> from "roaming/no service" to plain "no service" (though I
> do wonder what that means). Another e.g. was the recent
> thread regarding the South Rim of the Grand Canyon --
> service available with some voodoo under AC1, for pay,
> but none at all under AC2.
>
> Now, full disclosure is that I've never actually needed
> to roam out there. So, it could be my concerns are moot
> anyway. However, I think there is a philosophical issue
> here: I resent having options taken away because others
> have a hard time using them. Why not just keep the AC1
> model and ship phones with a "never roam" toggle? It
> could even default to on for all I care. (Not that I
> expect others to have similar resentment -- this is just
> how I feel.)
I'm sure only part of it (probably a very small part) is
customers having problems/understanding or abusing
unintentional roaming. Probably a much greater issue
is the overhead associated with billing. Dealing with a
multitude of roaming "partners" all with different billing
systems, rates, delayed billing, etc. Much more efficient
to deal with a fixed (much smaller) number of roaming
partners all of whom comply with procedures, conforming
billing systems, etc. Then there is the time with CS,
disputes, misunderstandings, and abuse. Lots of overhead.
So the "never roam" toggle would defeat much of the
savings. It doesn't matter if the manual says "NEVER
use this toggle because you will be held liable, possibly
charged huge amounts and it may or may not show on
the bill covering the time the feature was used".
Doesn't matter. If it's provided people *will* use,
abuse, and misunderstand it. They will also hold the
provider responsible for anything that came of it.
-Quick
| |
| Reid Priedhorsky 2006-09-24, 4:33 am |
| On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 18:46:47 +0000, user wrote:
>
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 12:33:00 -0500, Reid Priedhorsky <reid@reidster.net> wrote:
>
> FWIW, we just upgraded my wife's phone, which is the primary
> phone on an AC1 Family plan, using NE2, and we still have AC1
> on the account. We did it all via the net, without talking with
> a rep.
As a followup, this is what I ended up doing. My plan is indeed unchanged
as confirmed by the PRL. The v325 is certainly much, much nicer
usability-wise, though the old StarTac had a lot more character.
Many thanks to all those in this group who helped me!
Reid
| |
|
| Reid Priedhorsky wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 18:46:47 +0000, user wrote:
>
> As a followup, this is what I ended up doing. My plan is indeed unchanged
> as confirmed by the PRL. The v325 is certainly much, much nicer
> usability-wise, though the old StarTac had a lot more character.
The V325 is even nicer once you modify it to allow vibrate then ring,
and to allow Motorola Phone Tools to be fully functional.
| |
| Diamond Dave 2006-09-24, 10:33 pm |
| On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 00:15:58 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
>The V325 is even nicer once you modify it to allow vibrate then ring,
>and to allow Motorola Phone Tools to be fully functional.
What extra features do you get, and how can I get these tools?
I'm not that crazy about the V325, but since I have one (three, if you
count the wife and step daughter on the family plan), I'd like to
"unlock" the phone and get the most out of it.
Dave
| |
| Steven J. Sobol 2006-09-24, 10:33 pm |
| In article < 5b8eh2t0ki22fthtegsh
1gq7stvn727pqq@4ax.com>, Diamond Dave wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 00:15:58 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> What extra features do you get, and how can I get these tools?
MPT is a software package like Susteen Datapilot and it's available from
Motorola or other retailers.
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED
It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.
|
|
|
|
|