Get the myAT&T app
ATTTimCS's profile
Employee

Employee

 • 

420 Messages

Thursday, June 16th, 2016 1:15 AM

AT&T Wi-Fi Calling

 

Wi-Fi Calling.png

 Talk and Text in More Places!

Hello Community!

 

We all have run into those areas where we don’t have the bars we need though.  To help keep you connected, AT&T has introduced Wi-Fi Calling! Wi-Fi Calling lets you talk and text from indoor locations where it’s hard even for a strong cellular signal to reach. Wi-Fi Calling can be used in the Domestic Coverage Area (U.S., Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands) and from most international countries.

Wonder if your device supports WiFi calling? Find out if your phone supports it and how to set it up.

 

Tim, Community Specialist

*I am an AT&T employee, and the postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent AT&T's position, strategies or opinions.

Still need help? Ask a question! Our 1.4 million members typically respond within 1 hour.

1 Attachment

ACE - Sage

 • 

116.4K Messages

7 years ago

@bragap

Nope.  ATT has yet to wake up and smell the java.  unless it's an iPhone, or has ATT brand on it, no dice.    No HD voice, no wifi calling.

The dumb thing is it wouldn't be a big deal for them to drop the bit of programming on their network  that looks for ATT programming on android phones.  

 

Master

 • 

3.5K Messages

7 years ago

Yeah, I'm another really outspoken amongst the annoyed masses here, as @lizdance40 knows ;-]

 

It's such a simple thing, the carriers (and even larger, eventually) really need to standardize on a codec(s) or whatever they're going to use to implement, if they ever want to have really seamless roaming in this technology...

Sure, some phones might really mess this up, if they don't do a full-stack implementation correctly, but on the other hand, there are literally dozens of VOIP (cell and otherwise) providers out there, doing this today, and it works, consistently and reliably (more reliably than the current AT&T implementation, if the forums are any indication...).

 

I wish AT&T would come out with a statement as to *why* they don't do this, and back it up with factual, technical documentation.  Maybe they'd claim branded phone sales depend on the differentiation, but I bet the carriers that let this go (all the other big ones, really) didn't see any huge hits.  Are people going to buy branded to be able to have a handful of features?  Maybe, but I bet that's a really small number.

More likely though, if every other carrier doesn't have the requirement, is they bail, for one of the carriers that works with the phone of their choice.  Or they just ignore the de-featured issue, for now, like some of us do, hoping that things will get better, soon ;-]

ACE - Sage

 • 

116.4K Messages

7 years ago

@pgrey  

You actually hit on what I have suspected is ATT reasoning.  In order for ATT to sell the phones they have to preorder, they have to be at least perceived as being better than non branded phone.  

If they preorder a ton of phones but they don't sell, it hits them in the bottom line.    The pressure to allow non branded phones coincided with the end of 2 year contracts and a dip in sales of carrier phones.  

Im conviced the BOGO sale starting in December 2015 were to try to make lemonade out of plummeting handset sales.   Every quarter a phone stays on the shelf, its worth less.

You notice they were still selling the Samsung GS6 and Apple iPhone 6s on the bogo sale when the phones are a year and a half from release date.  They must have ordered way to many.   The GS7 is a year old, and they are still selling it too.

 

 

 

ACE - Expert

 • 

16.5K Messages

7 years ago


@lizdance40 wrote:

 

You notice they were still selling the Samsung GS6 and Apple iPhone 6s on the bogo sale when the phones are a year and a half from release date.  They must have ordered way to many.   The GS7 is a year old, and they are still selling it too. 


Isn't right now around 1.5 years since the iPhone 6s came out? 

 

Have we seen iPhone 6s BOGOs since the iPhone 7 debuted?

 

 

ACE - Expert

 • 

23.9K Messages

7 years ago


@Gary L wrote:

@lizdance40 wrote:

 

You notice they were still selling the Samsung GS6 and Apple iPhone 6s on the bogo sale when the phones are a year and a half from release date.  They must have ordered way to many.   The GS7 is a year old, and they are still selling it too. 


Isn't right now around 1.5 years since the iPhone 6s came out? 

 

Have we seen iPhone 6s BOGOs since the iPhone 7 debuted?

 

 


@Gary L

 

the iphone 6s was included in the oct an nov offers then removed in the DEC to now offers.

ACE - Sage

 • 

116.4K Messages

7 years ago

The 6s should be shuffled over to Gophone shortly.  The Samsung GS6 has been shuffled to Gophone. 

Point is, ATT ordered more than they could sell in a reasonable time.   Manufacturers are trying to prop up sales figures, but cannot truly do so without a sale, rebate, or retail insentive of some kind.

If ATT wants to corner the market as a retailer and a service provider, then they should offer the SERVICES customers want and compete with the likes of Best Buy as a retail phone seller.   

Remove cranium from lower anatomy....

 

ACE - Expert

 • 

23.9K Messages

7 years ago


@lizdance40 wrote:

The 6s should be shuffled over to Gophone shortly.  The Samsung GS6 has been shuffled to Gophone. 

Point is, ATT ordered more than they could sell in a reasonable time.   Manufacturers are trying to prop up sales figures, but cannot truly do so without a sale, rebate, or retail insentive of some kind.

If ATT wants to corner the market as a retailer and a service provider, then they should offer the SERVICES customers want and compete with the likes of Best Buy as a retail phone seller.   

Remove cranium from lower anatomy....

 


Its not a mater of ordering to many phones its a matter of samsung and apple making to many phones.  Look at the LG G6.  LG is giving away a google home to get you to buy the phone.  Why the darn thing is nice looking but lacks in the processing dept as it has a 821 when it should have had a 835.  LG is a sad OEM that cant find its way out of a wet paper bag.  But then again they should just sell there mobile division.

ACE - Sage

 • 

116.4K Messages

7 years ago

@GLIMMERMAN76   "...LG is a sad OEM that cant find its way out of a wet paper bag. But then again they should just sell there mobile division....".  😆😆😆

True and sad.  LG has excellent products in other departments.  The G6 is gorgeous, the camera is promising.  But neither means squat if the thing limps along from months 13-30 while a customer is still paying for it.  

And Yes, agree.  People are keeping phones longer and the 2nd hand market and Unlocked phones are booming.  BB has the right idea, they adapted and added a full display featuring unlocked phones.  Adapt or die.  

 

Master

 • 

3.5K Messages

7 years ago

@GLIMMERMAN76 I thought LG *tried* to go with the 835, but a certain other manufacturer has an exclusive on most of the first round of chips?  That's what the trade rags are calling anyway, same for the HTC.

 

@lizdance40 I agree 110%, with extended use of devices, manufacturers need to think more beyond a 6 month or so sales-window, and start looking at more of a lifespan that's reasonable (I'd say at least 2 years).  Like you said BB (and Win Phone, unfortunately in the wings right now) did it right, they can upgrade phones outside of the distributor loop.  

Eventually, if more people figure it out, I think there will be a shift towards OEMs that actually update their devices regularly, for a solid service life, coupled with OTA updates (carriers) that also don't get blocked.

There's very little difference between your typical smartphone and a desktop PC (other than OS) and tablet PCs, which have a MUCH longer lifespan, but users haven't made that connection, yet.

 

The more I think about it, this is an interesting "catch-22" situation, in that maybe if a carrier can sell a device that's sort of "artificially retired early", due to lack of current OS updates, users get boxed into having to buy a new device, to upgrade/stay-current.  This would be yet another way to convince people into a branded device, but it might backfire, longer term...

 

Obviously, whatever (Codec) they're using for this, it's problematic, whereas if they used the built-in one, I would bet there would be FAR fewer problems with WiFi call/text.  If you look at other carriers forums (ones that support the inbox solution for unbranded devices and branded alike), they tend to have far fewer posts about problems like the current ones here.

ACE - Expert

 • 

23.9K Messages

7 years ago

@pgrey

 

them not offering wifi calling has nothing to do with the codex there using it has everything to do with their RCS implementation. 

Not finding what you're looking for?
New to AT&T Community?
New to the AT&T Community? Start by visiting the Community How-To.
New to the AT&T Community?
Visit the Community How-To.