I used to write a fair amount of music for television commercials.  It was interesting to have a glimpse into the workings of the advertising industry for a few years, even from the ‘gun-for-hire’ sidelines - for example, I was once called back in to do some minor revisions on a previously approved music track for an aerosol carpet deodorizer because of last-minute changes required by legal at the ad agency.

In this particular commercial, the product’s effectiveness was illustrated by an ‘odor-smelling wand’ prop waved over 2 pieces of carpet recently sat upon by the family dog - one carpet treated with our deodorizer, one with theirs.  After the post production was complete, though, it was discovered that the number of (fake) beeps coming from the prop didn’t accurately match the (real) numbers coming from the underlying focus group testing - so the spot had to be reedited with the correct  ratio of fake beeps  - hence my (and the voice-over talent’s) call-back.

Such is the attention paid to potential litigation arising from directly comparative advertising…

With that experience in mind, I knew from the first ‘There’s a Map For That’ Verizon commercial that those numbers had to be accurate and defensible - otherwise Verizon’s advertising agency would have never put them on the air in the first place. For 5 minutes last November, AT&T thought differently, but soon withdrew its plans for a lawsuit (apparently after it was made clear internally they were sure to lose the case and suffer even worse publicity).  Instead, our loss as iPhone users is Luke Wilson’s gain: the company continues on with a campaign built upon the (true) claim that in certain cases their 3G network can be faster. This of course is not much help to a user if she can’t get coverage in the first place - in this sense AT&T’s network is much like like American health care - potentially better in a given best-case scenario, but completely unavailable to too many people for that to matter much (but I digress).

I am, as you might have guessed, like many people: a thoroughly happy iPhone owner and a (just as thoroughly disgruntled) AT&T subscriber.  And forget data network issues - I’ve had trouble getting voice coverage in half of my apartment (which I’ve written about here).   Although I reported my issue via the iPhone “Mark the Spot” iPhone app At&T came out with to enable its users to report dead spots months ago, I still have no voice coverage in the bedroom - and continue to have routinely dropped calls elsewhere in the NYC area (sometimes it feels like AT&T decides when my calls are over almost as often as I do).

All of which brings us to recent iPhone “Line 2” app, which allows you to have a second number on your iPhone running over wifi and/or the above mentioned 3G network.  What I find most interesting about this app is that Apple ever allowed it onto the App Store in the first place.  While in the past Apple has offered (however halfheartedly) lukewarm support AT&T’s “networks are hard” excuses, evidently they’re running out of patience too - is a 3G Skype app next?
While the Line 2 app might seem like the perfect AT&T workaround for someone in my position, a few things have prevented me from signing up: the hassle of notifying folks about a new number, the difficulties Line 2 has had working the kinks out, and lastly, the principle of the thing - while Line 2’s monthly $14.95 charge seems reasonable, it’s hard to accept on top of the monthly charges I’m already paying for a phone that doesn’t work in my home.

What would be the right thing for AT&T to do?   Implement similar technology to Line 2’s that would allow our AT&T numbers to transparently fail over to wifi or 3G if available.

As a tacit admission of failure, though, don’t look for this to happen any time soon.

Luke Wilson seems like a nice enough guy - but he’s selling an inferior product.  Verizon would be in court by now if he wasn’t.