Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 150

Thread: When is 3G going to not suck?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,874
    Phone
    iPhone 4S 64GB, SGS III
    Carrier
    MSV 10GB 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0

    When is 3G going to not suck?

    In my area (Connecticut) AT&T's 3G network, well, sucks. It drops calls right and left, it often can't get a signal, switches between 2G and 3G all the time, and basically doesn't work well at all.

    When do you think AT&T's 3G network is going to work as well as the 2G network does? For now, I'm getting an E71 so that I can disable 3G until the network is able to work properly.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    NYC Area
    Posts
    5,002
    Phones
    Google Nexus 5
    Google Nexus 5
    Google Nexus 4
    Carrier
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.2; U; Series60/3.1 NokiaN95_8GB-3/31.2.008 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 ) AppleWebKit/413 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/413)

    what part of ct are you in since i have my phone locked to 3G mode only and i get no issues. Im in the fairfield county area tho but it's perfect.


    Im in bridgeport and getting -80dBm right now. All parts of norwalk and westport and new haven that i've been to were great too.
    Last edited by SHoTTa35; 07-04-2009 at 03:34 PM.
    - yeah, don't listen to that guy!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    NIMbY Land
    Posts
    19,192
    Phones
    LG G2
    LG G2
    Carrier
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GSMinCT
    In my area (Connecticut) AT&T's 3G network, well, sucks. It drops calls right and left, it often can't get a signal, switches between 2G and 3G all the time, and basically doesn't work well at all.

    When do you think AT&T's 3G network is going to work as well as the 2G network does? For now, I'm getting an E71 so that I can disable 3G until the network is able to work properly.
    I think 2G is dying, soon we'll be past the point of no return. As built out by ATT it can't keep up. But enjoy your E71, I'm envious.
    Today a group of leading venture capitalists published an open letter to the FCC calling on them to prevent what they say would be the end of net neutrality and a crippling blow to young startups.
    No Google, say it ain't (or wouldn't of been ) so! ATT and Verizon would have killed their own cash cow.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    700
    Feedback Score
    0
    Nowhere near you, but really feel your PITA! PDX's overlay started about a year ago and the problems you're having mostly cleared up in about April, tho' I'm still dropping some calls with the new iPhone FW (it's the FW, I can see the drops in the daily logs). So you're looking at several months of overlay goodness.

    If I knew how f***ed up the network would have been and knowing that 850 WCDMA was in the air, I would have opted for a Nokia like the E51, 6120, 6500 Slide - with 850 3G (checking to see if it's got the correct flavor of 850 3G, of course) and no 1900 3G to fight with... Until ATT fixes their backhaul problems on 1900 3G, the subscribers on 3G voice are going to have plenty to gripe about...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    536
    Feedback Score
    0
    Op what phone are you using now?
    Quote Originally Posted by veriztd
    It doesn't really matter why At&t requires the $30 data plan, it just does.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles - San Diego, CA / St. Albans, VT
    Posts
    20,160
    Phones
    RIM BlackBerry Q10
    Apple iPhone 5S
    Samsung Galaxy S4
    Carriers
    Pacific Bell Wireless / T-Mobile USA / MetroPCS
    Telcel MX
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GSMinCT
    When do you think AT&T's 3G network is going to work as well as the 2G network does? For now, I'm getting an E71 so that I can disable 3G until the network is able to work properly.
    I think you will be waiting for a long time for this happen when GSM coverage is reduced/turned off. At least by then AT&T will have enough experience with UMTS/HSPA+ technology, unlike today.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,874
    Phone
    iPhone 4S 64GB, SGS III
    Carrier
    MSV 10GB 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm along the Shore Line, east of New Haven, and then in Storrs during the academic year. I get crappy 3G reception everywhere.

    2G is guaranteed at least another 30 months of being a mainstream system, since they are still selling 2G phones, and will continue to (presumably) for the next six months. Plus, most of the country (square miles wise) is 2G only.

    Yeah, the E71 is going to be nice. I am planning, for the forseeable future, to lock it on 2G. I don't need simultaneous voice and data, and most of the limited data I will be doing on it will be Twitter, email, and Facebook, so bandwidth isn't exactly a big deal.

    I want 3G to be good, but for right now, I have to hate it because AT&T locks their phones down so that you that the user can't force the phone onto 3G, and the 3G at my house is nearly non-existent, while 2G works pretty well.

    The 2G network is very adequate, and it was at the point where it was nearly complete 5 years ago, at least here is densely populated (and hilly) CT. I've heard that 3G today in Rochester, NY absolutely rocks, and is around 1.8mbps in some speed tests a friend of mine did.

    I'm using a Nokia 2610 now, so no worries about 3G. It has GPRS and 2MB of memory, but amazing reception. I was using a Pantech Duo, and I will be using an E71 in about a month. A friend of mine with the iPhone has had such problems with 3G in CT, that he just uses EDGE, because it actually works.

    Part of it may be the phones I have played with on 3G, I can try the E71 on 3G and see how it works, it certainly has the battery capacity to withstand it, then I can do a more direct comparison, but from what I've seen, 3G is a disaster in this part of CT.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles area & PA/NJ, USA
    Posts
    17,403
    Phones
    Nexus One
    N97 Mini (SOLD)
    Carrier
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    if you lock your phone to 3g i bet you will have solid coverage with zero issues. and i think CT has WCDMA 850 3g and if so then DEFINITELY should have solid service there.
    Current Device: Nexus One
    Phone History: |N97 Mini| |5800| |E71-2| |N95-4| |N95-3| |N75| |6131| |6230| |SE T616|


    | My HoFo Feedback |

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    2,761
    Phone
    Galaxy Note 2
    Carrier
    ATT
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    I traveled extensively throughout Connecticut for my last job and I gotta tell you ATT has the worst coverage there. It's got to be some sort of record how many places I traveled in Conn that either had no reception or 1 bar or less.........

    ATT's motto In Conn, your world not delivered. Pay up sucka....

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shoreline - CT
    Posts
    155
    Phone
    iPhone 3G
    Carrier
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    This thread has too many blanket statements...I think it is unfair to say "Coverage in CT sucks". I think it is fair to say "Coverage in areas away from the major highways and high population areas of CT sucks".

    I live east of New Haven...travel to Hartford, Fairfield County, New London, Boston via 395 and have great coverage. My only complaint is that RT 9 from Essex to Middletown is still 2G.

    That said, North Madison up to Durham is spotty for sure, but I do not do that route that often.

    Don't get me wrong...there are areas of trouble in CT....but it really depends on where you go.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,874
    Phone
    iPhone 4S 64GB, SGS III
    Carrier
    MSV 10GB 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by RogerPodacter
    if you lock your phone to 3g i bet you will have solid coverage with zero issues. and i think CT has WCDMA 850 3g and if so then DEFINITELY should have solid service there.
    The issue is, the 3G network only covers half of CT, so then I'd have nothing in much of the state.

    Quote Originally Posted by RYOBI
    I traveled extensively throughout Connecticut for my last job and I gotta tell you ATT has the worst coverage there. It's got to be some sort of record how many places I traveled in Conn that either had no reception or 1 bar or less.........

    ATT's motto In Conn, your world not delivered. Pay up sucka....
    The 2G network works pretty well for me, and since the TDMA days, the coverage has been pretty good. Good for CT anyways. Even with Verizon, the challenging hilly terrain means that there just is no service in some places.

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL
    This thread has too many blanket statements...I think it is unfair to say "Coverage in CT sucks". I think it is fair to say "Coverage in areas away from the major highways and high population areas of CT sucks".

    I live east of New Haven...travel to Hartford, Fairfield County, New London, Boston via 395 and have great coverage. My only complaint is that RT 9 from Essex to Middletown is still 2G.

    That said, North Madison up to Durham is spotty for sure, but I do not do that route that often.

    Don't get me wrong...there are areas of trouble in CT....but it really depends on where you go.
    I think it's fair to say that it sucks in my area, because it, well, does. At least the 3G part. There is a newish tower North of the Rt. 80/79 circle, that was spearheaded by Cingular. They are, unfortunately, building these towers to nowhere. There aren't very many people in Rockland, and I don't think that they should have tried to fill the coverage hole up there.

    Long story short, they are building one between 1 and 80 near Rt. 79 in order to fill in two little tiny holes. T-mobile is spearheading it, and their models of reception are total BS, as they show the useful cutoff around -80db, when in reality it is about -100, at least on AT&T with good phones. There have been two dead spots on 79 since AMPS went out of fashion, and there really isn't a legitimate need to fill them.

    The carriers and the state citing council are going NUTS trying to build these big, ugly towers left and right. They should have left good enough alone and frozen the development of cell sites 5 years ago, and focused on co-locating different carries on the existing sites.

    I wish that the companies would have used their powers as a cartel to carve areas off of the coverage map, and compete on pricing and features instead of competing on coverage, ripping people off all along the way, with marginal gains for doubling the number of cell sites. They have wasted billions adding more cell sites to compete with each other, when they could have agreed to simply not service areas that don't have enough density or need for service.

    What I am complaining about is the 3G coverage, compared to the existing 2G coverage. There are many areas that don't get good coverage, have no need to get good coverage, or it is impractical for them to get good coverage, and should never get good coverage by any carrier.

    The state siting council has gone off the deep end and is basically trying to cover every square inch of the entire state, in the process chewing up billions and building tons of these ugly cell towers.

    The biggest problems that I have with the 3G network is that it can't seem to hand calls off. They just drop. 2G seems to be fine with handing calls off.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    5,101
    Carrier
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GSMinCT
    I wish that the companies would have used their powers as a cartel to carve areas off of the coverage map, and compete on pricing and features instead of competing on coverage
    Do you know what a cartel is? Cartels don't compete on price -- by definition. They consist of a group of companies that collude to manipulate the market so they can screw over the consumers. Rather than let prices be set by supply and demand, they set prices arbitrarily through agreements among themselves (which don't have to be formal agreements but can be informal ones, such as raising text messaging PPU rates to 20 cents per message). Once all of the members of the cartel set their prices at the levels determined by those "agreements", this leaves consumers no choice but to pay those prices.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    256
    Phone
    Nokia E71
    Carrier
    At&t. (3g sucks in NY/NJ)
    Feedback Score
    0
    I've been with ATT two months now and I'm pretty dissapointed too. I was hoping for speeds close to a meg but it's only about 600kb/s.


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    here and there
    Posts
    42
    Phones
    iPhone 3Gs
    iPhone 2G
    HTC S620
    Feedback Score
    0
    I think it's fair to say AT$T on the East coast (D.C. and North) is really poor in terms of capacity and speed. I'm in NYC and 25% of my calls are poorly connected and the 3g speed, while faster than 2g, is not that great.

    I spent the last week in the midwest, had great coverage and it was fast. In fact using speed test 2 to 3x the speed I see on my best day in NYC.

    They need to get the capacity issue fixed.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Black Hills
    Posts
    2,108
    Phone
    AT&T IPhone 4
    Carrier
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Good luck with getting your wishes. They are too busy trying to make IPhone users happy in the big cities.

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Bookmarks