AT&T to officially deploy its LTE network September 18th

[Guest 214]

And what about all the people still on 1X or in areas that say 3G but all they get is 1x? So you may want to tell them Verizon is doing it right too. They don't care about the numbers or all of the advertising or what is said by the carriers. They don't care if they are in the 5%, 50%, or 1%. 1x is 1x. Even if their map says 3G coverage where they are at. I almost find it misleading how often I've seen it happen with Verizon when I had them the past 4 years up until early this year when I left them.

Ok? You don't still have it right? Devices with better radios handle EVDO signal better, older ones like the first droid were crap.

Another thing, there really aren't *large* areas without Verizon 3G. I can go all up the TN mountains and get VZW 3G and no other carrier has anything.

The SAME can be said about AT&T, what about ALL those areas that have *3G* but only get EDGE.

[Guest 214]

They will be getting 3G. AT&T has been rolling it out. And those getting 3G will be getting hspa+.

So when AT&T has that 17% covered it will be a better network in reality than VZW because you'll fall back on hspa+ instead of the old beater CDMA VZW fallback network.

Here's an example. In my region since March AT&T has turned up the notch. Data is very fast. When they get hspa+ rolling data will be even faster right? So if we are getting 3 up in my region consistently what speeds will hspa+ bring?

Take the above example when there isn't LTE available. You don't need LTE really for a smartphone. Maybe for data cards or tether'ers but most people using smartphones don't tether to begin with.

VZW marketing in reality is hype because they must deploy LTE because they are at a disadvantage with there old beater network.

In reality AT&T shouldn't be shaken one bit because of their huge advantage and a better overlay network.

Listen, I know your trying to justify yourself having an iPhone but really?

The Verizon CDMA network isn't an *old* beater network. Its still one of the most advanced technologies running in the US.

You don't KNOW when they are getting 3G, for god sakes it might be by the time Verizon has finished LTE. Just because the network is called HSPA+ doesn't mean JACK. I keep bringing this up, but my market in Metro Atlanta has one of the worst congestion problems.

WE HAVE HSPA+ already, its already been launched a long time ago. They aren't launching any new radical HSPA+, and our speeds are horrific. They get slower than EDGE during peak times. Hence why they went directly to LTE. As data usage increases, having a technology that peaks at 73mbit/s deployed at 10x10, is a lot more efficient than a tech that finishes at 21.1mbit/s

Also your area really ISN'T likely to get much faster because YOU ALREADY HAVE HSPA+. It's been deployed in Philly so speeds are probably going to stay the same until LTE comes out. If you are only getting about 3-4mbits on the iPhone then you probably wouldn't get too much faster with an HSPA+ handset in real world situations.

You probably don't use a large amount of data on your iPhone and probably haven't experienced LTE yet so you will so.

AT&T isn't at a huge advantage, because at this point they still have less HSPA+ than Verizon's LTE. And at Verizon's expansion rate, the same areas with AT&T you will be in HSPA+ you will have Verizon LTE.

Verizon's marketing isn't just *Hype* because they are actually somehow fulfilling their promises unlike AT&T.

All these areas you would fall back to EVDO on Verzion now, you would likely be falling back to regular AT&T 3G as well. They already have over 50% of the US pops covered today, by 2012 2/3, and 2013 97%.

For all we know AT&T could still have big areas of EDGE only and slow HSPA+ by then.

[Jordan T]

Why do you troll the AT&T forum just to do this. And if he's getting 3-4mbps on the iPhone 4, he is in a pretty good area and will do MUCH better with an HSPA+ device.

[Guest 214]

Why do you troll the AT&T forum just to do this. And if he's getting 3-4mbps on the iPhone 4, he is in a pretty good area and will do MUCH better with an HSPA+ device.

I have AT&T, and you cannot say that for certain. Besides, he has mentioned his wife having an Inspire I believe and it gets worse than the iPhone. This tends to be the case on AT&T's HSPA+ network. My Atrix will often times get slower speeds than my iPhone. The only device that makes an astonishing improvement is the Infuse with real HSPA+.

From what I have experienced in the many HSPA+ areas I live, work, and travel in, if your only getting 3-4mbit/s on an iPhone, then the H+ devices won't get significantly better. Its only the areas that are constantly topping out at 5-6mbit/s every time that would get astonishing speeds.

It obviously is decent in his area, but at the same time its not like Verizon's network is a beater network there either.

He has only compared Verizon's aging 3G network to AT&T's HSPA+ network. I have personally been there with both and yea AT&T is great, but VZW has LTE there and its fast as well.

[whitetigergrowl]

Ok? You don't still have it right? Devices with better radios handle EVDO signal better, older ones like the first droid were crap.

Another thing, there really aren't *large* areas without Verizon 3G. I can go all up the TN mountains and get VZW 3G and no other carrier has anything.

The SAME can be said about AT&T, what about ALL those areas that have *3G* but only get EDGE.

Oh did I forget to mention it hasn't been just the original Droid? Crap, one of my co-workers has the Droid 3 and has crap *** 3G service. Unless you think rocking 500-700k is your idea of blasting 3G on a more advanced technological network. lol The phone really doesn't determine if you are going to get 1x or 3G in areas everyone else regardless of phone model is getting them. If the map shows solid 3G coverage, but you and everyone around you with Verizon are getting the same thing, it's safe to say it's no longer a phone issue. Hell even our Verizon reps here have run out of excuses for how crappy it's gotten the past 2 years.

Verizon is great at advertising. I think it's great when people say, "I thought it was 3G there, there, and there. I mean it looked solid on the map. But all I got was this 1x crap. I can barely do anything on it. And on top of that voice was horribly spotty, even though again, it showed good solid coverage.".

Welcome to the world of advertising and fine print and kids in advertising with magic markers.

The Verizon CDMA network isn't an *old* beater network. Its still one of the most advanced technologies running in the US.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Are you for real. Feel free to go to Verizona 3G network and talk and surf....oh wait you can't. Feel free to more easily swap phon....oh wait you can't. How about easily unlock....oh wait. Enjoy those blazing fast 3+mbps 3G spe....oh wait.

Nice wording. One of the most most advanced technologies in the U.S......but not the world? I wouldn't even call it one of the most advanced technologies in the U.S.. Especially with how limited it seems.

Also your area really ISN'T likely to get much faster because YOU ALREADY HAVE HSPA+. It's been deployed in Philly so speeds are probably going to stay the same until LTE comes out. If you are only getting about 3-4mbits on the iPhone then you probably wouldn't get too much faster with an HSPA+ handset in real world situations.

Lot's of probablys there. Not a lot of I'm positive's.

[Jordan T]

CDMA is dead technology, LTE Fever. As for HSPA+, yes, you're right, the Infuse does MUCH better. Because it actually supports the highest order 64QAM modulation where much of the benefit is. Where your share of the airtime gets you more data. The other HSPA+ devices are not very impressive, but still, honestly, 2-3mbps is all you need on a phone. Good quality streaming video without pauses. EVDO can't accomplish that consistently. HSPA+ (and even HSPA 7.2) can as long as the congestion isn't ridiculous.

[mpossoff]

CDMA is dead technology, LTE Fever. As for HSPA+, yes, you're right, the Infuse does MUCH better. Because it actually supports the highest order 64QAM modulation where much of the benefit is. Where your share of the airtime gets you more data. The other HSPA+ devices are not very impressive, but still, honestly, 2-3mbps is all you need on a phone. Good quality streaming video without pauses. EVDO can't accomplish that consistently. HSPA+ (and even HSPA 7.2) can as long as the congestion isn't ridiculous.

Right we're talking about speeds for smart phones right?

[DRC72]

Listen, I know your trying to justify yourself having an iPhone but really?

The Verizon CDMA network isn't an *old* beater network. Its still one of the most advanced technologies running in the US.

Your not living in reality man........... While CDMA at one time was state of the art, it's old and outdated with all upgrade paths exhausted. Even Verizon has acknowledged this, hence why their building out LTE at strong pace. While CDMA maybe good for voice, it sucks for data.

[mpossoff]

Your not living in reality man........... While CDMA at one time was state of the art, it's old and outdated with all upgrade paths exhausted. Even Verizon has acknowledged this, hence why their building out LTE at strong pace. While CDMA maybe good for voice, it sucks for data.

Right from doing research VZW invested in the wrong technology from the beginning.

[zephxiii]

CDMA is great for voice if you aren't running whatever ****** codec verizon runs while being overloaded at the same time....oh but wait this is just the standard with any wireless network .CDMA is great on USCC and Sprint for voice for the most part, my friend seems to drop a lot of calls on sprint though...I blame sprint lol.

I'd say EVDO is decent for data. What is interesting though is that EVDO is similarly as efficient on the air interface as HSPA yet AT&T's average was a lot faster with less spectrum devoted to 3G as a total (due to sharing with GSM/EDGE). A lot of this has to do with dynamic balancing of voice/data in the carrier though. Even still for similar networks AT&T really isn't doing bad. I think the reason why T-mobile does better is simply because they have less users, higher cell density, actually have 64QAM, and haven't been selling 3g phones for very long compared AT&T nor did they have the 3G penetration in their line up for as long.

Geeze look at Sprint's 3G average lol. Sprint's WiMax average is not much faster yet AT&T managed a higher peak than WiMax lol.

Now EVDO/HSPA isn't going to perform like a new LTE network primarily because those networks are basically handling all the devices so that isn't really any surprise here.

[mpossoff]

CDMA is great for voice if you aren't running whatever ****** codec verizon runs while being overloaded at the same time....oh but wait this is just the standard with any wireless network .CDMA is great on USCC and Sprint for voice for the most part, my friend seems to drop a lot of calls on sprint though...I blame sprint lol.

I'd say EVDO is decent for data. What is interesting though is that EVDO is similarly as efficient on the air interface as HSPA yet AT&T's average was a lot faster with less spectrum devoted to 3G as a total (due to sharing with GSM/EDGE). A lot of this has to do with dynamic balancing of voice/data in the carrier though. Even still for similar networks AT&T really isn't doing bad. I think the reason why T-mobile does better is simply because they have less users, higher cell density, and haven't been selling 3g phones for very long compared AT&T nor did they have the 3G penetration in their line up.

I'll post the image of the speed tests, we average 2.5 up 1.5-1.75 down.

I'm assuming since it's the iPhone it's not hspa+.

When an hspa+ iPhone comes out what kind of speeds can we expect?

[zephxiii]

I'll post the image of the speed tests, we average 2.5 up 1.5-1.75 down.

I'm assuming since it's the iPhone it's not hspa+.

When an hspa+ iPhone comes out what kind of speeds can we expect?

That will boil down to there being 64QAM on the network and phone or not. Interestingly the Infuse seems to do better than Inspire/Atrix so....dunno.

[Guest 214]

Oh did I forget to mention it hasn't been just the original Droid? Crap, one of my co-workers has the Droid 3 and has crap *** 3G service. Unless you think rocking 500-700k is your idea of blasting 3G on a more advanced technological network. lol The phone really doesn't determine if you are going to get 1x or 3G in areas everyone else regardless of phone model is getting them. If the map shows solid 3G coverage, but you and everyone around you with Verizon are getting the same thing, it's safe to say it's no longer a phone issue. Hell even our Verizon reps here have run out of excuses for how crappy it's gotten the past 2 years.

Verizon is great at advertising. I think it's great when people say, "I thought it was 3G there, there, and there. I mean it looked solid on the map. But all I got was this 1x crap. I can barely do anything on it. And on top of that voice was horribly spotty, even though again, it showed good solid coverage.".

Welcome to the world of advertising and fine print and kids in advertising with magic markers.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Are you for real. Feel free to go to Verizona 3G network and talk and surf....oh wait you can't. Feel free to more easily swap phon....oh wait you can't. How about easily unlock....oh wait. Enjoy those blazing fast 3+mbps 3G spe....oh wait.

Nice wording. One of the most most advanced technologies in the U.S......but not the world? I wouldn't even call it one of the most advanced technologies in the U.S.. Especially with how limited it seems.



Lot's of probablys there. Not a lot of I'm positive's.

HAHA, tell that to everyone here in Atlanta getting 200kbps on AT&T 3G. And tell that to everyone who gets handed back to EDGE the minute towers get congested.

Also that comment about talking and surfing at the same time on EVDO was HILARIOUS. Obviously you haven't used the HTC Thunderbolt

[Guest 214]

Right from doing research VZW invested in the wrong technology from the beginning.

No, thats not true at all. Because up until 2010 Verizon had AT&T consistently beat in every area until AT&T started actually expanding their HSPA network and putting backhaul to go with it. Every tech peaks, and CDMA has peaked which is why they are rapidly rolling out LTE.

Its a cycle, Verizon was ahead of AT&T for many years, now AT&T has some leverage in some markets, but by next year Verizon will be on top again until AT&T starts their aggressive rollout.

CDMA has served people in places where AT&T still hasn't touched with HSPA 3G. We could say AT&T invested in the wrong technology from the beginning instead of not going straight to UMTS, they kept pouring money into GSM when its been *dead* for quite some time. But they wanted to cut costs.

There isn't really a *wrong* technology as its served customers in rural areas more efficiently, and in the areas its pathetically slow they are rolling out LTE quickly so it won't have a significant and negative impact.

[Guest 214]

CDMA is great for voice if you aren't running whatever ****** codec verizon runs while being overloaded at the same time....oh but wait this is just the standard with any wireless network .CDMA is great on USCC and Sprint for voice for the most part, my friend seems to drop a lot of calls on sprint though...I blame sprint lol.

I'd say EVDO is decent for data. What is interesting though is that EVDO is similarly as efficient on the air interface as HSPA yet AT&T's average was a lot faster with less spectrum devoted to 3G as a total (due to sharing with GSM/EDGE). A lot of this has to do with dynamic balancing of voice/data in the carrier though. Even still for similar networks AT&T really isn't doing bad. I think the reason why T-mobile does better is simply because they have less users, higher cell density, actually have 64QAM, and haven't been selling 3g phones for very long compared AT&T nor did they have the 3G penetration in their line up for as long.

Geeze look at Sprint's 3G average lol. Sprint's WiMax average is not much faster yet AT&T managed a higher peak than WiMax lol.

Now EVDO/HSPA isn't going to perform like a new LTE network primarily because those networks are basically handling all the devices so that isn't really any surprise here.

Go back to 2010 and look at the results, Verizon was actually doing better than AT&T shockingly, but as with every tech one must retire sooner. Now that AT&T can modulate HSPA+ to their advantage, they clearly are the winners in 3G overall. But Verizon is rapidly launching 4G and so the cycle continues LOL.

As for the call quality, I can completely understand what your saying, they overuse EVRC-B just like AT&T did Half Rate in many areas with GSM.

Sprint, well there isn't anything to describe Sprint. If we want to talk about the *wrong* technology then WiMax would be that.