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

[Guest 214]

Key takeaway from that latest speediest --> AT&T 3G is already 3.5 times faster than VZW 3G. Imagine the discrepancy iPhone users will have based on what carrier they choose if VZW is stuck with an EVDO phone and AT&T gets an HSPA+21.

Well seeing the iPhone isn't the only nor the best phone then I am sure they won't care. The main crowd of iPhone users can barely turn on a computer, let alone use huge amounts of data. If your going for speed you wouldn't be choosing an iPhone on either carrier. And maybe in your area AT&T 3G is 3.5 times faster, but here its more than 3.5x slower.

[Guest 214]

Ok name the phones you can do this with. That AREN'T LTE.



Who steals an IPhone for an IPod? I've seen people do it. And if I stole your Verizon phone, I can get it reflashed and put on another carrier. Point being?



Most carriers in the U.S. are CDMA so its not a matter of who would you go to. You ask 'seriously?', but people every day want to. There are phones on Sprint people want on Verizon and can't get. And so on and so on. Even basic feature phones on other carriers people would like to bring to Verizon and can't.



So where have you traveled to get those speeds? With Verizon I was always lucky to break 1.5mbps on a good day.

Verizon doesn't have the slowest 3G speeds? You're in denial I'm guessing.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/...one-speedtest/

http://www.mobile-broadband-reviews....-3g-speed.html

http://gizmodo.com/5428343/our-2009-...a-test-att-won

http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/02/a...3g-speed-tests

So let's try this again shall we?

And NONE of these are using HSPA+ for comparison. You can't use that as excuse for everywhere because as you have stated elsewhere, it's not everywhere.



Just because it shows red on a map doesn't mean it's all 3G. It's not. Or that there aren't dead spots. Otherwise I wouldn't be getting 1x AT ALL in supposed 3G coverage areas. Yet I still would. And would have solid voice, but wouldn't.

You don't spew out incorrect facts? Such as the IPhone not being able to do HD? LOL

You keep talking about your experiences like they are that way everywhere. And there are many people on these forums that can show you they aren't. Be it LTE or otherwise.



You're just a walking advertisement for Verizon aren't you.



Really? Show me what all of the Verizon phones were I have owned. It's true. Look it up. Or are you just assuming or don't know how to read?



Come out to South Dakota and ask those questions and make those statements again. Greater MN. And even ND and Wyoming. Guaranteed you would be going back home going, "Oh, yeah, he was right." Areas covered in solid 3G have been giving me 1x. Where data is lucky to go above 1mbps on a good day. And how the voice quality sucks. Let alone all of the red voice areas that were solid red and I would have numerous no coverage areas. I-94 through North Dakota, I-90 through SD, Hwy 85 in SD, Hwy 34 through SD.

In MN go off the main highways like 10 and 71. It gets spotty.

They show solid coverage for voice and data. Far from it. And even if voice is there, 3G data is spotty. My son could color those in just as good.

The HTC Thunderbolt can AND DOES SVDO ON 3G. How hard is that to understand?

And once again, South Dakota isn't likely on any carriers hot list seeing as most people in America probably can't even point out SD on a map. Of course there are going to be a lot of crappy areas in SD and MN. For goodness sakes, SD only has a little more population than Alaska along with North Dakota.

Where data really matters are much larger areas like NYC, DFW, ATL, San Diego, LA, ect.. Go to those cities and report back which one is the best carrier.

[whitetigergrowl]

The HTC Thunderbolt can AND DOES SVDO ON 3G. How hard is that to understand?

And once again, South Dakota isn't likely on any carriers hot list seeing as most people in America probably can't even point out SD on a map. Of course there are going to be a lot of crappy areas in SD and MN. For goodness sakes, SD only has a little more population than Alaska along with North Dakota.

Where data really matters are much larger areas like NYC, DFW, ATL, San Diego, LA, ect.. Go to those cities and report back which one is the best carrier.

You keep talking one phone like that is all phones. That is a small minority of people. Most people aren't going to get a Thunderbolt for that (especially with its horrid battery life) and it isn't exactly a selling point for Verizon. And it's not like you see threads or posts on here about how great it is either. There is a reason for that.

But MN is a bigger market. Especially with the Twin Cities. And that STILL doesn't explain it. As well, that doesn't account for the MILLIONS of tourists that come here year round. Be it for the Sturgis Rally, Mt. Rushmore, etc.. Before I moved here I thought it was going to be back woods too. It isn't as backwoods as you may think. In fact the economy here is amongst the best in the U.S.. ND because of the oil boom and SD because of tourism. Home Docsis 3.0 broadband up to 100mbps for home use. Not bad and far better than many bigger places in the U.S.. I was at an event in MN this summer that had 150,000 people. My AT&T 3G stayed strong at 1.5-2mbps. Verizons...well 1mbps would have been considered grand from what others said. 500k was the norm. In a strong 3G area too.

ATT acquired the Alltel assets here. However they have been doing incredible things with the AT&T network in the MN, SD, ND markets. The fact I drove over 500 miles with not one loss of signal or loss of 3G to Edge speaks volumes when just the year prior I had numerous dead spots in Verizons 'solid red' areas on those exact same roads. Let alone switched to 1x from 3G. ATT has been adding towers in places neither Verizon or Alltel has or had coverage. Data speeds have been increasing across the board too.

But you simply cannot say, "Oh look its got red there so it's solid." and actually mean it with a straight face. It's impossible. You can't tell me if you looked at a map and it showed solid voice and 3G, then went there and got 3G data speeds that averaged 500k to 1mbps when it wasn't switching to 1x, crap *** voice quality, numerous dead zones, etc. that you wouldn't be saying the opposite about how grand Verizons network is and how 'solid' those red areas really are with voice and data. And I doubt the excuse of 'it happens'. Especially if others say its the norm.

[whitetigergrowl]

Here ya go

[Guest 214]

Here ya go

Love how you erased all the other bad tests

[zephxiii]

Well here's Atlanta's results:



Hmm 3.18mbit average for AT&T. Sprint was abysmal on 3G.

[newyork4me]

Well seeing the iPhone isn't the only nor the best phone then I am sure they won't care. The main crowd of iPhone users can barely turn on a computer, let alone use huge amounts of data. If your going for speed you wouldn't be choosing an iPhone on either carrier. And maybe in your area AT&T 3G is 3.5 times faster, but here its more than 3.5x slower.

You do realize that iPhone users are both the most intelligent and wealthiest right? Analyst report after analyst report and survey after survey has proven that.

Here is a recent survey with 16,000 responses (way more than necessary to be statistically significant): http://blog.hunch.com/?p=51781 . This also shows how much more technology focused iPhone users are.

iPhone users are 37% more likely to have a graduate degree, and 67% more likely to have household incomes of $200k. Additionally, they are by far the most tech advanced, and 38% more likely to have their own domain for email.

My personal experience matches that--everyone I know with an iPhone meets those criteria.

So you are wrong twofold: 1) iPhone users as a group are highly technologically advanced and 2) I'm sure VZW will absolutely care about being at a such a large disadvantage for the absolute best demographic. Well educated and wealthy is the most desirable target group, and iPhone users are the most of both of those compared to any other smartphone users.

[Guest 214]

You keep talking one phone like that is all phones. That is a small minority of people. Most people aren't going to get a Thunderbolt for that (especially with its horrid battery life) and it isn't exactly a selling point for Verizon. And it's not like you see threads or posts on here about how great it is either. There is a reason for that.

But MN is a bigger market. Especially with the Twin Cities. And that STILL doesn't explain it. As well, that doesn't account for the MILLIONS of tourists that come here year round. Be it for the Sturgis Rally, Mt. Rushmore, etc.. Before I moved here I thought it was going to be back woods too. It isn't as backwoods as you may think. In fact the economy here is amongst the best in the U.S.. ND because of the oil boom and SD because of tourism. Home Docsis 3.0 broadband up to 100mbps for home use. Not bad and far better than many bigger places in the U.S.. I was at an event in MN this summer that had 150,000 people. My AT&T 3G stayed strong at 1.5-2mbps. Verizons...well 1mbps would have been considered grand from what others said. 500k was the norm. In a strong 3G area too.

ATT acquired the Alltel assets here. However they have been doing incredible things with the AT&T network in the MN, SD, ND markets. The fact I drove over 500 miles with not one loss of signal or loss of 3G to Edge speaks volumes when just the year prior I had numerous dead spots in Verizons 'solid red' areas on those exact same roads. Let alone switched to 1x from 3G. ATT has been adding towers in places neither Verizon or Alltel has or had coverage. Data speeds have been increasing across the board too.

But you simply cannot say, "Oh look its got red there so it's solid." and actually mean it with a straight face. It's impossible. You can't tell me if you looked at a map and it showed solid voice and 3G, then went there and got 3G data speeds that averaged 500k to 1mbps when it wasn't switching to 1x, crap *** voice quality, numerous dead zones, etc. that you wouldn't be saying the opposite about how grand Verizons network is and how 'solid' those red areas really are with voice and data. And I doubt the excuse of 'it happens'. Especially if others say its the norm.

Its so funny how when you get proven WRONG you spin this around over and over again. Your never going to win with anyone on here.

And you don't even have Verizon so whatever you say isn't really that credible. Obviously things can change, and sure you have friends who have Verizon but don't post speed tests and I doubt your with those devices 24/7.

[whitetigergrowl]

Love how you erased all the other bad tests

I did that earlier today and they weren't bad tests. I test in multiple cities and to multiple servers. And I'm not gonna sit here and try and explain each one to you or others.

But I do have another screen snap posted elsewhere backing this up that I posted not long back. Nice try though.

[Guest 214]

You do realize that iPhone users are both the most intelligent and wealthiest right? Analyst report after analyst report and survey after survey has proven that.

Here is a recent survey with 16,000 responses (way more than necessary to be statistically significant): http://blog.hunch.com/?p=51781 . This also shows how much more technology focused iPhone users are.

iPhone users are 37% more likely to have a graduate degree, and 67% more likely to have household incomes of $200k. Additionally, they are by far the most tech advanced, and 38% more likely to have their own domain for email.

My personal experience matches that--everyone I know with an iPhone meets those criteria.

So you are wrong twofold: 1) iPhone users as a group are highly technologically advanced and 2) I'm sure VZW will absolutely care about being at a such a large disadvantage for the absolute best demographic. Well educated and wealthy is the most desirable target group, and iPhone users are the most of both of those compared to any other smartphone users.

Wealthiest? Ok tell that to everyone in the trailer parks around here with one.

Obviously they aren't THAT technologically advanced for having one of the slowest devices on the markets, and also the fact that a good majority of them think they have 4G.

Every soccer mom and their little teenagers and kids have an iPhone. Its a status icon, not some technological marvel. That would be dual core devices and 4G phones.

Its quite obvious you don't have to be rich nor educated to own one. Just come to rural GA and find that out really quick. I am well educated and have a house well over 2mil but having that house doesn't entice anybody who lives here to get an iPhone. In fact my partner hates iPhone's, he drives a 2011 BMW 760li and has a T-Mobile Sensation, wouldn't that be considered a *poor people* phone? LOL

I would love to find out the reality of that survey.

[whitetigergrowl]

Its so funny how when you get proven WRONG you spin this around over and over again. Your never going to win with anyone on here.

And you don't even have Verizon so whatever you say isn't really that credible. Obviously things can change, and sure you have friends who have Verizon but don't post speed tests and I doubt your with those devices 24/7.

I guess having Verizon 4 years up until April of this year means nothing right? 4 years of 3G use. 4 years of voice use. Droid, IPhone 4, Droid Incredible, etc etc. Yep, you're right. Not having them a few months later makes all the difference!

And if I have to be with their devices 24/7 to try and get decent data signal there is something wrong. They were apprehensive adding Speedtest to their phone just to see. Doing anything else would be a no go. How awesome were the speeds here? I couldn't drive from Spearfish to Sturgis with Verizon without the phone always buffering internet radio. No matter the app, stations, etc.. buffer, play 3 seconds...buffer....play 3 seconds. Yep it rocked. And streaming video was blocky and took forever to buffer. Rock on!

Again, nice try.

[Guest 214]

Well here's Atlanta's results:



Hmm 3.18mbit average for AT&T. Sprint was abysmal on 3G.

Its funny how they said this is a Verizon town

[whitetigergrowl]

Its so funny how when you get proven WRONG you spin this around over and over again. Your never going to win with anyone on here.

And you don't even have Verizon so whatever you say isn't really that credible. Obviously things can change, and sure you have friends who have Verizon but don't post speed tests and I doubt your with those devices 24/7.

Of course you are failing to prove how I'm wrong. Thanks for teasing.

[Guest 214]

Of course you are failing to prove how I'm wrong. Thanks for teasing.

You prove yourself wrong every time you post something.

That's because the Thunderbolt isn't using the same CDMA network to allow it. It's splitting between CDMA and LTE. Voice and data are separated and last I looked CDMA didn't need to use a sim card. Last I looked there were still plenty of non-LTE Verizon phones that didn't use sim cards and are 3G only and can't talk and surf at the same time.

Also most Verizon markets were not upgraded on 3G to allow it. So the point still stands. Of course it's amusing how much you fail to mention on it. Trying to use one small area or market or 2 separate technologies as an example when you know full well most Verizon markets do not support it is (let alone most Verizon phones), is pretty sad.

Its quite obvious by this post you have no clue of the inner workings of the Verizon network (probably AT&T's as well)

[whitetigergrowl]

You prove yourself wrong every time you post something.

Its quite obvious by this post you have no clue of the inner workings of the Verizon network (probably AT&T's as well)

Again, quoting my post says nothing. And pointing to only 1 phone says nothing.

If you can't say it, then why say anything?