Now showing 4G on iPhone 4S after iOS 5.1 update

[Skuzz]

First - how about instead of us all theorizing on the handset behavior, someone with an iPhone that is Jailbroken just browse the filesystem of your phone and yank the carrier icons. See if there's even a 3G PNG file anymore. I bet it's either called 3G but displays 4G, or called 4G and 3G is gone. Or there's a carrier bundle that says "if AT&T, then lie and say FauxG"

AT&T doesn't program their phones. Thus they're not the ones lying as you claim. The manufacturers program their phone. So if you have a complaint because Apple or HTC show a 4G icon because their programmers were too inept to change it to something else when a person connects to a MicroCell, then file a complaint with them.

Unfortunately, AT&T does type-certify the phones for their network. They won't allow a phone on their network unless that handset meets their requirements, including branding, icons, etc. The handset manufacturers don't have much say in the matter. Apple did for a while but they're slowly losing their power...or something, I'm not really sure what is happening there.

Right. Because there are specific definitions for "Cobalt" and "Ferrari". Those items can be examined and it can be determined if they are what they say they are. No such exactness in definition exists for 4G. Thus no misleading could be proven in a court of law.

The problem is, there is a specific definition for 3G. Changing the name of something like this, while not necessarily illegal per se, is still deceptive marketing. Carriers have been called out for certain ways they list their pricing and other such things...this could go the same way with enough public outcry. Sure normal users may not know better, or even care, but isn't it reasonable for those that have expectations but maybe not all the knowledge to be able to easily tell things apart?

With LTE devices, even on weak signal you still see at least 6 megabits or so. I've never seen slower except on major fringe areas and it will drop back to EVDO around that time, offering up a similar speed to weak LTE. (Verizon's anyway) - on AT&T's FauxG, I've never seen speeds much faster than the 2.5Mbps I regularly see on Verizon EVDO. Sure, it's market-dependent as to how well X network is built out, and I know too that EVDO out in the boondocks is lucky to hit 300kbps-1 megabit if you're lucky, but the speed differential on some of the FauxG networks vs the true LTE "4G" networks is substantial.

Maybe 4G should just be redefined as LTEorWiMax/OFDM and 3G can remain being called CDMA?

Or we all just become apathetic and see how far the lies can go. That could be fun too!

[AnthroMatt]

I don't disagree with the premise, but the fake 4G is almost twice as fast as WiMAX, so I guess calling something 4G isn't always an indication of speed.

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

[Guest 214]

Have fun suing AT&T over such a trivial matter.

The funny thing is I would likely win because they would try and hush hush it. Obviously its not too trivial if you find the obsessive need to defend AT&T.

[Guest 214]

I don't disagree with the premise, but the fake 4G is almost twice as fast as WiMAX, so I guess calling something 4G isn't always an indication of speed.

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

Depends on where you are, WiMax is faster here than AT&T fake 4G.

[Skuzz]

New rules: Let's just get rid of the G indicator altogether. Maybe that'd be a future once GSM/EDGE/1x go away and we have expected speeds of 300kbps and greater? Signal meters are so laggy and inaccurate and lie these days too, we might as well axe them too. How about a light that says "you have data"? Hah.

[ilvla2]

Depends on where you are, WiMax is faster here than AT&T fake 4G.

It might be here too if Clear actually opened up the site in Ukiah (and in Santa Rosa, Eureka, Marysville and Yuba City.), protection sites, what a waste. I get up to 10 Mbps down on AT&T's HSPA+, so I'm not complaining.

[Doolie]

She's no expert when it comes to cellular technology, but she's done enough research to pass the smell test.

There are a lot of people out there that write about cell phones. Most of them do not know jack ****. The CNET article is mostly correct, although I'll admit, I did read over it rather quickly.

I agree she's no expert, though she claims otherwise: "AT&T's HSPA+ version of 4G is also not what I or most other experts would consider true 4G."

[Guest 214]

I agree she's no expert, though she claims otherwise: "AT&T's HSPA+ version of 4G is also not what I or most other experts would consider true 4G."

Of course she is no expert since she #1. Disagree's with something that AT&T does, and #2. She is part of public media

[Guest 214]

It might be here too if Clear actually opened up the site in Ukiah (and in Santa Rosa, Eureka, Marysville and Yuba City.), protection sites, what a waste. I get up to 10 Mbps down on AT&T's HSPA+, so I'm not complaining.

Well you would be hard pressed to get 1mbps on HSPA+ here so WiMax is pretty decent for that. If I lived in an extremely rural area AT&T would probably get 10mbit/s or higher easily, but we have lots of congestion :/

Thankfully AT&T is has/is deploying LTE to relieve some of the congestion.

[ilvla2]

Well you would be hard pressed to get 1mbps on HSPA+ here so WiMax is pretty decent for that. If I lived in an extremely rural area AT&T would probably get 10mbit/s or higher easily, but we have lots of congestion :/

Thankfully AT&T is has/is deploying LTE to relieve some of the congestion.

I thought you were living in an extremely rural area like me.

[Guest 214]

I thought you were living in an extremely rural area like me.

I have a house in an extremely rural area in AL, but currently am in Atlanta for work I'm back and forth weekly though.

In rural part's of AL I get 16mbit/s+

[ggore]

http://www.att.com/Common/about_us/p...nfographic.pdf

Here's a link to AT&T's latest advertising blather about their system. Oh and St. Louis is the ONE new market in their LTE system now.

Their marketing does have a point in the various upgrades they have performed over the years. AT&T has introduced several new technologies and software upgrades over the years, while CDMA carriers have not upgraded beyond the jump to LTE. AT&T's basic 3G service is faster than Verizon and Sprint. The difference of course being that EVDO/CDMA 3G is available EVERYWHERE, while as you progress up the stepladder of AT&T's upgrades, the territory in which those levels of service are available becomes smaller and smaller with each step until you get to LTE.

[RCtennis3811]

^^

[ggore]

^^

My sentiments exactly

[RCtennis3811]

My sentiments exactly

Glad you've come to terms with your posts.