Why are there so many 3G dead spots?

[TechAuthority]

I recently made a switch to Verizon because I travel a'lot from SLC,UT to Las Vegas & SLC,UT to Idaho Falls/Boise ID for business. I have to have internet for business reasons for these trips and the 3G cut's out for about an 80% of the trip to Idaho falls and Boise. It cuts out for nearly the entire trip to Vegas which is multiple hours after passing the major Utah citys, only to have service for 5-10min here and there through small towns near Nevada.

I had been told for years that AT&T is going to expand their mobile internet to cover these area's and many others across the country and they haven't. It just had been frustrating to not have 3G outside of city's while my business partners have internet the entire trip.

I was with AT&T for 9 years and was sad to leave, but it had to be done since they were not improving their coverage.

How have some of you dealt with these issues while traveling? I just can't understand why they wouldn't want to have the nations best network when they easily could.

[Jordan T]

Following the purchase of divested Alltel you should have AT&T UMTS 3G essentially the entire way from SLC to Vegas, except for in a small section of Nevada. Something is definitely wrong with your device if you didn't have 3G basically everywhere in Utah. Going north, especially to Boise, you'll have a large part of Idaho with GSM only, but again the vast majority of the trip (including all of Utah!) should have UMTS.

I am wondering if your device wasn't connecting to UMTS850 properly, and thus you were only getting coverage in cities (where AT&T used both 850 and 1900).

P.S. Your closing is just downright troll bait. "Nations best network" my backside. It's all about where you live. Here in Montana I have speeds that blow away Verizon, dramatically better coverage (and AT&T just got a large chunk of a main highway that's never had any cell service before covered!), and much better network reliability. Just today I listened to a friend (on Verizon) whine about having to resend all their messages several times. When I suggested he switch to AT&T, he said he needed the best coverage he could get and he'd heard how bad AT&T was. I told him the REALITY . Verizon's going to get a lot worse around here next year too, when they lose roaming on the old Alltel CDMA system (bye bye service in quite a few little towns...). Though they'll be faster too with LTE. Still, I'll take twice the coverage over a bit faster. 4-5mbps on my smart phone (in Helena, sadly Kalispell's more like 2-3mbps) is plenty fast enough for a phone!

[Guest 214]

AT&T does what they can to please investors, rural areas aren't always their priority. Verizon seems to cater to their rural area's more excluding AT&T's divested area's. Coveragewise AT&T is only 1% smaller, but data 3G wise its still got a ways to go.

[TechAuthority]

Following the purchase of divested Alltel you should have AT&T UMTS 3G essentially the entire way from SLC to Vegas, except for in a small section of Nevada. Something is definitely wrong with your device if you didn't have 3G basically everywhere in Utah. Going north, especially to Boise, you'll have a large part of Idaho with GSM only, but again the vast majority of the trip (including all of Utah!) should have UMTS.

I am wondering if your device wasn't connecting to UMTS850 properly, and thus you were only getting coverage in cities (where AT&T used both 850 and 1900).

P.S. Your closing is just downright troll bait. "Nations best network" my backside. It's all about where you live. Here in Montana I have speeds that blow away Verizon, dramatically better coverage (and AT&T just got a large chunk of a main highway that's never had any cell service before covered!), and much better network reliability. Just today I listened to a friend (on Verizon) whine about having to resend all their messages several times. When I suggested he switch to AT&T, he said he needed the best coverage he could get and he'd heard how bad AT&T was. I told him the REALITY . Verizon's going to get a lot worse around here next year too, when they lose roaming on the old Alltel CDMA system (bye bye service in quite a few little towns...). Though they'll be faster too with LTE. Still, I'll take twice the coverage over a bit faster. 4-5mbps on my smart phone (in Helena, sadly Kalispell's more like 2-3mbps) is plenty fast enough for a phone!

Thank you for your detailed response! I have experienced this with the iPhone 3, iPhone 4 and the Galaxy S. I do agree that AT&T does undoubtedly have much faster 3G speeds. I wouldn't have switched except for the fact that I get a good deal on Verizon now and that I am hoping that their 4G LTE will not get smashed by AT&T's 4G LTE speeds like we saw with 3G

[Jordan T]

How long ago? AT&T finished integrating the Alltel network in May of last year. That's what brought pretty much continuous 3G from Salt Lake City to Vegas.

LTE is the same tech on both, so results will be similar under equal users per channel width per site. AT&T is using narrower channels in some markets now, but also has a lot less LTE subs than Verizon. Both Verizon and AT&T will deploy additional capacity (it's not the same cut and dry additional channels as in GSM or UMTS as LTE has a variable channel width) as needed. Expect final LTE performance on both carriers to average 6-10mbps once fully deployed. It's nice, but it won't be a quantum leap from the 2-6 on AT&T UMTS and 0.5-2 on Verizon CDMA you see today.

[TechAuthority]

I definitely like both carriers for different reasons. We also have a ranch in the middle of no where above the Great Salt Lake and AT&T did not work for just basic phone calls, it was a safety issue. I do like AT&T, I hope no one takes this thread wrong. I am just curious, I have nothing bad to say about AT&T. I just had to have coverage & got a good deal with another carrier like I mentioned earlier. Also, never had an issue with their customer support over the phone or in the store. I would definitively have no problem switching back one day if they can fulfill my needs. Except that I would not be able to have unlimited data again if I came back.

Do you know when AT&T might have 4G LTE in medium-small city's in Utah/Nevada?

[Jordan T]

Who knows with AT&T now. I think they and the whole industry were really caught blind-sided by Verizon's rapid LTE deployment. Even in Montana, where I live, Verizon says they'll have LTE by the end of the year (didn't say how much, there's a few cities that'll probably get it first but who knows).

For me, personally, I'll stick with AT&T even once Verizon has LTE here. Why? It's a bit cheaper and most important, the coverage is dramatically better. For now, it's a lot faster than Verizon. Which frankly is fast enough for a phone and an iPad. Faster speeds in town with no ability to even as much as call 911 in an emergency on a highway I travel frequently? Nah, no thanks Verizon.

[ilvla2]

Southeastern Idaho is former Edge Wireless territory, and I am sure they would have more 3G if they hadn't have merged into AT&T. The good thing is there is HSPA+ w/Enhanced Backhaul in Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Twin Falls, Burley, Blackfoot, Hailey, Ketchum and Rexburg in SE ID. Go Idaho State Bengals!

[ICanHearYouNow]

AT&T does what they can to please investors, rural areas aren't always their priority. Verizon seems to cater to their rural area's more excluding AT&T's divested area's. Coveragewise AT&T is only 1% smaller, but data 3G wise its still got a ways to go.

At&t coverage-wise is only 1% smaller. Do you mean that as in Nationally in the US At&t is 1% smaller, or 1% smaller as in the area where the OP lives and travels too for work?

[TechAuthority]

I had a pre-paid non-smartphone from Verizon just for emergency's for years for our ranch (again, middle of nowhere). I agree though, coverage wise. AT&T isn't much different for most users. I was mostly curious to see if I had been the only one to feel neglected on 3G coverage for my area where I travel. Wasn't sure how the rest of the country was in other peoples travel routes. I am sure places like the West & East coast are amazing for mobile internet.

[Guest 214]

At&t coverage-wise is only 1% smaller. Do you mean that as in Nationally in the US At&t is 1% smaller, or 1% smaller as in the area where the OP lives and travels too for work?

Overall including roaming nationally, Verizon is the largest voice and data network and covers 1% more of the population, not sure how much land that is but CDMA is still by far the dominant technology here.

[Jordan T]

I had a pre-paid non-smartphone from Verizon just for emergency's for years for our ranch (again, middle of nowhere). I agree though, coverage wise. AT&T isn't much different for most users. I was mostly curious to see if I had been the only one to feel neglected on 3G coverage for my area where I travel. Wasn't sure how the rest of the country was in other peoples travel routes. I am sure places like the West & East coast are amazing for mobile internet.

Quite the opposite in my state, AT&T blows Verizon's coverage out of the water. And it's almost all 3G (the only places that aren't 3g) are a couple tiny dots that roam (there's a few dots of roaming on Cellular One, some roaming on Verizon in a very remore area of what's basically West Dakota, and another like two dots of roaming on Commnet. All of this is *extremely* remote.), and places GSM reaches UMTS doesn't (because of terrain while the theoretical range of UMTS is greater, the wider channel kills it in some places. I can think of one town that had perfectly decent Alltel CDMA and didn't have good AT&T service until AT&T integrated and tuned the Alltel GSM sites - AT&T, despite having UMTS and GSM on the same site - has perfectly fine GSM in this town but no UMTS. I can only think of one place like that though, and with the terrain and location of the cell tower, it's obvious why it's happening).

AT&T is also expanding rapidly, with many new sites going live in the year they have been in the state.

[TechAuthority]

Hopefully one day they will have 4G on the highways I travel

[ICanHearYouNow]

Overall including roaming nationally, Verizon is the largest voice and data network and covers 1% more of the population, not sure how much land that is but CDMA is still by far the dominant technology here.

I understand what your saying LTE, but like how is CDMA by far the dominant technology? I'm just curious, because other people on here say like how GSM is better, etc, etc... because there technology is a lot older but is easier to deal with and tweak versus CDMA which is a lot newer technology and a little more harder to deal with and tweak and what not. When people say how GSM is more dominant and a lot better and easier to deal with is that because like, GSM can hold on to a signal or call a lot better/stronger or why do you think a lot of people think that or why do you think CDMA is the dominant technology?

[newyork4me]

I understand what your saying LTE, but like how is CDMA by far the dominant technology? I'm just curious, because other people on here say like how GSM is better, etc, etc... because there technology is a lot older but is easier to deal with and tweak versus CDMA which is a lot newer technology and a little more harder to deal with and tweak and what not. When people say how GSM is more dominant and a lot better and easier to deal with is that because like, GSM can hold on to a signal or call a lot better/stronger or why do you think a lot of people think that or why do you think CDMA is the dominant technology?

GSM based providers have the better technology to be sure, but LTE Fever means that rural carriers flocked to CDMA because it was cheaper and available earlier. He considers it dominant in that it has 0.65% more of the country covered with roaming.

Of course, Verizon's insane rollout of LTE renders the point moot. LTE is a GSM technology, and all of the great benefits (and more) of GSM systems will be on VZW's whole network next year.