Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 65

Thread: Is the 2G Network completely shut down as of today?

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,235
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CavanalClimber View Post
    Some of my co-workers have Verizon service and report that it is great via their LTEiRA partner Pioneer Cellular in that area, also more comprehensive than AT&T. .
    You must've missed all the lies and non-sense that ggore has been posting over the years. For example, when GM OnStar went to AT&T, he started to throw a hissy-fit on here about how those cars have no HSPA fall-back support, even though plenty of users showed him otherwise.

    As recently as a few months ago, he was claiming that AT&T had no LTE on some roads by him, then another user on here came in and said they've seen LTE up in that area.

    He's also been claiming that AT&T's network is primarily HSPA, yet when we ask for data to back that up... he stops responding or replies with nothing of significance.

    It's become quite clear that ggore adds nothing to the discussion here. All he does is post the same drivel over and over again... makes sense because he is a Pioneer salesman and seems to have an axe to grind.
    Apple iPhone X

    Verizon LTE B4+B2


    AT&T LTE B2+B17

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    470
    Device(s)
    Moto X 2015
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by wiseguy321 View Post
    You must've missed all the lies and non-sense that ggore has been posting over the years. For example, when GM OnStar went to AT&T, he started to throw a hissy-fit on here about how those cars have no HSPA fall-back support, even though plenty of users showed him otherwise.

    As recently as a few months ago, he was claiming that AT&T had no LTE on some roads by him, then another user on here came in and said they've seen LTE up in that area.

    He's also been claiming that AT&T's network is primarily HSPA, yet when we ask for data to back that up... he stops responding or replies with nothing of significance.

    It's become quite clear that ggore adds nothing to the discussion here. All he does is post the same drivel over and over again... makes sense because he is a Pioneer salesman and seems to have an axe to grind.
    You bring up some interesting points, so I will discuss some of them. I will leave the vicious personal attacks for the Moderators to deal with and only discuss what is actually relevant.

    I remember his discussion relating to OnStar. Verizon, who provides LTE in his area via Pioneer, lost the OnStar contract to AT&T. Service switched to AT&T with the 2015 car model year. OnStar does indeed advertise in-vehicle HD video streaming and online gaming as some of their services. Those services require an LTE connection to work. When he was bringing up the subject, AT&T only offered 2G/EDGE where he lives. Therefore, it makes no difference if OnStar-equipped vehicles have HSPA fall-back support when there is no HSPA available to be used, as was the case in his area. I do not believe that HD video streaming and MMORPG works on an EDGE connection. Is that correct? I believe it is.

    Let's look at what Cellmapper shows for his area for AT&T's LTE service:

    Name:  Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 3.22.19 PM.jpg
Views: 207
Size:  46.1 KB

    I circled his location in blue. Surrounding that town is a pretty darn large area where there are no AT&T LTE sites. US 183 is largely blank from Seiling to Clinton, a distance of 49 miles if I remember correctly last time I was in that area. I can confirm that there is only flashes of LTE along that route, due to AT&T's sites that are putting out LTE being 20-30 miles away from that US highway. If you switch to Sensorly's HSPA map, it does show two additional sites along that highway that are HSPA, one being the one in ggore's town and one 15 miles or so south of there. Two consecutive AT&T sites that we know for sure have not been upgraded with LTE along US 183 in that 49-mile stretch. Sensorly shows other gaps in the surrounding area where site spacing looks to be at ridiculous distances.

    As for HSPA vs. LTE, I will ask you, which technology does AT&T cover the most land area with? LTE or HSPA? I believe that the correct answer is HSPA, AT&T covers more land area with that than they do LTE. If he wants to call it AT&T's "primary" network, he could very well be correct in that statement, since they do indeed cover more land and people with that than they do LTE. That is an uncomfortable fact for some people, I'm sure. It sure seems to be for you.
    Last edited by CavanalClimber; 07-17-2017 at 05:31 PM.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    294
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CavanalClimber View Post
    You bring up some interesting points, so I will discuss some of them. I will leave the vicious personal attacks for the Moderators to deal with and only discuss what is actually relevant.

    I remember his discussion relating to OnStar. Verizon, who provides LTE in his area via Pioneer, lost the OnStar contract to AT&T. Service switched to AT&T with the 2015 car model year. OnStar does indeed advertise in-vehicle HD video streaming and online gaming as some of their services. Those services require an LTE connection to work. When he was bringing up the subject, AT&T only offered 2G/EDGE where he lives. Therefore, it makes no difference if OnStar-equipped vehicles have HSPA fall-back support when there is no HSPA available to be used, as was the case in his area. I do not believe that HD video streaming and MMORPG works on an EDGE connection. Is that correct? I believe it is.

    Let's look at what Sensorly shows for his area for AT&T's LTE service:

    Name:  Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 3.22.19 PM.jpg
Views: 207
Size:  46.1 KB

    I circled his location in blue. Surrounding that town is a pretty darn large area where there are no AT&T LTE sites. US 183 is largely blank from Seiling to Clinton, a distance of 49 miles if I remember correctly last time I was in that area. I can confirm that there is only flashes of LTE along that route, due to AT&T's sites that are putting out LTE being 20-30 miles away from that US highway. If you switch to Sensorly's HSPA map, it does show two additional sites along that highway that are HSPA, one being the one in ggore's town and one 15 miles or so south of there. Two consecutive AT&T sites that we know for sure have not been upgraded with LTE along US 183 in that 49-mile stretch. Sensorly shows other gaps in the surrounding area where site spacing looks to be at ridiculous distances.

    As for HSPA vs. LTE, I will ask you, which technology does AT&T cover the most land area with? LTE or HSPA? I believe that the correct answer is HSPA, AT&T covers more land area with that than they do LTE. If he wants to call it AT&T's "primary" network, he could very well be correct in that statement, since they do indeed cover more land and people with that than they do LTE. That is an uncomfortable fact for some people, I'm sure. It sure seems to be for you.
    Wow, sensorly kept up the 2G reports in there




    Hmm seems like Verizon covers the main road?




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,410
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6S
    Carrier(s)
    Pioneer Cellular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jpiszcz View Post
    Wow, sensorly kept up the 2G reports in there



    Hmm seems like Verizon covers the main road?
    They do. That 2G is gone, it was shut down in November when they installed 4G/HSPA.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,410
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6S
    Carrier(s)
    Pioneer Cellular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by wiseguy321 View Post
    makes sense because he is a Pioneer salesman
    For the record, I am not and never have been a Pioneer Cellular salesman or worked for Pioneer Telephone Cooperative, their parent company. I have worked for a local internet service provider for 30 years. And I respond to civil discourse and discussion, not personal attacks.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    747
    Device(s)
    iPhone 8+ (Intel), iPhone 6S, Galaxy S6, iPad Mini 3
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CavanalClimber View Post
    You bring up some interesting points, so I will discuss some of them. I will leave the vicious personal attacks for the Moderators to deal with and only discuss what is actually relevant.

    I remember his discussion relating to OnStar. Verizon, who provides LTE in his area via Pioneer, lost the OnStar contract to AT&T. Service switched to AT&T with the 2015 car model year. OnStar does indeed advertise in-vehicle HD video streaming and online gaming as some of their services. Those services require an LTE connection to work. When he was bringing up the subject, AT&T only offered 2G/EDGE where he lives. Therefore, it makes no difference if OnStar-equipped vehicles have HSPA fall-back support when there is no HSPA available to be used, as was the case in his area. I do not believe that HD video streaming and MMORPG works on an EDGE connection. Is that correct? I believe it is.

    Let's look at what Cellmapper shows for his area for AT&T's LTE service:

    Name:  Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 3.22.19 PM.jpg
Views: 207
Size:  46.1 KB

    I circled his location in blue. Surrounding that town is a pretty darn large area where there are no AT&T LTE sites. US 183 is largely blank from Seiling to Clinton, a distance of 49 miles if I remember correctly last time I was in that area. I can confirm that there is only flashes of LTE along that route, due to AT&T's sites that are putting out LTE being 20-30 miles away from that US highway. If you switch to Sensorly's HSPA map, it does show two additional sites along that highway that are HSPA, one being the one in ggore's town and one 15 miles or so south of there. Two consecutive AT&T sites that we know for sure have not been upgraded with LTE along US 183 in that 49-mile stretch. Sensorly shows other gaps in the surrounding area where site spacing looks to be at ridiculous distances.

    As for HSPA vs. LTE, I will ask you, which technology does AT&T cover the most land area with? LTE or HSPA? I believe that the correct answer is HSPA, AT&T covers more land area with that than they do LTE. If he wants to call it AT&T's "primary" network, he could very well be correct in that statement, since they do indeed cover more land and people with that than they do LTE. That is an uncomfortable fact for some people, I'm sure. It sure seems to be for you.
    The site in Putnam should get LTE within the next 60 days, while the site in Taloga should get it within 120 days. All in 2017, just like I stated last fall.
    I do not represent any company or other entity. Anything I post in these forums or write on this site are my thoughts and opinions only. I make every attempt to be 100% accurate, but I am human and do make mistakes from time to time.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,801
    Device(s)
    iPhone X 256 GB Space Gray
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T Mobility
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CavanalClimber View Post
    As for HSPA vs. LTE, I will ask you, which technology does AT&T cover the most land area with? LTE or HSPA? I believe that the correct answer is HSPA, AT&T covers more land area with that than they do LTE. If he wants to call it AT&T's "primary" network, he could very well be correct in that statement, since they do indeed cover more land and people with that than they do LTE. That is an uncomfortable fact for some people, I'm sure. It sure seems to be for you.
    How many more people does AT&T serve with LTE daily than they do HSPA? I'd wager at least 10x as many more.

    If this is the argument, isn't Verizon's network primarily EV-DO? Or better yet 1xRTT? Given that they don't actually own the network in LTEiRA areas? Even with those accounted, it seems that they cover more with EV-DO according to OpenSignal on my iPhone.

    In nearly every area I've been with LTE (which, by the way, is all of them) UMTS is down to 1 carrier. What about that says primary network? 10 MHz of UMTS or 95 MHz of LTE?

  8. #53
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Palm City, FL (Previously Bristol, VA)
    Posts
    291
    Device(s)
    Galaxy S7 edge (SM-G935A), GNote 4 (SM-N910A), OnePlus One (US Edition)
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T (Current), VZW (2014), Boost Mobile (2010)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeuten View Post
    How many more people does AT&T serve with LTE daily than they do HSPA? I'd wager at least 10x as many more.

    If this is the argument, isn't Verizon's network primarily EV-DO? Or better yet 1xRTT? Given that they don't actually own the network in LTEiRA areas? Even with those accounted, it seems that they cover more with EV-DO according to OpenSignal on my iPhone.

    In nearly every area I've been with LTE (which, by the way, is all of them) UMTS is down to 1 carrier. What about that says primary network? 10 MHz of UMTS or 95 MHz of LTE?
    I think what ggore is getting at is a "last mile" coverage discussion. With Verizon's wireless service being their primary business and AT&T's primary business being a "one-stop shop" business, Verizon's motives and plans will be putting their wireless service first when it comes to spending, and AT&T doesn't do that. As a result, AT&T doesn't see a need to upgrade some areas to LTE, or to densify in some areas (or even have coverage at all in a few select areas).

    I state all of that for the obvious: a carrier's primary network is not defined by Sq. miles covered as much as POPs covered. That being said, I've had some head-scratching moments when I drive into areas that most certainly should have LTE but have H+ on bonded T1s (or something slow, with speeds being 2-3mbps), while with Verizon, they've got LTE that theoretically replaces their 2G/3G coverage (aside from 1X's crazy signal penetration and distance). AT&T hasn't upgraded all of their network footprint to theoretically cover their H+/UMTS footprint with LTE. Heck, there's another forum post about how Commnet roaming in Red River, NM is busted. At least with LTEiRA, I've not heard of any cut-offs. AT&T hasn't "created" anything like LTEiRA because it's apparent wireless service isn't their primary concern, otherwise, I'm sure their LTE network would be more broad.

    Of course, AT&T's network in more populated areas is more built-out to LTE, with the majority of spectrum being utilized on LTE. No one can deny that, but they've got a way to go with "last-mile" coverage with not only LTE holes, but coverage holes in general that weren't replaced with 2G's decommissioning.
    Quote Originally Posted by WishIWasHer View Post
    CSD was rarely used, and was before they started referring to cell phone technology in G's. This G stuff really started with 3G coverage and its because the 2nd iPhone was called the iPhone 3G. That's where cell phone tech got the G's from. The G stands for Gigs and the number is the number of Gigs the signal is.
    Quote Originally Posted by XFF View Post
    Oh boy....
    Quote Originally Posted by AttData View Post
    My thoughts exactly...

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,410
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6S
    Carrier(s)
    Pioneer Cellular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by BMWDude49120 View Post
    The site in Putnam should get LTE within the next 60 days, while the site in Taloga should get it within 120 days. All in 2017, just like I stated last fall.
    Very good, thank you very much for that update, I appreciate it.

    It is nice to know that, contrary to Posts #38 and #41, that on occasion, someone from a carrier does read these forums and can provide some shred of information related to a problem that a user has. Again, I thank you.
    Last edited by ggore; 07-18-2017 at 12:56 PM.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    470
    Device(s)
    Moto X 2015
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeuten View Post
    How many more people does AT&T serve with LTE daily than they do HSPA? I'd wager at least 10x as many more.

    If this is the argument, isn't Verizon's network primarily EV-DO? Or better yet 1xRTT? Given that they don't actually own the network in LTEiRA areas? Even with those accounted, it seems that they cover more with EV-DO according to OpenSignal on my iPhone.

    In nearly every area I've been with LTE (which, by the way, is all of them) UMTS is down to 1 carrier. What about that says primary network? 10 MHz of UMTS or 95 MHz of LTE?
    AT&T "serves" more people with HSPA than with LTE because as I have been saying, they cover more territory with that than they do LTE. If both HSPA and LTE are available, then, yes, more people are using LTE because the phone should ideally prefer LTE over HSPA. There have been plenty of instances documented here in HoFo though, where phones do not prefer LTE over HSPA if both are available. Some phones will stick with HSPA even though a perfectly usable and strong LTE signal is present. I don't know what the explanation is for that, but it definitely does occur. I have driven right by a known AT&T LTE site and my testing phone might stay with HSPA rather than switch. I would have to manually turn networking on/off to establish a connection with the LTE network, then re-drive the stretch to find the limit of the LTE coverage and re-run it. That has happened on many occasions.

    Definitely, I would agree that 3G/EVDO is still Verizon's primary network, simply because by the same logic, they cover more land area with it, and therefore, more people with it than they do with LTE. It is not their top-level network in capability but it is their network with the largest coverage. Very few people actually USE that 3G any more because Verizon only has a very few sites that haven't been upgraded to LTE.

    It makes no difference how many HSPA carriers are being used if LTE is also present. The phone should indeed prefer LTE over HSPA in that situation. But if LTE is not present, then HSPA is the primary, highest-speed, most capable network at that location.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,410
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6S
    Carrier(s)
    Pioneer Cellular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by balleron24z View Post
    I think what ggore is getting at is a "last mile" coverage discussion. With Verizon's wireless service being their primary business and AT&T's primary business being a "one-stop shop" business, Verizon's motives and plans will be putting their wireless service first when it comes to spending, and AT&T doesn't do that. As a result, AT&T doesn't see a need to upgrade some areas to LTE, or to densify in some areas (or even have coverage at all in a few select areas).
    The "one-stop shop" reasoning is interesting. I am a DirecTV customer, but I still receive lots of marketing calls from AT&T and they always ask if I am an AT&T Wireless customer and tell about the discounts I would receive on DirecTV service if I was. Even the DirecTV installer who came last week to install the new 4k receiver system mentioned the combo discounts. Of course I can't take advantage of those discounts, I would if I could, but right now their wireless service is not a viable option. If the upgrades mentioned above do occur, I could always reconsider.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Raleigh
    Posts
    174
    Carrier(s)
    t-mobile, at&t, FI
    Feedback Score
    0
    The reason Verizon is desperate to install LTE is because EVDO and 1R are completely useless for data and HSPA is NOT. In fact, I found HSPA as good as LTE on at&t (and even t-mobile) for all practical purposes. I never found EVDO useful for any data.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Chantilly, VA
    Posts
    367
    Device(s)
    Moto G4 Play
    Carrier(s)
    H2O (AT&T), Red Pocket (AT&T)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mvaar View Post
    The reason Verizon is desperate to install LTE is because EVDO and 1R are completely useless for data and HSPA is NOT. In fact, I found HSPA as good as LTE on at&t (and even t-mobile) for all practical purposes. I never found EVDO useful for any data.
    Agree 100%. EVDO & 1x are pretty much useless you are unless very close to the tower. Rarely notice any slowdown running on HSPA .

  14. #59
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Palm City, FL (Previously Bristol, VA)
    Posts
    291
    Device(s)
    Galaxy S7 edge (SM-G935A), GNote 4 (SM-N910A), OnePlus One (US Edition)
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T (Current), VZW (2014), Boost Mobile (2010)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mvaar View Post
    The reason Verizon is desperate to install LTE is because EVDO and 1R are completely useless for data and HSPA is NOT. In fact, I found HSPA as good as LTE on at&t (and even t-mobile) for all practical purposes. I never found EVDO useful for any data.
    Well, can't say I don't agree with you on that, 1x and EvDo were extremely slow when I was with Verizon, and of course, without a device that supports SVDO or VoLTE, you're missing out on data while in a voice call.

    That being said, LTE typically works a lot better at the edge of a cell, whereas CDMA can only realistically work with voice in fringe coverage areas. I've never been able to load anything on 2G/3G with VZW when I've had barely enough signal to call out.

    HSPA/HSPA+ are a lot faster, even at cell edge, than CDMA data technologies, but I still get way better performance out of LTE. Latency has always been an issue on AT&T's 3G/Faux-G networks (YMMV), and honestly, when downloading larger files, I do notice a difference. Granted, nothing like the spread between CDMA and LTE, but there is a difference. That, and HD voice being unavailable on AT&T's HSPA/HSPA+ network kills it for me; I sometimes force LTE just so I'm not stuck with shoddy call quality.

    That being said, now that I've ventured off on a tangent, I say all of that to argue that AT&T could do a lot better about upgrading all of their LTE sites with at least band 5 or band 12/17 (where available), and I think that they will after they figure out their "5G Evolution"...ahem, I mean LTE Advanced with 4x4 MIMO and 256k QAM modulation situation. I'm just looking forward to them covering more land mass, since they've got the FirstNet contract and have all of that glorious band 14 to deploy.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,410
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6S
    Carrier(s)
    Pioneer Cellular
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mvaar View Post
    The reason Verizon is desperate to install LTE is because EVDO and 1R are completely useless for data and HSPA is NOT. In fact, I found HSPA as good as LTE on at&t (and even t-mobile) for all practical purposes. I never found EVDO useful for any data.
    With the right deployment and backhaul, EVDO can be capable of 2-3 Mbps and quite useful for what it is. It has had its day and Verizon has moved on. AT&T and T-Mobile widely deployed HSPA in an effort to compete with that rapid rollout of LTE that Verizon was doing.

    T-Mobile has pretty much stopped deploying HSPA in favor of LTE and is well on their way to having an all-LTE network, while AT&T is using HSPA's capability as an excuse to not do or delay upgrades to LTE in places around the country. Some people on HoFo postulate why should AT&T ever upgrade all the way to LTE if HSPA is "good enough" where their system tops out with it? Well, HSPA is indeed capable of decent speeds, but you can't have VoLTE or the super-fast data capacity that LTE provides, and no future technology has anything to do with HSPA, so it could set up another digital-gap situation, where as in the past instead of being stuck with 2G/EDGE service while the rest of the country had HSPA and LTE installed, this time it will be the rest of the country moving on with 5G, 6G, etc while places are stuck with 3G/"4G"/HSPA.

    AT&T does not need to get itself into another situation like that. They just got out of one with the GSM shutdown. Having too many layers of technology wastes valuable spectrum, which was one purpose of the GSM shutdown that they specifically stated. AT&T was in a bit of a fix with some places with "G"/GSM, some with 2G/EDGE, some with un-enhanced 3G, some with HSPA, and some with LTE. Each one of those uses a bit of spectrum that could be combined to make a better experience with LTE.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is the entire network down?
    By ccamfield in forum Mobilicity
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-01-2012, 04:23 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-17-2009, 05:10 PM
  3. Is it possible to completely shut off the H3?
    By bsjd00 in forum Feature Phones
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-24-2006, 11:35 PM
  4. Is the GPRS network down for Rogers?
    By AndyVX in forum BlackBerry
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-30-2004, 08:41 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-12-2002, 06:06 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks