<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Wow.... in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21016545</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:05:50 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:05:50 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21021014</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/510249"><b>Guspaz</b></A> : They offer speeds of up to 15mbit. Their basic tier is 364kbit. What's your point? Up until recently, Bell Canada only let wholesalers use 256kbit for their "lite" DSL tier. They currently let them use up to 512kbit.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21021014</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:24:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21020207</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1477228"><b>Hambone</b></A> : You are too kind.  Sprint's customer service does not suck -- it blows !!!!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21020207</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:14:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017955</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/772729"><b>Nerdtalker</b></A> : I agree that we're talking about different things here (2.5EDGE versus 3G data versus CDMA EV-Do/1X). I think an important thing to note is that although Sprint's own network doesn't extend everywhere, the black part of that graph represents areas that are roaming through Verizon/Alltel. Keep in mind that this is included.<br><br>At this point, it really becomes a semantic argument, but what we're really talking about here is AT&T's 3G coverage, not EDGE, especially considering this is the thing's most touted feature.<br><small>--<br>"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn<br><br>I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com<br><b>Spam: 12900+</b> messages currently using 406 MB.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017955</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:15:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017735</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1551963"><b>Mattie_B</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Nerdtalker <A HREF="/useremail/u/772729"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  Mattie_B <A HREF="/useremail/u/1551963"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Its not a contradiction.  You obviously can't read very well.  I'll highlight the key point of his statement and see if you can figure out what he is saying.  Your attempt to flame ilikeme has only made you look stupid. <br><br>Hint:  It has to do with the word "but".  <br><br>They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, <b>but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.</b><br> </div>No offense, but if I have trouble reading, you apparently had trouble replying, since I'm not  ptrowski <A HREF="/useremail/u/1173383"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. I haven't flamed anyone, but on a related topic I've noticed that generally the first person to mention flaming is the one who ends up fanning a conversation in such a direction. Something to consider. ::shrug::<br><br>Regardless, my point still stands. Coverage is either good, or bad. You can't argue that company X has more coverage, and then turn around and say their coverage in general sucks compared to AT&T. I can't help it that you blatantly don't understand what's painfully contradictory about that sentence, I can't. <br><br>I understand that the point he was trying to make was that Sprint/Verizon/CDMA US Carriers have broader/wider/bigger areas of coverage (notice how I was specific in this context, "more" is so wholly lacking in specificity), and that he's trying to argue that what 3G coverage AT&T <i>does</i> have is somehow <i>better.</i><br><br>Honestly, that argument doesn't even stand on it's own. As I said before and repeat now, go back and look at the testing other AT&T users have done with the same hardware and compare speeds and signal strength; it simply isn't as good. Again, I know from looking over that map myself that it was apparent that backhauls weren't up to handling HSDPA speeds anywhere near 1.7 megabits, people were doing testing with marginal signal or worse, and I was generally appalled at the test results in my area. GSM in the US in general simply isn't as rolled out or deployed as the more mature CDMA here. It isn't something that you can stand and argue about, it's pure fact. You can wish all day long, it's just truth.<br><br>Additionally, so many of these arguments stand or fall based on purely anecdotal evidence. Think about how many pointless, frivolous, and worthless "I had bad signal here. You have bad signal there. My friend says he gets dropped calls. The provider map says I have 3G coverage somewhere I know I don't." arguments you've read over. Now, think about how little they really mean when we compare them to actual real-world testing and use. The sentiment and denial that another "thing" is better applies to consumer products the same way it applies to providers in this context; so many people convince themselves that "their" carrier is best to make themselves believe they made a smart choice. It happens with product reviews all the time, ever heard of ownership loyalty?<br><br>I know there's a congressional bill which would require the FCC to mandate street-level, high resolution, high quality, standardized signal strength (that means <i>real</i> dbm values the carriers get when they site survey) maps, as well as an easy to understand explanation of the PRLs/roaming they're signing on for, for <i>precisely</i> this reason! Carrier maps are vague, exaggerated, and borderline false. Honestly, AT&T fanbois screaming in the face of cold hard facts in some illogical crusade to justify a potentially expensive mistake to themselves and the world is an even worse one.<br> </div>First off were talking about different types of coverage.  There is the newer 3G and the older Edge networks.  His reference to there coverage in general isn't referring to 3G.  As he clearly stated by saying they have more 3G coverage.<br><br>I won't argue with you about the 3G coverage.  I know Sprint leads At&t on that.  But in terms of general coverage At&t destroys sprints coverage.  This is what he is referring to.  <br><br>For you pleasure I went ahead and made a comparison chart for you.  On the left you have Sprints coverage in green and on the right is At&t's coverage map in orange both taken from there sites. You can plainly see At&t has a greater area of overall coverage. <br><br> <IMG SRC="http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r175/widgetman101/AttVSSprintcoveragemap.jpg">  <br><br>I will agree with you on the topic of I've got a signal you don't here.  It does get old.  As long as your phone works were you use it that's all that matters.  I just wanted to clarify his post.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017735</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:31:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017612</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/772729"><b>Nerdtalker</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Mattie_B <A HREF="/useremail/u/1551963"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Its not a contradiction.  You obviously can't read very well.  I'll highlight the key point of his statement and see if you can figure out what he is saying.  Your attempt to flame ilikeme has only made you look stupid. <br><br>Hint:  It has to do with the word "but".  <br><br>They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, <b>but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.</b><br> </div>No offense, but if I have trouble reading, you apparently had trouble replying, since I'm not  ptrowski <A HREF="/useremail/u/1173383"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. I haven't flamed anyone, but on a related topic I've noticed that generally the first person to mention flaming is the one who ends up fanning a conversation in such a direction. Something to consider. ::shrug::<br><br>Regardless, my point still stands. Coverage is either good, or bad. You can't argue that company X has more coverage, and then turn around and say their coverage in general sucks compared to AT&T. I can't help it that you blatantly don't understand what's painfully contradictory about that sentence, I can't. <br><br>I understand that the point he was trying to make was that Sprint/Verizon/CDMA US Carriers have broader/wider/bigger areas of coverage (notice how I was specific in this context, "more" is so wholly lacking in specificity), and that he's trying to argue that what 3G coverage AT&T <i>does</i> have is somehow <i>better.</i><br><br>Honestly, that argument doesn't even stand on it's own. As I said before and repeat now, go back and look at the testing other AT&T users have done with the same hardware and compare speeds and signal strength; it simply isn't as good. Again, I know from looking over that map myself that it was apparent that backhauls weren't up to handling HSDPA speeds anywhere near 1.7 megabits, people were doing testing with marginal signal or worse, and I was generally appalled at the test results in my area. GSM in the US in general simply isn't as rolled out or deployed as the more mature CDMA here. It isn't something that you can stand and argue about, it's pure fact. You can wish all day long, it's just truth.<br><br>Additionally, so many of these arguments stand or fall based on purely anecdotal evidence. Think about how many pointless, frivolous, and worthless "I had bad signal here. You have bad signal there. My friend says he gets dropped calls. The provider map says I have 3G coverage somewhere I know I don't." arguments you've read over. Now, think about how little they really mean when we compare them to actual real-world testing and use. The sentiment and denial that another "thing" is better applies to consumer products the same way it applies to providers in this context; so many people convince themselves that "their" carrier is best to make themselves believe they made a smart choice. It happens with product reviews all the time, ever heard of ownership loyalty?<br><br>I know there's a congressional bill which would require the FCC to mandate street-level, high resolution, high quality, standardized signal strength (that means <i>real</i> dbm values the carriers get when they site survey) maps, as well as an easy to understand explanation of the PRLs/roaming they're signing on for, for <i>precisely</i> this reason! Carrier maps are vague, exaggerated, and borderline false. Honestly, AT&T fanbois screaming in the face of cold hard facts in some illogical crusade to justify a potentially expensive mistake to themselves and the world is an even worse one.<br><small>--<br>"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn<br><br>I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com<br><b>Spam: 12900+</b> messages currently using 406 MB.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017612</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:07:33 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017333</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1551963"><b>Mattie_B</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Nerdtalker <A HREF="/useremail/u/772729"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>      :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  ilikeme <A HREF="/useremail/u/679607"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Sprint blows compared to At&t.  They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.  <br> </div>Then you're one of the few and far between lucky of AT&T customers right now. You didn't say whether you were sporting an iPhone or not, but either way...<br><br>I think I just wanted to tell you how heartily I laughed when I read this particular contradiction: <br><div class="bquote">They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.</div>What? Care to espouse on the topic of how they can simultaneously have more 3G coverage but suck in general compared to the provider who has the death star for a logo? The company who had to drop the "fewest dropped calls of any network" advertising nonsense in favor of a less-outright-lie "more bars in more places" slogan?<br><br>Take a look at some of the maps people have been posting of "3G" iPhone performance (and I put 3G in quotes, because the speeds are anything but). I know that where I live at least, I saw speeds averaging around 350 kilobits/sec. That's plain disgusting...<br><br>I easily get 1.1-1.2 megabits (even in marginal signal areas) on my HTC Mogul tethering to my PC. EV-DO Rev.A FTW.<br> </div>Its not a contradiction.  You obviously can't read very well.  I'll highlight the key point of his statement and see if you can figure out what he is saying.  Your attempt to flame ilikeme has only made you look stupid. <br><br>Hint:  It has to do with the word "but".  <br><br>They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, <b>but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.<b>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017333</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:19:18 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017022</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/772729"><b>Nerdtalker</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  ilikeme <A HREF="/useremail/u/679607"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Sprint blows compared to At&t.  They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.  My experiences with at&t 3G have been good and I have gotten up to about 1.5 in a moving car.  Sprints customer service also sucks compared to any of the other carriers. <br> </div>Then you're one of the few and far between lucky of AT&T customers right now. You didn't say whether you were sporting an iPhone or not, but either way...<br><br>I think I just wanted to tell you how heartily I laughed when I read this particular contradiction: <br><div class="bquote">They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.</div>What? Care to espouse on the topic of how they can simultaneously have more 3G coverage but suck in general compared to the provider who has the death star for a logo? The company who had to drop the "fewest dropped calls of any network" advertising nonsense in favor of a less-outright-lie "more bars in more places" slogan?<br><br>Take a look at some of the maps people have been posting of "3G" iPhone performance (and I put 3G in quotes, because the speeds are anything but). I know that where I live at least, I saw speeds averaging around 350 kilobits/sec. That's plain disgusting...<br><br>I easily get 1.1-1.2 megabits (even in marginal signal areas) on my HTC Mogul tethering to my PC. EV-DO Rev.A FTW.<br><small>--<br>"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn<br><br>I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com<br><b>Spam: 12900+</b> messages currently using 406 MB.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017022</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:08:51 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016805</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1440579"><b>iansltx</b></A> : Let's see...it runs over a phone line and is >128k...it's DSL. Up until a year ago my parents wer paying $45 for a 512k wireless connection. Now it's up to 512k.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016805</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:21:44 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016741</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1286643"><b>flyingjoey</b></A> : yes their customer service may suck... you're right about that.<br><br>The last time I had to deal with customer service was... ummmm Sept. of 2005.  Haven't had a need to speak to them again.<br><br>Evdo Rev. A for $15 bucks a month is a small price to pay for what I get out of it... specially when I'm on the road and don't want to pay 12.95 for hotel Internet access.<br><br>I've had a company crackberry phone for 3+ years and I still rather pay for my sprint phone cause it feels more reliable and the voice calls sound better.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016741</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:06:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016683</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/679607"><b>ilikeme</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  flyingjoey <A HREF="/useremail/u/1286643"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>So you're getting 1.2 on AT&T's great network, the network that can put you back on Edge by walking 3 feet in the wrong direction. hahahh!<br><br>I've been in a moving car getting 1.4 consistently (on Sprint), and in certain places I've seen 2.3 down and 800 up.<br> </div>Sprint blows compared to At&t.  They might have more 3G coverage than At&t right now, but their coverage in general sucks compared to At&t.  My experiences with at&t 3G have been good and I have gotten up to about 1.5 in a moving car.  Sprints customer service also sucks compared to any of the other carriers. <br><small>--<br><br><A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/ftth">Fiber Optics</a> is the future of high-speed internet access. Stop by the <A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/ftth">BBR Fiber Optic Forum</a><br></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016683</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:56:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016545</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1575735"><b>IowaStudent</b></A> : Or if your an Iowa Telecrap customer still, basic is  384K Is this DSL? I think not<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://www.iowatelecom.com/residentialservices/article.asp?id=220&PID=108&GPID=0" >www.iowatelecom.com/residentials&middot;&middot;&middot;8&GPID=0</A><br><br>Oh and it is 384k not 364k]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016545</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:28:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016542</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1286643"><b>flyingjoey</b></A> : So you're getting 1.2 on AT&T's great network, the network that can put you back on Edge by walking 3 feet in the wrong direction. hahahh!<br><br>I've been in a moving car getting 1.4 consistently (on Sprint), and in certain places I've seen 2.3 down and 800 up.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016542</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:27:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016459</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1528955"><b>EPS</b></A> : I was thinking the same thing, actually  :p]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016459</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:02:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016067</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1440579"><b>iansltx</b></A> : Wait a minute...why doesn't Orange just not deploy an HSDPA network ;) 384 kbps is the speed of first-gen UMTS (no enhancements)...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21016067</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:45:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Wow....</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21015829</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1173383"><b>ptrowski</b></A> : That REALLY sucks.  Glad I am getting around 1.2 Mbps.   :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21015829</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:07:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
