Re: And the issue here is . . . ? -

Author	All Replies
kyler13 Is your fiber grounded? join:2006-12-12 Arnold, MD	reply to itguy05 Re: And the issue here is . . . ? said by itguy05: Dude you have no clue whatsoever. AT&T's problem is mainly the Internet backhauls from its cell sites. Do you know how long it takes to get a data circuit ordered, installed, tested, and operational? Hint: Lots of time, even if you are the telco. And then there's cell sites. Cost a couple hundred grand a pop and that's if you can put them where they will work best. You've got lots of NIMBY types that don't want them. And then there's working with landowners, getting it constructed, tuned, etc. Takes time and lots of $$. It is getting better, it will take time. Put down the Verizon Crack Pipe. Their network is not all that. Their advertising is top notch. Repeat anything long enough and people will believe it. AT&T doesn't have time. LTE is right around the corner and Verizon is pushing it. AT&T won't get real 3G up and running widespread before they need to abandon it and go all out on LTE. AT&T's real problem here is GSM. They're plagued just as much by dropped connections as slow speed. Verizon's network is all that, thanks to CDMA technology which is better suited for a country this expansive. You get the worldwide support of GSM, implementing it in the US, but few other carriers abroad need to shoehorn it into a widespread market place like AT&T does here.
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-29 18:14:57 ·
itguy05 join:2005-06-17	said by kyler13: AT&T doesn't have time. LTE is right around the corner and Verizon is pushing it. AT&T won't get real 3G up and running widespread before they need to abandon it and go all out on LTE. AT&T's real problem here is GSM. They're plagued just as much by dropped connections as slow speed. Verizon's network is all that, thanks to CDMA technology which is better suited for a country this expansive. You get the worldwide support of GSM, implementing it in the US, but few other carriers abroad need to shoehorn it into a widespread market place like AT&T does here. You really need to buy a clue. AT&T's 3G is UMTS/HSDPA, which is a form of CDMA. The only GSM/TDMA left in AT&T is the legacy stuff and I think they are upgrading ASAP. That's the hard part for them - going from GSM (TDMA) to CDMA. LTE is the natural progression from UMTS: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_···volution "LTE is a set of enhancements to the Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) which will be introduced in 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) " So AT&T can go to LTE and does have plans to move there in 2011. If you bother to read the article, UMTS, GSM, IS-95 (CDMA) and LTE are compatible. I've used them both and Verizon's network is not all that. CDMA can and does suck in many circumstances (high usage when voice quality goes in the crapper). I think you need to stop puckering up to the big red V.
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-29 20:39:51 ·

kyler13 Is your fiber grounded? join:2006-12-12 Arnold, MD	No, you need to learn more about what you're talking about. Just because you see the string of characters "CDMA" doesn't mean A=B. UMTS's use of W-CDMA is not compatible with the CDMA2000 family of standards we refer to when we talk about Verizon's network being CDMA (1xRTT, EVDO). Don't get caught up in the terminology. UMTS, like GSM/EDGE, doesn't have nearly the coverage area per cell site that the CDMA2000 standards have. Yes, you stand corrected. I don't care where LTE comes from. Verizon is rushing it to market at the end of this year. Of course AT&T can upgrade to it, but they're either gonna sit on their hands, wait until 2011 as planned, and fall further behind, or they're gonna be pushed to keep pace with Verizon and scrap their continuing 3G upgrades. They can barely afford to update their current network so what makes you think they can do this and upgrade to LTE at the same time? And BTW, the standards aren't compatible. I think you're again getting confused by simple terminology. LTE supports seamless passing with all the other standards. That's wholly different than compatibility. Forget about buying clues. I think you need to re-educate yourself. Good luck with that.
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-30 07:37:14 ·
itguy05 join:2005-06-17	They are all based off of CDMA which has a whole different network tuning, cell spacing and placement, and other requirements than GSM. Verizon has the advantage in that they have already built and tuned their system for a CDMA based technology. They have lots of experience with it. I'd love to see how you think AT&T can "barely afford to upgrade their network". If you look at the stats, AT&T spends just as much as Verizon in network upgrades per year. They do have the disadvantage in that they have to support GSM, UMTS, and LTE but if they are smart, they will do what they did to the TDMA/Analog customers a few years ago. I think you really need to stop thinking that VZW is the best and that everyone else will stand still. I'd love a pair of those red V tinted glasses. Also, if you think LTE will be smooth and everywhere on VZW, I've got a bridge to sell you. I saw their rollout of 1X and it was slow, probably as slow as AT&T's 3G rollout. I use them both and find Verizon's call quality to be subpar and their performance to be as good as AT&T. Not better, not worse but nowhere near the "God Carrier" that people think.
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-30 09:13:00 ·
funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA kudos:5	reply to itguy05 said by itguy05: I've used them both and Verizon's network is not all that. CDMA can and does suck in many circumstances (high usage when voice quality goes in the crapper). Maybe that's why VZW's voice quality is so poor. I've often wondered if that was a VZW thing or just the state of wireless in the USA (or world). -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-30 09:59:09 ·
funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA kudos:5	reply to itguy05 said by itguy05: I use them both and find Verizon's call quality to be subpar and their performance to be as good as AT&T. Not better, not worse but nowhere near the "God Carrier" that people think. Who here is saying that? -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-30 10:08:10 ·
kyler13 Is your fiber grounded? join:2006-12-12 Arnold, MD	reply to itguy05 said by itguy05: They are all based off of CDMA which has a whole different network tuning, cell spacing and placement, and other requirements than GSM. Verizon has the advantage in that they have already built and tuned their system for a CDMA based technology. They have lots of experience with it. I'd love to see how you think AT&T can "barely afford to upgrade their network". If you look at the stats, AT&T spends just as much as Verizon in network upgrades per year. They do have the disadvantage in that they have to support GSM, UMTS, and LTE but if they are smart, they will do what they did to the TDMA/Analog customers a few years ago. I think you really need to stop thinking that VZW is the best and that everyone else will stand still. I'd love a pair of those red V tinted glasses. Also, if you think LTE will be smooth and everywhere on VZW, I've got a bridge to sell you. I saw their rollout of 1X and it was slow, probably as slow as AT&T's 3G rollout. I use them both and find Verizon's call quality to be subpar and their performance to be as good as AT&T. Not better, not worse but nowhere near the "God Carrier" that people think. Wideband CDMA does not have nearly the same coverage area as CDMA2000/EVDO, period. I know it's not GSM, but it suffers from the same issue of increased need for infrastructure. That costs AT&T more. Dollar for dollar comparison of investment between Verizon and AT&T is worthless. I'm sure it'll take years for Verizon to get LTE smoothly rolled out and I'm sure there will be growing pains. What I'm not sure of is where you got the idea I think it's like flipping a switch. I do know that getting a head start on building the network will help, since AT&T has stated they'll be starting a year later. With respect to network quality, your opinion and my opinion matter only to our personal experiences. The statistics speak for themselves nationwide. There will always be places where AT&T is better, but on average, Verizon seems to have the edge. FYI, I know where you're located and I'm well aware that AT&T was the first mobile network in central PA so it's more mature. I spent time in State College for a few years and AT&T was the only carrier available.
	to forum · permalink · 2009-07-30 13:02:08 ·

Verizon App Store To Block Bandwidth-Intensive Apps > And the issue here is . . . ?

Re: And the issue here is . . . ?