| reply to morbo
Re: One dimensional thinking You are suggesting that consumers are conscious of a difference in coverage needed, but I'm suggesting consumers are ignorant to the multidimensional aspects of RF engineering, that Verizon knows of this consumer ignorance, and marketed accordingly.
Ignorance is bliss, as Verizon would suggest. And hey, I am not even using AT&T Wireless. Just that I know a little something about cellular RF engineering and can observe the common consumer. |
|
 RRedlineRated RPremium
join:2002-05-15
Williamsport, PA | said by GhostDoggy:Ignorance is bliss, as Verizon would suggest. And hey, I am not even using AT&T Wireless. Just that I know a little something about cellular RF engineering and can observe the common consumer. Verizon has better 3G coverage than AT&T does. I'm not sure what ignorance has to do with a fact such as that.
It sounds like you work for AT&T.
--
One nation, under Zod! |
|
|
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | reply to GhostDoggy
So you're saying that capacity is as important as/ore important than coverage? Well, Verizon beats AT&T there too. |
|
 dmeyer
join:2002-08-14
Austin, TX | In certain geographic areas that is true. However, the opposite is very much true in certain areas as well. That is the fact. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Welcome to the world of YMMV. However Verizon talked about 3G coverage in their ads, so they're fine. |
|
| reply to RRedline
I travel for work, and use a smart phone. For most people, the smart phone collects email automatically, and we just read it when we get a chance.
For this purpose, the difference between 2G and 3G connections is meaningless. I was camping for three days two weeks ago, in the boonies. I had one (2G) bar on my phone, but was able to receive and send email with no problem. Speed is just not an issue.
On the rare occasions that I use the web browser - maybe to check the weather radar, or check in for my flight - I hope for 3G, so I don't grow old waiting. But, that's rare.
At home I have a need for speed, but for smart phone email, I don't. |
|
RRedlineRated RPremium
join:2002-05-15
Williamsport, PA | said by jimness000:For this purpose, the difference between 2G and 3G connections is meaningless. I was camping for three days two weeks ago, in the boonies. I had one (2G) bar on my phone, but was able to receive and send email with no problem. Speed is just not an issue. And what about people in areas where they barely have ANY data speeds at all? Between my hometown and the town I work in, I am very lucky just to be able to send/receive email. I get anywhere from 0 to 100 kbps (and it's not at all uncommon to be at 0).
--
One nation, under Zod! |
|
| reply to RRedline
The red on the map, is it purely EVDO (3G) or 1xRTT? How much is 3G and how much is 1xrtt. As far as i know since i used it every in DC, when you fall to 1Xrtt, it doesnt fall back to 3G. Now you might not be experiencing that in voice but in data, we do all the time.... |
|
| reply to RRedline
AT&T coverage is just as good as Verizon in the city where I live. I don't care how many more places Verizon has 3G coverage if I spend 99% of my time in the same place that has AT&T coverage.
It may be great that Verizon has coverage in Backwoods Alabama, and AT&T doesn't, but that will never make one iota of difference to many, many people.
The point that Ghostdoggy is trying to make is that for many, many customers the extra coverage doesn't mean squat. In that respect, "better" coverage is immaterial. I'll take an iPhone over any crippled Verizon phone ANY day. |
|
