BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to BF69
Re: Karl is at it again Then why don't you get a carrier that works? AT&T clearly isn't a good choice in your area. Verizon or a local carrier if they are around would be a better choice.
@WiWavelength: I call it like it is, regardless of who is impacts. If anyone wants to talk data in Manhattan, I'm gonna bash AT&T hardcore. Their network down there is a POS.
They are using all their CLR and PCS, and the SMH and AWS is for LTE. Do you think they would just purposefully not use spectrum when their network has capacity problems in some markets?
@bbeesley: Exactly. They would fall apart.
@sonicmerlin: No one else can afford to build out on the spectrum anyways. Verizon has enough, AT&T needs some more so that they can compete with Verizon. |
| said by BiggA:They are using all their CLR and PCS, and the SMH and AWS is for LTE. Do you think they would just purposefully not use spectrum when their network has capacity problems in some markets? Yes, it helps with their claim of a congested network which helps to justify their prices and "data management" practices.
The numbers are out there, do a little research and see how much they have and how much they actually use. |
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
·Comcast
| Tell me what exactly they are squatting on? You make these claims with nothing to back them up. For example, in the NYC market, AT&T is listed with three PCS blocks, one CLR block, and two SMH blocks. The SMH blocks are in use for LTE (maybe one is, and one will be, not sure), the PCS and CLR is in use for UMTS and GSM.
In my neck of the woods, they have 1 CLR, four PCS (which they use for most HSPA+ traffic), and two SMH. The SMH will eventually be LTE. And what are they squatting on again? |
