 IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1 | AT&T is so far behind....
AT&T LTE Deployment Department |
In a mere 6 months from now, Verizon will have its 3G network completely overlaid by LTE coverage.
As for AT&T... well.... it won't.
Hey AT&T, wake the hell up and give a damn about your network deployment. Before you know it, Sprint and T-Mobile will pass you by.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army |
|
|
|
| Verizon and Sprint don't have a HSPA fallback either. They need LTE alot more than T or T-Mo does. |
|
| reply to IPPlanMan
AT&T is not going to catch Verizon at current pace. By the same token, however, there's no way Sprint or T-Mobile could catch AT&T. Ma Bell has 125 markets, Sprint has 49 (mostly with patchy coverage), T-Mobile has precisely none.
DJ |
|
Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
| reply to IPPlanMan
AT&T's fallback is a farce anyway. What percentage of their users on their network are able to reach over 21+Mb/s?
In numerous speedtest I have conducted in a HSPA+ area, where I actually also had more bars of AT&T, there was no speed difference. During peaks times att comes to a grinding halt. |
|
| AT&T's real problem is that *CALL FAILED*
Oh, sorry. I know how anno- *CALL FAILED*
AT&T should throw a couple of Lincolns toward fixing their drop- *CALL FAILED* |
|
IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1 | reply to Telco
said by Telco:AT&T's fallback is a farce anyway. What percentage of their users on their network are able to reach over 21+Mb/s?
In numerous speedtest I have conducted in a HSPA+ area, where I actually also had more bars of AT&T, there was no speed difference. During peaks times att comes to a grinding halt.
Exactly. Are we expected to believe in six months that AT&T's fallback network will be better than Verizon's primary and completely deployed LTE network, which overlays its entire 3G footprint?
Not buying it AT&T... Not by a mile.
--
"We're going to start at one end of (Fallujah), and we're not going to stop until we get to the other. If there's anybody left when that happens, we're going to turn around and we're going to go back and finish it."
Lt. Col. Pete Newell: 1st Inf. US Army |
|
Reviews:
 ·T-Mobile US
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| reply to Telco
I find myself personally talking to alot of Verizon subs and they breakup and seem to have more issues than AT&T in this area. I also hear alot more complaints about Verizon and T-Mobile than anything else as well. It all depends on where you are I suppose. |
|
| reply to bobjohnson
Isn't the fallback excuse kind of lame now considering that verizons lte coverage far exeeds At&ts 3g now? |
|
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| 
T | 
VZ |
|
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to IPPlanMan
said by IPPlanMan:AT&T is so far behind in its LTE deployment, it's laughable.
Does anyone really care ? Actually - going by their own metrics - I think AT&T is ahead of their LTE deployment schedule 
Of course, for the average user, LTE doesn't really matter much. |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to IPPlanMan
The average person does not care who has the "most" coverage. They only care if there is coverage in their area.
Unless you are someone who lives or often travels outside of large metro areas, who has better coverage is just a marketing hustle. Does anyone really care if Verizon covers 95% of Death Valley and AT&T doesn't?
And a lot of people aren't even on LTE anyway. There are bazillions of 3G devices out there and they are not going poof very soon. By time consumers get around to replacing them, LTE coverage will be a lot better. |
|
