dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
38

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

1 edit

tiger72 to 88615298

Premium Member

to 88615298

Re: Proof is in the pudding (or lack of)

said by 88615298:
said by tiger72:
said by Gdadkins:

If their LTE market deployment rate is like their 3G rate, then I think it would safe to say if you don't have 3G now, you won't have LTE either. Maybe they slowed down their 3G coverage in hopes LTE would provide better range/penetration/coverage....

I have Verizon, so it doesn't bother me either way since I enjoy 3G everywhere I go.
ATT actually has sped back up their 3g rollouts.
Too little too late. My area still doesn't have at&t 3G within 60 miles of me. Verizon's 3G has been here for 3 years. I'll see LTE from Verizon before I see 3G from at&t. Crap like that is why the vast majority of people here have Verizon service even though at&t regular cell service has the same coverage and quality.
I doubt that. Verizon has had the advantage of being able to upgrade its same digital network for the past 15 years. CDMAOne->CDMA2000-> EVDO are all upgrades to the exact same network. ATT (and TMO) have had to overlay their 2g networks with 3g coverage. In essence, Verizon is running one network, and has been running and expanding it for 15 years. ATT is running two. With LTE, Verizon's back at square one just like ATT and TMO were when they rolled out their 3g. They're now forced to overlay their existing network with a brand-spankin new one. New backend. New radios. New frequency.

So, are you more likely to get Verizon LTE than ATT 3g? Maybe. Maybe not. After looking at the map, you probably won't be seeing mobile speeds above 2.6mbps anytime soon by ANY provider - and that's assuming you're even getting good EvDO speeds in the first place.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

At least Verizon is actually doing, and not "sitting back, waiting".. which is a slam to the consumer's face and to the public in general in which it got spectrum from in order TO build out the next gen network.

Don't you see any issue with that?
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin

Member

said by fiberguy2:

At least Verizon is actually doing, and not "sitting back, waiting".. which is a slam to the consumer's face and to the public in general in which it got spectrum from in order TO build out the next gen network.

Don't you see any issue with that?
Who are you and what happened to the real fiberguy?
ssavoy
Premium Member
join:2007-08-16
Dallas, PA

ssavoy to tiger72

Premium Member

to tiger72
For what it's worth, AT&T 3G launched in my area about two months ago and it's consistently significantly faster than Verizon (think...2-2.5x faster). A typical Droid can't suck down more than 800-1000kbps on VZ in this area and I just peaked at 3.4mbps on AT&T.

And honestly I wanted to really see how fast Verizon 3G was in a rural area (full "3G"). Yeah, 125kbps down and 47kbps up. Basically EDGE with a 3G icon.

There's a difference between the 3G icon and actual 3G speeds. So if there's anything I have to say about Verizon, it's that they can easily deploy LTE and not really have "LTE"-like bandwidth to support it.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2 to sonicmerlin

Premium Member

to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin:

said by fiberguy2:

At least Verizon is actually doing, and not "sitting back, waiting".. which is a slam to the consumer's face and to the public in general in which it got spectrum from in order TO build out the next gen network.

Don't you see any issue with that?
Who are you and what happened to the real fiberguy?
lol