dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
AT&T LTE Reaches Green Bay, Tucson
Another Five Upgraded Markets Arrive
by Karl Bode 08:42AM Wednesday Dec 19 2012 Tipped by IPPlanMan See Profile
User IPPlanMan See Profile helpfully writes in to note that AT&T today launched LTE service if five additional cities as the company's deployment picks up pace. According to AT&T the company today launched LTE service in Green Bay, Wisconsin; Springfield, Massachusetts; Tucson, Arizona; Melbourne, Florida; and Oxford, Mississipi. The carrier says Phoenix, Los Angeles, New York, and Salt Lake City also saw improved LTE coverage this week. These launches bring AT&T's launch total to a respectable 125 cities, though still far behind Verizon's 470 market total. AT&T expects to have their LTE deployment completed by the end of 2013. A full breakdown of AT&T's LTE coverage can be found on the AT&T website.

view:
topics flat nest 

Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state

Yawn

They aren't Verizon.

IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

Springfield, MA

I was at the Holyoke Mall AT&T store last Monday and they said that LTE had been turned on in Springfield and Holyoke last Friday.

I went into their store to buy a privacy screen for my iPhone 5 even though I am a Verizon customer. When I bought my Verizon iPhone 4, I bought my privacy screen from AT&T and they put it on for free and it was only $14.99 where Best Buy wants $24.99 plus $7.99 to put it on. Verizon Wireless never did carry privacy screens in their stores.

Those screen protectors are a rip-off, they charge $19.99 for a 5 cent piece of plastic. That is price gouging in my world.

RichInCT

@mycingular.net

No love for Hartford

LTE just south of Hartford, now LTE just north of Hartford. When are they going to light up Hartford county? We desperately need something. Speeds downtown are around 5mbps in the morning, but we are lucky to get 900 kbps by afternoon.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

AT&T is so far behind....


AT&T LTE Deployment Department
AT&T is so far behind in its LTE deployment, it's laughable.

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

bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL

Re: AT&T is so far behind....

Verizon and Sprint don't have a HSPA fallback either. They need LTE alot more than T or T-Mo does.

Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state

Re: AT&T is so far behind....

Isn't the fallback excuse kind of lame now considering that verizons lte coverage far exeeds At&ts 3g now?

bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
·Sprint Mobile Br..

Re: AT&T is so far behind....


T
Click for full size
VZ
Not really... I know if I was picking based on coverage maps I would pick T... To each their own as witnessed by the fact that they both charge the same money and have an equal amount of customers...

Dan Jones

@ubm-us.com
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
Telco

join:2008-12-19
Reviews:
·Callcentric
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.
Oedipus

join:2005-05-09
kudos:1

1 recommendation

Re: AT&T is so far behind....

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*

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1
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

bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
·Sprint Mobile Br..
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.
en103

join:2011-05-02
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
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.
mocycler
Premium
join:2001-01-22
kudos:1
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.

openupshop

join:2000-11-25
Chandler, AZ

Looking Good In Chandler, AZ

Say it ain't so ha ha.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1

Re: Looking Good In Chandler, AZ

Well... There are 125 places you can go in the country to get LTE speed like that from AT&T... or 470 places for LTE speed from Verizon...

Which sounds more appealing to you?
Maniak

join:2008-03-29
Vail, AZ
Reviews:
·Wi-Power
·RuralNet

Re: Looking Good In Chandler, AZ

Having LTE where I live and normally travel to. If I don't have LTE on a trip (think a week) but I do the rest of the time then not having as many cities isn't a deal for me.

For me, Verizon has poor service where I live so the number of cities they cover doesn't matter if they don't cover where I am most of the time.

Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA

AT&T plan on bringing reliable 3G to most of its

major cities?
eco
Premium
join:2001-11-28
Wilmington, DE

.

They also launched it in the part of southern DE that I live in (Lewes). My signal dropped Monday night, came back a minute later with LTE. Speeds aren't quite as good as I get in the Newark/Wilmington area of northern DE. Up there I get about 45 down 25 up. Down here I get about 24 down 12 up. More than enough speed for me though.

MRCURAnon

@comcast.net

Lancaster, PA

AT&T also lit up Lancaster, PA on Tuesday night. Working fantastically well.
Lexcat

join:2001-02-06
Lexington, KY

Lexington, KY

AT&T LTE in Lexington, Kentucky went live as well over the night.