tobyTroy Mcclure join:2001-11-13 Seattle, WA
1 recommendation |
toby
Member
2010-Jul-6 3:38 pm
Coverage....Increase the coverage instead please. | |
|
| cp Premium Member join:2004-05-14 Wheaton, IL |
cp
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 3:47 pm
Re: Coverage....they need to do both.
backhaul is pretty crappy in the areas that are already "3g".
coverage is too. so many places i still leech off of edge service in a supposedly 3g area. | |
|
| | tiger72SexaT duorP Premium Member join:2001-03-28 Saint Louis, MO |
tiger72
Premium Member
2010-Jul-8 10:35 am
Re: Coverage.... TMO 3g |
Coverage and speeds work well for me! They upgraded their backhauls a few weeks ago here in Saint Louis. Backhaul at work got upgraded about a month before the bachaul at home (even though my home is in the city, while work is in the 'burbs). HSUPA is sucking, but hey, it's better than ATT! | |
|
| |
| | |
| | |
to stanleycr1
Re: Coverage.... CONCURTmobile seems to forget there overall foot print is far behind for a company of there size all the small time prepaid carriers have the same or better coverage than Tmobile does.. and with them being GSM that does not make it any better. I think Verizon, for there next coverage and signal strength ad aim it @ tmoble instead of ATT. whats the point of 41 or even 21 mbps data traffic in a high populated are if 1 mile away theres no coverage at all. seems counter productive if you ask me.. | |
|
| | | Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2010-Jul-7 2:53 pm
Re: Coverage.... CONCURsaid by buddahbless:Tmobile seems to forget there overall foot print is far behind for a company of there size all the small time prepaid carriers have the same or better coverage than Tmobile does.. and with them being GSM that does not make it any better. I think Verizon, for there next coverage and signal strength ad aim it @ tmoble instead of ATT. whats the point of 41 or even 21 mbps data traffic in a high populated are if 1 mile away theres no coverage at all. seems counter productive if you ask me.. Since T-Mobile only got many of their 3G licenses in late-2008 (due to the slow previous users to get off the frequency), I'd say they're doing a very good job of increasing coverage. | |
|
| en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA |
to toby
T-Mobile 'will' need to increase coverage, or 42Mbps won't mean jack. Going from 16QAM to 64QAM means that you'd better have good signal, or speed won't be much better than HSPA 14.4. I hate to quote Wiki, but.. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPA%2Bquote: At cell edge and even at half the distance to the cell edge there may only be slight increase compared with 14.4 Mbit/s HSDPA unless a wider channel than 5 MHz is used.
| |
|
| wdoa join:2001-10-16 Spencer, MA |
to toby
T-Mobile needs to beef up their coverage, but even where they have coverage, if you are outside of the city limits you will be lucky to have EDGE, much less 3g. Much of T-Mobile's network is still languishing in GPRS | |
|
| |
to toby
They seriously need to increase the coverage to match ATT. At my home I get the dreaded x on my signal strength but, when I force it to use ATT I get full strength.
Here in Hickory NC we only get 3G in a small 5 mile radius in the center of the city which is pretty much useless since no one lives here only businesses. That's the only 3G we have for about 100 miles in any direction. | |
|
| tiger72SexaT duorP Premium Member join:2001-03-28 Saint Louis, MO |
to toby
sell them some 850 or 700 spectrum and they'll no doubt be happy to. | |
|
|
BackhaulWonder what kind of pipes they would need at the towers? 100mbps?, or i wonder if we are takling 1gbps? | |
|
| Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 4:12 pm
Re: Backhaulsaid by cooldude9919:Wonder what kind of pipes they would need at the towers? 100mbps?, or i wonder if we are takling 1gbps? Probably 100mbps, or multiple 100mbps lines. | |
|
| 1 edit |
to cooldude9919
Clearwire is now doing 100Mbps backhaul in some places and says they'll need 500Mbps in future just to sustain many users at about 6-10Mbps. I'm able to peak to about 15Mbps but they market it "up to 6Mbps with bursts to 10". » Clearwire adding backhaulEven if the radio could be capable of 1Gbit it means nothing if the backhaul and spectrum aren't there. Tmob will use it as a marketing thing but they won't likely deliver it to many users at once. I wonder if they even have enough spectrum. I do think it's great that Tmob pushes the envelope, even if it's just a card to play. | |
|
| | |
Re: Backhaulsaid by xenophon:Clearwire is now doing 100Mbps backhaul in some places and says they'll need 500Mbps in future just to sustain many users at about 6-10Mbps. I'm able to peak to about 15Mbps but they market it "up to 6Mbps with bursts to 10". » Clearwire adding backhaulEven if the radio could be capable of 1Gbit it means nothing if the backhaul and spectrum aren't there. Tmob will use it as a marketing thing but they won't likely deliver it to many users at once. I wonder if they even have enough spectrum. I do think it's great that Tmob pushes the envelope, even if it's just a card to play. T-Mobile and Sprint both have coverage problems. Great they both have speed. Now they need network coverage like VZW and AT&T. | |
|
| | | Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 6:45 pm
Re: Backhaulsaid by iLive4Fusion:said by xenophon:Clearwire is now doing 100Mbps backhaul in some places and says they'll need 500Mbps in future just to sustain many users at about 6-10Mbps. I'm able to peak to about 15Mbps but they market it "up to 6Mbps with bursts to 10". » Clearwire adding backhaulEven if the radio could be capable of 1Gbit it means nothing if the backhaul and spectrum aren't there. Tmob will use it as a marketing thing but they won't likely deliver it to many users at once. I wonder if they even have enough spectrum. I do think it's great that Tmob pushes the envelope, even if it's just a card to play. T-Mobile and Sprint both have coverage problems. Great they both have speed. Now they need network coverage like VZW and AT&T. Nah, as it's been said before, T-Mobile focuses on the urban areas. Since I practically never leave one, I don't care if T-Mobile increases their 3G coverage. It works fine for me already. Just got to wait for their HSPA+! | |
|
| | | | |
Re: Backhaulsaid by Gbcue:said by iLive4Fusion:said by xenophon:Clearwire is now doing 100Mbps backhaul in some places and says they'll need 500Mbps in future just to sustain many users at about 6-10Mbps. I'm able to peak to about 15Mbps but they market it "up to 6Mbps with bursts to 10". » Clearwire adding backhaulEven if the radio could be capable of 1Gbit it means nothing if the backhaul and spectrum aren't there. Tmob will use it as a marketing thing but they won't likely deliver it to many users at once. I wonder if they even have enough spectrum. I do think it's great that Tmob pushes the envelope, even if it's just a card to play. T-Mobile and Sprint both have coverage problems. Great they both have speed. Now they need network coverage like VZW and AT&T. Nah, as it's been said before, T-Mobile focuses on the urban areas. Since I practically never leave one, I don't care if T-Mobile increases their 3G coverage. It works fine for me already. Just got to wait for their HSPA+! But in a lot of metro area's they suck coverage wise too like Here. | |
|
| | | | | Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA
1 recommendation |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 8:03 pm
Re: BackhaulLooks like T-Mobile's robust 3G covers 'Hoover, AL' fine. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: Backhaulsaid by Gbcue:Looks like T-Mobile's robust 3G covers 'Hoover, AL' fine. Try "West Jefferson, AL 35130 And outdoor's their "slobust" network is "ok" but it's once you step in the building where the fun begins | |
|
| | | | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
to Gbcue
said by Gbcue:Nah, as it's been said before, T-Mobile focuses on the urban areas. And with that attitude they'll be out of business within 10 years. | |
|
| | | | | ArrayListDevOps Premium Member join:2005-03-19 Mullica Hill, NJ |
Re: Backhaulurban areas cover over 90% of the population. | |
|
| | | | | | tiger72SexaT duorP Premium Member join:2001-03-28 Saint Louis, MO |
tiger72
Premium Member
2010-Jul-8 10:38 am
Re: Backhauland their spectrum holdings reinforce that position. It's not a coincidence that the 1900 networks (Sprint and TMO) focus on the cities, while the 850 network (Verizon) is rural.
Physics and economics are amazing things. | |
|
| | | | | |
to 88615298
said by 88615298:said by Gbcue:Nah, as it's been said before, T-Mobile focuses on the urban areas. And with that attitude they'll be out of business within 10 years. I'd give it 5, and AT&T barely made it and they are just now realizing that their previous urban only attitude would drag them down. Well up until this year. | |
|
| | | | ArrayListDevOps Premium Member join:2005-03-19 Mullica Hill, NJ |
to Gbcue
agreed. t-mobile is an urban cellular provider. that is just what they do well. | |
|
| wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace join:2004-08-07 New York, NY |
to cooldude9919
said by cooldude9919:Wonder what kind of pipes they would need at the towers? 100mbps?, or i wonder if we are takling 1gbps? Most wireless providers are extending Ethernet to the cell towers whenever possible. This allows them to very easily upgrade the bandwidth without dropping in a new circuit. If a pure play ethernet circuit is installed then they can go from 100Mbps to 1000Mbps in a matter of minutes. However, if they use an underlying TDM circuit (DS3, OC3, etc) then they are obviously capped out at 45Mbps, 155Mbps, and so on. | |
|
| K3SGM- -... ...- - Premium Member join:2006-01-17 Columbia, PA |
to cooldude9919
said by cooldude9919:Wonder what kind of pipes they would need at the towers? 100mbps?, or i wonder if we are takling 1gbps? This kind of pipe, Zayo Bandwidth. » www.zayo.com/bandwidth/s ··· backhaulIt's dedicated leased fiber Ethernet from tower to switch. In Southeastern PA T-Mobile is installing these cabinets like crazy on all of their 3G sites. | |
|
SlickEnW Premium Member join:2003-01-21 Seattle, WA |
SlickEnW
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 4:04 pm
tmobilewas good people when I had them for 4-5 years before getting my first gen iPhone (unlocked for their network). If that whole spectrum issue wasn't a factor, i'd have an iPhone 4 (factory unlocked) on their network too. The prices were much better than ATT's. | |
|
Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 4:17 pm
Robustness!Wow, T-Mobile's nationwide 3G network is going to be the most robust of any US cellular networks! | |
|
| |
Re: Robustness!said by Gbcue:Wow, T-Mobile's nationwide 3G network is going to be the most robust of any US cellular networks! Not robust, its the smallest nationwide network in the US and will remain that way unless they focus on coverage. AT&T can have a much faster network than T-Mobile if they focused on a handful of market's. | |
|
| | Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA |
Gbcue
Premium Member
2010-Jul-6 6:47 pm
Re: Robustness!said by iLive4Fusion:said by Gbcue:Wow, T-Mobile's nationwide 3G network is going to be the most robust of any US cellular networks! Not robust, its the smallest nationwide network in the US and will remain that way unless they focus on coverage. AT&T can have a much faster network than T-Mobile if they focused on a handful of market's. Nah, as it's been said before, T-Mobile focuses on the urban areas. Since I practically never leave one, I don't care if T-Mobile increases their 3G coverage. It works fine for me already. Just got to wait for their HSPA+! | |
|
| | | |
Re: Robustness!But they don't even cover a lot of metro area's. I mean come on, Sprint has way more 3G coverage than T-Mobile.. | |
|
| | | | tiger72SexaT duorP Premium Member join:2001-03-28 Saint Louis, MO |
tiger72
Premium Member
2010-Jul-8 10:39 am
Re: Robustness!What metro areas aren't covered by TMO 3g? | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: Robustness!said by tiger72:What metro areas aren't covered by TMO 3g? Well not sure if this is considered a Metro area, but freaking Panama City Beach, FL one of FL's hottest tourist attractions are still on GPRS! | |
|
| | | Shack join:2002-01-17 Bloomington, IN |
to Gbcue
It is ridiculous to call a network robust just because it works well in your market. | |
|
| | | |
1 recommendation |
Re: Robustness! No actually it's ridiculous to obsess over coverage in areas you'll never use it and pay hefty monthly fees while you're at it.
Carrier marketing teams got you by the balls and brainwashed into thinking you need to pay more when you really don't.
It's one thing to have poor coverage where you need it and another to preoccupy yourself about coverage in Yellowstone National Park when you spend 99% of your life in Miami, FL.
Speaking of 3G coverage, T-Mobile is not too far behind AT&T in terms of the actual population covered. A few more metro areas and they'll be neck and neck.
| |
|
| The Limit Premium Member join:2007-09-25 Denver, CO |
to Gbcue
Verizon has a vastly superior, robust coverage area compared to T-mobile.
RULE THE AIR. lulz. | |
|
| | ArrayListDevOps Premium Member join:2005-03-19 Mullica Hill, NJ |
Re: Robustness!verizon also has a cap on their data plans. | |
|
|
OMG SO FASTExcept for the part where you have insanely low caps and high prices.
42mbps means nothing if you can only download 500megs/month. 42mbps means nothing if it costs $50/second.
They need to build out in capacity and coverage. Not speed. Make it so there are fewer people per tower. | |
|
| •••• |
|
monk
Anon
2010-Jul-6 9:44 pm
i havei have tmobile and they suck more stuff they want to get you for so who cares | |
|
|
|