The other day AT&T began crowing that the company's wireless network was the "most reliable," even though the majority of recent studies on network performance (including RootMetrics and PC Magazine) actually show Verizon's network is usually the most reliable (trhough your mileage will obviously vary geographically). The new ad campaign has apparently annoyed Verizon, who took out a full page ad in the Wall Street Journal protesting that their claims of reliability are "not a hollow claim...or a slogan...or a fancy ad campaign." Oddly they don't really directly dispute AT&T's claims, even though (for now) the data is in their favor. Granted none of this marketing bravado makes much of a difference at this point, given network coverage claims are all inflated, and every carrier now claims they offer the nation's "largest 4G network."
While I use AT&T LTE because it's free through work, I can tell you from personal experience it is not the most reliable, Verizon is better and most people in my area seem to agree. Both overcharge, though when comparing the two companies for my personal usage, AT&T is actually a bit cheaper, Verizon charges even more than AT&T.
Pretty unlikely. A 3rd party would have to come up with some sort of subspace transmitter for their phones and take half of each of their customers. Pretty much there is no way they will ever merge to become a monopoly. -- I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.
Coke vs Pepsi. They are already an oligopoly using Bertrand Competition which pretty much has the same pricing effects, there is just the illusion of competition.
They are both brown, made w/ HFCS, cost the same, have stupid ads, come in 2L, and are in every grocery store. Move on.
Of course if you live in the NE corridor you know 100% that Verizon is better than AT&T. I can't remember the last time a call dropped. However my AT&T counterparts will sit next to me on the phone and voila it drops ALL the time. NYC and AT&T forget it but is much better in the last year. Verizon has high floor issues in midtown tho. It's not perfect.
In any case we s**t on TMO and Sprint, but they were left to AWS and PCS scraps not juicy low frequency so their networks will never cover as much as the big two. Its like you let them play football, but without protection gear....
In any case we s**t on TMO and Sprint, but they were left to AWS and PCS scraps not juicy low frequency so their networks will never cover as much as the big two.
Sprint is rolling out 800Mhz voice now and 800LTE later this year. They should be competitive with ATT/VZW coverage (outside rural areas) within a year and will exceed them in capacity. Never say never.
oh yeah. Old Nextel. I never thought they would get those towers shut down. Touche... Of course TMO is still on the outside. I would love Sprint to air things out a little. 3-ways are always more interesting.... If they could free up some upper UHF for TMO and the game will be afoot.
Sprint will be in good shape by next year if they can execute. Softbank $16B boost should increase chances. Tmob's only chance for lower band appears to be 600Mhz auction, and that may be years away before they can deploy.
Last I knew Verizon was the one with all the lte outages, att doesn't need to report am lte outage as it falls back to "4g" I won't switch I'm still unlimited and so far att hasn't forced me off. Also I can't live without browsing and taking at the same time I use it daily. But that's my two cents.
2013-Jul-23 4:34 pm: ·
Hall Premium,MVM join:2000-04-28 Germantown, OH kudos:2
Although it varies by location, Verizon's LTE is overloaded in some key markets, and is paper thin in many places. In many places, AT&T's network is much denser, with LTE on nearly every tower.
I think the reality is that Verizon's CDMA voice is technically the most reliable (although it sounds like crap), but AT&T's data is better. Of course that's a nationwide average, and both carriers have their strong and weak markets.