 |
 | | | Re: ATT is way ahead Sprint is busy building their WiMax Network. Which they're actually head even with only a few markets open. They're still ahead and have prove they are clearly the winners that care about rebuilding. | |
|
| | glinc
join:2009-04-07
New York, NY | Re: ATT is way ahead Wrong. Sprint is not building their WiMax Network....its the cable companies that are financing it and building it. | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by hottboiinnc:Sprint is busy building their WiMax Network. Which they're actually head even with only a few markets open. They're still ahead and have prove they are clearly the winners that care about rebuilding. Sprint isn't building anything, Clearwire is, and they have only upgraded one of they handfull of pre-wimax markets to wimax, this standard and this company are dead. The wimax standard is going to be popular as Motorola Canopy. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
 ·WOW Internet and..
·Time Warner Cable
| Re: ATT is way ahead Sprint has money invested in the network. They may not be building it on their name but it is also their network.
And Moto Canopy is a great product and widely used. This is the only country that isn't using WiMAX. Instead they're waiting on LTE to see if it works in the field. The same as this country has done with GSM. | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead Ignore people who only see the us as the world.
Wimax is in use in every country even South America and Africa where the infrastructure to support anything else is just not there yet.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: ATT is way ahead said by BosstonesOwn:Ignore people who only see the us as the world. Wimax is in use in every country even South America and Africa where the infrastructure to support anything else is just not there yet. Every country? sure
Fixed or Mobile?
Again, WiMAX's market will never be anything more than a standardized version of Motorola Canopy. They haven't even agreeded on the VOIP system for circuit switched calls over WiMAX yet. How is a handset going to work on WiMAX unless each WiMAX provider has its own Softphone Software you have to run on the handset?
Oh, and what about WiMAX's spectrum bands? where EVERY COUNTRY AND CARRIER USES A UNIQUE BAND, and the standard has no concept of which bands to use, anything under 66ghz is fine with them.
A WiMAX client hardware is effectivly locked to a carrier by the bands its supports. LTE has its bands already defined, so your not going to see handsets with bands that fit inside an analog TV channel or a walkie talkie channel or a satellite communications channel or whatever license they were able to get their bribe from the local court house since the country doesn't have a functioning FCC.
And LTE already won the PR war, once it has the support of the established carriers, your going to have world roaming with LTE, try that with WiMAX.
And what about all the different WiMAX flavors such as WiBRO and other pre-WiMAX standards? Is there any industry entity responsible for testing WiMAX chipsets from different manufacturers together?
"I registered my MAC address, why do I have no bars?"
"Sir, your MAC address indicates you have a Motorola client adapter, our network requires Alvarion client adapters sold by us, any others we can not offer support with, I am going to transfer you to sales so you may purchase our recommended adapter" | |
|
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by patcat88:said by BosstonesOwn:Ignore people who only see the us as the world. Wimax is in use in every country even South America and Africa where the infrastructure to support anything else is just not there yet. Every country? sure Fixed or Mobile? Again, WiMAX's market will never be anything more than a standardized version of Motorola Canopy. They haven't even agreeded on the VOIP system for circuit switched calls over WiMAX yet. How is a handset going to work on WiMAX unless each WiMAX provider has its own Softphone Software you have to run on the handset? Oh, and what about WiMAX's spectrum bands? where EVERY COUNTRY AND CARRIER USES A UNIQUE BAND, and the standard has no concept of which bands to use, anything under 66ghz is fine with them. A WiMAX client hardware is effectivly locked to a carrier by the bands its supports. LTE has its bands already defined, so your not going to see handsets with bands that fit inside an analog TV channel or a walkie talkie channel or a satellite communications channel or whatever license they were able to get their bribe from the local court house since the country doesn't have a functioning FCC. And LTE already won the PR war, once it has the support of the established carriers, your going to have world roaming with LTE, try that with WiMAX. And what about all the different WiMAX flavors such as WiBRO and other pre-WiMAX standards? Is there any industry entity responsible for testing WiMAX chipsets from different manufacturers together? "I registered my MAC address, why do I have no bars?" "Sir, your MAC address indicates you have a Motorola client adapter, our network requires Alvarion client adapters sold by us, any others we can not offer support with, I am going to transfer you to sales so you may purchase our recommended adapter" You do know that the wimax gear is almost like wifi right ? it can use multiple channels and auto tune to the channel.
depending on the country where it is in use the adapter will be specific , just like wifi.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: ATT is way ahead said by BosstonesOwn:You do know that the wimax gear is almost like wifi right ? it can use multiple channels and auto tune to the channel. depending on the country where it is in use the adapter will be specific , just like wifi. The only thing WiMAX has in common with Wifi is ethernet frames, having a point to multipoint architecture, and being wireless clients around a base station, and being assigned under the IEEE 802 standard family. Thats about it.
WiMAX is related to Token Ring, as Bluetooth is ISDN Ethernet AKA IsoEthernet.
Wifi uses a single frequency band, 2.4 ghz.
All wifi chips are capable of the full wifi band, firmware selects the particular channel. The channels are in linear order.
»www.radio-electronics.com/info/w···idth.php
The same circuit and antenna will work for all wifi channels.
Totally different story with WiMAX, try comparing a DBS/Dish Network/DirecTv LNB/radio/receiver to CB Radio, try to make the same chip/circuit and the same antenna work on both frequencies. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead the newer wimax chips also can take in any channel in the wimax range.
the only difference is the antenna and how the adapter is set up.
I used wimax in Colombia and Australia for almost a year. I also used wimax in France for 4 months.
The same wimax adapter from Colombia worked in Australia , Even though Colombia was 5.8 and 5.9 while Australia was using 2.8 to 3.2 , thats an awful big hop. And yes the antennas did need to be changed. But that was because I had beta equipment. Yes I worked on wimax for many carriers.
The newest wimax gear can go anywhere in the world. Motorola's USBW 100 is a prime example , it is a usb thumbstick that can recieve wimax any where in the world. I have one sitting on my desk in front of me that was given to me by the clearwire engineers.
And btw , the handsets treat the wimax signal as data only. The handsets have sip settings to back end it to the sip call servers in the carriers data center. Once the call is actually acked , it is treated just like a voip call over sip.
I work with this stuff daily 
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Im very intrested in waht u have said, i need ur help i was in colombia they use sim cards and they have this think that they can open all the chanels or bands to use with what ever carrier.. just bye the sim card for the carrier and muala u have service,well i live here in us i have verizon and want to now wich phone i can bye that would work to open the bands so it can be used in colombia,,so i can use there sim card,instead of paying roaming | |
|
| | | | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by latino :
Im very intrested in waht u have said, i need ur help i was in colombia they use sim cards and they have this think that they can open all the chanels or bands to use with what ever carrier.. just bye the sim card for the carrier and muala u have service,well i live here in us i have verizon and want to now wich phone i can bye that would work to open the bands so it can be used in colombia,,so i can use there sim card,instead of paying roaming
use a tigo sim card in a verizon world phone , just call them and tell them you want the unlock code for it. Or buy a gsm phone that is unlocked and swap sim cards with either tmobile or at&t and tigo.
I actually can't use my tigo card in the us and im pissed , their so damn cheap it would run me about the same bill i have now.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: ATT is way ahead i like the iphone 3g can i unlock this 1 to use with verizon at&t ,tigo & more, but as i c hear att is the best service? & how can i unlock it here in US or theres a web site,thanx for ur prompt reply | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by thanx :
i like the iphone 3g can i unlock this 1 to use with verizon at&t ,tigo & more, but as i c hear att is the best service? & how can i unlock it here in US or theres a web site,thanx for ur prompt reply
u can use it on at&t and get it unlocked for use with tigo.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | | Sprint will eventually move their wireless business to LTE (voice + data). I'd bet money on it. | |
|
| | |  DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
 ·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by bartolo5:Sprint will eventually move their wireless business to LTE (voice + data). I'd bet money on it. .
They are going to have to , they will have no roaming partners. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | HAHA. They don't even have much of a 3G network. In my state between Verizon, Sprint an at&t, at&t has the smallest coverage. About 98-99% of the people in my state can get Verizons 3G coverage. I'll see Verizon's 4G here YEARS before at&t bothers to offer it. | |
|
| |  jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | Re: ATT is way ahead said by BF69:HAHA. They don't even have much of a 3G network. In my state between Verizon, Sprint an at&t, at&t has the smallest coverage. About 98-99% of the people in my state can get Verizons 3G coverage. I'll see Verizon's 4G here YEARS before at&t bothers to offer it. Do you also blame the sun for not shining on your city as much as it does in San Diego? Sprint has a great 3G network, but it's not the best everywhere. The same can be said for all of the major wireless carriers. | |
|
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: ATT is way ahead said by jmn1207:said by BF69:HAHA. They don't even have much of a 3G network. In my state between Verizon, Sprint an at&t, at&t has the smallest coverage. About 98-99% of the people in my state can get Verizons 3G coverage. I'll see Verizon's 4G here YEARS before at&t bothers to offer it. Do you also blame the sun for not shining on your city as much as it does in San Diego? Sprint has a great 3G network, but it's not the best everywhere. The same can be said for all of the major wireless carriers. Well as a potential customer yeah it kind of matters if a company has coverage in my area or not. Besides it a FACT that almost EVERYWHERE Verizon has better coverge. Try looking at a coverage map.
If you can see the map the yellow is Verizon 3G the orange is where there is Verizon and at&t 3G the red is at&t 3G only areas. I see far more yellow than red. | |
|
| | | | jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | Re: ATT is way ahead Yes, and you were making disparaging comments regarding Sprint's coverage area, and I told you that Sprint has excellent 3G coverage. Sprint has the most CDMA roaming agreements, and an agreement with Verizon is included. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Interestingly enough, I have a sprint PDA 3G phone and a verizon 3G phone, and in the two towns in Tennessee I spend most of my time in (pop less than 30k), SPRINT was the first carrier to offer EVDO by about 3 months in both cities, beating out verizon. AT&T , heh, they just recently got EDGE here. | |
|
| | | |  DragasoniWe're All Mad HerePremium
join:2001-12-14
Palm Bay, FL
·Earthlink Cable ..
| Thank you, I can't stand GSM providers! They always try to imply they have the biggest and the best, but the truth is CDMA trumps GSM, especially in voice quality. I want to shoot myself when people call me that have AT&T or T-Mobile phones, they sound like total crap. GSM is tinny, picks up a ton of background noise, drops constantly, it's generally sub par in my opinion.
And don't try to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about; I had a T-Mobile company phone along side my Alltel phone for 3 years. Alltel won hands down with signal, voice quality, and internet speeds. My realtor had a iPhone; I couldn't even understand him half the time, and his phone dropped every 5 minutes. Needless to say, I usually just communicated with him via SMS, because at least that worked.
-Dragasoni-
--
»www.dragasoni.com | |
|
| | | | |  tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: ATT is way ahead Do you know what effects codecs, compression, half-rate/full-rate, etc.. can have? How about what companies do when they have very limited spectrum in a given area? Or when they have tower congestion? The building-penetration abilities of the various frequency bands? It doesn't look like it.
The GSM/CDMA debate is pointless unless you take into account the countless differences that also contribute to call quality (or lack thereof).
You know, like how VZW is mostly 850mhz, while Sprint and TMO are 1900mhz, and ATT is a mix of both. Or how ATT uses a half-rate voice codec while TMO uses a full-rate voice codec. Or that TMO and Sprint typically have more towers (thanks to their 1900mhz usage) in urban areas than ATT and VZW do.
Frequency bands and codecs have far more to do with signal quality, nationwide coverage, and call quality than GSM/CDMA does. You'll see this when LTE rolls out. Everyone will use LTE, but you'll still notice substantial network differences due to codecs, frequency bands, and tower buildout.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara | |
|
| |
| | | | Re: ATT is way ahead said by swintec:Sprint is busy keeping quiet and silently pulling ahead. I believe they have some markets where there 4G is already deployed. Say what you will about there support, but there technical side has always been a night and day difference. Um yeah okay. Keep telling yourself that. Sprint is a joke and WiMax won't save them. | |
|
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: ATT is way ahead said by SprintSucks :said by swintec:Sprint is busy keeping quiet and silently pulling ahead. I believe they have some markets where there 4G is already deployed. Say what you will about there support, but there technical side has always been a night and day difference. Um yeah okay. Keep telling yourself that. Sprint is a joke and WiMax won't save them. I'm waiting for Sprint to announce they are switching to LTE. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Comcast
1 edit | I really hate when people talk out of their butt holes... anyway... why don't we all just freaken way to see what the future has in store for us.
I've used WiMax while visiting the Dominican Republic and this was 2 years ago.
But anyway, with all these freaken caps and metered billing that companies want to impose on customers, do we all think that a super fast/ultra portable/highly available connection is going to be worth anyway... Yes the bandwidth will be there, but the crappy caps and overages will keep everyone far from really enjoying them.
So FCK Verizon, FCK ATT, FCK Sprint and FCK TMo... Oh and to hell with WiMax & LTE! | |
|
| |
1 edit | Sprint support just plain sucks.
Even on the business side. | |
|
| | | said by DaveDude:ATT is already GSM, so there is no conversion, they just follow the GSM upgrade path to LTE. So ATT can keep UMTS for a long while. Verizon has to completely rebuild their network running a cdma network, with a GSM(LTE) network along side for quite awhile. They will suffer exactly like ATT, and Cingular did when they converted from tdma to GSM. ATT is going to be the winner for a while. Oh Where is sprint ? The question of who will be better or faster will not be a question of who has the "better network". Since carriers each have different signal strengths in different areas its going to be hit or miss. In today's wireless industry there could be 2 people either from the same company or different companies (most likely from different companies) where 1 person gets a good signal in one area and the other doesn't and in another area its visa versa. There is no "AT&T is better so I will stick with them" phrases. Try a carrier in your area, if you get good signal, then stick with them, else switch. In your 30 day trial you should be able to at least see if you get constant dropped calls or no signal in your house. | |
|
| | DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by k1ll3rdr4g0n:said by DaveDude:ATT is already GSM, so there is no conversion, they just follow the GSM upgrade path to LTE. So ATT can keep UMTS for a long while. Verizon has to completely rebuild their network running a cdma network, with a GSM(LTE) network along side for quite awhile. They will suffer exactly like ATT, and Cingular did when they converted from tdma to GSM. ATT is going to be the winner for a while. Oh Where is sprint ? There is no "AT&T is better so I will stick with them" phrases. Try a carrier in your area, if you get good signal, then stick with them, else switch. In your 30 day trial you should be able to at least see if you get constant dropped calls or no signal in your house. Well i am not saying ATT has a better network or anything like that and i agree with you. But ATT isnt going to have the growing pains of going LTE, that Verizon is going to have to do. ATT will spend alot less going LTE, then Verizon.
--
They Live... We Sleep...
“Spreading the wealth around” never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by DaveDude:Verizon has to completely rebuild their network running a cdma network, with a GSM(LTE) network along side for quite awhile. They will suffer exactly like ATT, and Cingular did when they converted from tdma to GSM. ATT is going to be the winner for a while. Oh Where is sprint ? Its guaranteed Qualcomm will build a hybrid CDMA/LTE chipset. »www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2···hip.html
So There will be no ATT style TDMA to GSM problems, but im sure the typical 3g to 2g handoff call drop will be everywhere. | |
|
| | DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by patcat88:said by DaveDude:Verizon has to completely rebuild their network running a cdma network, with a GSM(LTE) network along side for quite awhile. They will suffer exactly like ATT, and Cingular did when they converted from tdma to GSM. ATT is going to be the winner for a while. Oh Where is sprint ? Its guaranteed Qualcomm will build a hybrid CDMA/LTE chipset. » www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2···hip.htmlSo There will be no ATT style TDMA to GSM problems, but im sure the typical 3g to 2g handoff call drop will be everywhere. Its still 2 networks, cdma and LTE. So they have to maintain dual networks, a cdma one, and a LTE one. ATT has a single GSM>UMTS>LTE network.
--
They Live... We Sleep...
“Spreading the wealth around” never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|
| | | Verizon won’t have to rebuild their existing network. That is a myth spread by the number 2 wireless carrier. LTE is a totally different standard from CDMA and GSM. No matter what technology a company uses for voice they will be able to build and run a LTE network. And sprint is already live with their 4G. So It looks like ATT will be in third place when I comes to an all I{ network. | |
|
| | DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: ATT is way ahead said by SHABAZZ:Verizon won’t have to rebuild their existing network. That is a myth spread by the number 2 wireless carrier. LTE is a totally different standard from CDMA and GSM. No matter what technology a company uses for voice they will be able to build and run a LTE network. And sprint is already live with their 4G. So It looks like ATT will be in third place when I comes to an all I{ network. Nope, LTE is the exact upgrade path of 3gpp. Check it out at wiki. It isnt new and its exact prescribed path of GSM.
--
They Live... We Sleep...
“Spreading the wealth around” never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|
| | | | | Re: ATT is way ahead You are wrong! It still requires putting up new equipment in towers, regardless of whether you are a GSM or CDMA provider. It's not like AT&T can flip a switch and a tower suddenly becomes LTE.
The cost & time for verizon to deploy LTE is roughly on par with AT&T deploying LTE... actually, since Verizon already owns/leases more tower space than AT&T (and is about to acquire alltel), it'll probably be cheaper/faster for Verizon to deploy LTE!
Furthermore, the difference in costs for the handsets will also be minimal. Since much of this service will be in spectrum outside of the normal 800AB/PCS bands you need very complex or multiple radios in both GSM and CDMA handsets! Much like UMTS/HSDPA operates now. Verizon has already started offering dual mode GSM/CDMA handsets.
There will be no "growing pains" here. Verizon will just offer dual mode LTE/EVDO radios in their phones and roll out the LTE network as a normal extension of their current EVDO network (starting from major markets and moving out just like they did with EVDO). This is no different than AT&T offering a GSM/HSDPA/LTE handset. The consumer will never notice the difference in either case!
As for the current state of comparison, it's not even remotely close! Anyone that tells you otherwise has not actually used the products extensively. I had an AT&T smartphone for a while and a verizon data card (built into my laptop) while traveling the country last year. Verizon had 3G data service in areas where AT&T couldn't even get voice service, much less edge or 3G! The map posted above is no lie. AT&T data really is a complete joke in my experience. Don't expect to get reliable AT&T 3G data anywhere that is 5 minutes outside of a major metro area! Edge coverage is a bit better, but still doesn't come close to verizon evdo, much less 1xrtt coverage!
For a short part of my travels, I even tried a 3G option globetrotter data card (like $50 off e-bay) with my AT&T sim. In those tests the verizon data was ALWAYS faster than the 3G AT&T data by a significant margin.
I've actually used both data networks extensively for work around the US, in real-world conditions. The gulf between verizon data and AT&T data is so absurdly vast that I cannot imagine anyone favorably comparing both. There is no doubt in my mind that if you want data in the USA, the only real option is Verizon CDMA... (or Sprint which supposedly has really good data roaming agreements with verizon) | |
|
| | | Verizon won’t have to rebuild their existing network. That is a myth spread by the number 2 wireless carrier. LTE is a totally different standard from CDMA and GSM. No matter what technology a company uses for voice they will be able to build and run a LTE network. And sprint is already live with their 4G. So It looks like ATT will be in third place when I comes to an all I{ network. | |
|
| | | | Re: ATT is way ahead Sorry I hit submit twice | |
|
|
1 edit | edit: ^what shabazz said | |
|
| | | not rely go find a coverage map of where you can use you 3g device | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| I was tapped to work with this project as a contractor.
There is no rebuilding of the network , they will be adding antennas to the tower and adding the handler for billing. The data back haul is already there. And so is most of the gear they need.
This won't cost them as much to upgrade as you think. With the quad band and even hex band phones now moving into testing , the cdma network will remain and lte will be built on top of it.
Verizon will not be going full blown gsm , they are not stupid enough to , brew app purchases alone make it crazy to try and swap to gsm.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
|  NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | said by DaveDude:ATT is already GSM, so there is no conversion, they just follow the GSM upgrade path to LTE. So ATT can keep UMTS for a long while. Verizon has to completely rebuild their network running a cdma network, with a GSM(LTE) network along side for quite awhile. They will suffer exactly like ATT, and Cingular did when they converted from tdma to GSM. ATT is going to be the winner for a while. Oh Where is sprint ? That's actually wrong. Moving from CDMA to LTE is just as easy as GSM to LTE. In either case both companies will have to carry phones with CDMA/GSM radios and LTE radios.
Second, LTE is being mostly deployed on new spectrum purchased a few years back. I believe this is the 700mhz range. This spectrum is prime for any wireless, but for LTE it will be king. I doubt there will be any LTE in the PCS ranges due to penetration issues. The higher the frequency the less penetration you get.
To make a tower LTE you have to do a few things.
Big data circuit
Install Radios and Antennas
Turn it on..
There's no taking down of any of the existing cellular equipment. In some cases they may take a carrier offline and move the antennas around to give the LTE antenna better placement, but in the end it's going to be highly seamless.
AT&T suffered because they combined at a stage when all their data networks for each company was advanced. Verizon Wireless came about during the CDPD days and the merger was complete long before 1xRTT was being deployed. So in a sense the merged company just builds a new network as the combined company rather than piecing together several networks and hoping it works okay.
So in actuality AT&T's sole benefit for anything is that Verizon will pay higher upfront costs to deploy LTE and drive down the prices for AT&T's late adoption. AT&T's only other benefit is that this time they can make a new network without the burdens of piecing together a merger's worth of mess.
Verizon's benefit is that they will get all the shiny new launch devices, have a mature network by the time AT&T finishes it's trials. AT&T can also kiss those churn figures they're toting because by then Verizon will be the company with the shiny new phones and maybe a iPhone or iNetbook or whatever hot item there is. Companies are probably beating on their doors to get their LTE products on the market sooner rather than later. AT&T will most likely find difficulty getting new devices for HSPA+ if Verizon quickly deploys LTE.
Essentially the next 2 years will be interesting to say the least.
--
Play a Death Knight?
www.theebonhold.com | |
|
| | RE: ATT is way ahead verizon may have to spend more, but they have the billions more to spend. they invest over $5billion every year in the network. i live in a very small town outside of albany like 30 miles near the mass/vt border and i have full VERIZON 3G coverage that was just installed last sept.. ATT has "0" bars. we all used to have att because it semi worked in the area, we called and complained. we told them that we wanted them to put their antennas on the verizon tower or we were swtiching carriers. well guess what. we all switched carriers. and we all are WAY happier now. the VZW network has more coverage and speed in the Capital Region Metropolitain Area.
which network has 86 million people? oh yea thats right. VERIZON. | |
|
| | | Re: RE: ATT is way ahead said by techguy518 :verizon may have to spend more, but they have the billions more to spend. they invest over $5billion every year in the network.
AT&T spends just as much on their network. They just don't brainwash you into believing the BS that they have "The Network". If anything, Verizon is the NOTwork. quote:
which network has 86 million people? oh yea thats right. VERIZON. Because they BOUGHT ALLTEL. Not because they are better. | |
|
 baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Does anyone here have pudding? Because that is where the proof is.
Verizon, get the iPhone contract, and get LTE out faster than WiMAX and other companies, and you shall rule the world... (the wireless world) | |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL Reviews:
·voip.ms
| Unless ATT does things a lot differently.... with HSPA deployments than their efforts with 3G, I'll have more confidence in VZ's upgrades. Honestly, I don't know what ATT did to cripple 3G deployments here, but it's frustrating to have significantly better 3G experiences elsewhere (UK, Ireland, even Mexico) than here in the states.
--
Jeff Howe
Jeff's Blog - »www.jeffhowe.net/Jeffhowe.net/Blog/Blog.html | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
 kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | Really? Did the dude really just brag about killing the planet just a little bit more by driving a quarter of a million needless miles? Why? so they can make the dubious claim of being "america's best network"?
I'll gladly take a few dropped calls if it means our planet gets to live a little longer.
--
»www.Digium.com | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
approval from:
kapil 
| Depends on how much you want to pay Sprint has the best price to performance ratio of all of the carriers. They offer a great product for a fair price. Their retail technical support sucks (high school rejects), but if you can get past that, the 3G coverage is the BEST in my area.
When looking at a recent 10 line small business contract for a friend, we compared ATT, Sprint, Verizon and US Cellular. Sprint was more than $100 cheaper per month on just the voice package alone. Once we added in data Sprint was over $200/month cheaper than ANY of the other carriers.
I really don't understand all of the Sprint hate. They seem to be the carrier that is always on the technology bleeding edge and not bleeding their customers with Edge. | |
|
|  en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Depends on how much you want to pay said by moon1234 :
Their retail technical support sucks (high school rejects), but if you can get past that, the 3G coverage is the BEST in my area.
The key is that it is in 'YOUR' area. Sprint's national coverage area where you can obtain service (not roam) is smaller than that of VZW/AT&TW. I use both AT&T and Sprint/Nextel.
I don't hate Sprint or AT&T (actually - I don't _like_ any carrier to be more accurate). I use what's cheapest for me. AT&T here is cheaper - family plan 2 line 550 AT + rollover/weekends for $43/month after taxes/fees.
AT&T audio quality here is better on my HTC Tilt than it is on my Treo 800w. My Nextel BB 7100i actually has a better (more consistent) audio quality than the Treo 800w on Sprint does.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by moon1234 :
Sprint has the best price to performance ratio of all of the carriers. They offer a great product for a fair price. Their retail technical support sucks (high school rejects), but if you can get past that, the 3G coverage is the BEST in my area.
When looking at a recent 10 line small business contract for a friend, we compared ATT, Sprint, Verizon and US Cellular. Sprint was more than $100 cheaper per month on just the voice package alone. Once we added in data Sprint was over $200/month cheaper than ANY of the other carriers.
I really don't understand all of the Sprint hate. They seem to be the carrier that is always on the technology bleeding edge and not bleeding their customers with Edge.
why the sprint hate? tech support blows. I have had a problem with my phones shutting down for two years!!!..i have replaced the phones twice(with different ones) AND now calls are going straight to voicemail 25% of the time even if the phone is on and active? tech support can't be bothered to figure out the issues..as my service worsens..it's becoming time to move..after 12 years.
--
God Blesshttp://www.emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com-- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" | |
|
 BitPremium
join:2009-02-19
00000 | So McAdam claims... ...lets see the raw data.
--
POKE 65495,1 | |
|
| en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: So McAdam claims... poke 1,0
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | Talk is cheap Start doing it and then we will see. | |
|
| | I have 3G data cards for both AT&T and VZW. It's been my experience that while on 3G, AT&T kicks the crap out of VZW.
I have a serious beef with how slow AT&T is deploying 3G. If this is supposed to be a 'natural upgrade path' for GSM, I am scared to see what the upgrade to LTE is going to be like... | |
|
| | | Re: I have 3G data cards for both AT&T and VZW. AT&T is best in your area.
We are beginning to deploy all across the US with an application that requires a static wireless connection.
VZ is out of the loop so far, but Sprint and AT&T are evaluated side by side at every deployment.
We have a very good read on mid-Jersey/NYC area coverage so far.
The coverage data we are starting to acquire should be very interesting.
It's my experience coverage maps aren't worth boo, just wishful thinking. | |
|
|
|  MrMasterjetsetterPremium
join:2000-12-16
St Thomas, VI
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Virgin Mobile Br..
| Re: Verizons arrogance said by Mike_:rant Oh Verizon how ignorant and arrogant you sound. Don't leap before you think. OMG you drove 250k miles and saw better throughput. Better by whos standards? Are there millions of users on this vaporware lte network of yours? No, just you. You've got lots of ground to cover converting an entire national network, while hspa will already be ahead of your game, at '3g' even. How real-world is your test? You'll restrict and cap it to hell just like every other product you offer (save for FiOS [but soon to be]). /rant Oh where do i begin!
1. VZW wireless is capped...just like EVERY wireless carrier
2. LTE is completely separate from HSPA and GSM. Like it was mentioned before, it is a new buildout from ground zero. There is no "upgrade path" to LTE.
3. I might be on AT&T but honestly, just compare coverage areas for AT&T and Verizon (3g and evdo) its a no brainer VZW has better coverage. That and 3G sucks in some cities (like austin).
oh, and FIOS is owned by Verizon not Verizon Wireless.
--
One never notices what has been done; one can only see what remains to be done. -Marie Curie | |
|
| | |
| | | Reviews:
·Verizon Wireless..
| Re: Verizons arrogance My LG Dare tethers and file swaps via Bluetooth. I never hook up a USB cable to get pictures off of it. I even have a stereo Bluetooth headset for it. Actually it is one of the lessor locked up phones I have had in years. As far as internet goes I can go to any URL I please on the Dare and it isn't even a smart phone as long as I don't run out of memory and it takes a pretty stout web page to do that. | |
|
| | | MrMasterjetsetterPremium
join:2000-12-16
St Thomas, VI Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Virgin Mobile Br..
| said by Mike_:Verizon and Verizon wireless are all part of the same parent company No, they are not.
Verizon Wireless is 50% vodofone and 50% Verizon
--
One never notices what has been done; one can only see what remains to be done. -Marie Curie | |
|
| | DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ViaTalk
·Vonage
·Comcast
| said by MrMaster:said by Mike_:rant Oh Verizon how ignorant and arrogant you sound. Don't leap before you think. OMG you drove 250k miles and saw better throughput. Better by whos standards? Are there millions of users on this vaporware lte network of yours? No, just you. You've got lots of ground to cover converting an entire national network, while hspa will already be ahead of your game, at '3g' even. How real-world is your test? You'll restrict and cap it to hell just like every other product you offer (save for FiOS [but soon to be]). /rant O 2. LTE is completely separate from HSPA and GSM. Like it was mentioned before, it is a new buildout from ground zero. There is no "upgrade path" to LTE. I think these people would disagree, Verizon needs to change to a MAP core, from an Ansi core. Therefore they are moving to 3gpp, which is the gsm upgrade path.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3gpp
3GPP should not be confused with 3rd Generation Partnership Project 2 (3GPP2), which specifies standards for another 3G technology based on IS-95 (CDMA), commonly known as CDMA2000.
--
They Live... We Sleep...
“Spreading the wealth around” never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
| |
|
| | Att vs Verizon... who'd a thought... Sorry, but AT&T has Nothing on Verizon's Billing!
(That is sarcasm) | |
|
 HpowerRoflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA
·Charter
| Meh At the end of the day, there isnt that big of a damn difference anyway between who is the better wireless provider. It just varies depending where you are at. It is funny when I see these stupid ads and commercials of how a specific provider has "the best" coverage. Bullshet.
I've had verizon wireless for almost 2 years and I don't really have any complaints. Phone works fine. Their support is not bad. Only had a few dropped calls which is not a big deal as long as it dosen't happen often. I am just waiting to see what 4G is going to be like. I thought of going with an iphone but meh the phone itself just is too slow and doing anything on it online wise takes 1,000,000 years. I always see my friends with their iphones just sitting there waiting so long for a small simple website to load.
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually. | |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| whatever I'm not a absolute expert on this stuff.. but it's my understanding that verizon has serious problems w/ LTE like bandwidth problems.. they’re going to have to drop 850 using for CDMA and switch it to 1900 is what I've heard.. and even then they don't have enough spectrum.. for LTE
LTE is for data networks and there not even planning on using it for voice for years out seems to be what I'm hearing..
Here's what I know.. there are 455 Wimax networks in 135 countries and the one that can be the cheapest and activate the most networks will dominate be it wimax or LTE..
It would probably be a great world if we could have both wimax and LTE because.. then were guaranteed choice for data like we are today.. today's biggest 4G carriers are verizon and sprint.. and while sprint makes up a huge part of it via verizon's now owned "alltel" it's still a big footprint regardless of what others claim.. I've been around this country and lost EVDO w/ sprint rarely..
I also now claim that the world's best EVDO is provided by alltel (not sprint..) because unlike ver$zon you can actually roam on sprint via alltel not to mention ver$zon.. | |
|
|
|
·
·
