PDA

View Full Version : AT&T Prepares to Launch LTE 4G Network in 5 Cities This Summer




MacRumors
May 25, 2011, 09:28 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/25/att-prepares-to-launch-lte-4g-network-in-5-cities-this-summer/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/05/att_4g_promo.jpg


AT&T today announced (http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=19867&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=31948) that it will launch its next-generation LTE 4G wireless network in five U.S. cities "this summer": Dallas, Houston, Chicago, Atlanta, and San Antonio. An additional ten unnamed markets are planned to see LTE roll out in the second half of the year with AT&T aiming to cover 70 million Americans by the end of the year.AT&T has delivered five mobile broadband speed upgrades in recent years, including our HSPA+ deployment last year. And average nationwide speeds on the AT&T network have increased - more than 40 percent over the past two years alone.

The next network evolution will arrive this summer with the addition of LTE in five markets - Dallas, Houston, Chicago, Atlanta and San Antonio. We plan to add another 10 or more markets in the second half of the year, and cover 70 million Americans with LTE by year-end. We also have plans to add 20 4G devices to our robust device portfolio this year, with some of those being LTE capable.The announcement indicates that AT&T remains on schedule (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/09/16/atandt-looking-to-launch-lte-4g-network-by-mid-2011/) for its LTE rollout and offers the first word on launch markets for the service.

Many observers had been hoping that Apple might include LTE technology in the next iPhone, particularly given rumors that Apple won't be introducing the handset until several months after its usual annual update window, but increasing numbers of reports are indicating that LTE won't make it into the new iPhone, simply because the chips required by Apple won't be available (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/no-apple-suitable-4g-lte-chips-until-early-2012/) until late this year. Apple has stated that the current generation of LTE chips requires handset design compromises that the company is not willing to make.

Article Link: AT&T Prepares to Launch LTE 4G Network in 5 Cities This Summer (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/25/att-prepares-to-launch-lte-4g-network-in-5-cities-this-summer/)



mattwolfmatt
May 25, 2011, 09:30 AM
Nice! I just wish there were some more cities in Texas getting the 4G speeds.

jav6454
May 25, 2011, 09:32 AM
Why just Texas? Why?!


Edit -

Before you quote me, answer is on Post #92 and #93 of this same thread.

machpost
May 25, 2011, 09:33 AM
It would be awesome if they actually made sure their 3G didn't absolutely suck in almost every city before attempting this upgrade.

chrisfromalbany
May 25, 2011, 09:33 AM
ATT is the best service ever..

ToroidalZeus
May 25, 2011, 09:33 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Moyank24
May 25, 2011, 09:34 AM
Excited to see Houston on the list. Hopefully, the LTE iPhone will be coming sooner rather than later so we can take advantage of this.

Molson1020
May 25, 2011, 09:35 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Chicago is the third largest city in the US. How does it "not matter?"

BLACKFRIDAY
May 25, 2011, 09:35 AM
Next year when the iPhone launches with LTE 4G, AT&T or Verizon, won't be advertising LTE network access with any phone.

To me, this tinkles me to believe that this year iPhone won't be LTE. :|

Small White Car
May 25, 2011, 09:36 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Testing something new in only major markets first = fail

Come on now. Be serious.

Mr. Gates
May 25, 2011, 09:39 AM
The only reason I would want 4g in those cities would be to book a flight out quicker.

min_t
May 25, 2011, 09:40 AM
Testing something new in only major markets first = fail

Come on now. Be serious.

Sounds to me like they've already done the testing. Rollout doesn't mean testing...unless you're Google.

theOtherGeoff
May 25, 2011, 09:41 AM
fun with numbers.

AT&T has delivered five mobile broadband speed upgrades in recent years, including our HSPA+ deployment last year. Average nationwide speeds on the AT&T network have increased - more than 40 percent over the past two years alone

So with 5 major speed upgrades the last a verbal upgrade from 3G to '4G', they went from 250kbps average to 350kbps.

Whoopdie Freakin' do.

5 upgrades? 4G? You'd think you'd hear the words 'Doubled', or 'Tripled', or 'XX Times faster.' No... 40[.1]% is the speed increase. I'm spending I'm spending $200 a month with ATT, for the last 4 years, and I get '40%'? my stock portfolio did 40% COMPOUNDED annually.

metzy25
May 25, 2011, 09:42 AM
after everyone switches to a 4g phone a 3g iphone will be just as fast because there isnt going too be a lot of people left on 3g meaning the less people on 3g the faster 3g will be

Small White Car
May 25, 2011, 09:43 AM
Sounds to me like they've already done the testing. Rollout doesn't mean testing...unless you're Google.

I had my guess. So if it's wrong then what's your idea? Why imply that you have a better idea and then not share it?

alexbasson
May 25, 2011, 09:43 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Chicago and Houston rank third and fourth, respectively, in the list of U.S. cities by population. San Francisco, with fewer than 1 million people, ranks 13th. Atlanta, admittedly, ranks 40th.

if you prefer metro areas to population within city limits, then Chicago/Joliet/Naperville and Houston/Sugar Land/Baytown rank third and sixth, respectively. Atlanta/Sandy Springs/Marietta ranks 9th, while San Francisco/Oakland/Fremont ranks 11th.

Not knowing basic U.S. geography nor knowing how to use Google to look up facts about basic U.S. geography = fails.

topmounter
May 25, 2011, 09:44 AM
Can't we finish the 3G roll-out first? :confused:


Heck, I'd be happy if they'd finish the EDGE roll-out first. :eek:

deppisch
May 25, 2011, 09:44 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Wow, elitist much?

You do realize that Chicago and Houston are both larger than San Francisco, right? Also, I'm sure those living in the aforementioned cities don't echo your sentiments.

Yelmurc
May 25, 2011, 09:45 AM
I'd Rather ATT add more towers in the Houston area than this fake 4G. I still run into dead zones.

Themaeds
May 25, 2011, 09:46 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

That cant even offer reliable 3g in NYC.....why even bother with 4g

starzplacez
May 25, 2011, 09:46 AM
+1 for H-Town! Now where is that LTE iPhone 5/4G/4S/Stevie?...:eek:

justgeig
May 25, 2011, 09:48 AM
Yippee...another "G" that I won't have. AT&T: How about you cover your service area with 3G before you work on 4G? I'm stuck paying for a data plan that is practically useless because of how slow EDGE is.

MacLawyer
May 25, 2011, 09:48 AM
If Apple is to be believed, 4G is a battery killer. Even at 3G speeds, my son-in-law's HTC Thunderbolt can barely make it 8 hours in light use. And that's WITH a battery pack.

I suppose in a couple of years the technology will be such that these issues will be gone, whether it's an Apple or Android machine.

starzplacez
May 25, 2011, 09:49 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

not everyone and their mother live in those "major" cities.. those that enjoy lower gas prices and higher standard of living like it...:)

zhenya
May 25, 2011, 09:50 AM
Unfortunately just more marketing spin. The carriers don't have the bandwidth or the backbone capacity in place to saturate the current 3g chipsets. What's the point of a 20Mbps capable network that still operates at 1?

Honestly, 99% of users would be happy with a network that worked at a consistent 5x5 - which is within the capability of existing devices. No need for massive upgrades.

skellener
May 25, 2011, 09:51 AM
Apple has stated that the current generation of LTE chips requires handset design compromises that the company is not willing to make. Completely understandable, just as say...people passing on another 3G network iPhone. Committing to a two-year contract with a 3G network iPhone after LTE is introduced is a compromise I bet that most smart phone customers are not willing to make.

PapaStu
May 25, 2011, 09:52 AM
Why just Texas? Why?!

It helps that Texas is home for AT&T. It's not a big stretch of the imagination to see why they'd have Houston and Dallas in their rollout.

bbeagle
May 25, 2011, 09:53 AM
Why just Texas? Why?!

Note that all the cities AT&T is testing in are relatively flat with small concentrations of buildings.

New York? Too high of a concentration of buildings.
San Francisco? Too hilly
Los Angeles? Both.

coder12
May 25, 2011, 09:55 AM
The picture reminds me of sonic colors! :)

Warbrain
May 25, 2011, 09:58 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Hate to break it to you, bud, but Chicago plays a bigger role than San Francisco in the overall economy.

FriarNurgle
May 25, 2011, 09:58 AM
Evolve smarter, do you get a free copy of Spore?

jedivulcan
May 25, 2011, 10:00 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Atlanta is the headquarters for AT&T Wireless. They have buildings all over the place. Hopefully... likely not, they'll take the opportunity to expand 3G rather than strictly overlap their existing 3G infrastructure with faster service.

Thunderhawks
May 25, 2011, 10:01 AM
Most customers don't have a clue of what they are using.

If it works, great. If not, they'll listen to a friend who is tech savvy what to buy next.
The average user couldn't tell you the difference between 3G and 4LTE.

Besides, it will take a long time before it's rolled out everywhere. If 3G was an example, two years is nothing . In my area it was promised for 2 years and finally came this (3rd) year and it's still not working depending what spot one is in.

So, what's the rush?

ToroidalZeus
May 25, 2011, 10:10 AM
Hate to break it to you, bud, but Chicago plays a bigger role than San Francisco in the overall economy.

Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

Warbrain
May 25, 2011, 10:12 AM
Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

We're still the industrial center of the country and we have many major corporations with headquarters in our city including those involved in the technology sector. Silicon Valley is important as it's related to tech but all it takes is another bubble to bring it to it's knees.

Howardchief
May 25, 2011, 10:12 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Chicago is the third largest city in the US. How does it "not matter?"

Exactly. I agree. +1

darthraige
May 25, 2011, 10:12 AM
Their 4G logo is awful.

Howardchief
May 25, 2011, 10:14 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I hope this is accurate. Not sure how things work but I hope you're right.

acslater017
May 25, 2011, 10:15 AM
Chicago and Houston rank third and fourth, respectively, in the list of U.S. cities by population. San Francisco, with fewer than 1 million people, ranks 13th. Atlanta, admittedly, ranks 40th.

if you prefer metro areas to population within city limits, then Chicago/Joliet/Naperville and Houston/Sugar Land/Baytown rank third and sixth, respectively. Atlanta/Sandy Springs/Marietta ranks 9th, while San Francisco/Oakland/Fremont ranks 11th.

Not knowing basic U.S. geography nor knowing how to use Google to look up facts about basic U.S. geography = fails.

1) First, I will say that regardless of where you're from, this is a terribly slow rollout compared to Verizon's. I'm seriously considering switching over next year when my iPhone 4 contract expires.

2) I'm from the Bay Area, and the division used by these statistics are largely arbitrary. When people say "Bay Area" they're usually putting San Jose/Santa Clara, San Francisco, and Oakland-Fremont all together, which would put the population at 6,100,000 - roughly tied for 4th with Dallas-Ft.Worth. Driving from San Jose to San Francisco takes only 45 minutes when traffic's good, with completely urban area in between. And San Jose borders Fremont! I dunno where these divisions come from. I won't pretend to know about the other metro areas, but just speaking on behalf of the Bay...

Not that it's all a numbers game anyway. Like it or not, the Bay Area enjoys a hugely outsized influence on the country in terms of technology. We're early adopters, inventors, home of Silicon Valley, etc. Not saying that it entitles us to special treatment. But if I were a marketer, I would be prioritizing the forward-leaning areas. Putting 3/5 rollouts in Texas would not be my first inclination (nothing personal against Texans; just went there last month and it was very charming).

NoExpectations
May 25, 2011, 10:15 AM
Testing something new in only major markets first = fail

Come on now. Be serious.

Agreed. Look at Verizon....major fail as they rushed their LTE out (they were forced to,,,,,CMDA was at a dead end). Verizon has had major LTE Network outages and even had to delay the release of LTE phones as a result.

John J
May 25, 2011, 10:17 AM
I sat in Yankee ( :eek: ) stadium watching a graduation ceremony SURROUNDED by AT&T wireless ads. I couldn't Tweet or FaceBook because my iPhone would only get one bar and it was Edge network. Really?! AT&T should save the ad money and put it towards the technology or lower my bill!

Even in Boston I constantly bounce from all bars Edge to one bar 3G. The other providers are starting to look better and better.

I think the big corps are at the point now where we know they exist and we have no choice but to use them so they can stop with the in your face advertising and actually work on things that matter. Do you really need to see another COKE ad? Especially at the movies!

acslater017
May 25, 2011, 10:19 AM
Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

I'm proud to be from the Bay Area, but Chicago is still a huge center of population, culture, and business...It played Gotham City if I'm not mistaken!

treyjustice
May 25, 2011, 10:20 AM
Why just Texas? Why?!

AT&T is based in texas.

Warbrain
May 25, 2011, 10:23 AM
AT&T is based in texas.

And probably easier to get approval to do the work.

treyjustice
May 25, 2011, 10:23 AM
Dallas/Fort Worth is the fastest growing area in the US, has been the past few years. Has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the US, and has repeatedly been named a top 10 city to live in.

ToroidalZeus
May 25, 2011, 10:23 AM
I'm proud to be from the Bay Area, but Chicago is still a huge center of population, culture, and business...It played Gotham City if I'm not mistaken!

Vancouver BC plays almost all everything in every movie or TV show but that does not make it more important than Los Angeles or even important period.

acslater017
May 25, 2011, 10:28 AM
Vancouver BC plays almost all everything in every movie or TV show but that does not make it more important than Los Angeles or even important period.

Yea, I was just throwing it out there for fun :D

bengtc
May 25, 2011, 10:29 AM
Great now you can get to your data cap faster

Full of Win
May 25, 2011, 10:33 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

They can shove their 4G where the sun does not shine if they use ut as a way to add a cap to unlimited data plans

tempusfugit
May 25, 2011, 10:34 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

San Francisco is a major city but not Chicago? My friend, I recommend you take a minute to review your facts.

interrobang
May 25, 2011, 10:35 AM
ATT is based in Texas (currently Dallas, formerly San Antonio.)

ATT Wireless is based in Atlanta.

Chicago has a history of being first in mobile deployments (The first general-use US cell phone network was deployed by Illinois Bell in 1983.) Also, Motorola is based in Chicago.

Warbrain
May 25, 2011, 10:37 AM
ATT is based in Texas (currently Dallas, formerly San Antonio.)

ATT Wireless is based in Atlanta.

Chicago has a history of being first in mobile deployments (The first general-use US cell phone network was deployed by Illinois Bell in 1983.) Also, Motorola is based in Chicago.

Not to mention Boeing, United, MillerCoors, etc.

emaja
May 25, 2011, 10:37 AM
Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

Flyover states?

Elitist much?

Houston is 5th, Atlanta is 18th and Chicago is 48th in economic strength.

Bay Area is 67th - behind places like Sioux Falls SD (10th) and Trenton NJ (34th).

GDP? Chicago has the 4th highest GDP in the world. That's IN THE WORLD!

SF? 18th - behind Atlanta at 17th.

Don't be such an elitist snob parroting stupidity. These facts are readily available. To ignore them shows your ignorance.

silentnite
May 25, 2011, 10:39 AM
Well, I guess it's a start but I'd rather see NY get it before those other places I don't go to as much. I travel to NY more

WestonHarvey1
May 25, 2011, 10:40 AM
Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

Boeing, Sears, Walgreens, Motorola, ADM, Allstate, Kraft, Caterpillar, Orbitz, Groupon, McDonalds, Abbot Labs, United Airlines, Aon, Wrigley, Mars, CME, CBOT... and on, and on, and on.

womble2k2
May 25, 2011, 10:41 AM
If you look further afield, and at the international markets where the iPhone is sold, you find that by 2013, only approx 2% to 5% of the population will be covered by 4G LTE networks, whereas about 90% will be covered by 3G networks.

It makes me wonder if an LTE iPhone is really worth having before June 2013?

Some posters have commented about the backbone networks that support LTE, and yes, they will certainly need serious upgrading. The data to be send to handsets will need higher data rates, but will take significantly less time to download say a webpage, so carriers will decide to raise the contention ratio, at least in the short term.

This means that at times, a user might experience amazingly fast downloads, whilst peak times will be no better than now, or could be worse as Smartphones and use of them increases.

In terms of battery life, I do remember my first 3G phone, a piece of ****** made by LG, and even though it didn't have much processing power to download webpages fast, whilst on 3G networks you could actually watch the battery gauge drain away. Downloaded a podcast one day whilst waiting for a train and went from 90% to 25% in 10 mins!!

The same may be true for some early 4G phones, but battery technology has moved on leaps and bounds since 2003, so it won't be as severe. Coupled with the fact that silicon manufacturers now understand how to build in power management into each component, then it should be ok.

Personnally, I find that the majority of time when I need fast downloads, that I'm in a wifi zone (at home, work or out and about) and have only only downloaded 2gigs of data via cellular in the past 10 months. So will 4G change my life?? Maybe, if there is a 'killer app' out there that would need it!

Will I still upgrade to the iPhone 5 if it isn't 4G? Simple answer, yes. i.e. it's not a deal maker and nor a deal breaker.

Phil

3goldens
May 25, 2011, 10:43 AM
and all I have to say is good luck to them!

SarahPalin
May 25, 2011, 10:43 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.


If they don't put Wasilla on the list I'm going to throw a fit.

gri
May 25, 2011, 10:45 AM
Why just Texas? Why?!

Strange choice of cities. I would have thought that New York, Washington, San Francisco, LA and Chicago would be a better fit...

beverson
May 25, 2011, 10:48 AM
Completely understandable, just as say...people passing on another 3G network iPhone. Committing to a two-year contract with a 3G network iPhone after LTE is introduced is a compromise I bet that most smart phone customers are not willing to make.

I bet that most smartphone customers aren't even aware of any of the minutia being discussed in this thread. And therefore, won't care.

As for me, I will still be upgrading from my 3GS to whatever comes out in the rumored Sept./Oct. timeframe, knowing full-well that I'll be locked out of LTE for another 2 years. It'll be just like having my EDGE original iPhone. I'll be happy not to deal with battery and coverage issues that the bleeding-edge 4G'ers will deal with on the first 4G iPhone, and then when I get around to buying a new one in approximately the fall of 2013 (or whenever "iPhone 7" comes out), I'll really enjoy the faster 4G speeds and reasonable battery life at the same time just like I did when I got my 3GS.

ghostface147
May 25, 2011, 10:51 AM
Rolling out LTE with no LTE devices that I am aware of....nice.

Come on 2012 LTE iPhone.

Rodimus Prime
May 25, 2011, 10:51 AM
Strange choice of cities. I would have thought that New York, Washington, San Francisco, LA and Chicago would be a better fit...

As someone else already pointed out AT&T home bases and former homebase are both in Texas and both listed. Houston is going to get it if SA and DFW are getting it. Houston also is a huge business interested to AT&T and has the oil industry. You also need to remember Houston is huge spreading at this point about 100 mils across when you add in all the suburbs.

SA is near the 2nd silicon Valley so it is not that bad in terms of technology if you are sitting near one of the silicon valleys.

gri
May 25, 2011, 10:52 AM
I sat in Yankee ( :eek: ) stadium watching a graduation ceremony SURROUNDED by AT&T wireless ads. I couldn't Tweet or FaceBook because my iPhone would only get one bar and it was Edge network. Really?! AT&T should save the ad money and put it towards the technology or lower my bill!

Even in Boston I constantly bounce from all bars Edge to one bar 3G. The other providers are starting to look better and better.

I think the big corps are at the point now where we know they exist and we have no choice but to use them so they can stop with the in your face advertising and actually work on things that matter. Do you really need to see another COKE ad? Especially at the movies!

Coke? :D

StealthscrapE
May 25, 2011, 10:53 AM
Wonder how much the 4G data packages will cost. I can se it now. "iPhone 4G data package $50".

toddybody
May 25, 2011, 10:53 AM
How is this front page Mac news?

juicedropsdeuce
May 25, 2011, 10:54 AM
Hate to break it to you, bud, but Chicago plays a bigger role than San Francisco in the overall economy.

Just because the people are bigger it doesn't mean anything. I'm not sure what you are getting at. :confused:

Anywho, hopefully AT&T will roll out to more real American cities in the south. Then Apple can add LTE to the next iPhone and we can start using this technology for good things. :apple::apple:

gri
May 25, 2011, 10:56 AM
As someone else already pointed out AT&T home bases and former homebase are both in Texas and both listed. Houston is going to get it if SA and DFW are getting it. Houston also is a huge business interested to AT&T and has the oil industry. You also need to remember Houston is huge spreading at this point about 100 mils across when you add in all the suburbs.

SA is near the 2nd silicon Valley so it is not that bad in terms of technology if you are sitting near one of the silicon valleys.

To be clear I don't mind that these cities are getting it, happy for them. But the real show place is still NYC. If it doesn't work there they just fail (maybe thats why they don't do it here yet) - and I am saying that not because I happen to live here. Its just a city that is being watched by the world. Hey, I see even small snippets here and there about stuff happening in NYC in German news outlets but not in the NYT...

Winni
May 25, 2011, 10:58 AM
What's the point of a 20Mbps capable network that still operates at 1?

20Mbps is all that you get in the US? Vodafone Germany sells LTE with 50Mbps... Of course, those numbers - whether is 20 or 50 Mbps - are just "burst" speed; there is no bandwidth guarantee.

frunkis54
May 25, 2011, 11:00 AM
Wow everyone complaining about what citys it is getting rolled out in:confused: most of you all have iphones it has been practically confirmed that the next iphone won't be 4g so does it really matter? by the time the 4g iphone is rolled out it should be in your area!

juicedropsdeuce
May 25, 2011, 11:05 AM
To be clear I don't mind that these cities are getting it, happy for them. But the real show place is still NYC. If it doesn't work there they just fail (maybe thats why they don't do it here yet) - and I am saying that not because I happen to live here. Its just a city that is being watched by the world. Hey, I see even small snippets here and there about stuff happening in NYC in German news outlets but not in the NYT...

Yeeeah. The other day I was laughing at this chap in London who uses a phone on the Orange network. I was like bud, there is no Orange network in NYC, are you thick or something?? Bloody hell.

True story.

xxBURT0Nxx
May 25, 2011, 11:06 AM
3 cities in TX and they couldn't roll it out to more than 5 cities at a time?

maybe they should have taken a page from VZW and launched in 30+ cities, they are already last in line, and we are going to have 15 cities covered by the end of the year, while vzw will have 78. att 4g is a joke at this point, better see some big speed improvements with LTE...

brianbauer04
May 25, 2011, 11:12 AM
I've been comparing Sprint and Verizon for a 4G mobile broadband plan; I wonder if it's worth it to wait to see how AT&T compares.

I wish they were more specific than "summer"

xxBURT0Nxx
May 25, 2011, 11:13 AM
I've been comparing Sprint and Verizon for a 4G mobile broadband plan; I wonder if it's worth it to wait to see how AT&T compares.

I wish they were more specific than "summer"
no way, vzw will have 78 markets by next month, att is saying 5 "this summer" with 10 more by the end of the year.... att sucks, lagging so hard right now on their network. Lucky for them they had the iphone or i think their numbers would really be hurting.

alexbasson
May 25, 2011, 11:19 AM
Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

Top ten sectors of the U.S. economy, by total sales:

1) Wholesale trade
2) Manufacturing
3) Retail trade
4) Finance and insurance
5) Health care & social assistance
6) Construction
7) Information
8) Professional, scientific, and technical services
9) Accommodation and food services
10) Administrative & support & waste management & remediation service

Again, all information sourced via a quick Google search. I understand that if you live in the Bay Area and work in tech, then you might think the entire economy revolves around you. Sorry to break it to you, but it really doesn't.

ten-oak-druid
May 25, 2011, 11:23 AM
It would be a bad business decision to launch a 4G iphone model now. Apple will likely have an iphone 4.5 later in the year with improved specs but 3G. And then have 4G in the iphone 5. There isn't enough 4G access yet for Apple to expect large sales numbers from people wanting 4G. Companies that make several models of mobile phones will make 4G models for those who want them. But I can't see Apple splitting the line with two current iphone versions for 3G and 4G simultaneously.

By the time iphone 5 comes out, 4G should be more widely available.

As for Sprint, it seems like the iphone 4.5 would be a good time to add that carrier.

nwcs
May 25, 2011, 11:29 AM
Yeah, most people won't be able to tell the difference between 3G and 4G in real world use. But it will matter in marketing (just like in megapixels in cameras). People think that higher numbers = better. So they'll see 3G in some phones and 4G on others and assume 4G must be better.

So I hope the next iPhone has 4G even if few people can make use of it.

gr8whtd0pe
May 25, 2011, 11:29 AM
Why just Texas? Why?!

Their HQ is in Dallas, I would guess that has something to do with it.

Can't we finish the 3G roll-out first? :confused:


Heck, I'd be happy if they'd finish the EDGE roll-out first. :eek:

For reals.

Verizon however flips the switch on my little city of Charleston, WV next month for LTE...

stockscalper
May 25, 2011, 11:30 AM
Funny article. AT&T hasn't even gotten to close to rolling out its 3G network and now they're teasing us with the promise of 4G.

parapup
May 25, 2011, 11:33 AM
Verizon executives must be laughing their butts off after reading this :D

Popeye206
May 25, 2011, 11:33 AM
Yawn.... wake me up when 4G is not hype but reality in most markets.

I love it when they (all the carriers) advertise 4G here in NE PA and I don't think we'll see it for at least 2 years yet.

xxBURT0Nxx
May 25, 2011, 11:40 AM
Yeah, most people won't be able to tell the difference between 3G and 4G in real world use. But it will matter in marketing (just like in megapixels in cameras). People think that higher numbers = better. So they'll see 3G in some phones and 4G on others and assume 4G must be better.

So I hope the next iPhone has 4G even if few people can make use of it.
??? there is a drastic speed difference between 3G and 4G, speak for yourself!

Yawn.... wake me up when 4G is not hype but reality in most markets.

I love it when they (all the carriers) advertise 4G here in NE PA and I don't think we'll see it for at least 2 years yet.
I would say VZW getting to 78 markets since Jan. is pretty damn good, of course it's going to take longer to get to small cities.

SAD*FACED*CLOWN
May 25, 2011, 11:41 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Son you do know Houston is the 4th largest city in America? Chicago the
3rd largest? a quick google search before you post nonsense

normwood
May 25, 2011, 11:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I am assuming Golden Valley, MN is in phase 2. :-)

nwcs
May 25, 2011, 11:47 AM
??? there is a drastic speed difference between 3G and 4G, speak for yourself! There is when both are working normally but the average person of whom I spoke won't notice that much difference in many cases. If something comes up in 1 second in 3G it won't show up in 0.1 second in 4G. Other factors such as application speed and rendering and latency negate some of the speed. It's like speeding on the road in town. Sure it seems fast until you hit the traffic light and the person you passed ends up right behind you before it turns green.

Incindium
May 25, 2011, 11:54 AM
This is a good thing. A 4g LTE tower can serve a bigger area than a 3g tower. This means they'll be able to cover more area with less infrastructure. Granted they'll have to put more bandwidth capacity at each site. This should mean better coverage, better speeds for everyone on 4g .

SockRolid
May 25, 2011, 12:01 PM
Real 4G, which we won't see before 2013 at the very earliest, combines voice and data into a single IP packet stream. An internet packet stream just like the one your ISP handles.

That's the carriers' motivation for calling LTE "4G." They want to establish "4G" branding as soon as possible, while there still is a distinction between voice and data connections. They want to continue charging separately for big-minute voice plans and tiered data plans, even after they are merged into a single bit stream.

Why? Because they can make more money by charging separately for voice and data. Subscribers have been trained for years to accept that separation. Your ISP doesn't charge separately for email and Netflix. AT&T and all the others will try to charge separately for voice and data. I don't think that will last long.

xxBURT0Nxx
May 25, 2011, 12:01 PM
There is when both are working normally but the average person of whom I spoke won't notice that much difference in many cases. If something comes up in 1 second in 3G it won't show up in 0.1 second in 4G. Other factors such as application speed and rendering and latency negate some of the speed. It's like speeding on the road in town. Sure it seems fast until you hit the traffic light and the person you passed ends up right behind you before it turns green.
obviously you aren't going to notice differences on tasks that take 1 second... how about youtube videos, loading graphic intensive web pages, google maps rendering, there are many things where you WILL see the difference. Sorry but you are wrong if you think the difference is unnoticeable. If you think it doesn't, try turning 3G off on your phone and run around on edge all day and tell me it isn't dog **** sloooooow!

gr8whtd0pe
May 25, 2011, 12:04 PM
Real 4G, which we won't see before 2013 at the very earliest, combines voice and data into a single IP packet stream. An internet packet stream just like the one your ISP handles.

That's the carriers' motivation for calling LTE "4G." They want to establish "4G" branding as soon as possible, while there still is a distinction between voice and data connections. They want to continue charging separately for big-minute voice plans and tiered data plans, even after they are merged into a single bit stream.

Why? Because they can make more money by charging separately for voice and data. Subscribers have been trained for years to accept that separation. Your ISP doesn't charge separately for email and Netflix. AT&T and all the others will try to charge separately for voice and data. I don't think that will last long.

this. truth.

ipoppy
May 25, 2011, 12:09 PM
Enlighten me!!!
Why so many people moan about lack of 4G in next iPhone? Why do you really need it for at current speed demanded by apps or another programs available on iphone? 3G is more than good enough for me and I DO a lot.
The same apply to NFC technology. How many places do you really have (I mean for average iphone user) around you with that technology available to you? Is it safe? Is it? You will change your mind when someone rob you of your money on local bus by using some sort of "smart" device which can read through all NFC devices just like that. Then what? Ooops...we have never thought about that...but... is fixed now-they will say. Yea...until next time.
All what I say is let Apple take time to developed matching and safe technology. There is no need for rush to have it NOW.

bushido
May 25, 2011, 12:10 PM
we already got LTE in lots of areas here, mostly for people that still can't get broadband. it's indeed crazy fast. its like 19 Euro for voice AND data! + 50 mbit/s inet but only 30 GB before they slow u down to 3G speed

alent1234
May 25, 2011, 12:11 PM
Real 4G, which we won't see before 2013 at the very earliest, combines voice and data into a single IP packet stream. An internet packet stream just like the one your ISP handles.

That's the carriers' motivation for calling LTE "4G." They want to establish "4G" branding as soon as possible, while there still is a distinction between voice and data connections. They want to continue charging separately for big-minute voice plans and tiered data plans, even after they are merged into a single bit stream.

Why? Because they can make more money by charging separately for voice and data. Subscribers have been trained for years to accept that separation. Your ISP doesn't charge separately for email and Netflix. AT&T and all the others will try to charge separately for voice and data. I don't think that will last long.


so will it make you happy if the carriers just charge everyone $100 per month or some tiered all in one prices depending on which services you want?

A LOT of people don't really care about data on a phone at this point. and it won't change in 2013 either

mygoldens
May 25, 2011, 12:13 PM
Why just Texas? Why?!

Because we ROCK in Texas!
:D

jav6454
May 25, 2011, 12:14 PM
Because we ROCK in Texas!
:D

Thank you! This was the answer I was looking for!

bushido
May 25, 2011, 12:17 PM
so will it make you happy if the carriers just charge everyone $100 per month or some tiered all in one prices depending on which services you want?

A LOT of people don't really care about data on a phone at this point. and it won't change in 2013 either

like i said, 19 bucks for voice and data here and its 2011. not everyone is as slow as the US and gets billed for tethering too lolol

benthewraith
May 25, 2011, 12:18 PM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

There's so much wrong with what you just said.
1) Dallas is AT&T Corp.'s headquarters.
2) Atlanta, Chicago and Houston have a larger metropolitan area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas) compared to San Francisco.
3) Atlanta is the headquarters for AT&T Mobility.
4) Chicago doesn't matter?

cooldaddybeck
May 25, 2011, 12:20 PM
I know there are a lot of haters, but the AT&T 3G network is the best mobile network I've used (yes, that definitely includes Verizon).

4G is just another excuse for AT&T to try and get rid of my unlimited data plan.

benthewraith
May 25, 2011, 12:22 PM
I know there are a lot of haters, but the AT&T 3G network is the best mobile network I've used (yes, that definitely includes Verizon).

4G is just another excuse for AT&T to try and get rid of my unlimited data plan.

Unlimited data is unlimited data. Doesn't matter whether you're on Edge, 3G or 4G. It carries over.

And the real reason they're capping data? They want to cut down on people using Google Voice.

Rodimus Prime
May 25, 2011, 12:29 PM
Unlimited data is unlimited data. Doesn't matter whether you're on Edge, 3G or 4G. It carries over.

And the real reason they're capping data? They want to cut down on people using Google Voice.

Umm Google Voice still uses minutes. It is not a data service. It is not like Skype but instead just bridges your number with your google number.

HangmanSwingset
May 25, 2011, 12:37 PM
Not to mention Boeing, United, MillerCoors, etc.

I miss the good old days when Boeing was in Seattle.

benthewraith
May 25, 2011, 12:37 PM
Umm Google Voice still uses minutes. It is not a data service. It is not like Skype but instead just bridges your number with your google number.

You are correct about the minutes use. :o

However, GV app still uses data.:p

cvaldes
May 25, 2011, 12:39 PM
Umm Google Voice still uses minutes. It is not a data service. It is not like Skype but instead just bridges your number with your google number.
Google Voice would use minutes on incoming calls.

You can use the Talkatone app on an iDevice (iPhone, iPod touch, iPad) for outgoing Google Voice calls that are true VoIP once you have configured and successfully made one Google Voice call via Google Talk.

I've called the United States from abroad this way on my iPod touch via WiFi. No cost.

optophobia
May 25, 2011, 12:41 PM
I miss the good old days when Boeing was in Seattle.

Oh, so I guess all the people that say they work for Boeing around me are either commuting across the country, or lying to me....:eek:

Rodimus Prime
May 25, 2011, 12:42 PM
Google Voice would use minutes on incoming calls.

You can use the Talkatone app on an iDevice (iPhone, iPod touch, iPad) for outgoing Google Voice calls that are true VoIP once you have configured and successfully made one Google Voice call via Google Talk.
that is a work around and all GV is doing id bridging the connection between Talkatone phone network.

You are correct about the minutes use. :o

However, GV app still uses data.:p

While true it is so minor it is not like it matters.
GV is what I use on my Atrix for my voice mail. I find it to be a much better VVM service than then iPhone's. Notificaitons are just as quick as the network and having the transcriptions done for free as well is nice. Now not the best at getting every word but it is generally close enough for me to get the jest of the message.

Castiel
May 25, 2011, 12:44 PM
Psh, I'm still waiting on 3G in my area. :(

lamar0607
May 25, 2011, 12:45 PM
Note that all the cities AT&T is testing in are relatively flat with small concentrations of buildings.

New York? Too high of a concentration of buildings.
San Francisco? Too hilly
Los Angeles? Both.

Hmm, considering Chicago has the 2nd largest metropolitan area behind NYC, I wouldn't say they are only doing the rollout in small concentrations of buildings. Have you seen the Chicago skyline?

Discoverer
May 25, 2011, 12:45 PM
Bring it to Indianapolis. We have a lot of corn here.

HangmanSwingset
May 25, 2011, 12:47 PM
Oh, so I guess all the people that say they work for Boeing around me are either commuting across the country, or lying to me....:eek:

I meant based in, I should have been more clear. My grandpa used to work in the Everett plant.

Hastings101
May 25, 2011, 12:49 PM
Ok, the little green monster thing is awesome.

CIA
May 25, 2011, 12:50 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but LTE isn't just about blazing upload/download speeds.... Isn't it also a better system for handling data/voice volume? So your "5 bars but still lousy service" problem might go away when operating on a LTE based network? And yes, I know the US (or anyone for that matter) doesn't have REAL LTE, but the LTE flavor Verizon and AT&T is rolling out is a step in the right direction compared with "marketing" 4G that T-Mobile is using for HSPA+ networks.

womble2k2
May 25, 2011, 01:03 PM
That's odd, because I too have an HTC Thunderbolt and go to school in a 4G area. My battery lasts a whole day.

Although you have a 4G phone and your school is i a 4G area, it is only when downloading large files or website assets that 4G actually kicks in. Have you tried downloading say a 2 gig podcast whilst in a 4G coverage area? It would be interesting to know how it decreases the battery life.

Phil

mcmlxix
May 25, 2011, 01:04 PM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston. The NIMBYs in SF have probably shot themself in the foot. It'll be a while before they'll allow any new towers or modifications to existing ones.

eastercat
May 25, 2011, 01:09 PM
While it's great that 4G is coming to Dallas, I'll probably have to lose my unlimited data plan to sign up for it. :(
For the self-centered who are bitching about the rollout and think that only the east and west coast matters, grow up. :p Apple does their testing in their home area and so does AT&T. If a previous poster was right about Chicago being a testing ground for cellular, then they'd be a good choice to add to the rollout.

DroidRules
May 25, 2011, 01:18 PM
No major cities = fails.
New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.



Says you.... I bet those in Chicago, Atlanta and Houston would disagree with you. I know nothing matters except what YOU think matters.

leomac08
May 25, 2011, 01:23 PM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

I actually agreed, if ATT is rolling out 4G they must have tested it out already and are not using Chicago, Houston, Dallas, etc as Guinea Pigs...

especially Chicago

ciTiger
May 25, 2011, 01:30 PM
It still remains to be seen but it can't come soon enough!!!

segfaultdotorg
May 25, 2011, 01:41 PM
I'd be happy if AT&T offered 3G in my area.

axual
May 25, 2011, 01:55 PM
to the 21st century.

Now, if you could only solve that 'dropped call' problem, we'd be happy.

Pman17
May 25, 2011, 02:05 PM
Why just Texas? Why?!

AT&T is based in Texas. Their headquarters are in Dallas. Also AT&T has the best coverage and service in Texas. I love being a Texan.

centauratlas
May 25, 2011, 02:07 PM
I get 2.4 Mbps down and 1.18 Mbps (speedtest.net app) here with AT&T (it is much faster than Edge on T-Mobile here).

fun with numbers.



So with 5 major speed upgrades the last a verbal upgrade from 3G to '4G', they went from 250kbps average to 350kbps.

Whoopdie Freakin' do.

5 upgrades? 4G? You'd think you'd hear the words 'Doubled', or 'Tripled', or 'XX Times faster.' No... 40[.1]% is the speed increase. I'm spending I'm spending $200 a month with ATT, for the last 4 years, and I get '40%'? my stock portfolio did 40% COMPOUNDED annually.

TRSmudge
May 25, 2011, 02:21 PM
Yippee...another "G" that I won't have. AT&T: How about you cover your service area with 3G before you work on 4G? I'm stuck paying for a data plan that is practically useless because of how slow EDGE is.

Bingo......

RalfTheDog
May 25, 2011, 02:37 PM
4G service is just compensation for being stuck in Texas.


Enlighten me!!!
Why so many people moan about lack of 4G in next iPhone? Why do you really need it for at current speed demanded by apps or another programs available on iphone? 3G is more than good enough for me and I DO a lot.
The same apply to NFC technology. How many places do you really have (I mean for average iphone user) around you with that technology available to you? Is it safe? Is it? You will change your mind when someone rob you of your money on local bus by using some sort of "smart" device which can read through all NFC devices just like that. Then what? Ooops...we have never thought about that...but... is fixed now-they will say. Yea...until next time.
All what I say is let Apple take time to developed matching and safe technology. There is no need for rush to have it NOW.

I use 4g for tethering to my laptops. I have a Sprint 4g device I use when I need to get out of the lab to stay sane. It is not that much faster than my ATT devices, but it gives you free unlimited bandwidth when in 4G.

ATT 4G should be much faster than Sprint.

NFC should be safe. It will only connect to one device at a time for financial transactions it will ask for a password on your device before it performs a transaction and it will have some kind of conformation code on the vending device to inform you that you are connected to the correct device. I am sure it will also use some form of public/private key encryption.

AT&T is the worst. Their service is absolute garbage where I am, and I don't live in a low-population area. I'm in a major metro area...



How many times to we need to keep saying this, Skunkwood North Dakota is not a major metro area.

:)

That's odd, because I too have an HTC Thunderbolt and go to school in a 4G area. My battery lasts a whole day.

I would not brag about one day. When you can get four days of heavy use per charge, please come back.

Hmm, considering Chicago has the 2nd largest metropolitan area behind NYC, I wouldn't say they are only doing the rollout in small concentrations of buildings. Have you seen the Chicago skyline?

I think they are doing Chicago for the pizza. Chicago is also a great city to make money from gang violence. You can make a fortune sweeping up the brass after a big gun fight.

AidenShaw
May 25, 2011, 02:56 PM
Agreed. Look at Verizon....major fail as they rushed their LTE out (they were forced to,,,,,CMDA was at a dead end). Verizon has had major LTE Network outages and even had to delay the release of LTE phones as a result.

That's odd, since my husband with a Thunderbolt has been thrilled with his LTE coverage in the bay area.

segfaultdotorg
May 25, 2011, 03:22 PM
AT&T is based in Texas. Their headquarters are in Dallas. Also AT&T has the best coverage and service in Texas. I love being a Texan.

Texas, where everything is bigger and more annoying!

KingCrimson
May 25, 2011, 03:28 PM
Completely understandable, just as say...people passing on another 3G network iPhone. Committing to a two-year contract with a 3G network iPhone after LTE is introduced is a compromise I bet that most smart phone customers are not willing to make.

Wanna bet? iPhone sales in this coming quarter are going to be blowout as usual.

emaja
May 25, 2011, 03:30 PM
4G service is just compensation for being stuck in Texas.

How many times to we need to keep saying this, Skunkwood North Dakota is not a major metro area.

I think they are doing Chicago for the pizza. Chicago is also a great city to make money from gang violence. You can make a fortune sweeping up the brass after a big gun fight.

Texas, where everything is bigger and more annoying!

Why does this need to turn into city-bashing?

There are lots of reasons to roll 4G out to different areas, civic pride not included.

apeman88
May 25, 2011, 04:22 PM
I know there are a lot of haters, but the AT&T 3G network is the best mobile network I've used (yes, that definitely includes Verizon).

4G is just another excuse for AT&T to try and get rid of my unlimited data plan.

You must not come up to San Francisco or the East Bay much - because it is Terrible...TERRIBLE. I support 1000 folks w/ them and they are poor poor poor for making calls....

chrmjenkins
May 25, 2011, 04:52 PM
LTE adoption is likely to be very quick in affluent urban areas like LA and NY. Last thing you want is a network rollout to debut with bad press.

bushido
May 25, 2011, 05:03 PM
I would not brag about one day. When you can get four days of heavy use per charge, please come back.


i hope ur not talking about the iPhone bc my iPhone 4 lasts about half a day during college days ...

lazyrighteye
May 25, 2011, 05:27 PM
Chicago and Houston rank third and fourth, respectively, in the list of U.S. cities by population. San Francisco, with fewer than 1 million people, ranks 13th. Atlanta, admittedly, ranks 40th.

if you prefer metro areas to population within city limits, then Chicago/Joliet/Naperville and Houston/Sugar Land/Baytown rank third and sixth, respectively. Atlanta/Sandy Springs/Marietta ranks 9th, while San Francisco/Oakland/Fremont ranks 11th.

Not knowing basic U.S. geography nor knowing how to use Google to look up facts about basic U.S. geography = fails.

Maybe 'density' would be a better parameter to consider when testing cellular speeds. Maybe not.
But if so, the top 10 U.S. cities by density are as follows:

New York, NY
Paterson, NJ
San Francisco, CA
Jersey City, NJ
Cambridge, MA
Daly City, CA
Boston, MA
Inglewood, CA
Santa Ana, CA
El Monte, CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population

RalfTheDog
May 25, 2011, 05:27 PM
i hope ur not talking about the iPhone bc my iPhone 4 lasts about half a day during college days ...

What generation and are you using the flashlight app 4 hours at a time?

SeaChange
May 25, 2011, 06:17 PM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Chicago(3rd largest in the US) and Houston are not major cities? You must be joking. Atlanta(largest in the Southeast) is also a major city.

madaski
May 25, 2011, 07:01 PM
Silicon Valley in the bay area is one of the most important aspects of the economy. What does Chicago have that even comes close? Sorry to break it to you but Chicago along with the rest of those cities are in the flyover states.

Ever heard of a little company called Boeing?

oban14
May 25, 2011, 07:14 PM
Hate to break it to you, bud, but Chicago plays a bigger role than San Francisco in the overall economy.

Detroit used to say the same thing.

Everybody Loves Raymond played a bigger role on television than Arrested Development. It doesn't mean it's worth watching.

SeaChange
May 25, 2011, 07:14 PM
4G service is just compensation for being stuck in Texas.




I use 4g for tethering to my laptops. I have a Sprint 4g device I use when I need to get out of the lab to stay sane. It is not that much faster than my ATT devices, but it gives you free unlimited bandwidth when in 4G.

ATT 4G should be much faster than Sprint.

NFC should be safe. It will only connect to one device at a time for financial transactions it will ask for a password on your device before it performs a transaction and it will have some kind of conformation code on the vending device to inform you that you are connected to the correct device. I am sure it will also use some form of public/private key encryption.



How many times to we need to keep saying this, Skunkwood North Dakota is not a major metro area.

:)



I would not brag about one day. When you can get four days of heavy use per charge, please come back.



I think they are doing Chicago for the pizza. Chicago is also a great city to make money from gang violence. You can make a fortune sweeping up the brass after a big gun fight.

And Los Angeles and California in general are the gang capital of the world. Step a few blocks away from USC campus if you don't believe me.

oban14
May 25, 2011, 07:15 PM
Ever heard of a little company called Boeing?

Ever heard of a little company called Apple? You should send Steve Jobs an email, I'm sure he'll move the whole company to Chicago as soon as he hears that it's a bigger part of the economy than the bay area.

Chicago has it's good points but there is a reason Steve Jobs would never consider living there.

SeaChange
May 25, 2011, 07:16 PM
Detroit used to say the same thing.

Everybody Loves Raymond played a bigger role on television than Arrested Development. It doesn't mean it's worth watching.

San Francisco is a beautiful city, but it not worth much in the big scheme of things.

SeaChange
May 25, 2011, 07:18 PM
Ever heard of a little company called Apple? You should send Steve Jobs an email, I'm sure he'll move the whole company to Chicago as soon as he hears that it's a bigger part of the economy than the bay area.

Chicago has it's good points but there is a reason Steve Jobs would never consider living there.

Who cares where Steve Jobs wants to live? Do you have a crush on him?

oban14
May 25, 2011, 07:18 PM
Maybe 'density' would be a better parameter to consider when testing cellular speeds. Maybe not.
But if so, the top 10 U.S. cities by density are as follows:

New York, NY
Paterson, NJ
San Francisco, CA
Jersey City, NJ
Cambridge, MA
Daly City, CA
Boston, MA
Inglewood, CA
Santa Ana, CA
El Monte, CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population

I wouldn't be surprised if AT&T's abysmal performance in SF and NYC is because they ignore this very sort of thing. "It works great in a flat, spread out mess like Houston... it's probably fine everywhere".

SeaChange
May 25, 2011, 07:19 PM
Ever heard of a little company called Apple? You should send Steve Jobs an email, I'm sure he'll move the whole company to Chicago as soon as he hears that it's a bigger part of the economy than the bay area.

Chicago has it's good points but there is a reason Steve Jobs would never consider living there.

Apple is a "little" company in the in the big scheme of business. Just because you worship them don't get delusional.

oban14
May 25, 2011, 07:19 PM
San Francisco is a beautiful city, but it not worth much in the big scheme of things.

Like I said, you should let Steve Jobs know. I'm sure he'll very quickly move the company to that hotbed of technology and innovation known as Chicago.

oban14
May 25, 2011, 07:20 PM
Apple is a "little" company in the in the big scheme of business. Just because you worship them don't get delusional.

You should let the stock market know. Last I checked they had one of the three biggest market caps in the world.

But yeah, they're just a small time company. No one buys Apple products.

kiljoy616
May 25, 2011, 07:27 PM
Nice but not a big deal. Plus how is battery life going to be impacted considering it has been terrible on android phones. :confused:

SAD*FACED*CLOWN
May 25, 2011, 07:35 PM
Unlimited data is unlimited data. Doesn't matter whether you're on Edge, 3G or 4G. It carries over.

And the real reason they're capping data? They want to cut down on people using Google Voice.

Uhhhh....Google Voice uses cell minutes not data

oban14
May 25, 2011, 08:05 PM
That's odd, since my husband with a Thunderbolt has been thrilled with his LTE coverage in the bay area.

Agreed - LTE in the bay area is outstanding. Night and day compared to AT&T service, and it's faster than some people's cablemodems.

Ammo
May 25, 2011, 09:54 PM
I hope iPhone 5 for AT&T has HSPA+ built in.

CIA
May 25, 2011, 10:10 PM
Agreed - LTE in the bay area is outstanding. Night and day compared to AT&T service, and it's faster than some people's cablemodems.

Let's just hope this stays true once the vast majority of phones use LTE. I mean AT&T 3G is awesome when no one else is on your tower.

froggiemlm
May 25, 2011, 11:45 PM
From being a PM on the clear/sprint 4G roll-out 2 years ago it takes a lot to get a city online. you have to deal with landlords who own property in which towers sit. you have to deal with city governments. and from what i heard from some of my contractors that would install for me ATT like to use just one company as there installation team so that could be part of the limited city's. How true that is IDK? I do know philly, NYC, are the two hardest city's to build in though.

AidenShaw
May 26, 2011, 12:02 AM
Who cares where Steve Jobs wants to live? Do you have a crush on him?

No, but it's a short walk from my house to his.

I grew up in the midwest and northeast - and never want to deal with the winter weather again...

DeanSolecki
May 26, 2011, 02:02 AM
Pretty funny. You can always gauge how empty someone's life is by the ferociousness with which they defend the merits of their region. You can qualify the "importantness" of a city in whatever way you wish.

I live in the bay area and it is a cultural wasteland compared to places like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, NYC, but the weather is better. If you want uninteresting people desperately trying to make as much money as possible before dying meaninglessly at 55 from a type-A heart attack then this is the place for you.

It sucks less than Texas, but if I were building cell towers I'd probably not be worried about racism and rabid Christianity.

Thus, dear friends, our discussion of a city's "importantness" is a little misguided.

Anyway, I just wanted to take a cheap shot at texans. Wankers.

SoFresh~SoClean
May 26, 2011, 02:15 AM
I'd be happy with consistent 7+ Mbps data rate. Makes sense for Apple to hold off on LTE capable iPhones until more carriers have the backend capacity. On Fido I'm getting about 3 Mbps at best even in the city but it would be nice if it were greater. I know some people will be throwing their arms up in the air at Apple not making 4G capable iPhone next revision but I bet it won't be until 2012 that more carriers are ready to roll out faster networks.

bergmef
May 26, 2011, 04:23 AM
Maybe these cities have decent enough backhaul in place but then again, there won't be that much lte traffic at the beginning. I'm more interested in how they are doing the backhaul. Verizon said it's only using fiber to connect lte (for the backhaul). Haven't seen anything from att since earlier in the year when they didn't give me a warm fuzzy on their backhaul for the current system.

As usual, get what works in your area.

Boston007
May 26, 2011, 08:08 AM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

Typical arrogance

You must be an :apple: fanboy

DigMe
May 26, 2011, 08:20 AM
Too bad you probably STILL won't be able to send or receive any data at any event in Cowboy Stadium because their back end can't handle the load. :mad:

littfam
May 26, 2011, 08:32 AM
Whatever! I'm still living in the EDGE network. Probably will for a long time to come. This means nothing to me as an ATT subscriber.

Ammo
May 26, 2011, 08:37 AM
If AT&T's iPhone supports HSPA+ then we're going to have a 4G iPhone.

I know it's not LTE but the difference won't be very noticeable for several years until LTE is in its next revision. HSPA+ theoretically supports up to 28.8 Mbps speeds anyway...PLENTY fast and most certainly as fast as if not faster than Verizon's LTE network.

xxBURT0Nxx
May 26, 2011, 08:42 AM
If AT&T's iPhone supports HSPA+ then we're going to have a 4G iPhone.

I know it's not LTE but the difference won't be very noticeable for several years until LTE is in its next revision. HSPA+ theoretically supports up to 28.8 Mbps speeds anyway...PLENTY fast and most certainly as fast as if not faster than Verizon's LTE network.
there is your key word...

seeing as att has already released HSPA+ handsets as "4G" and in real world speed tests it has often been reported to have slower speeds than ATT 3G, I wouldn't hold my breath for 28.8Mbps HSPA+ that will be faster than VZW LTE.

juliandroms
May 26, 2011, 12:14 PM
No major cities = fails.

New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco these are the cities that matter not Chicago, Atlanta and Houston.

It's much easier and faster to roll out cell phone towers in Texas and probably in other southern states. I once read an article quoting a CEO from one of the major networks (I forget whether it was AT&T or Verizon) who said it was crazy how long it takes to get a permit for a cell phone tower in a state like California or New York, with all the environmental permits and so forth that are required. I can't recall the exact quote, but my impression is that it sometimes takes years of wrangling. The CEO specifically cited Texas as being a very favorable environment where things can be done very fast.

Why would they spend a longer time and more money to set up networks in states with a high regulatory burden first, or risk that their plans may be interrupted or delayed because of a need of a difficult to obtain permit in one area or another, when they can reach an overall larger population using less money and in less time by starting first elsewhere?

I wouldn't blame AT&T. Blame your lawyers, state politician-goons and judges in California and New York.

AidenShaw
May 26, 2011, 01:43 PM
I wouldn't blame AT&T. Blame your lawyers, state politician-goons and judges in California and New York.

If that's true, why does Verizon 4G cover Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, New York City and Rochester?

http://network4g.verizonwireless.com/#/coverage

chrmjenkins
May 26, 2011, 01:54 PM
If that's true, why does Verizon 4G cover Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, New York City and Rochester?

http://network4g.verizonwireless.com/#/coverage

Yeah, kind of ridiculous idea. It will be in both by year's end. Arguably it will be their two largest deployments (NY for users, LA for area covered) so it makes sense for them to come a little later.

mstrze
May 26, 2011, 02:12 PM
Maybe 'density' would be a better parameter to consider when testing cellular speeds. Maybe not.
But if so, the top 10 U.S. cities by density are as follows:

New York, NY
Paterson, NJ
San Francisco, CA
Jersey City, NJ
Cambridge, MA
Daly City, CA
Boston, MA
Inglewood, CA
Santa Ana, CA
El Monte, CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population


I'm not quite sure where you got your data...this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density
shows US cities ranked by population density and 8 of top ten are simply the NYC metro area.

Daly City comes in 49th on the list, El Monte 69th.

Here are the top 10:
1 Guttenberg, New Jersey
2 Union City, New Jersey
3 West New York, New Jersey
4 Hoboken, New Jersey
5 New York City, New York
6 Maywood, LA
7 Cliffside Park, New Jersey
8 East Newark, New Jersey
9 Passaic, New Jersey
10 Cudahy, LA

[...typed from the 4th largest city in the US... Houston. (based purely on population)]

caspersoong
May 27, 2011, 07:58 AM
That's fast. Hope this doesn't delay iPhone 5.

xxBURT0Nxx
May 27, 2011, 08:00 AM
That's fast. Hope this doesn't delay iPhone 5.
fast? hardly.... they are the last major carrier in the US to make the move to 4G.

And why would it affect the release of the iPhone which is NOT going to support LTE?

b0r3dguy
May 28, 2011, 07:38 PM
fast? hardly.... they are the last major carrier in the US to make the move to 4G.

And why would it affect the release of the iPhone which is NOT going to support LTE?

Technically, T-Mobile doesn't have 4G, they just advertise HSDPA+ as "4G".

But if you exclude T-Mobile and are only talking about the "Big 3" (AT&T, Sprint & Verizon), then yes, AT&T is the last to the party.

xxBURT0Nxx
May 29, 2011, 12:36 PM
Technically, T-Mobile doesn't have 4G, they just advertise HSDPA+ as "4G".

But if you exclude T-Mobile and are only talking about the "Big 3" (AT&T, Sprint & Verizon), then yes, AT&T is the last to the party.
It really comes down to if you distinguish 4G as speeds, or by the technology on the backend. Even still, T-Mobile's "fake" 4G is faster than Sprint 4G in a lot of places and T-Mobile is going to be upgrading to 42Mbps this year....

smithrh
May 29, 2011, 01:05 PM
Too bad you probably STILL won't be able to send or receive any data at any event in Cowboy Stadium because their back end can't handle the load. :mad:

This a *physics* problem that no carrier worldwide will be able to deal with without spending a huge amount of money.

It's not a backhaul issue per se - the problem arises when thousands of users try to use a very small amount of RF spectrum in a very small space, all at the same time.