Oh yeah....that makes a lot of sense (sarcasm)...allow these bandwidth intensive applications to chew up the network BEFORE you upgrade the network. HELLO?!?!? Think!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T Announces Plans for 7.2 Mbps 3G Deployment
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh yeah....that makes a lot of sense (sarcasm)...allow these bandwidth intensive applications to chew up the network BEFORE you upgrade the network. HELLO?!?!? Think!
I live well within, what AT&T terms "Best Coverage". What a joke.
300 dropped calls out of 1400 minutes. Data rates as fast as 156K.
I am certain their going to a faster data rate will effect only a small percentage of customers.
300 dropped calls out of 1400 minutes. Data rates as fast as 156K.
I am certain their going to a faster data rate will effect only a small percentage of customers.
Regretfully, my love for the US cell carriers is on hold until any of them impress me with more than just rhetoric and press announcements like this one today.
Exactly. That's all this is. Something to get people excited about with the iPhone announcement around the corner. And in the end, the implementation and execution will fail and we will get some lame excuse like "AT&T is preparing for the next upgrade, which promises faster speeds, coming in 2014." I can't wait for the iPhone exclusivity to end.
How about a "How come you don't have 200Mbps already" comment instead?
Virgin have just started trials in the UK of 200Mbps cable broadband.
Because despite offering "roughly" the same [whatever] most of them offer something unique that makes them competitive for certain groups of people.
Sprint's "Simply Everything" plans include unlimited data/text + a voice plan. The cheaper plans (400/900 minutes a month) save around $30/month over the price of the same services on AT&T/Verizon. Sprint's $99/month plan is unlimited data/txt + unlimited voice. That's a huge value that sets Sprint apart from the other three.
And how many years did T-Mobile offer the value of the "faves" before another national carrier (Verizon) picked up on it?
VZW's dumped billions in rural coverage and roaming agreements, so if you're someone who travels the US a lot and needs a signal, their network coverage (esp in rural areas) can be a huge incentive.
Thank god AT&T has the iPhone, because I can't really think of much they're doing to stand out from the other carriers.
I don't disagree with you that a lot of what the carriers do doesn't differentiate them from the others, but there are a few things that each of them are doing that I think does make a huge difference (when it comes to values and incentives, anyways).
You need to compare the coverage areas for the iPhone in Europe to the coverage areas for the iPhone in the US to make this a legitimate comparison, and you're not going to get that from Wikipedia. However, the reasons for the slow adoption of faster mobile in the US aren't really related to logistics, but to standards-body politics.
From my perspective....
ATT needs to get their sheet together or I am leaving them at the end of my contract in 2010. The iphone is great but the dropped calls and no service found in a major metropolitan area like San Diego is just Bovine Scat.
Performance is measured by results and if ATT can not service cities like San Diego and San Francisco with decent coverage and few dropped calls they just don't deserve my business.
My hope is that Verizon gets the iphone in 2010 otherwise...hello Crackberry.
ATT needs to get their sheet together or I am leaving them at the end of my contract in 2010. The iphone is great but the dropped calls and no service found in a major metropolitan area like San Diego is just Bovine Scat.
Performance is measured by results and if ATT can not service cities like San Diego and San Francisco with decent coverage and few dropped calls they just don't deserve my business.
My hope is that Verizon gets the iphone in 2010 otherwise...hello Crackberry.
I personally don't think AT&T sucks in any area I have been in with my iPhone. That doesn't mean I think AT&T is great, but over the past year AT&T has shown me they continue to need improvement with their 3G. In some places I get great signal with a pretty fast speed, but then there are places where I can go from great signal to no signal in a matter of about 300 feet. That is what bothers me about the current set up of the AT&T 3G network. Hopefully this new deployment will improve the speeds as well. I personally never experience dropped calls either. My only complaints are the availability of 3G and the top speeds I get with it.
Bullsh*t. The original poster used the term Europe and not EU. You asked what topographical data to use. And that's what I answered to with the wikipedia link. In your posting you then continued to speak, about France, Spain, Germany and the EU while the original poster clearly that Europe and not the EU.
Wow!
I just wish I could get any cell phone service at my house. I have to drive 20 miles to get cell coverage.
If I could get 4g or this faster 3g, I could drop my slow DSL service.
I just wish I could get any cell phone service at my house. I have to drive 20 miles to get cell coverage.
If I could get 4g or this faster 3g, I could drop my slow DSL service.
Fact Check:
The continent of Europe is only somewhat larger than the US.
The European Union is less than half the size and population density more than three and a half times that of the US.
Other Carriers Worse
CDMA EVDO Rev A (Sprint and Verizon) is limited to 3.1 Mb/s on the downlink.
HDUPA on ATT (but sadly not implemented on the current iPhone) has a much faster uplink.
CDMA EVDO Rev A (Sprint and Verizon) is limited to 3.1 Mb/s on the downlink.
HDUPA on ATT (but sadly not implemented on the current iPhone) has a much faster uplink.
Signal Strength Really Does Not Matter
Recent disciplined measurements strongly indicate that for most of the cell carriers there is no correlation between signal strength (e.g. "bars") and network throughput.
Sufficient signal is the least problem ... enough radio bandwidth and enough backhaul bandwidth are the most serious problems.
Ultimately, more cell towers will be required to get enough SNR to use these higher burst speeds of 3.5G and 4G.
Recent disciplined measurements strongly indicate that for most of the cell carriers there is no correlation between signal strength (e.g. "bars") and network throughput.
Sufficient signal is the least problem ... enough radio bandwidth and enough backhaul bandwidth are the most serious problems.
Ultimately, more cell towers will be required to get enough SNR to use these higher burst speeds of 3.5G and 4G.
