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 4G LTE iPhone Planned for 2012 Launch?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They may fall back to HSPA+ but that network isn't anywhere near as widespread as VZW's EvDO. Thus, they will probably be falling back to EDGE, which is way worse than EvDO.
VZW's LTE footprint will probably outcover AT&T's HSPA+ network before AT&T even upgrades their EDGE to HSPA...
Read this
I agree IMO At&t is in the best spot. Verizon LTE is going to be a lot smaller than At&t HSPA+ so if you lost your signal on Verizon LTE out screwed, were at least At&t LTE if you fall back you're on HSPA+
I don't know whats going on with T-Moblie and their LTE plans but their HSPA+ 4G is smaller than At&t's HSPA+
dammit!
i made a bet for 200 bucks that the iphone will come early in 2011 because of a certain post on a certain site called macrumors
See bold part...
Doesn't make sense
While ATT's current 3G network is far from decent, I really don't know why they'd move to 4G. When good strength, 3G is awesome, I say work on fixing 3G before adding another level of bandwidth because call me a fortune teller, but I am pretty sure 4G will suck ever more than 3G at ATT's network.
Amen
While ATT's current 3G network is far from decent, I really don't know why they'd move to 4G. When good strength, 3G is awesome, I say work on fixing 3G before adding another level of bandwidth because call me a fortune teller, but I am pretty sure 4G will suck ever more than 3G at ATT's network.
Amen
That's what I'd focus on...
AT&T's 3G network is great when it works. The problem is the coverage sucks, and even inside of coverage zones I found myself falling back to EDGE quiet often even though the map says I should have 3G. Verizon might not be as fast as AT&T peaks but it's consistent and I never fall back to 1X (CDMA's equivalent to EDGE).
duh, because HSPA+ and other newer technologies will fix the problems that people are experiencing now due to demand
Apple needs to put some satellites in orbit and establish a viable satellite phone system. Perhaps a dual system. Towers for a wifi network and satellites for phone service and internet when no towers are about. Perhaps they could buy a company in the satellite communications business?
The isat or something.
The isat or something.
They're not "taking" anyone's cash, people are willingly giving them their cash. You seem really bitter around the whole concept of "paying for nice things", what's up with that?
Apple makes nice things, they tend to make and release nice things on a predictable yearly basis, what about this is so evil?
People LINE UP to give Apple their cash, anticipate, and make whole websites about the nice things Apple makes. If all this is just highway robbery to you and isn't a valuable/desireable upgrade, why are you party to it?
Apple *IS* a for-profit business, I'll remind you, taking in cash is a huge part of what they do. But, I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that the pace of innovation is stagnant or just superficial. Go throw rocks at other businesses who put out point releases purely for the "upgrade" - but you'll lose that argument with Apple for the vast majority of products. Besides, legacy support on Apple hardware is very good. They're not a "planned obsolescence" business model.
Apple makes nice things, they tend to make and release nice things on a predictable yearly basis, what about this is so evil?
People LINE UP to give Apple their cash, anticipate, and make whole websites about the nice things Apple makes. If all this is just highway robbery to you and isn't a valuable/desireable upgrade, why are you party to it?
Apple *IS* a for-profit business, I'll remind you, taking in cash is a huge part of what they do. But, I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that the pace of innovation is stagnant or just superficial. Go throw rocks at other businesses who put out point releases purely for the "upgrade" - but you'll lose that argument with Apple for the vast majority of products. Besides, legacy support on Apple hardware is very good. They're not a "planned obsolescence" business model.
ATT *hopes* we think HSPA+, etc will fix the problem. It won't. The problem isn't a carrier signal. It's spectrum, backhaul, and plain oversubscription.
ATT sold massive amounts of unlimited data plans, data handsets, and didn't have the spectrum from the handset to the tower to do it, regardless of what 3G technology or 3G+ technology they try to schelp.
Then, they simply didn't do the investment (or couldn't get approval) for the right physical presence sites to operate the various spectrum they bought at auction/from the Cingular acquisition. They had their old TDMA stations they migrated to GSM and later to 3G, but the physical design of a voice-centric TDMA network (e.g. the spacing/needs/density of physical sites) is MARKEDLY different from a GSM network, let alone a network evolving into being very data (packet) centric.
Then, from what under-built physical network they did deploy, they didn't build in a very good backhaul infrastructure.
ATT isn't stupid, neither is it poor. But, they do have some massive leadership issues, some difficult legacy/technology/real estate/heritage/acquisition issues, etc that are all exacerbated more on the focus more on marketing & sounding good than walking the walk.
This HSPA+ thing is a great example. de Vega and team are putting Fancy Feast on a plate and calling it fine Foie Gras. They want to win this "4G" war in words & labels when they really should be focused on winning the "customer experience" war. They're *lying* (and they know it, how can de Vega go up there and call HSPA+ 4G? He's got no ethics). HSPA+ is NOT 4G. It's sexed up 3G.
It's not a question of whether they can do it, the technology exists, or even if the capital exists - it's a question of willingness, culture, and priorities. ATT shows what theirs are everyday, and it's not the build out of a network with the best customer service. That company is called Verizon (they have their own bevy of issues, but being focused on network build-out and coverage is NOT one of them!).
ATT sold massive amounts of unlimited data plans, data handsets, and didn't have the spectrum from the handset to the tower to do it, regardless of what 3G technology or 3G+ technology they try to schelp.
Then, they simply didn't do the investment (or couldn't get approval) for the right physical presence sites to operate the various spectrum they bought at auction/from the Cingular acquisition. They had their old TDMA stations they migrated to GSM and later to 3G, but the physical design of a voice-centric TDMA network (e.g. the spacing/needs/density of physical sites) is MARKEDLY different from a GSM network, let alone a network evolving into being very data (packet) centric.
Then, from what under-built physical network they did deploy, they didn't build in a very good backhaul infrastructure.
ATT isn't stupid, neither is it poor. But, they do have some massive leadership issues, some difficult legacy/technology/real estate/heritage/acquisition issues, etc that are all exacerbated more on the focus more on marketing & sounding good than walking the walk.
This HSPA+ thing is a great example. de Vega and team are putting Fancy Feast on a plate and calling it fine Foie Gras. They want to win this "4G" war in words & labels when they really should be focused on winning the "customer experience" war. They're *lying* (and they know it, how can de Vega go up there and call HSPA+ 4G? He's got no ethics). HSPA+ is NOT 4G. It's sexed up 3G.
It's not a question of whether they can do it, the technology exists, or even if the capital exists - it's a question of willingness, culture, and priorities. ATT shows what theirs are everyday, and it's not the build out of a network with the best customer service. That company is called Verizon
(they have their own bevy of issues, but being focused on network build-out and coverage is NOT one of them!).
AT&T doesn't even have 3G in most places and that's been around for a while, I doubt 4G will get very far either.
+1! In usable, actual throughput, I wouldn't be surprised if Verizon's EVDO network was faster than ATT's "4G" (either LTE or HSPA+, which is just really 3G incremented with a 4 by ATT marketing to make ATT look good) when it goes live.
no they wouldn't, because if they did I would only buy the iphone once. Plus there losing developers to android,
anyways 2012 LTE sounds right on to me
Doubt that. Ever use a sat phone? You would never put up with the delay. When you talk across the 'pond', you are using fiber and copper under the ocean. Heck, straight up and down would be over 44,000 miles. Use the speed of light and do the calculation. Ever watch a tv report from another country that uses a sat?
Are you from ATT marketing? Do you really believe that or are you just really misinformed? Do you *really* believe ATT covers 250M people? Do you really think ATT's HSPA+ network is just sitting there ready to go?
It isn't. ATT doesn't cover 250M people, they cover *perhaps* half that, and they don't cover them with solid, reliable service, either, that takes the pool down to perhaps 75M - on a good day with you head pointed in just the right direction/angle.
Do you know how ATT came up with that 250M number? Some ATT marketing wonk looked at a map of where they have cell sites, put a 5 mile radius around each one, colored it in in photoshop/some GIS package, added up the cities' populations and came up with that 250M number.
Have you ever used a cellular network? ATT specifically? If so, then surely you know that just because you have a site somewhere within a 5 mile radius of yourself whether it is usable to actually place a call or transfer data is a completely different story.
That ATT map, their claims, and your assumptions about ATT have more holes in them than Windows 7.
It isn't. ATT doesn't cover 250M people, they cover *perhaps* half that, and they don't cover them with solid, reliable service, either, that takes the pool down to perhaps 75M - on a good day with you head pointed in just the right direction/angle.
Do you know how ATT came up with that 250M number? Some ATT marketing wonk looked at a map of where they have cell sites, put a 5 mile radius around each one, colored it in in photoshop/some GIS package, added up the cities' populations and came up with that 250M number.
Have you ever used a cellular network? ATT specifically? If so, then surely you know that just because you have a site somewhere within a 5 mile radius of yourself whether it is usable to actually place a call or transfer data is a completely different story.
That ATT map, their claims, and your assumptions about ATT have more holes in them than Windows 7.
No they won't.
People will still take an iPhone over a Droid or and WP7, because the average user now understands that the iPhone will set the standard and it has a one year life span, versus the 2 month life span of an Android or Windows Phone 7 device.
That's a technicality, it was buried in a press release on Dec 17. Just because you can "technically" get away with lying, doesn't make it right.
It's not ethical to call your HSPA+ network 4G, whether you bought the decision from the ITU or not. I know ATT and TMO need to compete in the marketing war, but the best marketing tactic isn't a number letter combo that is meaningless to most people, it's having a network that WORKS.
Ironically, the only carrier out there doing that is also the only carrier with a real bona-fide 4G network - VZW.
It's not ethical to call your HSPA+ network 4G, whether you bought the decision from the ITU or not. I know ATT and TMO need to compete in the marketing war, but the best marketing tactic isn't a number letter combo that is meaningless to most people, it's having a network that WORKS.
Ironically, the only carrier out there doing that is also the only carrier with a real bona-fide 4G network - VZW.
Yup, ATT and TMO beat the tar out of VZW on paper...but we don't make calls and send data packets on paper, that in real life over real physical carriers, and let me tell you what, there are VERY few circumstances where real handsets, over real air, to real POPs validate your paper assumptions.
Because some corporate lobbyists got their way with the ITU doesn't make it right or true.
I can pay a scientist to tell you the world is flat, will you believe it? I can pay a publisher to print a dictionary that tells you dark is light and light is dark, will you believe that, too?
It's a technicality that was born out of a bunch of lobbying and money from T-Mobile and ATT so they could keep up in the marketing wars.
I can pay a scientist to tell you the world is flat, will you believe it? I can pay a publisher to print a dictionary that tells you dark is light and light is dark, will you believe that, too?
It's a technicality that was born out of a bunch of lobbying and money from T-Mobile and ATT so they could keep up in the marketing wars.
Sprint has a bona-fide 4G network as well--or more accurately, their subsidiary Clearwire does. Their WiMax network is substantially larger than VZWs, and the technologies are similar enough that even the hardware is the same.
Tmo and ATT are playing games/lying, but Sprint and VZW both have the real deal.
It's not ethical?
Are we still talking about technology?
Remember, don't hate the player, hate the game.
If HSPA+ falls within the requirements that the ITU put forth defining 4G, then it's 4G. End of story.
Why do people get so excited over this stuff.
I actually switch my iPhone to Edge only and guess what it works great. On my iPhone 4 I have never dropped a call. And I spend a lot of time in both NYC and San Francisco. Go figure. But then again I don't walk around with a phone or a Bluetooth ear piece connected to my ear like an idiot either. Blabbering away, looking like I'm crazy, talking to myself.
As far as data goes the AT&T network and my iPhone does it job. But again, that's just me, some one who is on the road traveling between 2 to 3 weeks a month.
Im on O2 in the UK, reception for me is brilliant, it aint broke as far as Im concerned, no need to fix (break) it.
No such thing as 4G
Bottom line: it is what it is unless we revise it to be what we say it is, even if it is not.
Fan me later.
Bottom line: it is what it is unless we revise it to be what we say it is, even if it is not.
Fan me later.