AT&T and LTE

[rjohnstone]

I'm excited, it's sink or swim time for Big Blue. I have the utmost confidence they'll swim.

Big Blue??? What does IBM have to do with this?

AT&T has sufficient spectrum for their LTE plans.
The T-Mobile purchase was for future spectrum growth and more backhaul.

 

[BiggAW]

I'm not an expert but try to be a smart consumer/layman but what I've been reading/studying I would agree. I think in metro areas they'll be the same.

I'm in a top metro area Philly in which I spend most time. Even when we vacation it's in a populated area like the Jersey shore or Florida.

So since I think LTE will be similar or close in metro areas and I live and spend most time in our metro area, I'll have to make an informed decision.

Yeah, we'll also have to see how well AT&T uses HSPA+ in the areas that they won't be doing LTE to have either Four G or Faux G nationwide...

 

[mpossoff]

Yeah, we'll also have to see how well AT&T uses HSPA+ in the areas that they won't be doing LTE to have either Four G or Faux G nationwide...

The issue I see is AT&T has too many things that aren't complete at one time. Converting edge areas to 3G, converting 3G area to HSPA+, converting whole network to LTE.

I think the biggest one would be getting edge areas to 3G. From reading it looks like a lot of AT&T network is still edge, if that's true that's a shock to me.

How much of VZW is '3G' compared to AT&T network? If VZW network is almost 3G it makes sense for VZW to deploy LTE because their network is almost entirely '3G', speeds being irrelevant. If AT&T network needs more edge to 3G then I don't understand why they wouldn't convert those areas to 3G.

AT&T just seems they have too many open ends.

 

[rjohnstone]

The issue I see is AT&T has too many things that aren't complete at one time. Converting edge areas to 3G, converting 3G area to HSPA+, converting whole network to LTE.

I think the biggest one would be getting edge areas to 3G. From reading it looks like a lot of AT&T network is still edge, if that's true that's a shock to me.

How much of VZW is '3G' compared to AT&T network? If VZW network is almost 3G it makes sense for VZW to deploy LTE because their network is almost entirely '3G', speeds being irrelevant. If AT&T network needs more edge to 3G then I don't understand why they wouldn't convert those areas to 3G.

AT&T just seems they have too many open ends.

EDGE, 3G HSPA/HSPA+ and LTE networks run along side each other.
AT&T is already adding (not replacing) 3G/HSPA+ capabilities in older EDGE areas that are not slated for LTE in the near future.
They can do this as they use different frequencies for each type.
AT&T will keep their legacy networks in place along side their LTE network as a fallback.
They're not open ends, they are fallback options.

Verizon does the same thing with their network.

 

[BiggAW]

The issue I see is AT&T has too many things that aren't complete at one time. Converting edge areas to 3G, converting 3G area to HSPA+, converting whole network to LTE.

I think the biggest one would be getting edge areas to 3G. From reading it looks like a lot of AT&T network is still edge, if that's true that's a shock to me.

How much of VZW is '3G' compared to AT&T network? If VZW network is almost 3G it makes sense for VZW to deploy LTE because their network is almost entirely '3G', speeds being irrelevant. If AT&T network needs more edge to 3G then I don't understand why they wouldn't convert those areas to 3G.

AT&T just seems they have too many open ends.

I feel like we're having the same discussion on two different forums.