AT&T Announces Summer Launch of New LTE Modem and Hotspot Devices

[milan03]

Peak sustained 40 Mbps is still much lower than 56, which is why I said a burst test isn't representative. That's all the speedtests do.

And if Verizon was concerned about not dissatisfying users, they wouldn't have axed their unlimited plans. The carriers' objectives is to lure customers in with good networks and phones and then bend them over a barrel with features and overages.

So 40+mbps sustained is slower than AT&T's 28mbps Lab test that "should mimic" real world performance? I get it.
We the early vzw LTE adopters have the option to keep our unlimited data for $30 a month and on top of that unlimited hotspot for extra $30 if we wish to do so.
Didn't AT&T introduce metered data plans more than a year ago, way before they even offered LTE?
I'm just not sure how is AT&T gonna lure their customers in since they haven't had the goods in the network data performance department for quite some time.
Your arguments are simply incompetent. No offense.

 

[chrmjenkins]

So 40+mbps sustained is slower than AT&T's 28mbps Lab test that "should mimic" real world performance?

Nope. I rescinded my earlier point when I remembered that the speed I saw was Mbps, not MBps (crediting you for the correction). I then went on to compare tested speed to advertised speed by way of showing that AT&T's network would be competitive, not faster, provided sufficient backhaul existed.

We the early vzw LTE adopters have the option to keep our unlimited data for $30 a month and on top of that unlimited hotspot for extra $30 if we wish to do so.
Didn't AT&T introduce metered data plans more than a year ago, way before they even offered LTE?

Which is irrelevant since AT&T will continue to grandfather, just as verizon will. Faulting AT&T for a decision that hurts its consumers doesn't vindicate a second carrier doing it a year later.

On top of that, Verizon's new tiered structure is worse than AT&T's.

I'm just not sure how is AT&T gonna lure their customers in since they haven't had the goods in the network data performance department for quite some time.
Your arguments are simply incompetent. No offense.

AT&T will retain a strong 3.5G network while they build up their LTE network. Their HSPA+ network can be up to 7 times faster than Verizon's aging 3G network if my numbers are right. They've also built up quite a bit of backhaul in major cities, which is still being stressed as they have the lion's share of iPhone users, which tend to be big data hogs. They also still have simultaneous voice and data, which Verizon will need to wait for deploying VoLTE for. Finally, they also have more generous upgrade eligibility for their iphone customers, which Verizon does not. Many arguments will seem incompetent when you choose to misinterpret them deliberately.

 

[milan03]

AT&T will retain a strong 3.5G network while they build up their LTE network. Their HSPA+ network can be up to 7 times faster than Verizon's aging 3G network if my numbers are right. They've also built up quite a bit of backhaul in major cities, which is still being stressed as they have the lion's share of iPhone users, which tend to be big data hogs. They also still have simultaneous voice and data, which Verizon will need to wait for deploying VoLTE for. Finally, they also have more generous upgrade eligibility for their iphone customers, which Verizon does not. Many arguments will seem incompetent when you choose to misinterpret them deliberately.

In order for AT&T to retain a strong HSPA+ network, they have to build it first. They do NOT have sufficient backhaul in 95% of their market so there is absolutely nothing to retain. T-Mobile has way less money and resources than AT&T, but T-Mobile is kicking AT&T's axe in most major cities performance wise. They've actually had their backhaul in place BEFORE they started advertising their 4G offerings. Their speeds are the closest to Verizon's LTE.
I'm just not sure when you talk about AT&T's backhaul being built "quite a bit" are you talking out of your own experience or simply what you heard or read on the internet? Do you own AT&T's HSPA+ device?

 

[chrmjenkins]

In order for AT&T to retain a strong HSPA+ network, they have to build it first. They do NOT have sufficient backhaul in 95% of their market so there is absolutely nothing to retain.

Source on 95%?

T-Mobile has way less money and resources than AT&T, but T-Mobile is kicking AT&T's axe in most major cities performance wise. They've actually had their backhaul in place BEFORE they started advertising their 4G offerings. Their speeds are the closest to Verizon's LTE.

They also have fewer users and a stagnate clientele. I would be curious to see a comparison of total data served amongst the carriers.

I'm just not sure when you talk about AT&T's backhaul being built "quite a bit" are you talking out of your own experience or simply what you heard or read on the internet? Do you own AT&T's HSPA+ device?

Their slides from investor meetings are freely available online. They have increased capacity 5, 10 fold in a lot of cases over the past several years. In a lot of cases, it's still not enough, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been built up a lot either.

And yes, I have an Inspire 4G.

 

[milan03]

Source on 95%?

The simple fact that they are "not ready" to start marketing areas with the "enhanced backhaul" Which means even the markets with so called "increased backhaul" are not blanketed in full so you would have to drive around in order to find the cell site with the sufficient backhaul. I tested it myself in various different markets using ShockWave 21mbps AirCard. Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Seattle, NYC. Not only not ready, but the best results I was able to get was around 13mbps in the middle of the night in Boston's Kenmore Square area. Then ran the tests on ShockWave and iPhone at the same time, and the results halved.

I believe it when I see it, and there hasn't been much to see for the past 8 months.

 

[chrmjenkins]

The simple fact that they are "not ready" to start marketing areas with the "enhanced backhaul" Which means even the markets with so called "increased backhaul" are not blanketed in full so you would have to drive around in order to find the cell site with the sufficient backhaul. I tested it myself in various different markets using ShockWave 21mbps AirCard. Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Seattle, NYC. Not only not ready, but the best results I was able to get was around 13mbps in the middle of the night in Boston's Kenmore Square area. Then ran the tests on ShockWave and iPhone at the same time, and the results halved.

I believe it when I see it, and there hasn't been much to see for the past 8 months.

I understand and agree with the general conclusion that they need to improve drastically, but an anecdote does not sufficiently support the 95% you claimed, which is what I was interested in.

 

[jamesryanbell]

I understand and agree with the general conclusion that they need to improve drastically, but an anecdote does not sufficiently support the 95% you claimed, which is what I was interested in.

Generalizing is ok. The same point still exists if it's anywhere even remotely close to that.

 

[DroidRules]

That is odd, I have the exact opposite experience. TMobile data is faster and many people with AT&T phones ask to borrow my T-Mobile phone, as they are out of coverage quite often when T-Mobile is doing great.

YOUR experience huh....

I really love all the at&t hate. Go with whats best for you and move on with your lives I say.

I understand and agree with the general conclusion that they need to improve drastically, but an anecdote does not sufficiently support the 95% you claimed, which is what I was interested in.

You schooled him bro, no need to keep arguing with him.

Generalizing is ok. The same point still exists if it's anywhere even remotely close to that.

Lol generalizing a number of 95% is ok? You have a lot in common with Jon Kyl

 

[Ammo]

and no, just cause ATT doesn't reinvest in it's network it is no reason to approve monopolistic behavior in their proposed T-Mobile buyout.

No other provider is investing as much in their network like AT&T is. That is a fact.

 

[AidenShaw]

No other provider is investing as much in their network like AT&T is. That is a fact.

Links?

And are AT&T forced to do it because their network is so far behind Verizon that it's laughable, or are they working on becoming #1 in some dimensions?

 

[Ammo]

Links?

And are AT&T forced to do it because their network is so far behind Verizon that it's laughable, or are they working on becoming #1 in some dimensions?

Well the T-Mobile acquisition alone is a huge network investment.

The investment in HSPA+ and providing LTE to 95% of all Americans is more investment than Verizon is doing. AT&T is essentially investing into two 4G networks.

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

No other provider is investing as much in their network like AT&T is. That is a fact.

how many LTE markets does ATT have again? What about VZW? Oh yeah, even t-mo, and sprint already have 4G networks in place with speeds that womp on ATT....

As usual, ATT is last to the party, too little, too late, can't wait to drop them in favor of verizon (perhaps even sprint, since they have cheap plans and unlimited data) as long as the next iPhone truly is a "world phone"

The investment in HSPA+ and providing LTE to 95% of all Americans is more investment than Verizon is doing. AT&T is essentially investing into two 4G networks.

except that they provide lte to 0% of americans right now, while verizon has over 50 LTE markets. Plans for investment =/= Reality

 

[AidenShaw]

Well the T-Mobile acquisition alone is a huge network investment.

You mean the *proposed* acquisition, of course. It's a long way from happening.

The investment in HSPA+ and providing LTE to 95% of all Americans is more investment than Verizon is doing. AT&T is essentially investing into two 4G networks.

Please supply links to articles comparing the dollar value of AT&T network upgrades to the dollar value of Verizon upgrades.

My husband has a Thunderbolt, so I can see what Verizon has already done.

Maybe that's a key point - since Verizon has already brought 4G LTE online in many markets, it looks like they are slacking off. AT&T, desperate to catch up, is spending like crazy because they are so far behind.

 

[milan03]

Well the T-Mobile acquisition alone is a huge network investment.

The investment in HSPA+ and providing LTE to 95% of all Americans is more investment than Verizon is doing. AT&T is essentially investing into two 4G networks.

Wait wooooot?!
Spending $39BILLION for acquisition of another GSM carrier is better for consumers than investing those $39Billion dollars into infrastructure, backhaul in particular? Do you understand what kind of network would AT&T have if they right now dropped just half of $39Billion for backhaul to their existing cell sites? Do you also understand that it will take years for consumers to see benefits from that merger?
AT&T would've dwarfed any other competitor in terms of performance and customer satisfaction if they shelled out $20Billions right now to keep the customers happy. But no, that's not their goal.

Why would you ever support acquisition of the only other big GSM carrier that actually has a great HSPA+ network, knowing that if the acquisition goes through, we won't see absolutely any performance improvements until the end of 2013 once they properly migrate existing T-Mo customers? On top of that, why would I support downgrading a perfectly fine network to AT&T standards?

Acquisition of T-Mobile network isn't a huge network investment for any one of us. It's a huge customer increase with almost no hard work for AT&T's executives. Not to mention that it looks like they may get government money for it.

 

[hms84]

I don't see a Mac related news here, AT&T used to be an exclusive carrier for iPhone. I don't see them part of apple!

 

[imageWIS]

Not coming to NYC. Why? Because att service in NYC is non-existant.

 

[shingi70]

Just imagine next year ATTs 4G LTE and Tmobiles 42 mbps HSPA+ as a fall back.

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

Just imagine next year ATTs 4G LTE and Tmobiles 42 mbps HSPA+ as a fall back.

since they are launching with 5 markets and are only projecting 15 markets by the end of 2011, I'm not holding my breath.

VZW launched with almost 40 markets LAST YEAR, and plans to have 175 by the end of this year... att 4G is an absolute joke at best.

 

[erayser]

How is preliminary lab testing that reached 28mbps faster than my Verizon LTE smartphone that gets up to 57mbps in real world testing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdF3AnNc308

Can someone explain this to me. Thanks.

That's pretty good. I have Verizon 4G LTE also, but I never went over 12 Mbps in San Diego. Not complaining because I think it's fast enough. I guess it has to do with location?

You're absolutely right. Unless you get unlmited 4G, its a pure rip off to tie yourself into the contract where the Cell Lords will be draining your account with all kinds of overages for 2 years. It's a slavery! If you can grandfather yourself into the unlimited 4G and lock it down, you'll enjoy the web as it's meant to be enjoyed.

I am connected to wifi at home and work. Outside of that, I try devote my time with my wife and kids. I try not to be a slave to my mobile devices.

I have unlimited data, and I enjoy the data I use. Plus, it helps when work pays for all my data.

 

[Thish]

Glitches with the video conference will be fix by LTE I guess...