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 to Complete 3G Rollout by June
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lucky for me I live in the 3g coverage of NoVA....outside of that it is pretty sketchy....
Wewt for The 703.
And The 571, I guess.
Welcome to the economics of the service industry. In short, most service providers earn more if they spent $10,000 to service an area with 1000 customers per square mile, versus spending $5,000 to service an area with 100 customers per square mile.
That's the rub of rural living. Then again, I've got some beautiful trees and a pasture and lots of mountains that city folks can't get.
A few notes:
- The rumored 3G chip going into the iPhone doesn't support HSUPA (Infineon SGOLD3H), just HSDPA. However I believe it does support HSDPA 7.2Mb/s.
- The problem with video calls over the data network is latency - the latency on the voice call is lower than it is for a data connection. So if they were to try and use HSUPA for video calls, it could be laggy.
- The rumored 3G chip going into the iPhone doesn't support HSUPA (Infineon SGOLD3H), just HSDPA. However I believe it does support HSDPA 7.2Mb/s.
- The problem with video calls over the data network is latency - the latency on the voice call is lower than it is for a data connection. So if they were to try and use HSUPA for video calls, it could be laggy.
1.4 Mbps -- is this a joke?
In Austria every single wireless provider has been offering 7.2Mbps HSDPA for 1-2 years (up from 3.6Mbps, which has been available for years), so 1.4Mbps seems like a step back in history. I certainly hope AT&T will upgrade their network to 7.2Mbps HSDPA ASAP, and don't quite understand why they would even implement obsolete network technology at this point.
In Austria every single wireless provider has been offering 7.2Mbps HSDPA for 1-2 years (up from 3.6Mbps, which has been available for years), so 1.4Mbps seems like a step back in history. I certainly hope AT&T will upgrade their network to 7.2Mbps HSDPA ASAP, and don't quite understand why they would even implement obsolete network technology at this point.
I presume 1.4Mbps is an AT&T cap. 3G is either 384 (which nobody uses), or 3.6/7.2/14.4Mbps (HSDPA, technically 3.5G but everybody calls it 3G). That's theoretical of course, but I consistently get 2.5-3Mbps on the 3.6Mbps connection... and the networks here are upgrading to 7.2Mbps over the next year so that should double (OTOH my DSL is 18Mbps so it's got some catching up to do).
We can get 3Mbps DSL here in Alaska for $90 a month. Any chance of 3G up here? Are there places that they said won't be getting it by June?
Could be just a deadline... these things take years of planning - way longer than the iphone has been in existance.
eg. When the Ofcom in the UK sold the 3G licenses in 2000, a condition of the license was 80% 3G coverage by 31 December 2007. It didn't happen overnight... there was 7 years of slack in there and a certain operator begnning with O and ending in 2 didn't even manage that modest goal (most providers except the aforeentioned one are over 90% now).
* http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Feb2007/4316.htm
eg. When the Ofcom in the UK sold the 3G licenses in 2000, a condition of the license was 80% 3G coverage by 31 December 2007. It didn't happen overnight... there was 7 years of slack in there and a certain operator begnning with O and ending in 2 didn't even manage that modest goal (most providers except the aforeentioned one are over 90% now).
* http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Feb2007/4316.htm
To all those that wonder if they can cancel their broadband cable or DSL, I wouldn't go to that level yet. Some people have pointed it out but latency is the real killer on these mobile broadband services.
I've gotten as low as 100ms latency on AT&T 3G hooked up to a laptop which made browsing a lot better than the 300ms latency on AT&T EDGE.
For those who have never really experienced latency, imagine there being lots of pauses when you surf:
Waiting for data from...
<pause>
Transferring data from...
<pause>
Waiting for data from...
<pause>
The effect is very noticeable off an EDGE connection. EDGE technically can hit 20-30kbps which if you sat down on a DSL connection at 20-30kbps pages would load up pretty fast actually due to the low latency (10-20ms). But try and use EDGE on a phone or tethered and even though you can pull 20-30kbps the latency makes the connection seem extremely slow in comparison.
I think this is all right, feel free to correct me if not
I've gotten as low as 100ms latency on AT&T 3G hooked up to a laptop which made browsing a lot better than the 300ms latency on AT&T EDGE.
For those who have never really experienced latency, imagine there being lots of pauses when you surf:
Waiting for data from...
<pause>
Transferring data from...
<pause>
Waiting for data from...
<pause>
The effect is very noticeable off an EDGE connection. EDGE technically can hit 20-30kbps which if you sat down on a DSL connection at 20-30kbps pages would load up pretty fast actually due to the low latency (10-20ms). But try and use EDGE on a phone or tethered and even though you can pull 20-30kbps the latency makes the connection seem extremely slow in comparison.
I think this is all right, feel free to correct me if not
Huh??? Most carriers have DSL up to 6Mbps/768k up. I know I've had 6 megs for several years now.
Charleston better get 3G or I probably won't buy a 3G iPhone. I heard we are getting it in June, but we aren't listed on their cities list.
They won't increase the unlimited data plan fee right?
I changed to the $15 data, no virtual voice mail and 200 free text messages plan, to save $5 a month The AT&T guy told me that as long as it is only a smart phone, my current plan provides me unlimited 3G speed w/o any extra cost
I changed to the $15 data, no virtual voice mail and 200 free text messages plan, to save $5 a month
The AT&T guy told me that as long as it is only a smart phone, my current plan provides me unlimited 3G speed w/o any extra costJust to be clear, are you suggesting santa cruz is rural? I mean, I am ass to ass with people here and our freeways hardly move. we have a 4,794 person per square mile density. true the city is only 12 square miles, but the county has 264,000 people. Sure, it is not big city...but on the bigger side of small.
They're expecting to have the network running at 7.2Mbps by the end of 2009, I believe.
If you are expecting video calling from AT&T, don't get your hopes up. The current "video sharing" adds video to an existing voice call by initiating separate call via the data connection. The audio/video is not synchronized because they are entirely separate connections. Additionally, there is no way to use the "video sharing" to call someone on another 3G cell provider that has video calling. While the AT&T network could support the same kind of video calling implemented outside the US, AT&T seems to be saving a few bucks by not investing in the needed 3G-324 equipment to move video calls between different types of networks.
Who knows, AT&T seems to be pulling subscribers from other US networks (Sprint is certainly taking it on the chin) and they may have enough cash to invest in the additional infrastructure. Video calling in Europe has had a very slow start and does not seem to be the "killer app" that drives revenue from the expensive 3G networks.
That's low-end DSL.
Considering all the 3G drooling that's going on, I predict that people will be disappointed with the speed once the 3G iPhone comes out, because (1) 3G is still slow (much better than EDGE, but still slow), and (2) the iPhone's processor is slow (and I haven't seen any rumors regarding a processor speed increase).
I have a somewhat fast DSL line (6.0mbps down, 600k up) with wifi, and I think the iPhone is only marginally usable in terms of speed (wifi, of course). Since AT&T's 3G is significantly slower than my DSL line, I'm definitely not excited about 3G (and please note that AT&T's 3G coverage is significantly less than EDGE).
Of course, there could be other features in the new iPhone that'll make me drool, but 3G is nowhere on my list.
First off this is a cell phone network so what do you expect?
Second, let's see you bring your DSL on your next vacation to another city.
I've got a question about 3G Coverage...
Do you have to be in the city that ATT lists as having 3G? I'm about 10 miles out of the major city here in CT that has 3G. Would I still be able to get the 3G speeds in my town?
I cant wait to get the new iPhone either way, it'll be my first smartphone!
Do you have to be in the city that ATT lists as having 3G? I'm about 10 miles out of the major city here in CT that has 3G. Would I still be able to get the 3G speeds in my town?
I cant wait to get the new iPhone either way, it'll be my first smartphone!
First of all, Quantico and Fredericksburg are in the lower ends of NoVA since the traffic is easily as bad or worse there. Secondly, ... or move out of state like I did to a larger city that has less traffic and great 3G coverage.
That's where I moved from. We couldn't take the traffic anymore. Just living there was stressful enough never mind the stress from work. What other city has ONE major road and does nothing about it!? Morons. If you want a case study on piss poor city planning that's the city to look at.
The only people that need a faster connection are those that download a lot from Bitorrent, etc. Just browsing the web won't be any faster since the servers are usually what's causing the slow down. Why buy a Ferrari when you're almost always going the speed limit?
Eh? WTH are you talking about?
Personally, I'm expecting 3G to be so-so in terms of speed (just as you say
-- go back and read what I wrote). I'm saying that too many people appear to be expecting blazing speed because of "3G", and I'm guessing that we're going to be seeing some serious whining here once people realize just how fast 3G is (in the US, not elsewhere).