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 Turbo Indicator Showing Up in iPhone Status Bar for Subscribers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Isn't regular AT&T 5G everywhere? I see it right now on my phone in the CA Bay Area.
With the recent naming trend, it should be AT&T+
The + could be seen as both a plus symbol to represent enhanced network performance and as a lower-case t for Turbo
Does Verizon have a similar tiered option? If not, as a 15+ year at&t customer this makes me want to switch this afternoon. Even though I can technically afford the turbo service, i’m much less comfortable with the idea that we're moving to a place where only those who can afford the top tier of prioritized phone service can access it. what are the implications for this in the face of a natural disaster Or other circumstances where having stable cell service access is crucial?
Whenever something is prioritized, there is always a natural trade off of something or someone else being deprioritized.
Whenever something is prioritized, there is always a natural trade off of something or someone else being deprioritized.
Verizon (and TMo) also do this. In fact, the MVNOs are on the 'lowest tier' of RAN prioritization from the cell capacity they buy from the big 3.
What you're seeing has been in place for years, and it's only because of capacity prioritization that first responders and others can get/be guaranteed service in times of natural disaster.
Wouldn’t surprise me that in their hubris, the EU would for emergency services to use the same level of service As the general public. 😄
and what if you're not a first responder, but instead a user who is on the lower tier and in need of help in times of a natural disaster or other crisis?
That's not the scenario this Turbo service is solving for, or would impact. If there was a genuine natural disaster/crisis, none of the consumer-level cellular plans would likely work. Only those for first responders.
You pay the $7 if you're at a crowded event and your videos are buffering or your FaceTime is glitchy. Everyone else will have slow, unstable or time-outs for the web services, yours will work better.
Ahem, no, just no. The USA is light-years behind the rest of the world regarding wireless communications infrastructure. This couldn't be further from the truth.
So first you claim that there is no other country that has a provider close to AT&T or Verizon, now you are talking about their limited bandwidth. LOL That just shows how bad the infrastructure is in the USA if they need to implement measures like this.
Do you feel like there's a tier of network quality above the average user but below first responder prioritization that this Turbo taps into?
That’s exactly what Turbo is.
ArsTechnica describes the technical elements as such:
AT&T confirmed to Ars today that Turbo "is assigned to a QCI to which some of our consumer traffic was previously assigned." But AT&T said it has "materially modified it and increased network resources and relative weighting for AT&T Turbo traffic, thereby creating a higher level of performance than we've ever before offered to consumers."
This reminds me of 2020 when we had 4G Telstra #StaySafe and then later for about 6 months we had Telstra #letsVaxx and nothing has happened since, nor prior to then. I am in Australia, Telstra is pretty much the main provider as 43% of the population uses it (second place is Optus at 29%). the rest use piggybacks of those 2 networks...
What? When did that change? Europe rolled out faster cheaper wireless while AT&T was dragging its heels. AT&T failed so hard to keep up that they even started calling their “4.5g” network “5g”, even though 5g had a meaning, and it wasn’t a modified LTE network.
AT&T Now Has “5G” Wireless Service, But It’s Not Really 5G
AT&T has unveiled its new and faster “5G” service, but availability is extremely limited, T-Mobile already has it, and it’s really only faster 4G LTE.
To some degree that makes sense. But the article states something on offer here is clearer zoom calls. That was already a thing that people had without paying more. So they are degrading the service you already pay for with the intent to upsell?
More like you bought the ZR1, and then one day they turned it into a Stingray just so they could upsell you back into a product you already had.
Ones a subscription, and the other an upfront cost, but I didn’t invent the analogy ;-)
I previously posted the relevant comment from AT&T to proactively address the misconception that they 'took away' something people had before. They didn't.
As for upfront cost vs. subscription... welcome to the 2020s, I guess?
Your data is deprioritized based on your data consumption level, they just don't tell you. If you're on "unlimited" plan, that is.
Not mentioning data roaming "fair use" charges.
Forget the carrier name. The issue is that this service exists at all really.
When AT&T created 'turbo' they did not event a new generation of cellular data (e.g. GPRS, EDGE, LTE), they started to class the priority of their users on a shared resource without improving the resource. Did they lower the price for non-turbo users? I doubt it. They're simply allowing people to pay a premium to receive a technologically normal 5G service, at the expense of service quality to non-turbo users; should there be congestion where they have to choose one over the other.
If I use the (imperfect) analogy of 3 congested lanes of traffic on a road, they didn't create a new lane (5G is just 5G) and ask for money for its use, they just rebranded a lane that was already there and are asking people to pay for it, funneling the remaining traffic unto the remaining lanes at times of resource contention.
Which is cheaper than them actually investing in their network to increase capacity to give everyone the maximum potential of 5G.
When AT&T created 'turbo' they did not event a new generation of cellular data (e.g. GPRS, EDGE, LTE), they started to class the priority of their users on a shared resource without improving the resource. Did they lower the price for non-turbo users? I doubt it. They're simply allowing people to pay a premium to receive a technologically normal 5G service, at the expense of service quality to non-turbo users; should there be congestion where they have to choose one over the other.
If I use the (imperfect) analogy of 3 congested lanes of traffic on a road, they didn't create a new lane (5G is just 5G) and ask for money for its use, they just rebranded a lane that was already there and are asking people to pay for it, funneling the remaining traffic unto the remaining lanes at times of resource contention.
Which is cheaper than them actually investing in their network to increase capacity to give everyone the maximum potential of 5G.
Last edited:
Wha?
The US doesn't even have its own major cellular equipment maker any more; Lucent/Bell Labs is now part of Nokia.
All 4 US carriers bought more spectrum, added more backhaul capacity and rolled out SA core capacity/capabilities in the past 5 years, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. And it's been deployed. All of this is public information.
So the road has been widening this entire time. More lanes are being added. This particular 'new lane' is just for people that pay the $7, but that doesn't mean that more regular lanes weren't added.
Cellular networking equipment for US carriers is made in Lewisville, TX.
https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/company-facts/ericsson-worldwide/united-states/5g-smart-factory
Silicon, USA: Technology That's Actually Made in America - Ericsson: Lewisville, TX
Ever tried to buy a computer assembled in the United States and made entirely of US parts? You can't. But we found 43 companies that make high-quality tech products in the United States.
If there was no constraint on supply, there would be no value to the premium proposition - as all customers would get the fully fledged speeds the technology (5G) has to offer. There would be no reason for anyone to pay the $7. The constraint on supply of fully fledged 5G speeds (inc. latency) that justifies the existence of the premium plan is either real, or manufactured.
There is constraint on supply. Always has been. Radio spectrum, radio capacity at the tower, backhaul transport capacity, network core capacity…. These are all finite things. And increasing capacity at any step along the way is not an inexpensive or quick endeavor.
Absolutely not true at all. As much as people like to hate on the US and carriers are evil, for both LTE and 5G deployments, the US beat out Europe by far. And even today if you just drive along highways to a random rural cherry stand, I can get 5G UC 600mbps+ downloads. I'd bet 99% of the time I try this in another country it means LTE only coverage.
US deployed 5G way earlier. Maybe China is the only one that really can compete in terms of coverage, and I say this as someone who travels a lot. The data backs this up.
And if we go back in time looking at snapshots in 2016, 2022, it backs up exactly what I said about LTE deployment and 5G deployment being first in the US.
Last edited:
You don’t have unlimited everything. Read the fine print and stop gaslighting people.
Ok, that is like taking the same measurements with racing cars in a straight line. Now try to take some corners and you'll understand what was meant. Stats can prove anything, reality is a different matter. Look at the silly conversation we have here about selling what is just standard in a good working infrastructure. If it is true and worked as well as you suggest, then there wouldn't be a need.Absolutely not true at all. As much as people like to hate on the US and carriers are evil, for both LTE and 5G deployments, the US beat out Europe by far. And even today if you just drive along highways to a random rural cherry stand, I can get 5G UC 600mbps+ downloads. I'd bet 99% of the time I try this in another country it means LTE only coverage.
US deployed 5G way earlier. Maybe China is the only one that really can compete in terms of coverage, and I say this as someone who travels a lot. The data backs this up.
And if we go back in time looking at snapshots in 2016, 2022, it backs up exactly what I said about LTE deployment and 5G deployment being first in the US.
Cellular networking equipment for US carriers is made in Lewisville, TX.
https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/company-facts/ericsson-worldwide/united-states/5g-smart-factorySilicon, USA: Technology That's Actually Made in America - Ericsson: Lewisville, TX
Ever tried to buy a computer assembled in the United States and made entirely of US parts? You can't. But we found 43 companies that make high-quality tech products in the United States.www.pcmag.com
…by a European company.