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.
ATT relabeling 3G as 4G????
- Thread starter einmusiker
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
what's worse is that people are calling anything 4G, since 4G doesn't actually exist or has been invented at the moment.
LTE is technically only 3.9G, the last iteration of the 3G network, with a theoretical maximum speed of 1Gbit/s
stuff like HSDPA+ cannot even be called 3.9G since its maximum is far less than 1Gbit/s
LTE is technically only 3.9G, the last iteration of the 3G network, with a theoretical maximum speed of 1Gbit/s
stuff like HSDPA+ cannot even be called 3.9G since its maximum is far less than 1Gbit/s
Tmobile started first but its more for a publicity gimmick IMO.
Most people dont know the tech details of 4G and what not.
They just call a faster 3G a 4G network.
Most people dont know the tech details of 4G and what not.
They just call a faster 3G a 4G network.
AT&T basically got backed into a corner by T-Mobile doing it. Verizon and Sprint have legit 4G, T-Mobile has fake 4G, and AT&T would be left in the marketing dust if they didn't label their HSPA+ as 4G.
But, it's the speed that matters. It's quite possible that AT&T's 3G network is faster than Sprint's WiMax and Verizon's LTE if their networks aren't up to par. But people see that the other guys have more Gs and assume they're better.
When LTE starts rolling out, it's going to be one huge fustercluck at AT&T and T-Mobile because I doubt they will refer to LTE as 5G but they'll have all of these "4G" phones that they sold that aren't compatible with the LTE network. It wasn't so bad with the move from GPRS-EDGE and UMTS-HSDPA because a GPRS phone could work on an EDGE network (albeit at GPRS speeds), likewise with UMTS on HSDPA, but there's just no compatability at all between HSPA+ and LTE.
Yeah, listen to this guy. He clearly has a plethora of mobile carrier business knowledge.
I think they'll have to change their minds on that. They should all agree that they'll start calling LTE 5G and that'll solve ALL these problems.
(Hey, I can dream, can't I? Yeah, nevermind. I know they'll just decide to go with clusterf***.)
Why is relabeling 3G to 4G any worse than Verizon claiming to have 3G that only works one way (i.e. can't surf and receive calls at the same time)? Too much gets made of subtle differences in technology. There may be a huge amount of R&D behind the tech, but I seriously doubt there's much difference in speed to the average user. Big deal.
Rethink possible, people.
It's quite possible we're continuing to be duped by AT&T.
I hope Seth the Blogger Guy comes out and tries to explain this crap. I wanna kick him in the throat.
It's quite possible we're continuing to be duped by AT&T.
I hope Seth the Blogger Guy comes out and tries to explain this crap. I wanna kick him in the throat.
Sprint's WiMax deployment is not 4G... not even close to 4G.
It tops out around 4 to 5 Mbps download speeds... when you can get a signal.
And technically, neither is Verizon's LTE deployment.
Because if things go the way I think they will here is the consumer's view of this:
Apple will come out with an iPhone in 2011 that can use at&t 4G. Great! A 4G iPhone!
Then, in 2012, they'll come out with another iPhone that uses at&t's new 4G. This 4G will be much, much faster than last year's. But to get it you need the 2012 4G iPhone, not the 2011 4G iPhone. They're completely different technologies, you see, poor consumer. That 4G iPhone you bought wasn't THE 4G iPhone after all. No, it was something else. Why didn't you know that, consumer?? Ha ha!
This is needlessly confusing for people. I really do wish they'd just start calling the faster LTE '5G' so people will understand that the 2012 iPhone accesses different technology than the 2011 iPhone. People can understand this stuff if they just label it clearly. But, of course, they're not.
I find it funny to see people state that "technically" 4g is 100mbps.
I find that funny because that number is what the ITU originally specified as 4G. This is where people get this idea, the ITU specification.
However as of around 12/18/2010, the ITU has redefined its definition of 4G to include LTE, WIMAX, and "Evolved 3G technologies that provide a substantial performance increase over traditional 3G" i.e. HSPA+.
In other words, 4G is NO LONGER defined as 100mbps, and in fact HSPA+ has been reclassified as 4G, not by the carriers, but by the original group that people are citing the 100meg number from.
I find that funny because that number is what the ITU originally specified as 4G. This is where people get this idea, the ITU specification.
However as of around 12/18/2010, the ITU has redefined its definition of 4G to include LTE, WIMAX, and "Evolved 3G technologies that provide a substantial performance increase over traditional 3G" i.e. HSPA+.
In other words, 4G is NO LONGER defined as 100mbps, and in fact HSPA+ has been reclassified as 4G, not by the carriers, but by the original group that people are citing the 100meg number from.
Faster? You sure about that?
T-Mobile is rolling out 42mbps HSPA+ this year. In fact today they had a demo of it and got a real world 30mbps download on the CES floor.
LTE is still 5-12mbps real world, right (according to Verizon itself)? So in other words, HSPA+ is already delivering 3x the speed of LTE in a real world setting. By next year, could be double that.
For once I think T-Mobile might be on to something. Not to mention the better battery life an HSPA+ phone will offer right out of the gate.
From my understanding WiMax and LTE are 4G technology because the go up to 99mbps but were not getting any of those speeds anytime soon.
Again, LTE, WiMax, and HSPA+ are all now classified as true, bona-fide 4G technologies. This is according to the ITU, the classification agency responsible for the original 100meg number.
As stated above, the ITU has said evolved 3G can be labeled as 4G.
AT&T needed something to market this year for their network with everyone else doing it. At least they have a LTE plan unlike T-Mobile.
AT&T needed something to market this year for their network with everyone else doing it. At least they have a LTE plan unlike T-Mobile.
Read the press release.
No where does it actually change the definition of 4G.
Source: http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2010/48.aspx
Technically speaking, 4G still remains "undefined".
My statement remains true. I was speaking to those who have assigned 4G the definition of 100mbps, which was based on the ITU's original statements. The ITU has revised their statements to include HSPA+. So if someone is relying on them by using their original 100mbps number, they must now change their view as the source has revised it's definition.
They changed it enough. The whole 3G/4G labeling is pointless any damn ways so why should anyone give a damn?
Yes their going to have 42mbps HSPA+ but it's going to be small just like their HSPA+ is now. I think there in around 70 cities now. All their "4G" networks are in major cities, when At&t turns on their HSPA+ they will have a bigger "4G" network than T Mobile.
IMO At&t in the best position their HSPA+ "4G" is bigger than anyone else and it's going to give very good speeds until they roll out LTE
If HSPA+ is going to smoke the hell out of LTE anyway, who cares if they turn it on? I'm sticking with the faster speeds.
If T mobile HSPA+ is in your area, also In the long run LTE will be faster than HSPA+
speaking of which has At&t ever said how fast their LTE will be... when they do get LTE