Good news about AT&T LTE, but not really

[Buildbright]

No, I was replying to the post about why so many are 'AT&T fanboys'. I've never had an iPhone and probably never will. I started out with a Windows phone in 2004 I think. Was actually a flash junkie for many years. Now we all have Wp7 phones and love them. When my husband was in the market for a new phone last year I begged him to get an iPhone, same for my daughter-in-law. Mostly because I was tired of being the tech phone support for the family. But they both chose the Focus. Luckily, they haven't needed me to help. Which surprised me a bit since neither seems to understand anything technical (even my husband who has 3 engineering degrees seems lost when it comes to IT work). Of course that might just be a hedge on his part to get out of doing the actual work of updating etc.

I love my iPad but having that OS on a phone doesn't meet my personal needs.

Ohh. I like WP7 but after being a mostly BlackBerry user my whole smartphone life. But I started on Blackberry 6210 in 2003. I strayed with the Treo 700 with Windows Mobile (worst phone ever) and went black to black. Swore I would stay forever but the iPhone 4 Verizon got me after I had it on my iPad. Granted I use it for business and require excellent push email support which Apple is almost as good as the Blackberry but no one does mobile business email like Blackberry. Please Apple steal the functionality of blackberry email.

I do enjoy using WP7 in the store. I wish people would buy those instead of Android.

 

[Rafterman]

While AT&T phone service and 3G data speeds are very good where I live, in Buffalo NY, their LTE rollout is pathetic. Verizon had LTE here in Buffalo back in October, but AT&T has their list out through this summer and still nothing.

Since the major factor in me staying with AT&T is that GSM can do data and voice simultaneously, that doesn't apply to iPads since they aren't phones. I seriously thought about a Verizon iPad. But the resale value (got to think about iPad 4 ) of GSM iPads is up to $100 higher. But it is a serious possibility I will have the iPad 3 for its entire life span, until next years upgrade, without ever seeing the LTE speeds.

While Buffalo is a smallish city, its got two major professional sports teams (though that's a matter of opinion these days ), has one of the largest public universities in the world and is just 15 miles from Niagara Falls, a tourist spot that draws millions of people from around the world, we still wait behind places getting LTE that are tiny towns and rural areas.

Though I should't complain too hard. Philadelphia is a major metropolis and they still wait for LTE too.

Verizon has 200 million under LTE, AT&T just 70. And they say they won't be done until the end of 2013. Just pathetic, AT&T.

 

[Stealthipad]

I'm surprised that so many people are AT&T fan boys. I switched from AT&T to Verizon because I was sick of the garbage service. The only advantage that AT&T had over Verizon 2 years ago was that they had the iPhone . A year ago their advantage was that they used GSM technology that allowed for data and call plus faster network speeds. Now that apple is turning to LTE, AT&T has nothing on Verizon . Verizon has a larger 3G and LTE network along with better service and customer service.

It is all where you live as in Jacksonville, FL AT&T is KING!

I am no fan boy but I go with what works the best! I tried Verizon which their map indicated it had great service at my office, but had to go outside to make a call. So I would rate it with T-Mo and not an option for me.

 

[RMSko]

Is there anywhere where I can get all the cities that have AT&T LTE? I went to their site and found the map, but that's not really helpful. I'm looking for a more detailed list.

 

[dread]

http://www.att.com/network/
Click on coverage. I see they updated it with the coming soon cities and it is still pathetic

 

[Bheleu]

By the time "The New iPhone" hits...

I expect AT&T to have plenty of LTE coverage.

 

[RMSko]

Wow - I must be thick but I click on coverage and don't see the "coming soon" cities. I think I'm lucky though b/c I live in NJ and it looks like almost all of NJ and NYC is covered. I have the iPad 2 with unlimited data and the only reason I'm thinking of switching is to get 4G for my commute to NYC and so unless I'm missing something, it looks like it may be worth it for me.

 

[ZBoater]

Even if they don't have 4G LTE, their HSPA coverage is not shabby. I get 2-4Mbps down and 1Mbps up consistently on my AT&T iPad 2.

 

[aristobrat]

Even if they don't have 4G LTE, their HSPA coverage is not shabby.

That's why I think Verizon is hustling to get LTE rolled out ASAP -- they know their 3G network is amazingly slow compared to T-Mobile and AT&T's HSPA networks.

As a long-time AT&T customer that switched to Verizon last summer, I truly feel sorry for any AT&T customer that switches to Verizon for LTE but finds themselves frequently on Verizon's 3G network (when LTE isn't available).

 

[dread]

Wow - I must be thick but I click on coverage and don't see the "coming soon" cities. I think I'm lucky though b/c I live in NJ and it looks like almost all of NJ and NYC is covered. I have the iPad 2 with unlimited data and the only reason I'm thinking of switching is to get 4G for my commute to NYC and so unless I'm missing something, it looks like it may be worth it for me.

That is not 4g in Jersey its faux G. Verizon is based in Jersey so I would expect them to have better coverage. They already have north central jersey covered in LTE.

 

[RMSko]

That is not 4g in Jersey its faux G. Verizon is based in Jersey so I would expect them to have better coverage. They already have north central jersey covered in LTE.

What do you mean by "faux G"? If I look at the AT&T coverage map, it's all dark blue and supposed to be 4G. Is that incorrect? For me I'm not going to update to the new iPad unless I'm getting 4G so I really want to make sure. I thought they updated in January, but I'd like to know if that is wrong.

 

[aristobrat]

What do you mean by "faux G"? If I look at the AT&T coverage map, it's all dark blue and supposed to be 4G. Is that incorrect? For me I'm not going to update to the new iPad unless I'm getting 4G so I really want to make sure. I thought they updated in January, but I'd like to know if that is wrong.

T-Mobile and AT&T are calling their HSPA+ networks "4G". AT&T is calling LTE "4G LTE". There is a difference in network speed between 3G, 4G, and 4G LTE.

If an area has AT&T LTE coverage, its coverage map specifically calls out LTE.

 

[fridgeymonster3]

I still can't believe that AT&T hasn't rolled out LTE to Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs where I live. Philly is the 5th most populous city in the US and basically the only city in the top 10 that AT&T doesn't have LTE coverage in.

 

[TroyBoy30]

not an issue here in atlanta. we have had smoking fast lte from att since day 1!

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Minneapolis-St. Paul is the 13th largest market in the nation. Verizon already has LTE here, you'd think AT&T would want to catch up. Cleveland, ok... AT&T is dropping the ball.

 

[billhelm]

Minneapolis-St. Paul is the 13th largest market in the nation. Verizon already has LTE here, you'd think AT&T would want to catch up. Cleveland, ok... AT&T is dropping the ball.

I think that's strange also. I didn't realize it wasn't in MSP yet till after I ordered the new AT&T iPad. At least they have HSPA+ here.

 

[aka777]

If someone has VZ LTE in their area, run (don't walk) to order the VZ version. However, if you do not, then AT&T's HSPA is probably a tad faster than VZ's EVDO.

Keep in mind that even though AT&T markets their faux 4G network as HSPA+ 21MB, they often do not have the backhaul to actually support (deliver) these speeds.

I've only ever seen my AT&T service download over 3 MB between 3am to 5am. Whereas, during the day, I average 1.2MB DL and lower.

With all things being equal, there are a few technical differences between the LTE networks. VZ has secured a consistent band of 700Mhz spectrum throughout the US and actually owns more bandwidth, which should result in higher speeds and less congestion.

Depending on where you live, YMMV of course.

 

[RMSko]

That is not 4g in Jersey its faux G. Verizon is based in Jersey so I would expect them to have better coverage. They already have north central jersey covered in LTE.

Dread - the AT&T map I am looking at specifically says it's 4G LTE in parts of NJ, inlcuding the parts where I live. Are you sure there isn't any 4G LTE coverage in NJ?

Does AT&T have a list of towns/cities by name that is covered by LTE. The map just says NYC and when I click on it I get another map, but I'm particularly interested in looking up a few cities.

 

[wordoflife]

I'm surprised that so many people are AT&T fan boys. I switched from AT&T to Verizon because I was sick of the garbage service. The only advantage that AT&T had over Verizon 2 years ago was that they had the iPhone . A year ago their advantage was that they used GSM technology that allowed for data and call plus faster network speeds. Now that apple is turning to LTE, AT&T has nothing on Verizon . Verizon has a larger 3G and LTE network along with better service and customer service.

Just wanted to point out some things ...
1) not everyone on AT&T has garbage service
2) Verizon is slower
3) AT&T customer service has been nice to me

Does that make me a fanboy?

_________________________________________________

In my opinion, LTE from both carriers are useless for me as they are only available in a few and select major cities. Additionally, LTE really works in the heart of major cities, not in the suburbs.

The only reason I'd get Verizon is for mobile hotspot.
The only reason I'd get AT&T is for HSPA+.

 

[aristobrat]

Keep in mind that even though AT&T markets their faux 4G network as HSPA+ 21MB, they often do not have the backhaul to actually support (deliver) these speeds.

FWIW, on AT&T's coverage maps, 4G areas are to have both HSPA+ and enhanced backhaul.

Does AT&T have a list of towns/cities by name that is covered by LTE. The map just says NYC and when I click on it I get another map, but I'm particularly interested in looking up a few cities.

I haven't seen a text list of the towns/cities covered, just the yellow dots on their interactive map.

 

[dread]

so its only the most eastern parts of north central jersey near the city.

 

[BiggAW]

Well, I sure hope those bozos roll out 3G in my area - have been stuck with Edge since day one, although 3G is available about a mile to the north.

Only went with AT&T because their reps claimed 3G would be available in "a couple of months." That was over a year ago. Now the claim is that LTE will be available in "a couple of months." And pigs fly.

If I decide to buy the third generation iPad, it won't be an AT&T model.

Don't ever buy based on what may be available in the future... only what IS available.

 

[aneftp]

I realize it takes a while, but six years is ridiculous especially when they haven't even completed their 3g rollout. All I'm saying is Verizon will dominate even more unless AT&T gets their act together and that those that are buying AT&T iPads may have a long time to wait to take advantage of the technology. Maybe by the 6th generation iPad they will be ready.

People have to realize it was much easier for Verizon to enable "CDMA 3G data" way back 10-12 years ago because of the CDMA technology than it was for Cingular/ATTWS (original ATT wireless) to go from brand new GSM to UMTS. That's why if you compared ATT Mobility's EDGE coverage to Verzon's CDMA 3G, it's almost identical. Because EDGE was still 2G tech (technically 2.5G).

Verizon has no choice but to be early to the LTE expansion because they have no real high speed data network to fall back on. Most real time CDMA averages around 1 mbps while HSPA plus can easily hit 4-7 mbps in real time use and often higher.

And Verizon intends to do true VOIP LTE only by end 2013/beginning of 2014.

 

[dread]

200 more reasons why Verizon is a better choice for most people if you want 4G LTE and not faux G. Verizon is still ahead of schedule.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-5...g-lte-sites-by-the-end-of-2012/?tag=cnetRiver

 

[BiggAW]

People have to realize it was much easier for Verizon to enable "CDMA 3G data" way back 10-12 years ago because of the CDMA technology than it was for Cingular/ATTWS (original ATT wireless) to go from brand new GSM to UMTS. That's why if you compared ATT Mobility's EDGE coverage to Verzon's CDMA 3G, it's almost identical. Because EDGE was still 2G tech (technically 2.5G).

But now Verizon has the hard transition going to LTE, and yet they started last Winter/Spring, and are going to finish 100% of their native network plus some LTE in Rural America areas by mid-2013. That's about 30 months to do a technically difficult network build that required all new antennas, on a larger network than AT&T's.

It also wasn't 12 years ago. It was like 2004ish. I remember the PCMag article raving about the data cards that broke the 1mbps barrier with EVDO Rev.0 and how incredible and transformative it was to have a PCMCIA card with unlimited 1mbps data for *only* $80/mo.