Holy LTE speeds! AT&T


tekjunkie

macrumors 6502
Oct 25, 2013
406
226
Those speeds are probably only 2 carrier aggregation. The highest I've seen in 185ish. 3 carrier aggregation would be higher under good conditions.
 

ACURA2015

macrumors regular
Sep 1, 2015
220
31
Miami, Florida
Lucky you, because I have an iPhone 7 128gb and live in Miami and I can tell you that signal and speed were I work in Miami Lakes is HORRIBLE ! I pretty much have 2 dots the most in signal many times 1 dot, and speed stinks. I'am very disappointed with AT&T and I've notice a big drop in signal strength and speed with this new iPhone 7 everywhere. **Also I must mention I've had both the GSM and the GSM/CDMA models and the isssue of signal strength and speed continue.
 

tekjunkie

macrumors 6502
Oct 25, 2013
406
226
Lucky you, because I have an iPhone 7 128gb and live in Miami and I can tell you that signal and speed were I work in Miami Lakes is HORRIBLE ! I pretty much have 2 dots the most in signal many times 1 dot, and speed stinks. I'am very disappointed with AT&T and I've notice a big drop in signal strength and speed with this new iPhone 7 everywhere. **Also I must mention I've had both the GSM and the GSM/CDMA models and the isssue of signal strength and speed continue.
Band 30 needs to be deployed there.
 

KillaMac

Suspended
May 25, 2013
973
366
View attachment 666734 So this morning I tried a Speedtest and was disappointed with LTE speeds here in South Florida.

Just did a couple and wow. Updated the firmware this afternoon.

Anyone else notice any changes? I would normally average about 30-40mbps down/20mbps up.

iPhone 7+ 256gb btw.
Man, must be nice. I only get 7 down and 4 up.
 

willmtaylor

macrumors G4
Oct 31, 2009
10,197
7,726
Here(-ish)
Nice. Now people can go through their data plan in much less time, so more data overage fees for them! Sweet!
I'm with VZW, so I don't care, but I have a question: how would having faster speeds mean someone would use more data? Could you explain that for me?

If I drive faster from Memphis to Nashville, I'm not driving more miles; I'm simply getting there faster.
 

psac

macrumors 6502a
Jul 6, 2009
734
447
I'm with VZW, so I don't care, but I have a question: how would having faster speeds mean someone would use more data? Could you explain that for me?

If I drive faster from Memphis to Nashville, I'm not driving more miles; I'm simply getting there faster.
The contrary argument would be, "if I have 5 minutes to surf, and I can download three 1-minute videos in that time, I'll watch the 3 videos. If I can download five 1-minute videos in that time, I'll watch all 5, therefore using up more data." It's compounded more with longer timeframes, and applies to loading webpages, downloading music, etc.

I think the reality is somewhere in between that argument and yours.
 

BeeGood

macrumors 68000
Sep 15, 2013
1,802
4,881
Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
I'm with VZW, so I don't care, but I have a question: how would having faster speeds mean someone would use more data? Could you explain that for me?

If I drive faster from Memphis to Nashville, I'm not driving more miles; I'm simply getting there faster.
I think the idea is that on faster speeds, you spend less time consuming a given amount of content (because it loads faster/buffers less) and have extra time to consume more.

I've never seen someone test this idea, so no clue if it's true or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Applejuiced

willmtaylor

macrumors G4
Oct 31, 2009
10,197
7,726
Here(-ish)
The contrary argument would be, "if I have 5 minutes to surf, and I can download three 1-minute videos in that time, I'll watch the 3 videos. If I can download five 1-minute videos in that time, I'll watch all 5, therefore using up more data." It's compounded more with longer timeframes, and applies to loading webpages, downloading music, etc.

I think the reality is somewhere in between that argument and yours.
Well, I can see that idiots would have self-control or awareness, and I understand that watching more video leads to more data usage.

However, I've never understood the argument that simply having faster speeds means one automatically consumes more data as a result.
 

Low country

macrumors 6502
Feb 6, 2016
312
197
South Carolina
Lucky you, because I have an iPhone 7 128gb and live in Miami and I can tell you that signal and speed were I work in Miami Lakes is HORRIBLE ! I pretty much have 2 dots the most in signal many times 1 dot, and speed stinks. I'am very disappointed with AT&T and I've notice a big drop in signal strength and speed with this new iPhone 7 everywhere. **Also I must mention I've had both the GSM and the GSM/CDMA models and the isssue of signal strength and speed continue.
Hi, I agree. I live in the Carolinas and have a home in Ft Laud. I travel all over south fl, LTE data speeds down there are horrible, especially east of Fed. Hwy...
 

bbplayer5

macrumors 68030
Apr 13, 2007
2,940
518
I'm with VZW, so I don't care, but I have a question: how would having faster speeds mean someone would use more data? Could you explain that for me?

If I drive faster from Memphis to Nashville, I'm not driving more miles; I'm simply getting there faster.

The faster you can load media / pages etc, the more inclined you are to do more of it. If I have 10 minutes to surf the web, the faster connection will allow me to view way more pages/media than the slower connection in the same timeframe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaptMarvel

Brookzy

macrumors 601
May 30, 2010
4,747
4,723
UK
I'm with VZW, so I don't care, but I have a question: how would having faster speeds mean someone would use more data? Could you explain that for me?

If I drive faster from Memphis to Nashville, I'm not driving more miles; I'm simply getting there faster.
I know lots of people have already replied giving reasons why - but it is an accepted fact that faster connections mean people use a lot more data, and this is a key reason for the carriers to prefer higher speeds when it would be more economical in the short-run to run a congested LTE network - it makes you burn through your allowance faster and have to buy more.
 

ray737

macrumors 6502
Sep 11, 2014
413
163
I know lots of people have already replied giving reasons why - but it is an accepted fact that faster connections mean people use a lot more data, and this is a key reason for the carriers to prefer higher speeds when it would be more economical in the short-run to run a congested LTE network - it makes you burn through your allowance faster and have to buy more.
That's why it's nice to have unlimited data no need to worry about how much you consume
 

Applejuiced

macrumors Westmere
Apr 16, 2008
40,650
6,404
At the iPhone hacks section.
I think the idea is that on faster speeds, you spend less time consuming a given amount of content (because it loads faster/buffers less) and have extra time to consume more.

I've never seen someone test this idea, so no clue if it's true or not.
Yes, I think that's what they're talking about.
But the difference would be if you're having very slow speeds and you're waiting a while for pages to load and videos to buffer.
If you have decent speed then it will not make any difference if you're pulling 6-7mpbs or you're pulling 100mbps.
The pages and videos will load about the same time.
You can only do so much with 125mpbs on a cellphone unless you're tethering to other devices that are downloading big files.
 

willmtaylor

macrumors G4
Oct 31, 2009
10,197
7,726
Here(-ish)
The faster you can load media / pages etc, the more inclined you are to do more of it. If I have 10 minutes to surf the web, the faster connection will allow me to view way more pages/media than the slower connection in the same timeframe.
I know lots of people have already replied giving reasons why - but it is an accepted fact that faster connections mean people use a lot more data, and this is a key reason for the carriers to prefer higher speeds when it would be more economical in the short-run to run a congested LTE network - it makes you burn through your allowance faster and have to buy more.
So you both agree with me then?

My point is that there may be correlation, but that does not mean there is inherent causation. The faster speed isn't what is causing more data to be used, as many suggest. More data is being used because the user is consuming more content.

It's like blaming a ticket on a fast car or blaming heartburn on the all-you-can-eat buffet.

I grow so weary of the blame game and folks not owning up to the consequences of their own decisions.

/rant. :p