The difference in speeds is well outside the margin of error a server should have.
If having the same server makes the difference, that indicates serious problems with it.
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.
To all those people waiting for the evo 4g wimax holy grail...
- Thread starter hefeglass
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The difference in speeds is well outside the margin of error a server should have.
If having the same server makes the difference, that indicates serious problems with it.
All those speed tests are pointless. Sure one company may be faster than another one, but if the coverage sucks, what's the point. COVERAGE people, learn this word. If you're going to sit down in one spot the entire day where you get great speeds, than you might as well not have mobile internet and you should just get a router. If you're going to be on the road, than coverage is what your really look for, not just the speed.
I turned off my Wi-Fi and ran the SpeedTest.Net app on my iPhone 
and had no issues (DL: 848 kbps / UP: 297 kbps). I think it's just people attempting to skew the "facts" to prove their own point.
Anyone here live in or around Houston, Tx having issues with the AT&T 3G Network because besides a dead spot here and there I'm happy with coverage. Nothing to the point that I would go about bashing AT&T completely and switching.
and had no issues (DL: 848 kbps / UP: 297 kbps). I think it's just people attempting to skew the "facts" to prove their own point. Anyone here live in or around Houston, Tx having issues with the AT&T 3G Network because besides a dead spot here and there I'm happy with coverage. Nothing to the point that I would go about bashing AT&T completely and switching.
I honestly don't understand why people have to argue over what carrier is better. If you like AT&T, use AT&T. If you like Verizon, use Verizon. Same goes for Sprint, and T-Mobile. Speed tests aren't even a very good way to compare networks.
This.
AT&T fanboy - I get better speeds than in you in this one exact spot!
Verizon customer - I get coverage two steps away from you, while you have 0 bars, LOL!
We all know who wins the coverage game, AT&T fanboys - shall I pull out the maps?
It does make a difference... hence why all tech blogs try their hardest to get on the same server to test different places on different carriers. The more uniform and equal test the better the results.
Testing with one server 500 mi away vs a server 50 mi away WILL have a different result and CAN NOT be compared equally.
Just finished a trial with clear wimax, and it's just not there yet. In certain spots it was easily double my AT&T 3G iPhone service. Everywhere else it was equal to or slower and very spotty. Dropped signal a lot. I live in one of the "clear cities" too but right near some holes. It will get better they are adding tons of towers, right now it's just not as reliable as AT&T 3G for me.
No, not a serious problem at all. The different servers are located in different cities. This means many different network components along the way. It's impossible for the ISP (or carrier in this case) to control this equipment as it is outside of their network. Some equipment may perform better than others. Routes to different cities may take a differing number of "hops". So getting on the same server CAN help assure that you are comparing the same network equipment as well. Apples to Apples (no pun intended). However, even pointing to the same server, there's no guarantee that you are taking the same route over the same equipment....but there's a good chance you might be.