Verizon Freaking Delivered with LTE, I am not sure how att can top this...

[BHP41]

What exactly is everyone supposed to be "hating" on??

The speeds of verizons LTE are impressive there's no doubt. If your referring to it being on the thunderbolt, I'm sorry you feel the need to post a comment like that. This has nothing to do with the phone. It the network. Again. Impressive.

I agree with the err404, was it really necessary to start another thread. You already have one. This is just a lame attempt on a iPhone forum to post something that doesn't even pertain to the phone.

 

[Geckotek]

I think VZW had no choice but to build another network because their 3G network IMO isn't good for smartphone data usage. IMO AT&T 3G network is best for smartphone data usage.

In order to compete VZW had to buildout LTE.

Like you said it's a cycle.

No, Verizon's 3G network PIONEERED smartphone data usage. And Verizon is not "building a new network", they are upgrading their existing network with LTE.....just like AT&T replaced their TDMA network with W-CDMA and will also follow suit like VZW and upgrade to LTE.

 

[Consultant]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYVfZbmv34U&feature=player_embedded


45Mbps+ Tether using the Verizon ThunderBolt to Tether internet to a MacBook Pro, Haters Come on in!

BS.

1. Wrong screen size for MacBook Pro
2. Wrong OS
3. Does not show that it's tethered

 

[smithrh]

There will be an LTE iPhone with AT&T.

Not interested, honestly.

Why? Mainly due to the terrible voice service I've had to endure for more than 3 years now, but also because there's no usable data coverage outside of big cities on AT&T.

With Verizon, if/when I'm out of LTE coverage, I'll still have EVDO to fall back on, and I'll have the vastly superior voice coverage everywhere.

 

[smithrh]

And Verizon is not "building a new network", they are upgrading their existing network with LTE.....

Actually, in this case I'd pretty much say it is a new network.

Sure, some elements will be shared (MTSO space, etc) but all the NEs are new and specific to LTE. Basically it's a forklift upgrade.

Then again, the other upgrade scenarios you mentioned that AT&T did were essentially forklifts too.

 

[mpossoff]

No, Verizon's 3G network PIONEERED smartphone data usage. And Verizon is not "building a new network", they are upgrading their existing network with LTE.....just like AT&T replaced their TDMA network with W-CDMA and will also follow suit like VZW and upgrade to LTE.

Never said VZW didn't or did pioneer 3G data which isn't the subject of my comment anyway.

IMO opinion VZW 3G network is outdated compared to AT&T in regards to smartphone data. Yes VZW might have pioneered 3G data but it doesn't mean their 3G network is best suited for 3G smartphones.

 

[Savor]

I think my next phone will be more dependent on the actual carrier and LTE data plans over the OS.

We've been paying well over $130 per month on data, cable, & landline with Verizon FiOS before that we had to cut our internet connection at 10% of that speed as well as our cable. Home internet is going up too now that carriers showed how to rip-off millions of people to be stuck for two years on 3G speed. Tethering on an unlimited LTE plan would eliminate my need for a home data connection. Those speeds are crazy! A single-core 1 GHz HTC phone has now been the talk of the tech world leaving everybody in the dust. ThunderBolt, baby. Amazing sprinter -drag car speed from Verizon's LTE with no stamina for batt life.

Trust me, try to grandfather yourselves with the current LTE data prices ASAP! These carriers will raise the price eventually once we all start clogging up their networks.

 

[Savor]

HTC ThunderBolt has now become the trailblazer for Verizon's LTE.

I'm more intrigued with Verizon's 4G speed and the data plan over the actual phone, but the ThunderBolt has now become the current poster child for LTE phones. Those speeds are wicked fast.

I'm currently looking for a reasonably priced internet connection for our home. I think tethering might be the most logical step. The key is to try to grandfather into the current plans before carriers start raising prices once we start clogging up their networks. Losing my unlimited Edge plan on AT&T pissed me off so much after moving onto a new account. Unlimited now became 200 MB for the same price and I rarely use 3G which made it sting more.

My next phone won't be dependent on the brand or OS, but the carrier, speeds, and cost of tethering plans.

 

[marksman]

WELL SAID!

As a att customer, att struggles in everything they do and they do nothing really top notch or great. With the T-Mobile buyout the will have on big congested as network. Especially when you consider that att wants to dump all 35million+ T-mobile users unto the current att 850mhz/1900mhz HSPA+ 3G network, that is already absorbed by 90 million+ current att customers. And the want to free up the T-Mobile 1700mhz 3G network and use it for LTE only. So att wants to add 35million+ more T-Mobile customers to the already slow-ass 850mhz/1900mhz HSPA+ att 3G network........ expect already slow speeds to really suffer once the merger is complete..........

And CURRENT GRANDFATHERED UNLIMITED DATA ATT CUSTOMERS WILL BE BEND WIDE OVER THE BARREL WHEN LTE ROLLS OUT BECAUSE ATT WILL NOT GRANDFATHER ANYONE INTO LTE WITH UNLIMITED DATA!

No because if AT&T cuts off the people who tether illegally on their network, they will have more than enough bandwidth for all the tmobile customers. People don't realize how much bandwidth these people use... We are talking one thief using up the resources of 300-600 customers each. Realize you would need to remove 100,000 such users from your network to have room for all of T-Mobile's customers. That is 1/10th of 1% of all their current users.

It is about 30% of the suspected bandwidth hogs using AT&T smartphones.

As for people thinking they are going to end up with lifetime unlimited LTE, dream on. I don't care if it is Verizon or AT&T.

 

[mpossoff]

As for people thinking they are going to end up with lifetime unlimited LTE, dream on. I don't care if it is Verizon or AT&T.

I think as long as you keep the device you were grandfathered into you'll keep unltd data. The catch is if you change devices. Example being going from a thunderbolt to an LTE iPhone. Or going from an HTC Inspire to an LTE iPhone.

I don't think VZW will end unltd LTE data for existing customers. They have a good marketing plan in this regard. 'switch to verizon so you can get unltd LTE data'. Certaintely makes me contemplate on getting unltd LTE data. We don't know what AT&T will do with customers who have existing unltd 3G data and unltd hspa+ data plans. I do know when I switched from a 3G unltd data plan to a hspa+ device plan I was able to get unltd hspa+ data.

 

[Geckotek]

Never said VZW didn't or did pioneer 3G data which isn't the subject of my comment anyway.

IMO opinion VZW 3G network is outdated compared to AT&T in regards to smartphone data. Yes VZW might have pioneered 3G data but it doesn't mean their 3G network is best suited for 3G smartphones.

You read that wrong, I said Verizon pioneered the usage of wireless data for smartphones. I wasn't trying to point out that they pioneered the 3G space (in fact, I need to give Sprint more credit than Verizon in all of this). So if they pioneer the usage of 3G data for smartphones, how exactly is that exact same (actually upgraded and faster) network no longer suited for smartphones? It is perfectly suited for smartphones. Millions of Verizon smartphone users utilize it without issue or complaint every day.

Yes, it is dated. At this point it is older than the current AT&T 3G network. They upgraded to EVDO Rev A in 2007. AT&T upgraded to HSDPA just recently. At this point Verizon has a choice to move to EVDO Rev B or LTE. Of those 2 LTE is the more attractive option with a shiny future. Either way, nobody denies that Verizon's 3G network is in need of an update. But it's far from useless for smartphones. Even in AT&T's own commercial, all but Luke Wilson's head shows up in the "browsing showdown". It's not like people sit and sit waiting for a page to load like they did back in the days before 3G.

Actually, in this case I'd pretty much say it is a new network.

Sure, some elements will be shared (MTSO space, etc) but all the NEs are new and specific to LTE. Basically it's a forklift upgrade.

Then again, the other upgrade scenarios you mentioned that AT&T did were essentially forklifts too.

Yeah, both are doing forklift upgrades to LTE at this point. It's still far from "building a new network" as half the battle of building a new network is obtaining tower locations. Lucky for Verizon they've had fewer such upgrades in the last decade. AT&T's upgrade path has been much more painful. Actually, IIRC the move to WCDMA called for many tower relocations to get it optimized....right?

 

[DiamondMac]

I think as long as you keep the device you were grandfathered into you'll keep unltd data. The catch is if you change devices. Example being going from a thunderbolt to an LTE iPhone. Or going from an HTC Inspire to an LTE iPhone.

I don't think VZW will end unltd LTE data for existing customers. They have a good marketing plan in this regard. 'switch to verizon so you can get unltd LTE data'. Certaintely makes me contemplate on getting unltd LTE data. We don't know what AT&T will do with customers who have existing unltd 3G data and unltd hspa+ data plans. I do know when I switched from a 3G unltd data plan to a hspa+ device plan I was able to get unltd hspa+ data.

There is not a chance in HELL, imo, that AT&T lets current grandfathered data people on iPhones (which I am a part of) keep my unlimited on their LTE plans. Not a chance.

They have been looking to ditch as many people as possible off the plan and will call it a "new network which needs new plans"

 

[cocky jeremy]

AT&T couldn't top a cloud with a Space Shuttle. They're worthless. If you expect them to beat Verizon, you're in for a sad time.

 

[jav6454]

Yeah, both are doing forklift upgrades to LTE at this point. It's still far from "building a new network" as half the battle of building a new network is obtaining tower locations. Lucky for Verizon they've had fewer such upgrades in the last decade. AT&T's upgrade path has been much more painful. Actually, IIRC the move to WCDMA called for many tower relocations to get it optimized....right?

Yes but at this point AT&T is better suited for the upgrade than Verizon. Verizon has to deal with the whole new locations deal and new equipment.

AT&T has the right places already (plus all those spaces T-Mobile is giving them) and right optimization experience and some of their equipment can be reused for LTE now. Also, 3G sites where LTE is being set up will receive massive bandwidth boosts thanks to the new and even more improved backhaul.

Verizon had an easy path upgrading to 3G (software upgrade), and AT&T had the hard way(hardware and new locations upgrade); pretty much why Verizon has more 3G coverage and consistency. However, the tables have turned. All AT&T really needs to do is hurry the F* up! They take too long.

AT&T couldn't top a cloud with a Space Shuttle. They're worthless. If you expect them to beat Verizon, you're in for a sad time.

Some one call the whhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for this poor kid.

 

[nooaah]

I love when people say things like this or make comments like how great at&t is. Its also funny how people actually believe that the iphone is better than the Thunderbolt!! I own an iphone on both networks and a Thunderbolt. My iphone on Verizon is for my wife and for at&t is for my job, the Thunderbolt is my personal phone. I hate to tell you all but the Thunderbolt only has 1 down fall and that is the battery which will be fixed with a software update and a bigger battery soon enough. But at least I can take my battery out and change it if I want and I can use the phone without a case on and not drop calls and I can hold it anyway I want and not have to worry about losing my call because of the botched antenna! I know people will come on here and say there is nothing wrong with the antenna and its been blown out of proportion. That's like me saying that the Thunderbolt doesn't have a battery issue. When apple gives out free bumpers, there is a problem, plain and simple...moving on!! Next the iphone 4 is the worst iphone to be released yet, with every update it gets worse. The antenna is a joke, the software is full of glitches. Yes its a very attractive phone but its been a botched phone from day 1 and people just need to accept it. Apple messed up with the antenna and the proximity sensor and the phone has suffered ever since. The Thunderbolt can do everything the iphone can plus some!! The pictures are just as good, the video's are just as good, it uses flash and I can go to any actually website and the page actually loads with no red x's in the page. The phone just flat out out performs the iphone in every way except the battery..period. I know everyone on here loves apple and absolutely refuses to believe that any other phone is superior to the iphone but its time to face the facts!! Now cloud has been introduced, that is just one more thing that android has over apple. Android is starting to trump the iphone in every area and that is a fact! I love it when people say just wait for at&t's LTE network...I will as soon as they get me 3G first!! Its pretty sad that I can't even get 3G and they are rolling out their new network already. The fact is at&t is behind the eight ball and have been for years when it comes to coverage area's, they are terrible. I will never use at&t again once this contract is up because although Verizon's 3G is not as fast, it covers almost 3 times the area of at&t's network. Now with LTE rolling out there is truly no comparison. It will be years before at&t catches up and when they do their coverage will still be less superior to Verizon's. I have never seen 50 mbps downloads on my Thunderbolt but I do see 25 to 30 daily and I can use all the data I want any time I want and I never have to worry about them taking it away. Its a beautiful thing!!

I love when people don't use paragraphs when writing a 1,000 word post. I'm now cross-eyed.

 

[Geckotek]

Yes but at this point AT&T is better suited for the upgrade than Verizon. Verizon has to deal with the whole new locations deal and new equipment.

What makes you think Verizon will need new locations?

AT&T has the right places already (plus all those spaces T-Mobile is giving them) and right optimization experience and some of their equipment can be reused for LTE now. Also, 3G sites where LTE is being set up will receive massive bandwidth boosts thanks to the new and even more improved backhaul.

I'm fairly certain Verizon's wireless engineers are just as experienced if not better than AT&T's at optimizing their equimpment. And Verizon already upgraded their backhaul.

Verizon had an easy path upgrading to 3G (software upgrade), and AT&T had the hard way(hardware and new locations upgrade); pretty much why Verizon has more 3G coverage and consistency. However, the tables have turned. All AT&T really needs to do is hurry the F* up! They take too long.

The tables have not turned. The LTE rollout for Verizon isn't as extreme as you make it out to be.

 

[jav6454]

What? Explain your logic and source of information.



Once again I ask you to cite your source.



The tables have not turned. The LTE rollout for both will be almost identical.

1. AT&T buying T-Mobile means they gain those T-Mo cell sites. No need for new leases or licenses. All AT&T needs to do is flip switched to make T-Mo's signal now say AT&T and make AT&T phones work with those site. No need for source or logic here... Also, adding LTE will be just using all (AT&T + T-Mo) current sites to add the respective LTE equipment. In this respect AT&T has less troubles now. Verizon has to figure out if their current cell distribution works for LTE, if it doesn't start looking for new tower locations.

Final one, AT&T will seriously have more spectrum than Verizon at this point. AT&T will have their 700MHz, 850MHz and 1900 MHz bands, PLUS T-Mobile's 1900MHz, 1700MHz (full blown thing!) and 2100MHz bands. Obviously, they will have the upper card here.

2. Upgrading to LTE requires a new backhaul otherwise you'll be stuck with the same 3G backhaul system. If I am not mistaken many 3G cell sites have ~12 Mb/s connections and newly upgraded ones have ~40 Mb/s (using Fiber). LTE requires much more (in the 1 Gb/s range per site) in order to pump as close as possible to theoretical. Hence a 1 Gb/s line would most definitely help out 3G systems. Again, nothing logical, just reason it out.

3. In many respects to buying equipment yes, but AT&T has experience of having set up two entire networks (their old TDMA network and the newer UMTS/HSPA). Verizon doesn't, this will be their second network, so they will feel the pain of some set backs and/or problems AT&T already mastered (hopefully).

 

[Geckotek]

1. AT&T buying T-Mobile means they gain those T-Mo cell sites. No need for new leases or licenses. All AT&T needs to do is flip switched to make T-Mo's signal now say AT&T and make AT&T phones work with those site. No need for source or logic here... Also, adding LTE will be just using all (AT&T + T-Mo) current sites to add the respective LTE equipment. In this respect AT&T has less troubles now. Verizon has to figure out if their current cell distribution works for LTE, if it doesn't start looking for new tower locations.

AT&T has been buying switches that are upgradeable to LTE since they knew they were going to be going that direction. It's doubtful T-Mobile did the same.

AT&T now has some new towers...so this brings them about in line w/ Verizon coverage...maybe. T-Mobile was pretty crappy on it's own. It's a crap-shoot to see which areas are improved and which areas just have the same old coverage.

You are making assumptions that Verizon will need to relocate it's towers in your previous statements. I'm fairly certain they have already upgraded how many cities??? And how many tower relocations have you heard of???

Final one, AT&T will seriously have more spectrum than Verizon at this point. AT&T will have their 700MHz, 850MHz and 1900 MHz bands, PLUS T-Mobile's 1900MHz, 1700MHz (full blown thing!) and 2100MHz bands. Obviously, they will have the upper card here.

Not sure this will really pan out the way you think. They will most likely sell back some of that spectrum and not use it. (As they retire legacy systems).

2. Upgrading to LTE requires a new backhaul otherwise you'll be stuck with the same 3G backhaul system. If I am not mistaken many 3G cell sites have ~12 Mb/s connections and newly upgraded ones have ~40 Mb/s (using Fiber). LTE requires much more (in the 1 Gb/s range per site) in order to pump as close as possible to theoretical. Hence a 1 Gb/s line would most definitely help out 3G systems. Again, nothing logical, just reason it out.

So you are convinced that Verizon isn't using GBIT for it's new backhauls they upgraded over the last 2 years? That would be a foolish move not to.

3. In many respects to buying equipment yes, but AT&T has experience of having set up two entire networks (their old TDMA network and the newer UMTS/HSPA). Verizon doesn't, this will be their second network, so they will feel the pain of some set backs and/or problems AT&T already mastered (hopefully).

Wishful....or should I say...hateful thinking on your part.

Why do you hate Verizon so much that you come up w/ all this crap just hoping they will fail or at least be in pain????? I don't get it.

 

[jav6454]

AT&T has been buying switches that are upgradeable to LTE since they knew they were going to be going that direction. It's doubtful T-Mobile did the same.

AT&T now has some new towers...so this brings them about in line w/ Verizon coverage...maybe. T-Mobile was pretty crappy on it's own. It's a crap-shoot to see which areas are improved and which areas just have the same old coverage.

You are making assumptions that Verizon will need to relocate it's towers in your previous statements. I'm fairly certain they have already upgraded how many cities??? And how many tower relocations have you heard of???



Not sure this will really pan out the way you think. They will most likely sell back some of that spectrum and not use it. (As they retire legacy systems).



So you are convinced that Verizon isn't using GBIT for it's new backhauls they upgraded over the last 2 years? That would be a foolish move not to.



Wishful....or should I say...hateful thinking on your part.

Why do you hate Verizon so much that you come up w/ all this crap just hoping they will fail or at least be in pain????? I don't get it.

1 & 2. T-Mo was not planning LTE for now, but they did set up for HSPA+ which is just a small step from LTE, so I bet T-Mo has some crazy infrastructure already set up in many places.

T-Mo had many AT&T towers leased (back from the Cingular days), so AT&T is getting those back. I assume because Verizon is jumping to a different technology that requires new cell tower spacing due to the difference of underlying technology. I am not saying AT&T will not.

3. Highly doubt AT&T will sell that spectrum back. Remember, wireless spectrum is finite. Every chunk of it is gold. AT&T won't sell its gold this easily. Specially if it can do something with it. Just because old legacy systems are brought offline doesn't mean the spectrum will go to waste. No, newer systems may take its place, boosting 3G or boosting 4G.

4. Verizon has been simply connecting their FiOS network to each tower where possible. Also, I don't think they have given their backhaul much thought. Just look at Verizon speeds. They don't even come close to the 3.1 Mb/s theoretical, they are always in the crap 900 Kb/s. So something is not right. Also, Verizon has become slower on their 3G network... last years test by PCMag showed that. This year, I haven't seen any new comparison but cust. care comparisons. I may be proven wrong here.

5. Wishful...

 

[Geckotek]

I'm fairly certain their FIOS network is pretty damn fast. By the way, you haven't cited a single source. Are these assumptions?

Also, saying T-Mobile was upgrading to HSPA+ and saying the equip is upgradable to LTE are 2 totally different things.

YES, Verizon gave their backhaul tons of thought. They discussed this thoroughly before the iPhone release. And the 900Kbps average is a limitation of EVDO Rev A, not the backhaul.

BTW, Verizon owns a VERY beefy fiber network that they use to lease to other wireless carriers for backhaul purposes. I'm certain they are not hurting.

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Verizon-Leases-Fiber-For-Wireless-Backhaul-101591

Also...1 Gbps

http://techpinger.com/2010/08/verizon-fios-test-passes-1gbps/

 

[jav6454]

I'm fairly certain their FIOS network is pretty damn fast. By the way, you haven't cited a single source. Are these assumptions?

Also, saying T-Mobile was upgrading to HSPA+ and saying the equip is upgradable to LTE are 2 totally different things.

YES, Verizon gave their backhaul tons of thought. They discussed this thoroughly before the iPhone release. And the 900Kbps average is a limitation of EVDO Rev A, not the backhaul.

BTW, Verizon owns a VERY beefy fiber network that they use to lease to other wireless carriers for backhaul purposes. I'm certain they are not hurting.

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Verizon-Leases-Fiber-For-Wireless-Backhaul-101591

Also...1 Gbps

http://techpinger.com/2010/08/verizon-fios-test-passes-1gbps/

1a. I assume, because its late at night and too tired to actually look for a source, but I can owe you those for next post on a sunny day.

1b. Infrastructure does not mean or imply just the cell infrastructure, it can also mean leases, permits, backhaul, etc. All of this can make it easier on AT&T.

1c. Limitation of Rev A? Seriously? Rev A has a limit of 3.1 Mb/s max. AT&T's older 3G network had a limitation of 3.6 Mb/s mac and people managed to download at 2-2.5 Mb/s. There must be something wrong with AT&T then!

2. Let's see, did I say FiOS was slow? No. Your point is now null. Did I say Verizon was upgrading cell towers to FiOS? Yes. Your other point is null. I just happened to notice that even though some were FiOS ready, the network seemed not to improve, quite the contrary...

 

[Reaper0bot0]

Once again, Jav, you aren't so much making an argument as listing a bunch of hopes that Verizon will either fail or be evil, or possibly both.

I really don't get where you're coming from.

BTW, if Verizon's LTE network is broadcast in the 700 mhz band, which has a greater range than 800 or 1900 mhz, and the towers they are placing this equipment on are spaced for 800 or 1900 mhz, why would they need MORE towers for proper spacing? As a general rule, lower frequency = greater range. This LTE network should have superior range, I'd imagine, than the existing cellular and PCS networks Verizon runs based on simple physics.

 

[smithrh]

Once again, Jav, you aren't so much making an argument as listing a bunch of hopes that Verizon will either fail or be evil, or possibly both.

I really don't get where you're coming from.

BTW, if Verizon's LTE network is broadcast in the 700 mhz band, which has a greater range than 800 or 1900 mhz, and the towers they are placing this equipment on are spaced for 800 or 1900 mhz, why would they need MORE towers for proper spacing? As a general rule, lower frequency = greater range. This LTE network should have superior range, I'd imagine, than the existing cellular and PCS networks Verizon runs based on simple physics.

If people would understand that there is one particular poster, who posts quite frequently but really doesn't have any sort of experience, field knowledge, insight or background, then it all becomes clearer - and easier to deal with.

 

[jav6454]

Once again, Jav, you aren't so much making an argument as listing a bunch of hopes that Verizon will either fail or be evil, or possibly both.

I really don't get where you're coming from.

BTW, if Verizon's LTE network is broadcast in the 700 mhz band, which has a greater range than 800 or 1900 mhz, and the towers they are placing this equipment on are spaced for 800 or 1900 mhz, why would they need MORE towers for proper spacing? As a general rule, lower frequency = greater range. This LTE network should have superior range, I'd imagine, than the existing cellular and PCS networks Verizon runs based on simple physics.

You got your physics wrong.

 

[Prof.]

I hope Verizon doesn't kill Unlimited LTE before I can get my hands on it, but if they do, what sort of plans can we expect? $15/mo for 2 GB's and $30/mo for 4GB's. One of their advertisements said we can download full-length movies over-the-air. We can't do that if they don't give us ample data limits. If the most you can get per month is 2GBs, there's going to be a lot of upset people.

Time will tell, I suppose.