So
Are they going to acknowledge that their 3G coverage is crap outside of the major cities and stop claiming that the maps for the in the Verizon adverts are wrong in some indeterminate way?
AT&T plans $2bn wireless overhaul
AT&T has acknowledged that its US wireless service is in need of an upgrade, and the company is putting its money where its apologetic mouth is, allocating an additional $2bn or so to upgrade its network in 2010. "Wireless is our No. 1 investment priority," John Stankey, head of Big Phone's operations division, is quoted by the …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Ready by 2011??
Well I'm sure that all their current iPhone users will be happy to curb their usage until then. And not scarper to their competitors.
What competitors?
You mean competitor - in the US, the only nationwide GSM alternative would be t-mobile.
And that competitor uses a different 3G frequency. So the only alternative for iPhone users in the US is another network that has poorer coverage and 3G won't work.
I really don't see them leaving in droves.
Verizon, Sprint?
Remeber, Apple rumoured to be ditching exclusivity like they've done in the UK
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/25/apple_ending_att_exclusivity/
Vodafone are the parents of Verizon, and getting pushed to 3G. Not to mention that I'm sure T-Mobile would jump at the chance to move to a compatible 3G network for an Apple contract, AT&T practically did, and here in the UK we had O2 pumping out a decent EDGE network to support the iPhone.
Even if it takes them a year, and they launch at the same time AT&T "fix" their network, a year of attrocious service from AT&T will sure be the stick to any other wireless carrier's carrot.
Not accurate at all
1) Verizon Wireless tested GSM technology in the 2000/2001 time frame. They only did it as it was part of the agreement with Vodafone. When it was discovered that Verizon Wireless tested it, the news people picked up on it and asked Verizon Wireless about it. Their reply was that they only tested it because it was part of the agreement that they made with Vodafone and have no intention of GSM techologies. Chris Gent was the CEO of Vodafone at the time and he was not happy at all with their response.
Verizon Wireless is moving to LTE, which is the next generation for the GSM world and is a 4G technology, not 3G! Qualcomm has lost their footing in the CDMA space and the WCDMA camp is taking over. Qualcomm had nothing to do with WCDMA except it uses some of their technology so all they have done is collect royalties. Sprint went with Wi Max and that left Verizon Wireless as their largest CDMA customers for their 4G technology. It was behind schedule, expected to cost a lot more as most other CDMA carriers around the world planned on moving to LTE. So Verizon Wireless had little choice than to have a technology that only they use and that would limit handset choices.
2) AT&T didn't switch to anything for the iPhoney. They had a 3G network long before the iPhoney. While Apple was introducing a 2.5G handset; others had 3G handsets available for more than a year. When Apple released a 3.6Mbps handset; others had 7.2Mbps for over a year. When Apple released a 7.2Mbps handset; others were already selling 10Mbps.
Just because AT&T is upgrading to 7.2Mbps, doesn't mean they did it just for the iPhoney. They would need to upgrade anyway and it was planned to upgrade to a faster 3G speed before LTE. AT&T could have done 10Mbps, but probably decided not to a it would make the lame iPhoney look even more lame.
3) T-mobile doesn't have the spectrum to offer 3G on the same bands as AT&T. They spent money on the 1700MHz band. If they want 850MHz, they would need to buy another carrier; like AT&T or Verizon. They control the 850MHz spectrum in the top markets. T-Mobile has 1900Mhz spectrum which AT&T and Verizon does as well. T-Mobile doesn't have enough to offer GSM/GPRS/EDGE as well as WCDMA in the 1900Mhz spectrum; so they bought the 1700/2100 MHz bands for the 3G network.
As for the article in general; there will always be iPhoney suckage; it is the phone that sucks and blows.
Timing
Building a network worthy of the first decade of the 21st century.
'bout farking time!
Hallelujah! I currently hurl insults at my TV every time I see an AT&T commercial touting "more bars in more places" or "fewest dropped calls". I don't use 3G services, just basic phone and text. Because of the location of cell towers in relation to my home, I frequently have to step OUTSIDE to use my mobe. That's just inexcusable. A network upgrade and more towers will be a pleasant change. Here's to hoping they expand the network EVERYWHERE, not just in key large cities.
The only reason I don't switch to another carrier is because AT&T is the only one in my area using SIM-based phones. When my teenager destroys yet another device, I can reach into the Drawer Of HasBeen Phones™ and grab him another one. Pop in his SIM and it's ready to go (WAY cheaper to buy several used phones on e-Bay than pay the monthly insurance).
Wireless is our No. 1 investment priority," John Stankey
It sure as h ell isn't your employees!
Can you say: Outsource; Offshore; Surplus; Redundant?
At least they're admitting it
and (supposedly) spending some dosh toward fixing it. Better than T-Mobile and a lot of other companies going "problem? what problem?"
does that mean
We'll get an end to those hilarious verizon commercials bitch-slapping the att 3g network?
This topic is closed for new posts.
Sign up, sign up for The Register's weekly mobile & wireless newsletter - click here
Popular Whitepapers
- The BI Inflexion Point
Information is a right, not a privilege - VPN security - if you want it, come and get it
Attention WiFi hotspotters: You want it - The Register Guide to iSCSI
A primer on Internet SCSI, a protocol to transport SCSI commands over IP - Secure Mobile Working
Beyond the Technology - The Impact of IT Security Attitudes
Putting the pieces in place for effective security delivery - The Register guide to unified communications
A primer on the implications of unified communications for enterprise IT
