AT&T says "2000 more cities/towns covered with 4G than Verizon"

[iansltx]

Mod(s), move this if you'd like, but...

 

I just saw an AT&T banner ad saying that they have 2000 more cities and towns with 4G than Verizon does. Click the link and you see them playing up LTE at first, then going into their bit about having the country's only dual-tier 4G network, with "HSPA+ with enhanced backhaul" as the big lyer and LTE as the super-awesome, small layer.

 

Actually, AT&T isn't the only one with a "dual tier" 4G network (if you can call single-carrier HSPA+ 4G...I certainly wouldn't). Now that it looks like Sprint is letting people access its LTE sites in DFW, Atlanta and other places, Sprint has such a network as well. One sucky "4G" network that covers (comparatively) a lot of people (WiMAX for Sprint, 125MM pops or so; HSPA+ for AT&T, 200MM pops), and one network that's LTE...which currently doesn't cover as many people.

 

Also, from my experiences of AT&T HSPA+, I wouldn't call it 4G. My guess is that they are willing to call the network 4G even if speeds are routinely in the 2-4 Mbps range on downloads...correct me if I'm wrong but hitting anything beyond 6-8 Mbps on AT&T HSPA+ is nigh impossible. In comparison, my T-Mobile aircard (DC-HSPA+...I'm perfectly okay with calling that 4G) hits 5 Mbps routinely in areas with "zero bars". In areas with full signal and dual bonded HSPA+ carriers (something AT&T won't do), I've seen 20 Mbps down, 3 Mbps up, with low latency. More routine speeds hit 10-15 Mbps down, 2-3 Mbps up with LTE-like latency (I've seen 22ms to a local server before). Show me a reasonably large area where AT&T can do that on H+, particularly one that isn't already covered by LTE...oh wait, one doesn't exist.

 

To be fair, Sprint suffers in some of its WiMAX areas, and those areas are still marketed as 4G. But my guesss is that AT&T is going to take forever to deploy LTE "because we already have a pefectly good HSPA+ network", while Sprint catches up to and surpasses them with NV.

 

Sorry for the rant, but what do other folks think about how AT&T is spinning this?

[aerxx]

AT&T messed up with the iPhone, their network was great, but it wasn't built for the amount of data that came with the Apple hipsters.

[Supermallet]

Deceptive marketing is deceptive.

[silverhawknike]

Im getting tired of carriers's commercials. -_____-

Verizon-America's Fastest 4G Network

At&t-The Nation's Largest 4G Network

Tmobile- America's Largest 4G Network

 

As for Sprint- America's Favorite 4G network. Well, Sprint got it right... Sorta of. lol

[irev210]

Im getting tired of carriers's commercials. -_____-

Verizon-America's Fastest 4G Network

At&t-The Nation's Largest 4G Network

Tmobile- America's Largest 4G Network

 

As for Sprint- America's Favorite 4G network. Well, Sprint got it right... Sorta of. lol

 

Verizon says "America's Largest 4G LTE Network"

 

It's actually comical at this point. It creates nothing but customer confusion.

[gopher_otis]

How is this any different than the Sprint ads claiming “Blazing Fast 4G” and “Unprecedented Voice Clarity?” All carriers lie about their coverage and data speed.

[S4GRU]

How is this any different than the Sprint ads claiming “Blazing Fast 4G” and “Unprecedented Voice Clarity?” All carriers lie about their coverage and data speed.

 

I kind of disagree. Sprint's "Blazing Fast 4G" term was coined when they had the only 4G network. And relative to its 3G, it was blazing fast. And is blazing fast. Should they give up the term because a competitor comes up with something more blazing-er?

 

Also, Ive used Verizon, Sprint and ATT a lot. Sprint does have the best voice quality. Verizon is close. ATT, not even in the ballpark. I've never used Tmo, but I have not heard good things. And with HD Voice, Sprint definitely continues to lead voice quality.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[irev210]

I kind of disagree. Sprint's "Blazing Fast 4G" term was coined when they had the only 4G network. And relative to its 3G, it was blazing fast. And is blazing fast. Should they give up the term because a competitor comes up with something more blazing-er?

 

Also, Ive used Verizon, Sprint and ATT a lot. Sprint does have the best voice quality. Verizon is close. ATT, not even in the ballpark. I've never used Tmo, but I have not heard good things. And with HD Voice, Sprint definitely continues to lead voice quality.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

It's actually really interesting that Sprint decided to go with 1x Advanced and differentiate themselves in the market. I remember listening to Dan Hesse about 2 years ago and his quote was "voice is king". They definitely backed that up by launching 1x-advanced.

 

While every other carrier is going straight to VoLTE, it's very interesting that Sprint isn't doing the same. I thought about it a lot - they are committed to CDMA for long long long time and with it's backwards compatibility, 1x Advanced doesn't seem like the waste of spectrum that you might think.

 

I think it speaks to Sprint's commitment to voice quality. By continuing to separate voice from data, it allows for voice to be 100% unaffected by heavy LTE data usage.

 

In short:

• Sprint needs a platform for legacy CDMA users - 1x-Advanced is just that
  
• Something they can market against the big carriers - HD Voice
  
• Continues tradition of keeping voice/data separate - should theoretically provide a better level of voice service (less dropped calls, etc).
  

 

And don't forget - Sprint's 4G network was "America's Favorite 4G Network"

[S4GRU]

 

And don't forget - Sprint's 4G network was "America's Favorite 4G Network"

 

Its a distinction like being "America's Favorite Proctologist." The title just 'stinks.' Or should I say, it's 'crappy'?

 

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[surma884]

There needs to be regulation on how companies call themselves best at whatever. In Japan it is different. If Epson says they are #1 in making quality printers it means they really are #1 and other companies won't go around saying they are #1. At one of my other jobs we had a big client in Japan. They would compare our products to others over in Japan and they would market it accordingly. If our product wasn't as good as the others they wouldn't claim to be the best or #1.

[Abyss19707]

AT&T nows has 39 LTE Equipped Cities around the nation

[S4GRU]

I don't think the government needs to go around regulating slogans. If people are so mindless and follow everything they hear like sheep, they deserve to get what they pay for. We cannot govern to the lowest common denominator.

 

These are not mandatory services, they are optional services and people are free to choose whatever service they like. If they choose a carrier because their slogan says they are the largest, then they are making their carrier decision on just one item. And that is careless. A careless consumer will not be protected just because the government is trying to control slogans.

 

There is a lot of personal responsibility in a free and open society. And personally, I would rather continue to hear everything and filter and think for myself, then have the government try to filter and decide what's best for my ears.

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[gopher_otis]

I kind of disagree. Sprint's "Blazing Fast 4G" term was coined when they had the only 4G network. And relative to its 3G' date=' it was blazing fast. And is blazing fast. Should they give up the term because a competitor comes up with something more blazing-er? [/quote']Yes. Or have regional advertisements that better reflect the average network speed of a particular area. I don't have WiMAX anywhere near me and I see it being advertised in my area from Sprint and Clear quite often.

 

Also, Ive used Verizon, Sprint and ATT a lot. Sprint does have the best voice quality. Verizon is close. ATT, not even in the ballpark. I've never used Tmo, but I have not heard good things. And with HD Voice, Sprint definitely continues to lead voice quality.

I gotta say that I can really tell the difference (when I'm not dropping calls) between calling other Sprint phones and calling any of my friends who are with AT&T. Sprint is pretty clear while calls placed to AT&T phones have a lot of background noise and echoes.

[iansltx]

Plus one on Sprint voice quality. I have used TMo in the past and they are comparable. Verizon is close. ATT is not.

[JeffDTD]

Plus one on Sprint voice quality. I have used TMo in the past and they are comparable. Verizon is close. ATT is not.

 

I hated att voice quality when i tried them... i also struggle understanding people on verizon...

[Bob Newhart]

The term 3 or 4 G describes the potential of the technology, not what the service provided is, its just marketing.

 

HSPA+ on T-Mobile can get 20+ Mbps, plenty fast enough. The coverage of T-Mobile's HSPA+ and ATT's are poor when compared to their coverage maps. In a city just south of me, with T-Mobile HSPA+ 'only' maxes at out at 1Mbps, the data connection to the towers is the limiting factor.

 

I wish I could 'only' get 1Mbps on the Sprint service though. The WiMax in the same city, it'd be a regular 6 to 8 Mbps, really good.