Verizon Wireless: Only 5% of Users on LTE 1 Year After LTE Debut

[jpkjeff]

Interesting piece from today's Wall Street Journal - only 5% of Verizon's subscribers are on LTE one year after they debuted their LTE network...

 

Link: http://blogs.wsj.com...r-4g-lte-debut/

Edited February 28, 2012 by S4GRU

[4ringsnbr]

Until the iPhone has LTE, adoption will probably be slow-- even with the double data promos (only double data with an LTE device). I will say this, their LTE coverage around my house and work is great-- I get a stronger LTE signal than CDMA/EHRPD here at my house. At the office, they're closer to the same, but the CDMA cell breathes there more.

[legion125]

I honestly thought that it would be higher than that due to the length of time it's been out. Must be mostly early adopters, or people are either still in contract or taking a wait & see approach.

[4ringsnbr]

I honestly thought that it would be higher than that due to the length of time it's been out. Must be mostly early adopters, or people are either still in contract or taking a wait & see approach.

 

Well-- VZW's 3G network is great-- you can easily pull 1.5 - 2.5 megs just about anytime you need. Honestly, LTE is overkill for a phone. I do pull around 25-30 megs on my phone-- but a webpage or simple game or facebook update doesn't really need all that. I honestly think going to EVDO Rev. B for a few years would've been fine-- a nice match for HSPA+ for a while... LTE & 4G really is a lot of marketing hype at this point-- but I do love it!

 

I think you're going to see the same thing on Sprint-- LTE will take 3-4 years to get to >50% adoption-- then the EVDO can start coming down and farmed over to LTE. Remember, we're nerds on here-- we care about LTE and basebands and have enough sense to stay miles away from GSM-- most average Joes don't have the first clue about their phone except the brand that's stamped onto it-- they buy iPhones for God's sake!

Edited February 28, 2012 by 4ringsnbr

[pyroscott]

 

Well-- VZW's 3G network is great-- you can easily pull 1.5 - 2.5 megs just about anytime you need. Honestly, LTE is overkill for a phone. I do pull around 25-30 megs on my phone-- but a webpage or simple game or facebook update doesn't really need all that. I honestly think going to EVDO Rev. B for a few years would've been fine-- a nice match for HSPA+ for a while... LTE & 4G really is a lot of marketing hype at this point-- but I do love it!

 

I think you're going to see the same thing on Sprint-- LTE will take 3-4 years to get to >50% adoption-- then the EVDO can start coming down and farmed over to LTE. Remember, we're nerds on here-- we care about LTE and basebands and have enough sense to stay miles away from GSM-- most average Joes don't have the first clue about their phone except the brand that's stamped onto it-- they buy iPhones for God's sake!

 

It's not that great everywhere.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

[4ringsnbr]

It's not that great everywhere.

 

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

I've never seen it below about 850k anywhere in town... maybe we're lucky that they have the old Alltel network they upgraded to Rev. A along with their own PCS network here. Now that they've acquired parts of the old Centennial, they even have the A AND B sides of 850 in a few spots! Of course, I have LTE everywhere I go here, so it really doesn't matter.

[pyroscott]

I've never seen it below about 850k anywhere in town... maybe we're lucky that they have the old Alltel network they upgraded to Rev. A along with their own PCS network here. Now that they've acquired parts of the old Centennial, they even have the A AND B sides of 850 in a few spots! Of course, I have LTE everywhere I go here, so it really doesn't matter.

 

I'm glad I have 4G everywhere that is densely populated that I go. Once I leave 4G area, it is sparsely enough populated to have good 3G speeds.

[S4GRU]

 

I've never seen it below about 850k anywhere in town... maybe we're lucky that they have the old Alltel network they upgraded to Rev. A along with their own PCS network here. Now that they've acquired parts of the old Centennial' date=' they even have the A AND B sides of 850 in a few spots! Of course, I have LTE everywhere I go here, so it really doesn't matter.[/quote']

 

My government issue verizon phone that I use for work, I average speeds around 1MB on 850 channels, but 600k on 1900. I never get over 1MB on 1900. But I can get 1.8MB to 2.0MB on 850 on certain low burden rural sites ocasionally.

 

Posted via Forum Runner

[pyroscott]

My government issue verizon phone that I use for work, I average speeds around 1MB on 850 channels, but 600k on 1900. I never get over 1MB on 1900. But I can get 1.8MB to 2.0MB on 850 on certain low burden rural sites ocasionally.

 

Posted via Forum Runner

 

The truth comes out. You are now a shade of orange...

[S4GRU]

 

The truth comes out. You are now a shade of orange...

 

I've always been open that I use Verizon for work and Sprint for personal.

 

Although, in my area there is no issue being on Sprint. Both networks perform about the same here. And Sprint and Verizon are colocated at most sites. The big difference here is I can use VZW on 850. Thus, there are lots of deep valleys and canyons I can get VZW and not Sprint.

 

Although VZW data speed drops off really significantly around -90dBm. Whereas on Sprint, its totally usable all the way to -101dBm. I've never really understood why. I've wondered if Verizon configures it cell edges as to not interfere with the entire cell performance. But I have no idea.

 

Posted via Forum Runner

[pyroscott]

That's funny. I remember having a sprint personal phone and Nextel work phone and it seemed like they never both worked in the same place

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

[4ringsnbr]

I've always been open that I use Verizon for work and Sprint for personal.

 

Although, in my area there is no issue being on Sprint. Both networks perform about the same here. And Sprint and Verizon are colocated at most sites. The big difference here is I can use VZW on 850. Thus, there are lots of deep valleys and canyons I can get VZW and not Sprint.

 

Although VZW data speed drops off really significantly around -90dBm. Whereas on Sprint, its totally usable all the way to -101dBm. I've never really understood why. I've wondered if Verizon configures it cell edges as to not interfere with the entire cell performance. But I have no idea.

 

Posted via Forum Runner

 

It's the way the scheduler is configured-- with EVDO it's proportional-fair-- your handset reports its signal to the tower when it requests the data rate with a DRC value-- the higher the value, the better the signal (and more data requested). The link scheduler is configured to give higher DRC requests more timeslots to try to serve more users. Sprint's average signal quality is lower (on PCS 1900), so there are fewer high DRC requesters (speeds are more even-- even if they're bad!)

[MacinJosh]

That's funny. I remember having a sprint personal phone and Nextel work phone and it seemed like they never both worked in the same place

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

Years ago, my friend had cingular (old at&t wireless) TDMA and I had cingular GSM and I had service in many places she didn't. And that was when cingular was still in it's infancy.