Similar forum like this but for AT&T?

[Arysyn]

This is a long post, sorry about the length, lots to say here that will likely result in me writing short posts from now on that I'm not with T-Mobile anymore. I have some news to share. Before I write about it though, I want to first than gusherb for updating information about AT&T here and regarding his mention of the Freelancers Union membership discount on AT&T Wireless service, which up until today my mother and I couldn't find anyone at AT&T willing to recognize the Freelancers Union membership I signed up for shortly after reading gusherb's mention about it here long ago. Hence, why I haven't joined AT&T for wireless service all this time, while enduring many issues with T-Mobile, hoping to eventually get AT&T since I had a positive experience with the service using Cricket at one point on the Alcatel Idol 3 5.5, a device where I noted excellent signal reception on the AT&T network here in the Chicago area, despite the Alcatel Idol 3 5.5 not having band 30 compatibility. The device itself had some quality issues that I ended up cancelling Cricket at the time not liking any of the other devices cricket was selling back then. However, I kept in mind the positive experience using the AT&T network through Cricket in the Chicago area, while reading updates about AT&T here on S4GRU.

 

So, my mother went to the AT&T store this afternoon with the 16gb Apple iPhone 6s she got from T-Mobile, along with all the necessary paperwork, hoping perhaps this time around someone at AT&T would work with her on getting this done. I really wanted the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, after having trouble with the LifeProof case on the Apple iPhone 6s, realizing these cases just weren't working out very well for me from this and past experiences. I wanted a durable device that was of high quality, which since wanting the Samsung Galaxy S7 earlier this year, the active was perfect for what I wanted, but only available on AT&T. From reading the deal online the AT&T website, the device comes with a promotion for the Samsung Gear S2 smartwatch, a perfect replacement for the simplicity my mother is seeking for her phone calling and would do just fine for her instead of having the Apple iPhone 6s, which was due to her not having much ease of use with Android whereas Apple ios was just fine for her mostly, though she really doesn't need/want the added features.

 

Going to the AT&T store with in mind the Unlimited Plan for $100 and the $10 add-on cost for the smartwatch line, she talked with a store manager who was very laid back and cooperative. He accepted the Freelancers Union membership, and extended the $15 monthly discount on our 18mbps Uverse internet service, along with giving us the $49 monthly Uverse television package required for the Unlimited Plan, which this television service comes with a $100 reward card. The television service won't do much good for us in the next couple of months until we can move to where my aunt is, and share the television service with her throughout the house, along with having her switch onto our AT&T Wireless Unlimited Plan for her line at $40 monthly, saving her money from her current AT&T Wireless service.

 

Anyways, regarding monetary savings, the total of the Wireless service between the Unlimited Plan at $100 monthly and the smartwatch line at $10 monthly - $110 monthly subtotal before fees and taxes, the 22% Freelancers Union discount brings the subtotal down to $85 monthly before fees and taxes. That's a nice $25 monthly discount! It ends up being less expensive than the two $45 monthly unlimited lines my mother and I had with T-Mobile. So now we finally have left T-Mobile and are on a reliable network here in the Chicago area. T-Mobile will get better when band 12 is available at the end of the year or beginning of next year, though not likely to be great. I would have stuck with it considering the deals my mother and I had with them, but now with AT&T giving us this great deal on a much better network here, it just was time to switch. Besides, I really dislike what is going on at T-Mobile with these Uncarrier deals and such. Free frosties and Pokémon Go, no thank you! Lower the rates or give some sort of meaningful incentives like points that can be accumulated throughout time for service discounts and such, whatever woujld end up being at an equivalent cost to T-Mobile as these business partnerships are.

 

Also, now when John Legere does/says something stupid, I won't feel guilty about being their customer!

[gusherb]

This is what 5 MHz B17 looks like in a fairly crowded small tourist town:

 

 

These were taken a bit east of Michigan City, IN in a pretty rural area:

 

 

About what I would expect for 5 MHz B17 on a carrier with a lot of subs around here. Really not that awful for sparse site spacing.

[TheForce627]

Does anybody have any info on Band 29? Where can they deploy it and would they need new equipment?

[Arysyn]

AT&T has been a really great experience for me so far here in the Chicago area. Rarely ever drops off of LTE. I'm currently at my aunt's on band 4 AWS LTE getting over 20mbps, whereas T-mobile's LTE rarely ever could connect to LTE here, let alone get a decent HSPA signal. Much of the time nothing here on T-Mobile, meaning no signal at all. It makes me wonder if band 12 would even help.

 

Still, I'm hoping AT&T will make another attempt to purchase T-Mobile sometime after the new administration takes over. If T-Mobile can't secure a good chunk of 600mhz, I really don't see what future they really have left as a standalone carrier. My guess is if AT&T does get an acquisition deal in, they'll need to give off some spectrum to Verizon in exchange for the deal. However, I do believe this is going to happen, especially if Trump wins.

[travismheim]

AT&T has been a really great experience for me so far here in the Chicago area. Rarely ever drops off of LTE. I'm currently at my aunt's on band 4 AWS LTE getting over 20mbps, whereas T-mobile's LTE rarely ever could connect to LTE here, let alone get a decent HSPA signal. Much of the time nothing here on T-Mobile, meaning no signal at all. It makes me wonder if band 12 would even help.

 

Still, I'm hoping AT&T will make another attempt to purchase T-Mobile sometime after the new administration takes over. If T-Mobile can't secure a good chunk of 600mhz, I really don't see what future they really have left as a standalone carrier. My guess is if AT&T does get an acquisition deal in, they'll need to give off some spectrum to Verizon in exchange for the deal. However, I do believe this is going to happen, especially if Trump wins.

With how well T-Mobile has performed recently they would be hard pressed to sell that purchase as beneficial even with a new administration.

[greenbastard]

AT&T has been a really great experience for me so far here in the Chicago area. Rarely ever drops off of LTE. I'm currently at my aunt's on band 4 AWS LTE getting over 20mbps, whereas T-mobile's LTE rarely ever could connect to LTE here, let alone get a decent HSPA signal. Much of the time nothing here on T-Mobile, meaning no signal at all. It makes me wonder if band 12 would even help.

 

Still, I'm hoping AT&T will make another attempt to purchase T-Mobile sometime after the new administration takes over. If T-Mobile can't secure a good chunk of 600mhz, I really don't see what future they really have left as a standalone carrier. My guess is if AT&T does get an acquisition deal in, they'll need to give off some spectrum to Verizon in exchange for the deal. However, I do believe this is going to happen, especially if Trump wins.

Its not likely to happen. At&t is too busy investing abroad. The last thing they're thinking about is probably buying T-Mobile, especially after failing once already. They are going full speed ahead in deploying LTE in the former Iusacell Network and will probably be busy shutting down Nextel's iDen and repurposing spectrum for LTE in the next couple of years. I imagine once they finish, their next goal will be to expand their network down there. A Iusacell and Nextel network combined is still the smallest network in Mexico.

[WiWavelength]

An interesting loophole of sorts in the AT&T GoPhone $2/day plan plus the $1/day 100 MB data package add on is that AT&T does not debit the $2 base plan charge if no outgoing calls are made or SMS sent.  Only the $1 data package add on gets debited from the prepaid balance.  So, that is basically equivalent to a pay per use data only plan on the AT&T network at $10/GB or $30/mo for 3 GB.  Alternatively, for use of the AT&T network twice a week, that amounts to only $8/mo.

 

AJ

[Terrell352]

AT&T has been a really great experience for me so far here in the Chicago area. Rarely ever drops off of LTE. I'm currently at my aunt's on band 4 AWS LTE getting over 20mbps, whereas T-mobile's LTE rarely ever could connect to LTE here, let alone get a decent HSPA signal. Much of the time nothing here on T-Mobile, meaning no signal at all. It makes me wonder if band 12 would even help.

 

Still, I'm hoping AT&T will make another attempt to purchase T-Mobile sometime after the new administration takes over. If T-Mobile can't secure a good chunk of 600mhz, I really don't see what future they really have left as a standalone carrier. My guess is if AT&T does get an acquisition deal in, they'll need to give off some spectrum to Verizon in exchange for the deal. However, I do believe this is going to happen, especially if Trump wins.

If At&t was ever allowed to purchase Tmobile then Sprint would be 3rd place carrier forever and eventually Verizon wouldb be allowed to purchase Sprint for the sake of competition. Then prices would go all the way up and the duopoly would rule. Is that what you want?

[greenbastard]

If At&t was ever allowed to purchase Tmobile then Sprint would be 3rd place carrier forever and eventually Verizon wouldb be allowed to purchase Sprint for the sake of competition. Then prices would go all the way up and the duopoly would rule. Is that what you want?

While I don't think prices would go up substantially, I do think there certainly won't be any promotions to attract customers.

[gusherb]

I finally found a scenario that 5x5 B17 didn't work on AT&T due to overcrowding. I was at one of the wineries in Michigan which was having a fairly decent sized event and LTE was just crawling. I was able to pull between .4 and 1 Mbps, with a lot of flakiness. Mind you this is a good ways out in the country. When heading back west towards I-94 I tracked down the cell sector I was connecting to all the way back to a boomer type tower in Bridgman right next to the interstate. That turned out to be 7.5 miles from where I was. I was kind of surprised I had any LTE at all from a tower 7.5 miles away on a 5 MHz 700 carrier in the middle of a hilly forest.

Anyway the point I'm getting at is that Sprint definitely could turn up its 800 LTE in suburban areas where cells are only 1-3 miles apart and work fine, they would just need to watch out in rural areas like I was at. I haven't had a problem with AT&T 5 MHz B17 in the more suburban areas.

[RAvirani]

I finally found a scenario that 5x5 B17 didn't work on AT&T due to overcrowding. I was at one of the wineries in Michigan which was having a fairly decent sized event and LTE was just crawling. I was able to pull between .4 and 1 Mbps, with a lot of flakiness. Mind you this is a good ways out in the country. When heading back west towards I-94 I tracked down the cell sector I was connecting to all the way back to a boomer type tower in Bridgman right next to the interstate. That turned out to be 7.5 miles from where I was. I was kind of surprised I had any LTE at all from a tower 7.5 miles away on a 5 MHz 700 carrier in the middle of a hilly forest.

Anyway the point I'm getting at is that Sprint definitely could turn up its 800 LTE in suburban areas where cells are only 1-3 miles apart and work fine, they would just need to watch out in rural areas like I was at. I haven't had a problem with AT&T 5 MHz B17 in the more suburban areas.

Yea. Lowband is lowband, 5mhz or 50mhz. I wish we could get a network engineer at Sprint to explain why the power isn't up the way it is on all of the other carriers.

[payturr]

Yea. Lowband is lowband, 5mhz or 50mhz. I wish we could get a network engineer at Sprint to explain why the power isn't up the way it is on all of the other carriers.

The answer why is because it's 5MHz and band 25 is also 5MHz, its used mostly for capacity and not so much for coverage. If they operated it at full power, it would perform like 1x because of the sheer number of people that would be parked on it.

[RAvirani]

The answer why is because it's 5MHz and band 25 is also 5MHz, its used mostly for capacity and not so much for coverage. If they operated it at full power, it would perform like 1x because of the sheer number of people that would be parked on it.

AT&T seems to be doing that with their 5x5 B17 and they have about twice as many subs as Sprint so no, not really. If AT&T can get away with it, Sprint definitely can.

[payturr]

AT&T seems to be doing that with their 5x5 B17 and they have about twice as many subs as Sprint so no, not really. If AT&T can get away with it, Sprint definitely can.

With Sprint's history? No, not at all

[gusherb]

The answer why is because it's 5MHz and band 25 is also 5MHz, its used mostly for capacity and not so much for coverage. If they operated it at full power, it would perform like 1x because of the sheer number of people that would be parked on it.

 

And I just stated two posts above yours that such is not actually the case. its clearly proven by other carriers that this isn't true, that it CAN be turned up and pushed out quite far before the 5 MHz channel starts to buckle. There are no more valid excuses for why they don't turn up LTE 800, yes it will slow down but in most situations it'll still be working better than the alternative - EVDO.

[RAvirani]

And I just stated two posts above yours that such is not actually the case. its clearly proven by other carriers that this isn't true, that it CAN be turned up and pushed out quite far before the 5 MHz channel starts to buckle. There are no more valid excuses for why they don't turn up LTE 800, yes it will slow down but in most situations it'll still be working better than the alternative - EVDO.

Fully agreed.

[Arysyn]

I realize wireless carrier mergers are not that popular, but as I've been very happy with AT&T, I know the service would be even better with the added sites and spectrum T-Mobile has to add to AT&T's portfolio. I think AT&T may try again for T-Mobile despite their other plans going on in Mexico, etc. Verizon is busy gobbling up old internet search companies, so where does this have AT&T regarding growth here in the U.S? I don't believe that AT&T is going to stop growing their business here.

 

Nor do I think AT&T is going to allow T-Mobile to continue with their self-growth while the acquisition chances are good with the right administration in charge. Actually, even if it isn't Trump, though it would certainly be easier if it were him as President. If he is, then AT&T would have a great opportunity at it, which I believe could very well happen.

 

I'm definitely supportive of a three-carrier market here, but I'm thinking it could actually end up going less way down the line. My thinking is Comcast/Xfinity might get Sprint, then later merge with Verizon, again though that is much later on, and may not happen by acquisition, if Sprint ends up selling assets instead. I want the best for Sprint, but this news cycle of it going back and forth is unsettling. Masa and Marcelo really need to take full charge of it and grow the business, something I know AT&T certainly is willing to do with theirs.

[Arysyn]

By the way, AT&T works very well and fast on 700mhz here.

[anthony.spina97]

I finally found a scenario that 5x5 B17 didn't work on AT&T due to overcrowding. I was at one of the wineries in Michigan which was having a fairly decent sized event and LTE was just crawling. I was able to pull between .4 and 1 Mbps, with a lot of flakiness. Mind you this is a good ways out in the country. When heading back west towards I-94 I tracked down the cell sector I was connecting to all the way back to a boomer type tower in Bridgman right next to the interstate. That turned out to be 7.5 miles from where I was. I was kind of surprised I had any LTE at all from a tower 7.5 miles away on a 5 MHz 700 carrier in the middle of a hilly forest.

Anyway the point I'm getting at is that Sprint definitely could turn up its 800 LTE in suburban areas where cells are only 1-3 miles apart and work fine, they would just need to watch out in rural areas like I was at. I haven't had a problem with AT&T 5 MHz B17 in the more suburban areas.

 

AT&T seems to be doing that with their 5x5 B17 and they have about twice as many subs as Sprint so no, not really. If AT&T can get away with it, Sprint definitely can.

 

And I just stated two posts above yours that such is not actually the case. its clearly proven by other carriers that this isn't true, that it CAN be turned up and pushed out quite far before the 5 MHz channel starts to buckle. There are no more valid excuses for why they don't turn up LTE 800, yes it will slow down but in most situations it'll still be working better than the alternative - EVDO.

Except here's a problem with this idea of yours. I live in a town called Harrisburg in North Carolina. It's basically a suburb of Charlotte, but has a population of ~15,000 people. There is a Sprint tower about two miles away from me (which is outside of the city limits) that I connect to regularly with a -113 dBm Band 26 connection, and regularly get less than 2 Mbps down and less than .5 Mbps up, and that's late at night, or "off-peak" hours. This is an example of the power not being turned up on Band 26, with it not covering a huge expanse of land, and not being far away from it. And yet, my speeds still suck. Compared to EVDO, I can regularly get over 1 Mbps down and up at most times of the day, with a -85 dBm or greater signal. Turning the signal up is not the solution. Densifying with more towers/small cells is the solution. I can only imagine how bad the speeds would be if they had the power turned up on Band 26 here.

 

-Anthony

[gusherb]

Except here's a problem with this idea of yours. I live in a town called Harrisburg in North Carolina. It's basically a suburb of Charlotte, but has a population of ~15,000 people. There is a Sprint tower about two miles away from me (which is outside of the city limits) that I connect to regularly with a -113 dBm Band 26 connection, and regularly get less than 2 Mbps down and less than .5 Mbps up, and that's late at night, or "off-peak" hours. This is an example of the power not being turned up on Band 26, with it not covering a huge expanse of land, and not being far away from it. And yet, my speeds still suck. Compared to EVDO, I can regularly get over 1 Mbps down and up at most times of the day, with a -85 dBm or greater signal. Turning the signal up is not the solution. Densifying with more towers/small cells is the solution. I can only imagine how bad the speeds would be if they had the power turned up on Band 26 here.

 

-Anthony

Is the network real aggressive about putting you on higher bands when available? Because I've heard a lot (and seen for myself) the network parking devices on B26 where it's not really necessary. The other part of the problem is that they haven't really turned up B25 that high either. Your area may be a case where LTE needs to be kept turned down, but where I am with 15 MHz DL worth of B25 and 2 B41 carriers they really need to crank up B25, and crank up B26 and get things optimized so devices don't unnecessarily park on B26. B25 has to be turned up with B26 as part of avoiding B26 congestion. In the suburban area where I live, cranking up both wouldn't cause any harm to the network and would just fill in lots of gaps. Adding cells in some of these current weak spots would be silly because they're not really super high population areas that need more capacity.

 

I also would like to remind anyone thinking my logic is flawed, that KC has had things setup this way since early 2014 and AFAIK has no issues. I definitely saw B26 far outreach B25 in that market.

[caspar347]

Is the network real aggressive about putting you on higher bands when available? Because I've heard a lot (and seen for myself) the network parking devices on B26 where it's not really necessary. The other part of the problem is that they haven't really turned up B25 that high either. Your area may be a case where LTE needs to be kept turned down, but where I am with 15 MHz DL worth of B25 and 2 B41 carriers they really need to crank up B25, and crank up B26 and get things optimized so devices don't unnecessarily park on B26. B25 has to be turned up with B26 as part of avoiding B26 congestion. In the suburban area where I live, cranking up both wouldn't cause any harm to the network and would just fill in lots of gaps. Adding cells in some of these current weak spots would be silly because they're not really super high population areas that need more capacity.

 

I also would like to remind anyone thinking my logic is flawed, that KC has had things setup this way since early 2014 and AFAIK has no issues. I definitely saw B26 far outreach B25 in that market.

I can't speak for Anthony's area specifically (fraid I live on the opposite end of the city and I don't end up in that area a whole lot) but we still have just 5mhz of B25 DL BW. We're a 15mhz FDD A-F market (10mhz + 5mhz non-contiguous) so I really don't understand why they haven't refarmed the 5 non-contiguous mhz, but that is what it is for now. So it makes sense that B26 performance suffers here in places where entire towns are covered by single site sectors.

 

HOWEVER - I still think Sprint is holding back big time on B41 power levels for some reason here. At least in my corner of the Charlotte market, you basically have to have line of sight to the 8T8Rs to hold a connection more than a mile away. This hasn't been my experience in other markets. So if that's an issue market-wide here, Sprint could really improve capacity of B25 and B26 by fixing that. Plus like I said I have no idea why they haven't refarmed some more B25 yet.

[RAvirani]

Except here's a problem with this idea of yours. I live in a town called Harrisburg in North Carolina. It's basically a suburb of Charlotte, but has a population of ~15,000 people. There is a Sprint tower about two miles away from me (which is outside of the city limits) that I connect to regularly with a -113 dBm Band 26 connection, and regularly get less than 2 Mbps down and less than .5 Mbps up, and that's late at night, or "off-peak" hours. This is an example of the power not being turned up on Band 26, with it not covering a huge expanse of land, and not being far away from it. And yet, my speeds still suck. Compared to EVDO, I can regularly get over 1 Mbps down and up at most times of the day, with a -85 dBm or greater signal. Turning the signal up is not the solution. Densifying with more towers/small cells is the solution. I can only imagine how bad the speeds would be if they had the power turned up on Band 26 here.

 

-Anthony

I never understand when people make this argument - in a weak signal area, the goal should always be to get everyone on the most efficient network. Higher power levels would increase the signal strength, increasing your SNR and thus your speeds. Also, B26 should never die with EVDO at -85dbm...are you sure both signals are coming from the same site?

[payturr]

And I just stated two posts above yours that such is not actually the case. its clearly proven by other carriers that this isn't true, that it CAN be turned up and pushed out quite far before the 5 MHz channel starts to buckle. There are no more valid excuses for why they don't turn up LTE 800, yes it will slow down but in most situations it'll still be working better than the alternative - EVDO.

Oh no I'm not questioning how far 5MHz can go and still me usable, you misread me: I'm saying that the sheer number of people who start using it within that extended coverage will cripple the 5MHz carrier in no time.

[anthony.spina97]

I never understand when people make this argument - in a weak signal area, the goal should always be to get everyone on the most efficient network. Higher power levels would increase the signal strength, increasing your SNR and thus your speeds. Also, B26 should never die with EVDO at -85dbm...are you sure both signals are coming from the same site?

Yes, I am absolutely positive. It's the way the network is set up here. The power levels aren't turned up, and I could only imagine what would happen if that tower service even more people. And it's not the topography, because I live in a relatively flat area with not a lot of tree cover. They just don't have the power turned up here. My best guess is because of lack of site spacing so they don't turn it up so that it becomes completely unusable.

 

Basically the gist of what I'm saying is, what works for one carrier in one (or more) area(s) may not work for another in the same area(s). Yes, I do realize that that kind of contradicts what I was saying earlier when I was trying to compare my anecdotal experience to yours, and I'm sorry about that lol. 

 

-Anthony

[TheForce627]

Changes in AT&T's plans https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/32b7b79c-8451-3750-a5a9-f2e943aabe87/at%26t-hikes-prices-for-some.html