backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 24 comment(s) - last by Samus.. on Apr 9 at 1:00 AM

AT&T 4G service can be deployed faster thanks to less restrictions

With the FCC auction for the much ballyhooed 700MHz spectrum over, the big players were barred from detailing their plans and spectrum winnings until an FCC embargo was exhausted. Last week, that embargo expired and the winners are starting to speak out.

While Verizon was the primary winner in the prized C block, AT&T came out and said that the spectrum it won in the B block along with the 700 MHz C block spectrum it bought from Aloha Partners will allow it to roll out its 4G service much faster.

AT&T president and CEO of AT&Ts wireless unit, Ralph de la Vega said in a statement, “Our winning bids for B block spectrum, combined with the C block spectrum we acquired from Aloha Partners, significantly enhances AT&T's spectrum portfolio, which is already one of the broadest, highest-quality, and most efficient in the country.”

The reason de la Vega says AT&T will be able to more swiftly roll out its 4G service, also known as Long Term Evolution or LTE, is because of much less stringent FCC restrictions compared to the C block Verizon won.

AT&T goes on to state that in the future the 700 MHz spectrum it won will provide the foundation for its next generation wireless services like HSPA+ and LTE. AT&T says that while standards for 4G service are still emerging, broadband speeds of 100Mbps or more are expected.

For many AT&T subscribers it is a bit strange to hear AT&T talking up 4G when its 3G service is still not available in many locations. To that end, AT&T promises to deliver 3G service to nearly 350 leading markets by the end of 2008 including the top 100 cities.

AT&T also states that it currently offers devices running every major operating system and will add new ones as they become available and customer demand exits. That should mean that Google Android powered devices will make it to AT&T at some point.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Sprint!
By rupaniii on 4/7/2008 1:17:51 PM , Rating: 4
I still think Sprint will delivery XOHM 2 months ahead of Verizon LTE.




RE: Sprint!
By AlexWade on 4/7/2008 1:31:30 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but Sprint can't even figure out how to make 1G work right. Why would I trust them with 2G or 3G or 4G if they can't do older technology right? You must have a good foundation before you build the second floor.


RE: Sprint!
By ElFenix on 4/7/2008 2:04:48 PM , Rating: 2
1G has been dead for a while. sprint's whole network is at least 2G (it was never 1G, iirc) and for cities and interstates it is 3G, 3G+ evdo.

i've never had a problem with their network except at my parents' house which is way out in the boonies.


RE: Sprint!
By creathir on 4/7/2008 3:23:51 PM , Rating: 2
It really depends on the part of the country you are in.

Sprint is HORRIBLE in Florida... I mean HORRIBLE. But when you are talking parts of Texas (San Antonio for instance) it works just fine.

The same can be said of other carriers. AT&T works GREAT in Florida, but places like DC, Verizon is king.

Some third party should come out with a tri-carrier phone which works on all networks... Some may be fine paying for the luxary... I know my boss would.

- Creathir


RE: Sprint!
By AlphaVirus on 4/7/2008 5:35:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sprint is HORRIBLE in Florida... I mean HORRIBLE. But when you are talking parts of Texas (San Antonio for instance) it works just fine.

Keyword, Some.
Sprint is horrible everywhere I went in Texas and certain US states it just could not gain 25% signal (1/4 bar cell phone). Even if the signal was greater than 25% it would drop calls constantly. Anytime I hear someone even considering Sprint, I let them know how horrible the signal and customer service is. They will transfer you 5 times and still never answer your question.


RE: Sprint!
By kkwst2 on 4/7/2008 5:48:08 PM , Rating: 2
The number of bars on your particular phone is certainly not a good metric upon which to base recommendations.

Sprint is certainly known for dropped calls, but this hasn't been my experience. It drops calls occasionally, but nothing like you're describing. I've used it extensively in Houston and Dallas with no issues. My experience is greater in Pennsylvania, NJ, Ohio, NC, SC, Alabama, GA, Va, Md.

Alabama was the only place that I had significant issues with service. There were many places that I had to roam to get good service. I get free roaming, but obviously I can't get data service while roaming.

Customer service for me has not been great, but not significantly different than most other carriers IMO.


RE: Sprint!
By AlexWade on 4/7/2008 8:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
I live in North Carolina. Sprint is terrible in North Carolina. I know of lots and lots of business with Nextels and they are dumping them because of Sprint.

Verizon is great, but I refuse to get them because they overcharge and cripple the phones.

Alltel is great too in North Carolina too.

As far as AT&T, it depends on what part of the state you are in. AT&T technically was the first digital cell phone company here, as it was BellSouth before SBC bought BellSouth. They have had problems in the past with full towers, but have improved drastically lately. Still, in the bigger cities, their service is okay not great. Around the I-95 corridor, service is second to none. But coverage isn't as good as the other carriers.

I have AT&T because I needed international roaming and because GSM is the way to go. Where I live, dropped calls are a non-issue and when you have coverage, you have strong coverage.


RE: Sprint!
By HighWing on 4/7/2008 8:56:21 PM , Rating: 3
ok seriously I have no idea why no one ever mentions this, but just because your phone does not get good service in one area is actually NOT a good representation of how good the service's provider in that area really is.
Fact is and this is A FACT your service will vary depending on the phone you are using. Some phones get better range and service then others. And if you don't believe me, get two people who have the same provider, (Sprint, Verizon, etc) but have different phone manufactures (Sanyo, samsung, nokia, etc). Do that and I bet you will find areas where one phone will get service, and the other does not.

Seriously when will you people realize this and stop arguing over who gets better service where based on YOUR phone?


RE: Sprint!
By AlphaVirus on 4/8/2008 10:09:38 AM , Rating: 2
Well I guess it all depends on your network size, if you have more friends and family then you have more data to base your thoughts on.

If you only know 1 person with Sprint then you cant really judge, but if you know 20 people that use Sprint it makes a difference. There is a high chance that there are at least 10 difference phones out of those 20.

So just because you do not know lots of people and choose not to disclose that is fine, but if I know for a "fact" the service is horrible for multiple people, phones, and locations then I will warn people to avoid it. On the other hand, if I know a service (cell phone, food, customer, etc) is good then I also let people know about it. I try to give an unbiased summary, let them know the good and the bad so they can be the judge.


RE: Sprint!
By HighWing on 4/8/2008 1:26:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but if you know 20 people that use Sprint it makes a difference. There is a high chance that there are at least 10 difference phones out of those 20.


Actually thats where I would disagree with you. Often times people will buy into those family deals and everyone will get the same model phone, or all from the same manufacture because those are the cheap/free phones. And more often then not, the cheaper phones are the ones that get the poor service. So while you might know 20 people all with Sprint, I would be willing to bet most of them might have the same model phone or mostly all from the same manufacturer.


RE: Sprint!
By FITCamaro on 4/7/2008 7:05:19 PM , Rating: 2
Lived in Orlando and Melbourne for years and Sprint was fine. The only place my family had an issue(and why we switched to Verizon) was in my parents home for some reason.


RE: Sprint!
By FastLaneTX on 4/8/2008 12:59:21 PM , Rating: 2
I had Sprint for about five years and never had any serious problems with coverage in major cities, in Texas or anywhere else. They didn't have much coverage of rural interstates when I first got it, but they fixed that in 2002 or so -- right before I switched to a GSM carrier because I needed global roaming for work.

In fact, the only consistent problem I ever had (in a city) with Sprint was at my office, which was a dead spot for every carrier since the !@#$%^&* city council refused to let anyone put up towers.


RE: Sprint!
By kkwst2 on 4/7/2008 5:38:44 PM , Rating: 2
I've had no problems with Sprint data in Ft. Lauderdale and Orlando. I get EVDO service consistently. I haven't been there since the Rev A rollout so can't comment on that.

I use a Mogul with tethering while riding between Philly to Pittsburgh and get reasonable service continuously for the whole trip. Over half the time it's EVDO. Very acceptable for $15 a month.

I've used it in most major cities across the country without significant issues. It makes me not really worry about whether my hotel has free internet access.

Now, go outside major cities and all bets are off, but I think that is true with most carriers. Sprint certainly isn't perfect, but I think offers the best combination of speed/value. Agreed that it will depend on what region you're in, but my limited experience in Florida has not been bad.


RE: Sprint!
By Locutus465 on 4/8/2008 10:10:08 AM , Rating: 2
out of the carriers I have experience with...

AT&T was the worst, I used them until April '06 when I was working for a title company in cleveland. They had given me a black berry which got very good reception compared to the motorola flip they upped me from. The BBerry worked in most of the house I was renting a room in in FL, but not all of it. It worked best (but not great) in the cleveland area. If I visited my parents in Detroit I was screwed (though in a good way, who want's work calls on vacation?). Absolutly no signal.

Verizon:
It's all about the network, for the most part I'm a beleiver. I've been using VZW since '02 and I've lived in Detroit, Marquette MI, Cleveland OH and currently in Raleigh NC. I've never really had significant reception issues on their network. Travelling to DC there are some black spots on i85, specifically on the VA/NC border. Coming down to NC from cleveland it worked very well in the mountains of WV but crossing the border it got spotty in the mountains of VA. I guess VA must be a trouble state for them.


RE: Sprint!
By Samus on 4/9/2008 1:00:29 AM , Rating: 2
Sprint always worked well for me, but I have friends that live in dead spots here in the heart of Chicago. They literally have to walk down the street to get service and check their messages.


RE: Sprint!
By Alexstarfire on 4/7/2008 7:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
Well, if it's anything like AT&Ts 3G network then it probably sucks. I'm supposedly well within the boundaries of AT&Ts 3G network, with a 3G capable phone and a 3G simcard, and can't get 3G service. Isn't that just wonderful. Is it because I don't have AT&Ts firmware on my phone? Cause that'd be gay.


RE: Sprint!
By rupaniii on 4/7/2008 7:30:46 PM , Rating: 2
I guess everyone missed the joke that XOHM is already a few months late.


100Mbps?
By FITCamaro on 4/7/2008 12:21:21 PM , Rating: 3
Are those speeds even achievable on the 700MHz spectrum?




RE: 100Mbps?
By omnicronx on 4/7/2008 12:39:02 PM , Rating: 2
Ya sure.. shared between 1000 people in a 20mhz space =P


RE: 100Mbps?
By ZavyZavy on 4/7/2008 12:41:17 PM , Rating: 5
It's possible, but there are trade-offs e.g. your error rate and SNR and thus the number of users per radio array and service range.

I'm a bit rusty but here's an example:
Layer 1: 32 QAM CDMA Spreading factor of 32 => 700 Mbs for 32 users (theoretical) on a band.
Layer 1: Add in Low level FEC for fast and slow fading and whatever they use nowadays (Genetic Algo's, trellis coding, MIMO) => 350 Mbs per user.
Layer 2: More FEC, etc. => 250 Mbs
Layer 3: Network wrapping (IP, IMS, 3GPP-???) => 100Mbs

I thumb sucked a bit, but use this line of thought, wiki, the 3gPP spec, a bit of R&D and a dash of salt and you'll see it's possible.


Faster?
By icrf on 4/7/2008 12:25:51 PM , Rating: 2
I thought Verizon said 2010 and ATT said 2011.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11381




RE: Faster?
By icrf on 4/7/2008 12:29:10 PM , Rating: 2
Scratch that, it looks like ATT said nothing and blind speculation says 2011 for everyone.


The new AT&T
By EglsFly on 4/7/2008 9:10:02 PM , Rating: 3
Anyone notice...
By Alexstarfire on 4/7/2008 7:52:35 PM , Rating: 2
... that DailyTech/Anandtech got rid of the old article on the 700Mhz spectrum? I just wanted to go look and see if someone responded to my post and I can't even find it.




"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki