10-24-10 08:48 PM
31 12
tools
  1. The_Engine's Avatar
    Verizon to light up LTE network in 30 "NFL cities" this year -- Engadget

    Engadget article on the markets VZW is going live in. Since there are 32 NFL Teams, and 2 are in NY, that leaves 1 NFL Market out in the cold. Greenbay?

    And what does that mean for LA? Guess they should get them some NFL ASAP.
    09-16-10 12:22 PM
  2. corymcnutt's Avatar
    This year as in 2010??? Does that mean LTE phones should be rolling out soon? This GREAT news if it is true...but I "listen to the Engine. Dudes smart!"
    09-16-10 02:52 PM
  3. The_Engine's Avatar
    This year as in 2010??? Does that mean LTE phones should be rolling out soon? This GREAT news if it is true...but I "listen to the Engine. Dudes smart!"
    Yes this year. I think you can go to verizonwireless.com/LTE and get some info. They have been pretty open about this.

    They launch on 11/15 or 16 and will only have notebook cards at first. They may have a tablet or two before the holidays. They will announce Phones at CTIA in January and will have at least 5 by May 2011. RIM is in the line up and most expect the next Storm (not the refresh) to be LTE.
    I also think this is how Apple gets out of exclusivity with ATT since their Facetime feature on iOS 4 and iPhone 4 is practically made for LTE and ATT can't support it. So as soon as another carrier can (read VZW) you'll see an iPhone on that carrier.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-16-10 04:04 PM
  4. corymcnutt's Avatar
    Bump...I can't believe that no one has any information for this thread! This has to be the most "exciting" news we have heard in a while - this means LTE phone news should start leaking out...there must be SOME gossip out there. Toss in your crumb.
    09-17-10 02:57 PM
  5. The_Engine's Avatar
    Bump...I can't believe that no one has any information for this thread! This has to be the most "exciting" news we have heard in a while - this means LTE phone news should start leaking out...there must be SOME gossip out there. Toss in your crumb.
    This news has been out there. At least as far as VZW launching LTE this year. I think it was January where they said it would be 25 to 30 markets covering 120 million subscribers.

    I did think this was interesting though. Now ATT is saying they will launch LTE mid 2011 and cover up to 75 million subscribers by end of 2011. I was pretty sure that ATT wasn't even starting LTE until late 2011. So is this a play to keep iPhone exclusivity? Hence the Mid year timeline which is when Apple usually releases iPhones.

    Hmmmmm.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-17-10 04:11 PM
  6. breakmedown's Avatar
    AT&T has a much larger bandwidth backbone to support LTE, so I could totally see their (initial) LTE markets going up pretty quick. Verizon has a more substantial 3G network, but their 4G network is a completely new build. AT&Ts isn't nearly as drastic of a change.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-18-10 06:05 PM
  7. breakmedown's Avatar
    Oh, and as for cities left out. I'm gonna guess KC

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-18-10 06:08 PM
  8. The_Engine's Avatar
    AT&T has a much larger bandwidth backbone to support LTE, so I could totally see their (initial) LTE markets going up pretty quick. Verizon has a more substantial 3G network, but their 4G network is a completely new build. AT&Ts isn't nearly as drastic of a change.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    True that their upgrade path is shorter. But VZW has never held back anything when it came to their network. For example VZW is starting off covering 30 cities and 120 million people. ATT won't be there anytime soon. Heck Sprint won't be there and they have almost a year head start.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-18-10 07:58 PM
  9. the_sandman_454's Avatar
    I am somewhat disheartened by the news, as it means there will be few interesting 3G devices coming out before they really start churning out the LTE devices, amd those who aren't in the key cities will then be stuck choosing between the older 3g devices but no extra charge for "using" LTE or buying a shiny new LTE device and surely have to pay more for the LTE dataplan even if LTE isn't in their market area yet...
    09-19-10 08:40 AM
  10. green_ember's Avatar
    I vote to leave out Buffalo
    09-19-10 10:52 AM
  11. lnichols's Avatar
    AT&T has a much larger bandwidth backbone to support LTE, so I could totally see their (initial) LTE markets going up pretty quick. Verizon has a more substantial 3G network, but their 4G network is a completely new build. AT&Ts isn't nearly as drastic of a change.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Yeah I don't see this. CDMA has been running 1.5 to 3 Mbps for a while already. AT&T went from a few hundred kbps to up to 7.2 Mbps a little over a two years ago, and the network was not ready then to handle that amount of data then and AT&T is still building out to just support that 7.2 Mbps now. LTE is 50 to 100 Mbps capable, but I don't see anyone really getting that in a phone anytime soon (processor probably can't process data fast enough to support speeds that high). Verizon has all the old MCI/UUNET assets from buying them after the MCI meltdown, which is a lot of dark fiber in a lot of places, and they are building out Fiber networks for their FIOS offering. I would say Verizon is much more capable of have a full function LTE network before AT&T. Verizon has seen the way AT&T was hammered for their networks poor performance and footprint when they rolled out 3G and they capitalized on that with marketing campaigns. They won't want to allow AT&T to return the favor with a poor LTE rollout.
    09-19-10 11:33 AM
  12. breakmedown's Avatar
    CDMA maxes out at 3Mbps (for Rev A, which is where Verizon is stopping). Given that the HSPA+ (which is what AT&T is currently trying to upgrade to) can run 42Mbps and the current standard is 7.2Mbps, I'm not really sure there's a lot of comparison there. The cap on every single phone on the Verizon network is currently 3Mbps (and only if it's a Rev A phone). This definantely helps keep their data problems away. Not to mention that lack of simultaneous voice and data also helps make the network "perform" better because one function cannot clog the other. So considering that most people don't experience nearly the problems the iPhone users do, I'd say the network is pretty strongly supported.


    I'll totally agree that Verizon is considerably better at putting money back into their network. I think AT&T is finding out late that they need to put way more money into their network. The one thing that Verizon has going for them is that they had initially (and I'm guessing it's still the case) said they would roll out LTE and it would cover the data side and the EVDO would cover the voice side of things. This means that (atleast at rollout) the amount of bandwidth backbone doesn't have to be as substantial. Verizon said that they don't anticipate LTE to be completed until 2013 and no LTE phones until 2011. That gives AT&T a lot of time to catch up and reinvest in their own network.
    09-19-10 11:31 PM
  13. grahamf's Avatar
    The one thing that Verizon has going for them is that they had initially (and I'm guessing it's still the case) said they would roll out LTE and it would cover the data side and the EVDO would cover the voice side of things.
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but don't you mean 1xCDMA, as that's what EVDO phones drop down to for calls? (EVDO stands for EVolution-Data Optimized. originally meant EVD-Only, but that didn't market well)
    09-20-10 02:34 AM
  14. The_Engine's Avatar
    CDMA maxes out at 3Mbps (for Rev A, which is where Verizon is stopping). Given that the HSPA+ (which is what AT&T is currently trying to upgrade to) can run 42Mbps and the current standard is 7.2Mbps, I'm not really sure there's a lot of comparison there. The cap on every single phone on the Verizon network is currently 3Mbps (and only if it's a Rev A phone). This definantely helps keep their data problems away. Not to mention that lack of simultaneous voice and data also helps make the network "perform" better because one function cannot clog the other. So considering that most people don't experience nearly the problems the iPhone users do, I'd say the network is pretty strongly supported.


    I'll totally agree that Verizon is considerably better at putting money back into their network. I think AT&T is finding out late that they need to put way more money into their network. The one thing that Verizon has going for them is that they had initially (and I'm guessing it's still the case) said they would roll out LTE and it would cover the data side and the EVDO would cover the voice side of things. This means that (atleast at rollout) the amount of bandwidth backbone doesn't have to be as substantial. Verizon said that they don't anticipate LTE to be completed until 2013 and no LTE phones until 2011. That gives AT&T a lot of time to catch up and reinvest in their own network.
    You can't just look at possible speeds. You have to consider the backend. What's better? A 7 Mbps comnection where the backend only handles 1gb simulteneous transfer, or a 3mbps connection with a backend that supports 10gb simulteneous transfers. In the later case you are going to get the full 3 mbps all the time. In the former you could reach higher peak speeds but the pipe on the backend is too small and easily clogged.

    ATT's problem has never been the technology. Its the backbone and the network connecting the devices. Its not big enough.

    VZW had more work to do as far upgrading but they are building on a 3G footprint that is a teemendepus foundation. In November their 4G footprint will be larger than ATT's 3G. So by May you'll have 10mbps speeds on VZW where you have 7 mbps speeds on ATT (with much better backend through put) and still have 3 mbps speeds where ATT only can cover Voice and not Data.

    I don't see ATT Reinventing their network. Thet will improve it, no doubt, but I don't know that they will be in VZW's class even when all the dust settles on the LTE rollputs for both carriers.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-20-10 06:56 AM
  15. Snipperdo17's Avatar
    I vote to leave out Buffalo
    then i vote to leave out whatever city you live in..buffalo is nothing but verizon subscribers..how about green bay which is the smallest city
    09-20-10 01:52 PM
  16. The_Engine's Avatar
    Is Buffalo even in the NFL? : )

    Just kidding. I am sure they will go where the subscribers are.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-20-10 02:45 PM
  17. WNY Cycling's Avatar
    I don't vote for buffalo...I live in buffalo...Yes the football team is the worst in the NFL...so why can't we have the "Best" wireless network....we need a bone tossed our way once and a while...
    09-20-10 03:00 PM
  18. speede541's Avatar
    San Francisco and Oakland geographically share the a coverage area, don't they?
    09-20-10 08:48 PM
  19. The_Engine's Avatar
    San Francisco and Oakland geographically share the a coverage area, don't they?
    I was thinking that too. Not sure what constitutes a "Market" for VZW. Also LA doesn't have an NFL team but I can't believe they would left out for some smaller cities that do.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-21-10 06:46 AM
  20. breakmedown's Avatar
    You can't just look at possible speeds. You have to consider the backend. What's better? A 7 Mbps comnection where the backend only handles 1gb simulteneous transfer, or a 3mbps connection with a backend that supports 10gb simulteneous transfers. In the later case you are going to get the full 3 mbps all the time. In the former you could reach higher peak speeds but the pipe on the backend is too small and easily clogged.

    ATT's problem has never been the technology. Its the backbone and the network connecting the devices. Its not big enough.

    VZW had more work to do as far upgrading but they are building on a 3G footprint that is a teemendepus foundation. In November their 4G footprint will be larger than ATT's 3G. So by May you'll have 10mbps speeds on VZW where you have 7 mbps speeds on ATT (with much better backend through put) and still have 3 mbps speeds where ATT only can cover Voice and not Data.

    I don't see ATT Reinventing their network. Thet will improve it, no doubt, but I don't know that they will be in VZW's class even when all the dust settles on the LTE rollputs for both carriers.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    You're right. You can't just consider speed. You also can't just consider backend. Let's pretend both companies have a similar 5gb backend in any one market. Now, since both companies are pretty big, let's say they both have roughly a million subscribers. Verizon's network would have no problem with that because that exceeds the total bandwidth their current 3G network could ever use. AT&T would have problems because their current network couldn't support that.

    So yes, backend is important. You, and no other article I've read, has ever shown me any evidence that AT&Ts is smaller. It's just harder for them to keep up because each device can (and one of the biggest selling phone does) demand over twice the bandwidth.

    Since there be no 4G phones in 2010 on Verizon, data connect cards aren't really a good indicator of network strength. And the rate people will go to the 4G will be slow at first because of the availability of phones. So despite having rolled out 4G sooner, we'll see no sunstantial drain on that network for atleast a year. AT&T could easily have cellphones that are non-LTE and running the same kinds of speeds Verizon initial LTE phones would run, given the general device limitations at this point. So right now AT&T needs double the backbone, Verizon only needs a little more than they've got.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-21-10 12:37 PM
  21. The_Engine's Avatar
    You're right. You can't just consider speed. You also can't just consider backend. Let's pretend both companies have a similar 5gb backend in any one market. Now, since both companies are pretty big, let's say they both have roughly a million subscribers. Verizon's network would have no problem with that because that exceeds the total bandwidth their current 3G network could ever use. AT&T would have problems because their current network couldn't support that.

    So yes, backend is important. You, and no other article I've read, has ever shown me any evidence that AT&Ts is smaller. It's just harder for them to keep up because each device can (and one of the biggest selling phone does) demand over twice the bandwidth.

    Since there be no 4G phones in 2010 on Verizon, data connect cards aren't really a good indicator of network strength. And the rate people will go to the 4G will be slow at first because of the availability of phones. So despite having rolled out 4G sooner, we'll see no sunstantial drain on that network for atleast a year. AT&T could easily have cellphones that are non-LTE and running the same kinds of speeds Verizon initial LTE phones would run, given the general device limitations at this point. So right now AT&T needs double the backbone, Verizon only needs a little more than they've got.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Valid points all.

    I will leave it at history then. VZW has a history of building and maintaining their network to be the best. ATT does not. Could ATT surpass VZW with LTE? Surely they could. Will They? I highly doubt it.

    We will know in a few years. Maybe sooner if Apple drops the exclusivity and rolls the iPhone to VZW. That would be a stress test unlike anything VZW could imagine.
    09-21-10 03:24 PM
  22. Big Spartacus's Avatar
    So does this mean maybe verizon users who jump on the 4g bandwagon early will be able to use voice and data simultaniously(spl?) like tmobile and att customers already can?
    09-22-10 01:26 AM
  23. breakmedown's Avatar
    Valid points all.

    I will leave it at history then. VZW has a history of building and maintaining their network to be the best. ATT does not. Could ATT surpass VZW with LTE? Surely they could. Will They? I highly doubt it.

    We will know in a few years. Maybe sooner if Apple drops the exclusivity and rolls the iPhone to VZW. That would be a stress test unlike anything VZW could imagine.
    That point is very hard to argue against because you're right. AT&T definantely lags in the reinvest in their network sector. So unless it's a mistake they've learned from (and I doubt it is) I can't imagine that getting any better.

    I kinda wish the iPhone would go to Verizon. It would really show us how their network strength is, plus it would help AT&T by taking some load off theirs ;-) Maybe some day!
    09-22-10 02:58 AM
  24. The_Engine's Avatar
    So does this mean maybe verizon users who jump on the 4g bandwagon early will be able to use voice and data simultaniously(spl?) like tmobile and att customers already can?
    That is the plan. LTE supports simulteneous voice and Data but I believe day 1 VZW will only run Data over LTE and voice over CDMA.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-22-10 06:16 AM
  25. _StephenBB81's Avatar
    That is the plan. LTE supports simulteneous voice and Data but I believe day 1 VZW will only run Data over LTE and voice over CDMA.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I'm on a CDMA/HSPA network with Bell Canada, and I get my voice and data at once, once LTE hits Vzw I am sure you'll be getting it as well
    09-22-10 06:21 AM
31 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD