And your point?
That everybody's experience is different. Glad to see you're using your critical thinking skills there
I'm so very tired of this Verizon v AT&T garbage. Stick to what provider works for you.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T comes out triumphant in network comparisson in 12 major cities.
- Thread starter jav6454
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That everybody's experience is different. Glad to see you're using your critical thinking skills there
I'm so very tired of this Verizon v AT&T garbage. Stick to what provider works for you.
If your still arguing over dropped calls then you haven't read the first half of this thread. I do think its the iPhone with the problems. I think that even more now because with two people in the same area one said he has never dropped a call and the other said they have.
I live in a kinda non-popular area and in the year I've had my iPhone I have dropped maybe 2 calls. No biggie to me.
I live in a kinda non-popular area and in the year I've had my iPhone I have dropped maybe 2 calls. No biggie to me.
That everybody's experience is different. Glad to see you're using your critical thinking skills there
I'm so very tired of this Verizon v AT&T garbage. Stick to what provider works for you.
Problem is, that statement doesn't fly with Verizon goons.
That everybody's experience is different. Glad to see you're using your critical thinking skills there
I'm so very tired of this Verizon v AT&T garbage. Stick to what provider works for you.
Why don't you go tell the Verizon fanboys who have been pilling on AT&T for the past 3 years!
Once the iPhone goes to other carriers, life will be a lot easier... probably not though.
There's no point. AT&T fanboys are no worse than Verizon ones. They all suck.
Choose the provider that works for you. It's rather simple, but people choose to be epic douchers about it.
Of course it was a joke. Unless AT&T saw the results and somehow managed to fix all their network issues overnight. And then of course you would have to assume that Gizmodo didn't begin their testing around the entire country (including Hawaii!) until Saturday and got it all written up in 2 day. Trust me, I realize the whole chokehold thing was nothing but a lame waste of time and spent my lunch hour last Friday doing far more constructive things.
lol check out gizmodos site. its ALL orange. gizmodo is now "Presented by AT&T". sounds like an independent test you can trust. just like that nytimes article that quoted companies partnered with AT&T. so people that are paid/sponsored by AT&T think AT&T is better? imagine that.
They are ads, its likely run through a similar manner that MR is, anyone pays can have ad space.
Are you really suggesting Gizmodo is just plain out lying? That be a hugely risky move for all parties involved.
I don't think anyone ever disputed that AT&T has potentially the fastest data network when it works, which is exactly what Gizmodo was testing.
It's just that Verizon has a slightly slower data network that works more often and in more places.
I live smack in the middle of AT&T 3G country (NoVA) and when I can get it, I've had some wicked-fast, near-WiFi 3G speeds. The problem is that the other 75% of the time I drop calls, can't get a reliable connection ("Server did not respond!") or experience speeds just barely better than EDGE. Peak speeds are nice and all, but I'd give up a little bandwidth for a connection that was actually reliable.
It's just that Verizon has a slightly slower data network that works more often and in more places.
I live smack in the middle of AT&T 3G country (NoVA) and when I can get it, I've had some wicked-fast, near-WiFi 3G speeds. The problem is that the other 75% of the time I drop calls, can't get a reliable connection ("Server did not respond!") or experience speeds just barely better than EDGE. Peak speeds are nice and all, but I'd give up a little bandwidth for a connection that was actually reliable.
They are ads, its likely run through a similar manner that MR is, anyone pays can have ad space.
Are you really suggesting Gizmodo is just plain out lying? That be a hugely risky move for all parties involved.
oh yea. thats "typical" advertising all right.
the entire page is dominated by at&t ads when you first load the page. nevermind the fact that the main gizmodo banner says "presented by at&t" plain and simple. maybe microsoft should do that for macrumors right? "MacRumors.com: Presented by Microsoft" right at the top and then big Windows 7 and Windows Mobile ads all over the site when you load it up.
at&t is trying to buy their way out their current PR problem in all of the wrong ways. at&t can buy luke wilson, they can buy a nytimes fluff piece and they can buy exclusive ad space on gizmodo. looks like the only thing they cant buy is a cellular network that doesnt suck in major cities like new york and san francisco.
Actually all the ads for AT&T went up 2 days after the tests were published. Also saying advertising has affected Gizmodo is the most stupidest thing ever said. Reason is that Gizmodo bashes and hits negatively AT&T everytime they can. They too are frustrated; as far as publishing articles stating AT&T is spending less on the network.
Now, the 3G test article does quote all those previously posted articles and mentions them. You are simply too blind or lack reading skills to notice.
Also some background, Sprint did the same thing after last year's test, which they won. It wouldn't surprise me that AT&T put up ads.
so you think its normal that the site is now officially presented by at&t? to me, that shows a complete lack of journalistic integrity. who cares if they bash at&t? that just means they couldnt turn down the money at&t offered to buy their site and turn it all orange. how can they be seen as objective when they sell the front page of their site to a company they are doing a review on?
Reeeeeehhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaallyyyy? That's your argument? Here I was thinking you had something better to say, but I guess not. If you are wondering why I am telling you this it's because Palm bought out ads in Gizmodo right after the Palm Pixi's and Pre's reviews. And guess what? The Pixi was said to be bad, bad, bad, terrible, bad... did I say bad? And et, Palm bough the ads for quite a while. As a matter of fact, you can see Palm ads right now.....
Honestly, if you think Gizmodo compromised their journalistic integrity, then you are one sad little person. Gizmodo has never compromised their thoughts no matter who buys the ads... you can check their ad and post history, you'll see. But wait, no, you can't, you are too busy worshiping Verizon.
i have at&t and i am not denying that they have the "fastest 3G". that really doesnt mean much in the real world though when you actually need to use it and arent just trying to show off to your buddy next to you with a different carrier. gizmodo is a terrible site and i have long since removed them from my rss feed, but this worthless article made me visit. if you like gizmodo, thats up to you. but i guess this is more about reaffirming your confidence in your purchase than anything else. so congrats on your iphone i wont bother you any more.
AT&T or Verizon.. either company will suffer with the amount of data traffic from the iPhone user base. VZ would be sucking balls and making excuses that every iPhone user is at fault because we surf to much, download to much etc...
They both know their networks are not up to par for the data load the iPhone places on their network and neither care as long as they can attract millions of new users, which is what AT&T has done over the past year or so and the effect is a network that is not ready for the mass data used. I hope VZ has access to the iPhone so it splits up the user base to another network.
My personal experience has been over 7 years with Cingular, now AT&T and really have no issues with the service. KC is by no means a "major market" but great 3g speeds. I don't think I've ever had a dropped call and 3g coverage is as good as I'd expect until you are out into the rural area's. My company provides a VZ phone for work but it's not a smart phone so can't really compare the 3g coverage area's.
They both know their networks are not up to par for the data load the iPhone places on their network and neither care as long as they can attract millions of new users, which is what AT&T has done over the past year or so and the effect is a network that is not ready for the mass data used. I hope VZ has access to the iPhone so it splits up the user base to another network.
My personal experience has been over 7 years with Cingular, now AT&T and really have no issues with the service. KC is by no means a "major market" but great 3g speeds. I don't think I've ever had a dropped call and 3g coverage is as good as I'd expect until you are out into the rural area's. My company provides a VZ phone for work but it's not a smart phone so can't really compare the 3g coverage area's.
For me, the only network (besides AT&T) that should carry the iPhone in he US should be T-Mobile.
I want the mod who banned me to come and show me what offence I caused in this thread.
I would say something, but it'd probably get me banned... also, I don't see any offenses with your posts.
It's all about individual experiences/locations on the networks. Nothing new to see here, folks. Unfortunately, I've never seen decent throughput on ATT's 3G network, though--never even broken 900 kbit/s on it--and I've tried on a variety of hardware, from an iPhone 3GS to an HTC Cavalier to a Nokia E66. At the end of the day, my rate plan is what keeps me on ATT--for less than 40 bucks/month, I get a couple hundred anytime minutes, unlimited data, and 200 texts