Well, its from my simple observation that you need to drop AT&T and go to Verizon. Stop complaining and take your money elsewhere! On another note, I happen to have near flawless AT&T 3G coverage in Louisiana and Florida. AT&T is no where near as bad as people make it out to be. So only because you're having problems with AT&T doesn't mean everybody is having a problem with them.
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.
Has Anyone Held Out For Years Waiting For it to Come To VERIZON?
- Thread starter HappyDude20
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, its from my simple observation that you need to drop AT&T and go to Verizon. Stop complaining and take your money elsewhere! On another note, I happen to have near flawless AT&T 3G coverage in Louisiana and Florida. AT&T is no where near as bad as people make it out to be. So only because you're having problems with AT&T doesn't mean everybody is having a problem with them.
Another example, how happy AT&T customers are. Otherwise, they wouldn't bee 2nd largest now would they? Also, AT&T is not smaller because of Verizon being better, they are smaller now because Verizon bought out Alltell, other than that Verizon is second.
You really care about my spelling typos that much huh?
Maybe theres a reason that GSM is the international standard. And guess what, LTE is going to be backwards compatible with GSM tech so it will still be around for many years to come.
Still every phone manufacturer in the world will have compatible cellphones for AT&T's network and again Verizon and Sprint will be the only 2 companys that will need special headsets made for their networks that would need to include CDMA radios. And again they will have the worst phones on the market and devices would be released to GSM/LTE networks and months later for CDMA/LTE/WiMax carriers. You fail to see that Verizon/Sprint and CDMA tech is the oddball here.
Every cellphone provider in the world did besides Verizon and Sprint.
AT&T/Cingular/Cellular One or whatever you want to call them use to offer CDMA tech over 10 years ago also.
Most companys in the world evolved into the GSM standard, Verizon and a few others stayed and invested in improving and maintaining tech that is not supported by almost all other wirelss networks in the world. Thats why when you bring a Verizon phone outside of the US it will not work unless it has a supporting GSM radio with a simcard for roaming.
AT&T did not abandon CDMA. It never used it to begin with.
Over all CDMA was a better techology for wireless signals. It had a longer life span than TDMA (Edge and below). The ONLY reason TDMA took off was not because it was better but cause the licensing fees for CDMA because Quadcomm owned them. Europe forced its carriers to go with the GSM techs and they were not given a choice to go with at the time the by far superior CDMA tech.
Between the licensing fees for CDMA and European governments forcing GSM on its carriers is why GSM is world wide.
Hell the GSM techs did not pass CDMA in terms of speed until they switch over to W-CDMA (a type of CDMA). There is a reason why Verizon and spirint were able to go from 2G to 3G much faster and cheaper than the GSM carriers in the US. That is because those guys already had the basic technology in place.
I would not be surprised in the least to see that 3G for GSM carriers lining with the Quadcomm patients expiring on the CDMA technology.
I stopped reading your post right there and I am not going to finish reading it. Why? Simply because you are spouting stuff and do not know what you are talking about. Go hit the books.
If you had read it showed the history of why TDMA took off compared to CDMA.
But then again you are a resident ATT fan boy on these boards. You bash Verizon every chance you get and praise ATT all the time.
I suggest you look up the history on why CDMA never took off compared to TDMA (GSM). It was all about the money and licensing fees to Quadcomm to use the technology. I want to say at some point Verizon bought up and now own them Quadcomm but I do not know if they did or not.
Not that I know of. Could you provide a link? And AT&T is ONE carrier, correct? How is that some mass migration?
Do I need to go an list all carriers who ditched CDMA in favor of GSM? That's going to be a long list
Ok correct me. Some how I do not think you have ever looked at why most people did not go with CDMA back in the late 90's early 2000's.
Europe carriers were forced to use GSM (TDMA). They did not get a choice in the matter.
licensing fees for CDMA were a lot higher.
Now this is all information over 10 years old. You seem to only know the more recent stuff.
Come one correct me. CDMA was a better tech over 10 years ago but it also cost more to run.
It is an example of Beta vs VHS. VHS won out because the tech was cheaper not because it was better.
It will be alot easier to list the few remaining functional CDMA networks than list all global GSM providers.
That could take hundreds of pages.....
Sure, if you could. I know Tesla is one. To be clear, "ditched" means they actually had a CDMA network and migrated it to GSM. Making a decision between the two (and most were forced in Europe, from what I'm reading) does not constitute a migration.
Earlier you remark that you're tired of people ragging on AT&T because of two markets. Ignoring the fact that I doubt this widespread knowledge of AT&T's inability to cope is only in those two markets. Let me name a few cases just that I know of that really is the root of the issue - AT&T's network is good when the estimated people using it stays at that amount. When any amount above the norm uses it, it dies. AT&T is cheap and doesn't build their network apparently to deal with additional capacity.
South by Southwest Conference. AT&T only one unable to provide service
Ohio State football games this past season (No 3G, extremely slow edge, Verizon/Sprint work just fine) - They are the official sponsor of OSU athletics too. Quite embarrassing
Cedar Point this past summer - NO 3G. But I guess there's cows there right
Also EDGE was basically useless when trying to access facebook, etc.Random, but I was at a pumpkin festival in a smaller town and while there were a large amount of people there, I was unable to use the internet or even send an MMS message, despite my phone saying it had an Edge signal (5 bars even!). Verizon at the very least was able to do both confirmed by my aunt and uncle who were with me.
AT&T abandoned CDMA (as in the same CDMA Verizon current uses) long ago and favored GSM. That is it. TDMA/W-CDMA don't come in this one.
I am talking about AT&T now using a SIM. Period that is it. You however, fail this... please leave.
Oh so you do fail and completely missed the point on why TDMA (GSM) took off compared to CDMA tech and why so many carriers switch over to it.
Sorry but your failed not me.
Sure, if you could. I know Tesla is one. To be clear, "ditched" means they actually had a CDMA network and migrated it to GSM. Making a decision between the two (and most were forced in Europe, from what I'm reading) does not constitute a migration.
Earlier you remark that you're tired of people ragging on AT&T because of two markets. Ignoring the fact that I doubt this widespread knowledge of AT&T's inability to cope is only in those two markets. Let me name a few cases just that I know of that really is the root of the issue - AT&T's network is good when the estimated people using it stays at that amount. When any amount above the norm uses it, it dies. AT&T is cheap and doesn't build their network apparently to deal with additional capacity.
South by Southwest Conference. AT&T only one unable to provide service
Ohio State football games this past season (No 3G, extremely slow edge, Verizon/Sprint work just fine) - They are the official sponsor of OSU athletics too. Quite embarrassing
Cedar Point this past summer - NO 3G. But I guess there's cows there right
Random, but I was at a pumpkin festival in a smaller town and while there were a large amount of people there, I was unable to use the internet or even send an MMS message, despite my phone saying it had an Edge signal (5 bars even!). Verizon at the very least was able to do both confirmed by my aunt and uncle who were with me.
In any big event AT&T has its shortcomings. Those shortcomings are because AT&T has failed to upgrade the backhaul of it's cell sites. However, AT&T is in the process of doing that right now. They are adding additional Fibre lines and Ethernet lines to be able to cope with recent network wide 7.2Mb/s HSDPA upgrade, any heavy traffic (say a game of football) and future LTE (pre-4G) traffic.
That is a weakness of AT&T since they have to spend a bit more due to new hardware at the cell site.
Also, you are right with respect to carriers ditching CDMA. Tesla is a good example. From my home country we have Tigo who initially had a CDMA network, set up a GSM network and once the GSM network was robust, they terminated all life of the CDMA network. Simple. CDMA is a dying tech and even a carrier in a 3rd world country knows this. Mind you the switch over has back in 2002.
This takes the phrase, "How thick can you be?" to a whole new level.
Sure, if you could. I know Tesla is one. To be clear, "ditched" means they actually had a CDMA network and migrated it to GSM. Making a decision between the two (and most were forced in Europe, from what I'm reading) does not constitute a migration.
Earlier you remark that you're tired of people ragging on AT&T because of two markets. Ignoring the fact that I doubt this widespread knowledge of AT&T's inability to cope is only in those two markets. Let me name a few cases just that I know of that really is the root of the issue - AT&T's network is good when the estimated people using it stays at that amount. When any amount above the norm uses it, it dies. AT&T is cheap and doesn't build their network apparently to deal with additional capacity.
South by Southwest Conference. AT&T only one unable to provide service
Ohio State football games this past season (No 3G, extremely slow edge, Verizon/Sprint work just fine) - They are the official sponsor of OSU athletics too. Quite embarrassing
Cedar Point this past summer - NO 3G. But I guess there's cows there right
Random, but I was at a pumpkin festival in a smaller town and while there were a large amount of people there, I was unable to use the internet or even send an MMS message, despite my phone saying it had an Edge signal (5 bars even!). Verizon at the very least was able to do both confirmed by my aunt and uncle who were with me.
Good points. Now granted, there are some dyed in the wool AT&T zealots in this thread who apparently can't separate their coverage company with their device company.
AT&T works most of the time. But it's isolated events when the coverage just ceases to exist that the frustrations with the network comes out. It wouldn't be so bad if those singular isolated events didn't occur more and more often, no matter where I travel to, turning them in a stack of events.
Exactly, and that is what AT&T is fixing. Just ask the people where new backhaul has been added. They reach 4Mb/s speeds easy and report better network... your upgrade will come and the telling of Verizon fanboys will be huge...
3rd world country carriers likely don't want to pay licensing fees and/or don't have the influence to get CDMA phones made for them like Verizon and Sprint can. They also don't have the huge numbers that the US has.
How does that constitute GSM as being superior? Better yet - could you explain to me how CDMA is such a dying tech (ignoring the fact that Verizon & Sprint will be using it as a fallback for years to come), when GSM is older and also will be replaced? LTE is a big migration for both GSM and CDMA carriers. There's very little related between either of them to consider GSM thriving.
Since you have reduced yourself to petty insults you clearly have not ever looked at the history of CDMA and TDMA (which became the bases of GSM)
Back in the day before mobile web ever even took off you had those 2. CDMA had a more powerful signal and could cut threw interference better than TMDA. That interference being walls buildings ect. TDMA was easier on the battery and more importantly it cost less run because of the lower licensing fees
Now CDMA back then was faster for mobile web and mobile data but lets face it not a huge issue on phones until you start streaming media and video. Most items were small in data size.
Now the SIM card GSM uses there is as something like it for CDMA and always has been called R-UIM. Just a lot of the carriers never choice to go with it. It would be nice to see Verizon and sprint to start using R-UIM for their phones.
You have never even bother looking up why TDMA beat out CDMA have you and it has nothing to do with which tech was better.
Recent CDMA to GSM/HSPA converts:
Telecom New Zealand
Bell Mobility (Canada)
Telus (Canada)
Telstra (Australia)
Vivo (Brazil)
These are recent converts. They could've done what Verizon is doing and just keep the CDMA network and hold out for LTE, but CDMA must suck so bad that they decided to jump to GSM/HSPA in the meantime.
Telecom New Zealand
Bell Mobility (Canada)
Telus (Canada)
Telstra (Australia)
Vivo (Brazil)
These are recent converts. They could've done what Verizon is doing and just keep the CDMA network and hold out for LTE, but CDMA must suck so bad that they decided to jump to GSM/HSPA in the meantime.
And I've never had trouble with AT&T even at big events. So your personal experience means nothing to me, and for every AT&T customer who says "AT&T sucks!" I can find a Verizon customer that says "Verizon sucks!"