This is ironic considering their abysmal 3G coverage. I would say fair enough if 80 to 90 percent of their network coverage was 3G enabled but this is clearly not the case. Heck, it is quite the norm to see my phone go from 3G to Edge in Metro cities let alone when in other parts of the country. When looking at their coverage maps, I would estimate that not even 20% of their network is 3G enabled.
The AT&T execs needs to take a trip overseas and look at how to successfully launch and run a national 3G network. Telstra in Australia is a good one to look at considering how large the country is yet how fast their similar 3G 850mz network runs. As well as the fact that their entire network and 98% of the population has 3G coverage.
Such moves by AT&T is why I cannot wait for LTE to come in. Up until now AT&T has not had any real competitor with WCDMA/GSM. Hence their slow rollout and slow 3G performance. Whereas Verizon will give them a run for their money on LTE.
Having recently switched to ATT specifically for FUNCTIONING 3G (on a BB) So far the 3G coverage hasn't been too bad. Everywhere I've tethered or done something data intensive its been available. Having said that, yesterday in Manhattan I found a few spots where I could only get EDGE (15th and 9th) and GPRS (17th and 6th)... ironically WiFi was available at both locations so it didn't matter.
AT&T's 3.5G network has a lot of potential but they are stalling on both speed and coverage. Manhattan is one place where I have a number of 3G to edge issues myself. I am guessing they have a capacity issue there. Maybe it is time they start migrating everyone to 3G handset in such areas and use all of their frequencies for 3G services.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Scott @ Jan 7th 2009 8:08AM
This is ironic considering their abysmal 3G coverage. I would say fair enough if 80 to 90 percent of their network coverage was 3G enabled but this is clearly not the case. Heck, it is quite the norm to see my phone go from 3G to Edge in Metro cities let alone when in other parts of the country. When looking at their coverage maps, I would estimate that not even 20% of their network is 3G enabled.
The AT&T execs needs to take a trip overseas and look at how to successfully launch and run a national 3G network. Telstra in Australia is a good one to look at considering how large the country is yet how fast their similar 3G 850mz network runs. As well as the fact that their entire network and 98% of the population has 3G coverage.
Such moves by AT&T is why I cannot wait for LTE to come in. Up until now AT&T has not had any real competitor with WCDMA/GSM. Hence their slow rollout and slow 3G performance. Whereas Verizon will give them a run for their money on LTE.
Dan @ Jan 7th 2009 9:11AM
Having recently switched to ATT specifically for FUNCTIONING 3G (on a BB) So far the 3G coverage hasn't been too bad. Everywhere I've tethered or done something data intensive its been available. Having said that, yesterday in Manhattan I found a few spots where I could only get EDGE (15th and 9th) and GPRS (17th and 6th)... ironically WiFi was available at both locations so it didn't matter.
Scott @ Jan 7th 2009 9:26AM
AT&T's 3.5G network has a lot of potential but they are stalling on both speed and coverage. Manhattan is one place where I have a number of 3G to edge issues myself. I am guessing they have a capacity issue there. Maybe it is time they start migrating everyone to 3G handset in such areas and use all of their frequencies for 3G services.