Slashdot Mirror
AT&T Wins Gizmodo 3G Bandwidth Test
ink writes "Gizmodo has completed a 12-city test of 3G cellular bandwidth speed. Verizon won four of the twelve, however AT&T scored higher with six: 'Let's get this straight right away: We didn't test dropped voice calls, we didn't test customer service, and we didn't test map coverage by wandering around in the boonies. We tested the ability of the networks to deliver 3G data in and around cities, including both concrete canyons and picket-fenced 'burbs. And while every 3G network gave us troubles on occasion, AT&T's wasn't measurably more or less reliable than Verizon's.'"
From what I can see, the latency on the Verizon lines is much better. That's more important to me, at least, considering the amount of VoiP I do on my cell phone.
I mean, uh, browsing I do on mobile networks.
It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
Having been through Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T over the years (never tried Sprint), my conclusion is they're all way oversold with shitty reliability and doubly shitty and uneven customer service. Typical megacorporations to whom any individual customer matters NOT AT ALL.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Exactly, and also they completely left out the midwest. Well, thanks Gizmodo, if I move to the coasts I'll know what service to get, but since there weren't any tests done even close to where I live the data is totally useless.
They also failed to give a price to service ratio, that would have made things a lot more fair. Yeah, you might get a faster network but if the price difference is $15 a month, many people might reconsider.
This test the way it is, is akin to someone comparing an Intel Atom to a Pentium 4 to a Core i7 based on pure speed and saying that the Core i7 is the better bet, all the while ignoring the fact that a Pentium 4 box is much cheaper and an Intel Atom CPU is going to give you better battery life.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
3G is a joke, but it's not a funny one. The FCC promised that we'd start to see high speed wireless internet now that the spectrum's been auctioned off. But like everything else, they seem to have lied -- shoving costs down the consumer's throat in the middle of a recession, raking in the money with a smile from the auctions... Everything about the so-called digital transition was a scam. Price fixing of LCD TV prices, running out of converter boxes -- and charging twice as much as they were worth in the store to soak up the free money those vouchers gave them... hmph.
Where's the alternatives here? They all have bandwidth caps. None of them are investing in the backhaul infrastructure. The network coverage is a joke, the handsets have disabled tethering, locked in the search engines... I mean, hell -- a pringles can and a wifi card does better than every other solution we have here in the United States for mobile internet. What the hell happened?
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I travel all over (in the US). I usually consult in city that are not the major metropolitan centers (in the US). If you are NOT in the major metros (in the US), Verizon wins 9 times out of 10. Once I got back on Verizon, covered (in the US).
If you don't travel, get the best signal provider in your area. If you travel (only in the US), Verizon is best.
There, I fixed that for you. A CDMA phone is going to be useless outside of the US unless you have a "world" phone which also includes a SIM and GSM radio for the rest of the world outside of the US. If you travel internationally, you are better off with a GSM/HSPA phone.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
So how is this a 'win' exactly? Sounds more like a tie to me.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
Someone should go do a test of the dropped call quantity and voice quality when in these same areas. That is where AT&T is so difficult to have to use as a primary phone line. The data service is actually much more reliable, and ironically makes Skype average much higher in quality / reliability from the same phone in the same place.
At least, in my experience.
Simple answer. The congress is owned by corporate interests in this country.
What matters to me is the performance I get from the tower I'm connected to at the moment I'm trying to use it. I don't give two shits if the tower five miles up the road is giving 1700/350kbps when the one I'm using is doing 100/300. And I don't care if the one that was giving me 100/300 on Friday afternoon is able to do 1500/320 on Saturday morning because I'm not there Saturday morning. I need their network to function wherever I happen to be at whatever time I need to use it.
specifically because of the iPhone and iPhone upgrades. Yes, I like the iPhone. It's the first smartphone (having used Palm for a long time, then Blackberry for a while) that I really use to its potential, and that really simply transparently works for me for all of my calendaring, contacts, email, etc. in a way that doesn't feel "phone-ish."
Of the three, Verizon is the one I would absolutely refuse to go back to no matter what, for two reasons: 1) GSM [lack of], and 2) Verizon is the one of the three that caused the biggest billing cock-ups, which took months to clear up in each case and led to my determination to leave them ASAP.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
in which we do not agree to be raped every hour on the hour by corporations is in fact socialism, and socialism we leave for the "evildoers."
Same reason we prefer the poor to starve and the sick to have no medical care.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Actually, it's surprising that nobody else has noticed that this discussion is really about aviation, not telecommunications. Slashdotters are really slipping.
The thing that Europeans always forget is that the U.S. is more like the E.U. than it is like Finland. Actually, many Americans make the same mistake. When Europe becomes a single cellular market the way that the U.S. is, we will be able to compare the business practices of the providers.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Why do you, Americans, put up with your mobile operators specifically disabling features (like tethering or bluetooth) on phones being sold via contracts?
Because we get such a deep "discount" on the handset. Ideally, a 24-month plan with a $175 ETF would have a $7.50 per month discount if I bring my own phone, but the carriers offer no such discount. Besides, the CDMA carriers (Verizon and Sprint) don't use CSIM cards.
the operator would be advertising a specific phone model, while in reality, the phone model being advertised in reality has more or better features than the one sold to you under it's name by the operator.
Not necessarily. The standard unlocked GSM phone is sold under one name, and the carrier's version carries a slightly different name. For example, Motorola Droid is Verizon's customized version of Motorola Milestone.