Without T-Mobile, AT&T's LTE Will Cover Only 80% of U.S.
Clarification: Without T-Mobile, AT&T will CHOOSE to cover only 80% of US
"Give us what we want. Otherwise, screw you guys. We're taking our ball and going home."
AJ
This is why they made the BID to aquire T-Mobile USA. T-Mobile accepted the bid and agreed this was a good strategic course of action considering the similar technologies and ease of integration.
It seems like Verizon planned ahead and put their money where their mouth was and bid enough to cover 100% of the U.S.A. I guess beggars can't be choosy?
😎
Just because Sprint and Clear couldn't pull it off, don't blame other companies which are more able.
planethulk said:
Naaaah. They Bought Tmobile because Sprint would have been able to sit right next to them in the top 3.
Then Sprint should have when they had a chance, they couldn't or wouldn't, or didn't like the terms.
https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=18 ... »
Rich Brome said:
AT&T's current spectrum for LTE is extensive, but it definitely does NOT cover the whole country:
https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=18 ... »
Rich...
No, AT&T's Lower 700 MHz spectrum does not cover the entire country, nor did I assert that it does (for population or geographic area). But AT&T does hold spectrum in every single county in the US. (And a general rule of thumb is that anywhere that AT&T has spectrum it has a minimum of 50 MHz bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for rural LTE deployment.)
As such, AT&T's Lower 700 MHz holdings are only part of the story because AT&T is not limited to Lower 700 MHz for LTE. LTE is spectrum agnostic. It does n...
(continues)
It's more difficult to design phones that work on that many bands. The more technologies x bands a phone has to support, the more complex the radio circuits and antenna design. Qualcomm may balk and refuse to create chips supporting those bands, or if they do make the chips, it may take longer (and cost more) for manufacturers to bring such phones to market, putting AT&T behind.
Here's an example of Qualcomm saying "nope, that's too hard, we can only cram so many bands into one chipset":
http://www.mediaaccess.org/2011/04/att-cellular-sout ... »
That's why most carriers try to limit the number of bands each technology operates on. For example, Verizon has both 700 MHz and AWS (17...
(continues)
Rich Brome said:...
True. Except...
It's more difficult to design phones that work on that many bands. The more technologies x bands a phone has to support, the more complex the radio circuits and antenna design. Qualcomm may balk and refuse to create chips supporting those bands, or if they do make the chips, it may take longer (and cost more) for manufacturers to bring such phones to market, putting AT&T behind.
Here's an example of Qualcomm saying "nope, that's too hard, we can only cram so many bands into one chipset":
http://www.mediaaccess.org/2011/04/att-cellular-sout ... »
That's why most carriers try to limit the number of bands each technology operates on. For example,
(continues)
AT&T's claim that it needs T-Mobile's spectrum to deploy LTE is specifically referring to AWS (and not 1900). They've been very clear about that. They will need to maintain 1900 as NOT LTE in order to support existing customers.
AT&T owns AWS over the entire west half of the country. If they don't get T-Mobile, that's what they'll use to fill the 700 MHz holes, not 850. They've been clear about that. It won't fill all the holes in the east, though, which is why they're still buying 700 MHz lice...
(continues)
Rich Brome said:...
AT&T has said explicitly that it will use its own AWS 1700 spectrum for LTE, and that it will use T-Mobile's AWS 1700 spectrum for LTE as well. 700 MHz is the primary band, but AWS is what fills out the coverage whether they get T-Mobile or not.
AT&T's claim that it needs T-Mobile's spectrum to deploy LTE is specifically referring to AWS (and not 1900). They've been very clear about that. They will need to maintain 1900 as NOT LTE in order to support existing customers.
AT&T owns AWS over the entire west half of the country. If they don't get T-Mobile, that's what they'll use to fill the 700 MHz holes, not 850. They've been clear about that. It won't fill all the holes in the east, though, which is
(continues)
You're assuming that AT&T has a tower-by-tower plan for LTE 1700 in that specific area, and that the published map reflects that down to each square mile, and not only that, but how it will look from day one.
I don't assume that at all. I think you're looking it way more literally than AT&T intended. I assume AT&T said to themselves "we have spectrum and towers in that area, and there's population there worth covering, so that's what we'll plan to cover." Not shown - but implied - is that...
(continues)
Rich Brome said:
You're assuming that AT&T has a tower-by-tower plan for LTE 1700 in that specific area, and that the published map reflects that down to each square mile, and not only that, but how it will look from day one.
I don't assume that at all. I think you're looking it way more literally than AT&T intended. I assume AT&T said to themselves "we have spectrum and towers in that area, and there's population there worth covering, so that's what we'll plan to cover." Not shown - but implied - is that the service may not work as well, or that it may require additional towers over time, to fill in the holes. I don't think there's anything dishonest about showing a map with those assumptions.
AT&T is ...
(continues)
This forum is closed.