AT&T Airs Attack Ad of Its Own
How coverage is reported:
When a wireless carrier wants to impress investors they don't really talk about square miles of coverage. They report how many millions of population their footprint covers. This is why T-Mobile's, Sprint's, AT&T's and Verizon's coverage will work for the vast majority of consumers.
Showing a map of coverage that is painted red, green, orange or blue is great marketing but not as relevant as how many people live or work within the footprint.
It is possible for a carier to have more square miles of coverage and cover less of the population.
Consumers need to learn who is best in their local market where it is relevant to their needs.
In this case AT&T's 3G covers a good percentage of the population if you look at where they have covera...
(continues)
Showing a map of coverage that is painted red, green, orange or blue is great marketing but not as relevant as how many people live or work within the footprint.
It is possible for a carier to have more square miles of coverage and cover less of the population.
Consumers need to learn who is best in their local market where it is relevant to their needs.
In this case AT&T's 3G covers a good percentage of the population if you look at where they have covera...
(continues)
...
Yea...sure...Cept .... The Big V rocks at that too.
When 4 G hits... I am sure we will hear about the "millions" of people covered by it while the roll out the sqr mile map
When 4 G hits... I am sure we will hear about the "millions" of people covered by it while the roll out the sqr mile map
...
I can just see 100Mbps RAZR's running WAP.
LTE and WiMAX are primarily targeted at high end data use (laptops, and other high end data devices). The average user will probably not be using LTE / WiMAX unless they have a 4G / WiFi router or a laptop.
LTE and WiMAX are primarily targeted at high end data use (laptops, and other high end data devices). The average user will probably not be using LTE / WiMAX unless they have a 4G / WiFi router or a laptop.
...
The big V has a terrible value point. It costs way too much for their service when compared to T-Mobile and Sprint (If you dis on them it will show your arrogance) whose coverage is great for the vast majority of Americans.
I'm not sure coverage is the battleground. Value and device are
I'm not sure coverage is the battleground. Value and device are
...
i agree with you 100%. a lot of americans don't have data access or cant afford it. that's why there are the sprints and tmobiles out there for those that want value over data speeds and coverage. they could give a rats. there is a market and a company for everyone. as a retention agent for att i hear more people leaving for cost than anything else. the other main issue is they threaten to cancel if they cannot upgrade to the iphone RIGHT NOW! in the past month that the droid has been marketed, none of my customers have threatened to cancel and go to vzw for the droid.
...
Sure I COULD drive a Hyundai or a Kia but being the arrogant snob that I am I'll pass. If Verizon is too expensive for you...that is exactly the point.
...
It is RF for crying out loud! Are you saying that if everyone's signal strength is the same then somehow Verizon's is inherently better and therefore that justifies the higher price point?
If all things are equal, which they are for the vast majority of the population then why pay so much more for VZW?
I repeat, if the signal strength for all carriers in a given area is identical then what is the real difference?
Your Kia/Hyundai illustration is not relevant here because we are talking about mechanical devices that have moving parts.
When you represent a product you believe it to be superior to the rest of the world, that is only natural.
But really, electomagnetic waves work the same no matter who broadcasts them.
If all things are equal, which they are for the vast majority of the population then why pay so much more for VZW?
I repeat, if the signal strength for all carriers in a given area is identical then what is the real difference?
Your Kia/Hyundai illustration is not relevant here because we are talking about mechanical devices that have moving parts.
When you represent a product you believe it to be superior to the rest of the world, that is only natural.
But really, electomagnetic waves work the same no matter who broadcasts them.
...
Good point.
If our Verizon friend is going to argue that they have more towers to broadcast that RF than the competition then That is not accurate because AT&T owns more towers.
So what makes Verizon's overall coverage superior to a company with more towers?
If I live in Pittsburgh why do I care about coverage in North Dakota when I will probably not go there? It is as moot a point as AT&T's international roaming is to the majority of Americans. Most people won't do it.
If I live in North Dakota and Verizon' coverage there works best for me then it is the best choice.
If our Verizon friend is going to argue that they have more towers to broadcast that RF than the competition then That is not accurate because AT&T owns more towers.
So what makes Verizon's overall coverage superior to a company with more towers?
If I live in Pittsburgh why do I care about coverage in North Dakota when I will probably not go there? It is as moot a point as AT&T's international roaming is to the majority of Americans. Most people won't do it.
If I live in North Dakota and Verizon' coverage there works best for me then it is the best choice.
...
right but from what i understand, and correct me if i'm wrong, cdma technology penetrates buildings and structures better than gsm and has a larger range. however gsm and att 3g allows more channels on one tower therefore more customers able to use the service @ one time.
...
3G technologies all use a CDMA air interface with a rake filter which helps in building services.
CDMA uses a 1.25 MHZ wide channel
UMTS/HSDPA/HSPA uses a 5MHZ wide channel
Both accomplish the same thing except UMTS/HSDPA/HSPA allows voice and data simultaneously on the same channel
CDMA uses a 1.25 MHZ wide channel
UMTS/HSDPA/HSPA uses a 5MHZ wide channel
Both accomplish the same thing except UMTS/HSDPA/HSPA allows voice and data simultaneously on the same channel
...
well then how is it that att and t mobile(gsm) have sim cards and verizon, sprint, usc and the like(cdma) do not. if they all use cdma what's the difference?
...
AT&T and T-Mobile use a GSM data core and a CDMA air interface in their 3G.
Verizon, Sprint and USCC use a Qualcomm CDMA data core.
Using SIM cards is not unique to any technology. Everyone could but the U.S. CDMA carriers have chosen to go with an onboard ESN.
The similarity is in the CDMA technology that the towers and the phones broadcast. Other than that they are as different as a chestnut horse is from a horse chestnut.
Verizon, Sprint and USCC use a Qualcomm CDMA data core.
Using SIM cards is not unique to any technology. Everyone could but the U.S. CDMA carriers have chosen to go with an onboard ESN.
The similarity is in the CDMA technology that the towers and the phones broadcast. Other than that they are as different as a chestnut horse is from a horse chestnut.
...
"The big V has a terrible value point. It costs way too much for their service when compared to T-Mobile and Sprint (If you dis on them it will show your arrogance) whose coverage is great for the vast majority of Americans.
I'm not sure coverage is the battleground. Value and device are"
I did not bring T-Mobile or Sprint into the discussion, but since they were brought into it---the point is that if the only consideration is whether the phone works where one happens to live then yes...go with the cheaper provider. Obviously, that is not the only consideration. There are many reasons people choose carriers besides price. Sure many are brainwashed or drinking the kool aid (and on and on and on) So what? It's not your money. Why wou...
(continues)
I'm not sure coverage is the battleground. Value and device are"
I did not bring T-Mobile or Sprint into the discussion, but since they were brought into it---the point is that if the only consideration is whether the phone works where one happens to live then yes...go with the cheaper provider. Obviously, that is not the only consideration. There are many reasons people choose carriers besides price. Sure many are brainwashed or drinking the kool aid (and on and on and on) So what? It's not your money. Why wou...
(continues)
...
This forum is closed.
