Cell Phone Carrier Recommendation?

[exdeath]

Verizon in my area, this is what a BAD signal looks like:



Using the old NTSC television UHF spectrum is ingenious as the properties of those wavelengths was originally chosen for high bandwidth high urban penetration and propagation indoors for television broadcast reception, what better to use for high reliability data?

[MrX8503]

Originally Posted by lothar

I thought it was Sprint doing that, not AT&T?

http://gigaom.com/mobile/atts-chicag...he-windy-city/

AT&T is running at 10Mhz instead of 20. This cuts down on not only speed, but capacity as well. AT&T's lte would reach congestion much faster than Verizon.

Probably switch if AT&T's lte doesn't improve.

[Thegonagle]

Originally Posted by dagamer34

I'd also be very careful with people who blindly recommend Verizon. When you look at their spectrum assets, they only have 10Mhz of LTE currently supporting all of their customers...

Most of what you just said is true, and I agree with you about the Verizon LTE network loading up quickly as more and more VZW customers carry LTE smartphones. However, what you stated above is simply incorrect

Verizon is deploying LTE on the 700 MHz "C-block" license, which covers the 48 contiguous United States. The C-block has 22 MHz of total bandwidth, but it breaks down the middle; the C-block has two frequency ranges that are 11 MHz apiece. This allows them to build what's called a 10x10 LTE network (10 MHz uplink, 10 MHz downlink) throughout the "lower 48." (With 1x1 left over for... Profit?)

AT&T failed to acquire a single license for the lower 48, so they need to piece together local and regional licenses. They have 20+ MHz in some areas, just like Verizon, but in other areas (like Chicago ), they only have 10 MHz, so they can only build a 5x5 LTE network.

[lothar]

Originally Posted by MrX8503

http://gigaom.com/mobile/atts-chicag...he-windy-city/

AT&T is running at 10Mhz instead of 20. This cuts down on not only speed, but capacity as well. AT&T's lte would reach congestion much faster than Verizon.

Probably switch if AT&T's lte doesn't improve.

Interesting.
And here I was thinking 10Mhz was the "defacto" standard...I was not aware that Verizon was using 20Mhz.

I think Sprint on the other hand is using 5Mhz for LTE instead of 10Mhz.

[dagamer34]

Originally Posted by Thegonagle

Most of what you just said is true, and I agree with you about the Verizon LTE network loading up quickly as more and more VZW customers carry LTE smartphones. However, what you stated above is simply incorrect

Verizon is deploying LTE on the 700 MHz "C-block" license, which covers the 48 contiguous United States. The C-block has 22 MHz of total bandwidth, but it breaks down the middle; the C-block has two frequency ranges that are 11 MHz apiece. This allows them to build what's called a 10x10 LTE network (10 MHz uplink, 10 MHz downlink) throughout the "lower 48." (With 1x1 left over for... Profit?)

AT&T failed to acquire a single license for the lower 48, so they need to piece together local and regional licenses. They have 20+ MHz in some areas, just like Verizon, but in other areas (like Chicago ), they only have 10 MHz, so they can only build a 5x5 LTE network.

I'm sorry, I was referring specifically to the downlink.

[exdeath]

And a good link, indoors even.

Only reason I put up with Verizon's BS.