AT&T vs Verizon: LTE Networks Compared | Hacker News Reader

AT&T vs Verizon: LTE Networks Compared

pcmag.com

19 pointsadeelarshad8211 comments

And no, you can't use AT&T, Verizon and MetroPCS LTE devices on each others' networks, as the companies spec out their radios to exclude each others' frequencies.

Well that's also because nobody's doing voice over LTE, and they're still relying on the legacy network for voice (and fallback data service where LTE isn't available).

Every device sold right now is this hybrid of CDMA/LTE or GSM/LTE, so even if some AT&T device did support Verizon's share of the 700Mhz band on the LTE side, you'd not be able to talk on it on Verizon anyway.

At some point the network will be all-LTE (Verizon's said in the next couple years) and they can drop the legacy hardware. But in the meantime the phones just have an extra bolted-on radio that does a great job at two things: it pulls down data super fast, and it drains the battery just as quick too.

Since Verizon's LTE network is available in over 100 cities, I think that it would be a selling point for AT&T if their LTE devices were able to roam on other networks for faster data transfers. I am reasonably certain that AT&T has voice coverage in the urban markets currently covered by LTE.

There are probably several reasons why this is not the case, but I doubt lack of voice coverage is one of them. AT&T and T-Mobile both use GSM frequencies, but it is reasonably difficult to find phones that use the four frequency bands that they use for 3G coverage.

There are two things here: business and technology.

AT&T and Verizon are both using "700MHz" spectrum. However, Verizon is using the upper-700MHz band and AT&T is using the lower 700MHz band. It is possible (clearly) to support multiple frequency bands, but it isn't free. Plus, AT&T is shipping 700/AWS devices. While Verizon has AWS spectrum, their current crop of devices are 700-only. So, it would mean AT&T supporting three bands 700L, 700U, and AWS.

Beyond that, carriers generally don't do roaming where they have service already. AT&T already has data service everywhere Verizon has LTE. It's slower data service, but it's still service. Voice works the same way. A company might have very low signal in an area, but as long as the phone can get any signal, it will prefer its home carrier. If they had the same policy with LTE, it wouldn't help customers. Heck, Sprint users are allowed to roam onto Verizon for data, but are restricted to 1xRTT (2G) when roaming on Verizon (save for legacy Alltel areas). It might be that Verizon's data roaming rates are so high for newer technologies that it would be unreasonable to offer roaming like that.

The thing is IIRC AT&T, in the Bay Area at least, always seems to win the Speed Tests against Verizon [1]. However as a long time user of AT&T on the iPhone in SF the issue was never speed it was the ability to actually use the network which was problematic. I couldn't get phone calls in my apartment in Poterero Hill and still get dropped calls on my cell in our house in Berkeley (we were eventually forced to get a land line). I never had these problems with Verizon (which is why my wife and I are switching once the new iPhone's come out). Point being I find these kinds of comparisons meaningless unless their coverage gets better.

[1] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2364263,00.asp

This was clearly paid for by ATT.

Also, they need to look at their methodology. No way they got a true 40mbs over cellular - most likely something is happening with caching or compression.

That's quite an accusation. It's incredibly unlikely that PC Magazine is risking the FTC going after it by publishing something paid for by AT&T without disclosing it. Frankly, that was an unjustified attack to discredit without providing a compelling counter-argument or other evidence.

Moreover, 40Mbps isn't unrealistic on an empty network for an absolute maximum. Average speeds of 22Mbps seem realistic given Verizon's 16Mbps performance and the fact that Verizon probably has a couple million customers on its LTE network. Likewise, Verizon's absolute maximum is 50% more than their average speed. On an empty network, I'd expect more divergence in speed from average to maximum making AT&T's ~85% difference believable. Likewise, if you visit wireless forums, you'll find plenty of Verizon users posting their maximum rates over LTE and seeing similar speeds.

And these tests were being done using Speedtest.net run by Ookla and endorsed by the FCC. While I don't know the specifics of how it works, it is the standard in testing broadband speed. Without evidence that it can be tampered with, I'd listen to the FCC.

The real question is how AT&T and Verizon's networks will hold up as more customers come on board. Last quarter, Verizon sold only 1.2M LTE devices. AT&T has just started selling LTE devices. We might see the speeds of both networks lowered as the number of customers on the networks increases.

Many people dislike AT&T. PC Magazine is testing an unloaded AT&T LTE network and a mostly unloaded Verizon LTE network. These numbers seem very reasonable given those conditions. It doesn't mean that AT&T will remain at these speeds or remain "better" than Verizon (if your purpose is to defend a cherished carrier). It's simply an initial test of an unloaded network that shows promise for the network. Whether that promise will be realized or not we'll have to wait and see.

Heh. My reaction to them topping at 40mbps was 'only 40? How crappy'.

The most dominant mobile operator here tops at 80mbps...

EDIT: Where 'here' = Sweden

EDIT2: Uh, after reviewing the speeds, they actually top slightly over 100mbps.

That's good to know! I'm moving to Sweden soon :)

Can you adopt me? I don't eat much and require only a small room.

But seriously, why the stark contrast? That's a huge difference.

There is actual competition in the market that makes the ISP's and telcoms push the tech capabilities.

As for adoption, I doubt that is necessary. Get a job here, apply for temporary work permit or citizenship and you're in. Jobs are dead easy to get if you are in IT - almost every company is actively looking for people now.

Wonder if I can convince the special lady friend a big move is needed ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com