(Posts: 31; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
I am confused, Minneapolis, MN is not on the list but there is a green dot clearly located on the map where Minneapolis, MN would be found. Did I miss something? ATT lack of LTE network makes me want to switch but if they get it up and running I may stay!
(Posts: 443; Member since: 25 May 2011)
Minneapolis/St. Paul will be live by the end of 2012. Regional ATT Rep said around Thanksgiving. You can go to airport and experience LTE. LTE starts at Post Rd and surrounds the airport. LTE was also live at the State Fairgrounds.
(Posts: 167; Member since: 29 Aug 2012)
Dang AT&T is on the ball.
(Posts: 12; Member since: 06 Jan 2012)
On the ball? They missed all major metro cities on launch for LTE, got LTE up in NY and LA and skipped the remaining top 20 metro markets instead to put up LTE in San Juan and Oklahoma city. Verizon on the other hand started rolling out LTE much earlier and has been adding markets 3x fast the=an AT&T has and where it reaches the largest amount of customers and potential cust people are renewing contracts and dropping their old carriers to join Verizon in there LTE markets while AT&T takes its sweet time and losses custs in markets without LTE
(Posts: 55; Member since: 27 Aug 2012)
yeah but i would rather get t mobile for less money and 4 g which uses less battery than lte and gets around 20 m b p s download just for 30 bucks a month with 5 GB internet, unlimited messaging 100 min talk. you will be paying triple that abound with att
(Posts: 844; Member since: 12 Dec 2008)
Different strokes for different folks. In some areas, T-Mobile doesn't have good service. AT&T may be more expensive, but the fact of the matter is, AT&T has WAY more coverage than T-Mobile does at the moment. Also, the fact that AT&T 4G LTE phones supports both HSPA+ and LTE speeds put them at a great advantage.
However, if AT&T and T-Mobile both have good coverage in your area and you want a better value, then go for T-Mobile. If not, then AT&T is still a good option. Some people are willing to pay a bit more for better service.
(Posts: 6330; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
When you combine that with HSPA+ areas, AT&T has the best 4G coverage.
(Posts: 167; Member since: 27 Apr 2011)
YES! Albuquerque is on that list. About time lol...
(Posts: 39; Member since: 03 May 2011)
AT&T has the CRAPPIEST 4G coverage compared to VERIZON 4G LTE SERVICE which blows it off by far.
(Posts: 145; Member since: 02 Apr 2010)
I agree verizon does have much more LTE coverage than at&t . BUT in terms of speed were both at&t and verizon have LTE from what I seen in LA,NY,IL, and texas at&t beats verizon in speed with there LTE speed igot much faster speeds on my att galaxy note than my man got on his verizon razr maxx. And besides us at&t customers dont need lte because we have hspa+ were LTE is not available my man is just like u a verizon fanboy im sure u 2 would get along lol. Hes always talking shyyt bout at&t and comparing his phone with my phone and doing speed tests just bout everywere we go just to compare which is faster his or mine. HE has been shocked that I have been able to get 13 mbps on at&t hspa+ while hes getting 10 on verizon Lte . And even more shocked that when im on AT&TS lte I get up to 40 mbps while the highest he gets on verizon is 25. So yeaaa go figure.
(Posts: 257; Member since: 15 Feb 2011)
Verizon is at the point now where they are lighting up 40 at a time. Hahahaha.
(Posts: 332; Member since: 08 Dec 2011)
I have AT&T LTE in both my college town and home town but heir hspa+ has honestly been fast enough to not make me want an LTE phone. Speeds are usually between 2-4.5 Mbps which is enough for my use. I'll just stick with my unlocked nexus for a while.
(Posts: 48; Member since: 19 Jan 2012)
If Verizon gets 100% of their towers on LTE by the end of the year, it won't really matter if a provider such as AT&T has two levels of "4G" or not. Once every tower is with LTE, users will constantly be connected to 4G LTE no matter where they are or where they are going. Plus, talk and data simultaneously will also no longer be an issue. Considering over 75% of their network has LTE, it is very likely to happen. I am in Los Angeles, and I RARELY get off of 4G LTE.
(Posts: 6; Member since: 18 Dec 2011)
Has Phonearena not yet realized that Philadelphia has had LTE for the past week? I've had it on my Lumia as well as my galaxy siii.
(Posts: 237; Member since: 17 Jun 2010)
AT&T doesn't have LTE in Portland, OR yet?? Sheesh, I didn't realize their LTE coverage was so bad... I'm glad I have Verizon.
(Posts: 443; Member since: 25 May 2011)
Many people could give a rip about LTE. With AT&T 3G/HSPA+ most don't see the need. I have several friends that are content with Verizon 3G on there phones and don't see a need to get a LTE phone. My wife has a HSPA Blackberry and it suits her just fine. As for VZW LTE markets they broadcast all these areas, however, the coverage does blanket all the city. I have a VZW LTE work hotspot and cities that have both AT&T and VZW LTE, AT&T has been faster for me on my G-Note.
Also remember when you roll off VZW LTE you go to SLOW EVDO 3G.
(Posts: 8; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
I certainly hope Seattle, WA also means surrounding areas (such as Bremerton). It certainly doesn't mean that for Verizon, who has LTE in Seattle proper, but not in Bremerton/Kitsap county.
I'm with Sprint right now and am anxiously awaiting LTE to come to the area. If AT&T gets here first, I'm switching.
(Posts: 47; Member since: 05 Apr 2012)
Holy crap all the people at the AT&T store have told me it would for sure be in utah by the end of the year...doesn't look like that's happening! fuh
(Posts: 669; Member since: 19 May 2011)
The AT&T rep told me in Feb when I got my Note that no later than spring and Phila would have LTE it's now Sept and still no LTE here