x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • AT&T's LTE network to catch up with Verizon's within the next 3 years

AT&T's LTE network to catch up with Verizon's within the next 3 years

Posted: , by Nick T.

Tags :

AT&T's LTE network to catch up with Verizon's within the next 3 years
It is no secret that AT&T is only steps away from deploying its own LTE network, but haven't you wondered if it will ever be any better than Verizon's? Well, despite the impressive speed test results that AT&T is teasing us with, it is too early to know for sure. However, Ralph de la Vega, AT&T's president and CEO, is estimating that the LTE pipelines of both carriers may be practically “indistinguishable” by 2014.

Only 5 cities will have LTE coverage from AT&T at first with ten more being added to the list by the end of the year. Meanwhile, Verizon's 4G network is growing steadily and will likely be available in over 140 markets nationwide by the end of this year. Will AT&T manage to catch up within the given time frame and will it be able to match Verizon's speeds and coverage is anybody's guess, but at this moment chances are not in AT&T's favor.

AT&T's LTE network is to debut at some time within the second half of this year with subscribers in Houston, Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta, and San Antonio to be the first ones to give it a try.

source: CNN via PCMag

  • Options

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 09:18 5

1. Allday28 (Posts: 283; Member since: 19 Nov 2010)

No way in hell att is gonna catch verizon in three years. Att is always lying about everthing. There network is pathetic!!

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 09:32 6

2. Dave FL (unregistered)

ATT is pissing me off as much as my iphone. Three F'ing markets in texas? Those freaking backward hicks can still use dial up. Put 4G in decent parts of the country, for christs sake!

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 09:53 3

6. bigjon88 (unregistered)

Well maybe you should have gotten a decent cell provider in the first place. Oh and btw, christs should actually be Christ's. Who's the hick now? Bitch

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:07 2

10. Dave FL (unregistered)

Actually, d*ckwad bigjohn88, putting the apostrophe (look it up in a dictionary) between the "t" and "s" is a contraction (look that up too!) for "christ is". If you want possessive (can you follow this thought?) you put the apostrophe AFTER the last letter. Dumbass!

And you only capitalize if it's a real name, not a made up goober fairy tale from the christ ripoff and nonsense center(s) in DallASS TexASS!

Feel pretty stupid now revealing your lack of understanding the language don't you? ESL??

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:20 7

13. applesauce (unregistered)

While you aren't wrong about about the ' between t and s indicating the abbreviation for "is", the bigjon88 is correct, as "Christ's" would indicate possessive, and you are invoking His sake, he is correct stating that it should be "Christ's sake". As for the apostrophe after the last letter, that's only necessary when the final letter in the word is an s, i.e. Chris', or Jesus', or Carlos'. Your statement about "Christ is sake" is erroneous and nonsensical.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:26

14. ATTCallCenter (unregistered)

Who cares about the correct grammar of the english language. As long is it's spelled right is all that matter's

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 00:32

31. duh (unregistered)

Typical of at&t...they don't care if they don't get the small things right. They only care about the big thing and that's their clients paying for unsatisfactory service. Btw callenterperson it does matter, Dave was wrong on two tiers and was corrected. It really shows how small people are.

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 17:34

38. Anonymous since At&t brought t (unregistered)

Isn't that the whole point of getting it spelled correctly? BTW Dave FL, you are correct only when dealing with the word its / it's if you want to show possession, the word is "its". If you want to contract "it" and "is," then the word is "it's". Oh and applesauce is also correct in reference to words ending in "s"

Get it? Got it? Good.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 16:01 2

28. bossmt_2 (Posts: 454; Member since: 13 Oct 2009)

How is Christ not a real name?

Well actually it originally wasn't, it was originally a title, but then against when I take about King James I don't write king James, but then again this is the internet where grammar and decency go the wayside.

posted on 11 Jun 2011, 09:32 1

45. agent7 (Posts: 19; Member since: 20 Apr 2011)

It's not a "real" name unless it is a person's given name at birth. It can also be a "real" name if you were to legally change your name to Christ. The Christ that someone would refer to when using "for Christ's sake", however should be capitalized since it is referring to a person's title. The title in this case would be Jesus Christ. The situation is the same when referring to a monarch such as Queen Elizabeth.

But, more importantly, this is a website about the wireless industry. Pointless conversations like this don't really have a place here. Shall we move on and discuss the topic at hand?

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:03

7. simplyj (Posts: 406; Member since: 23 Dec 2009)

Says the person who has never left Florida..

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:09 1

11. Dave FL (unregistered)

Sigh. Another person who knows not of what he speaks.
Is ignorance truly bliss, simplyj? And why would you want to make it public knowledge?

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 13:02 4

25. lp_522 (Posts: 46; Member since: 31 May 2011)

I know what this is. This isn't about AT&T LTE.. This is about Dave FL still being upset over the whooping Dallas Mavs gave Miami last night!!

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 09:36 6

3. bossmt_2 (Posts: 454; Member since: 13 Oct 2009)

AT&T has never invested the money into their network than Verizon. Can't see them catching up, or having a full roll out.

I mean if even after all these years, is their 3G coverage even close to Verizon?

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 11:27 2

18. Gawain (Posts: 423; Member since: 15 Apr 2010)

That was my first thought too. They still haven't been able to roll out basic HSPA to cover existing EDGE markets, and they're going to "catch-up" with VZW on LTE in three years? Um...no. No only that, they don't have the spectrum to do it without cannibalizing their existing network.

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 17:44

39. Anonymous since At&t brought t (unregistered)

what you both fail to realize is that during the roll out of 3G, the advent of LTE came along and the blue deathstar decided to halt 3G roll out and focus on LTE. It is in more markets than you all might think, it is not implemented yet because of the carrier switching issues btwn 3G and LTE seamlessly as well as the voice bands not being right yet either (remember when Verizon's LTE network crashed)

They are working out the kinks and have decided to run a test of 5 markets which tells me most of the kinks appear to be resolved. I know for a fact it has been pushed to several SE Michigan markets, can't tell you how I know. I wish they didn't choose 3 TX markets, that's what happens when corporate big wigs live there. 2 of those could have been Det, and LA or NY.

I would say anything yet if I were them, it makes them look slow and behind the 8 ball. Just get it tested and open it all up and go BAM! LTE for all! Just don't wait too long.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 09:47

4. kain (unregistered)

Really Dave? Houston and Dallas are backward hick towns? Wouldnt it just be better for you to switch to Verizon instead of making yourself sound foolish?

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:04 1

8. simplyj (Posts: 406; Member since: 23 Dec 2009)

Don't forget San Antonio, the seventh largest city in the U.S.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:11 1

12. Dave FL (unregistered)

Been there. Like all of Texas, I try to forget it.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 12:03 1

21. Wow... (unregistered)

Bro what's with the state bashing? You can try to relax, whatever Texas did to you, it's over now.

We can all agree that AT&T's network sucks nationwide, LTE or not.

(Proud resident of Austin, TX)

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 09:47 4

5. FuShinickich (unregistered)

Even if (IF) they could pull this off, by this time, Verizon will probably be upgrading to LTE+ anyway, so what will it matter.

De la Vega has always spoke from his ass.

AT&T are such pathetic liars, have a swiss-cheese network, and the absolute worst customer service bar none.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:30 3

15. Jeff (unregistered)

That's the stupidest thing I ever heard! Catch up.
AT&T needs T-mobile just to catch up, what a lame service provider!
It amazes me why stupid AT&T has so many subscribers when they suck so bad!!

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 12:35 3

23. sscorp99 (Posts: 40; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

they only have that many subscribers because 20% are employeees and are required to have att service for their discount.

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 17:47

40. Anonymous since At&t brought t (unregistered)

Wouldn't any employee of any company be required to have their own company's service in order to get the "EMPLOYEE DISCOUNT"?

...just sayin'

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 10:27

35. forsaken77 (unregistered)

If you live in an area where AT&T's service is not filled with holes, like me, then it's not bad. And for my needs, it's cheaper than Verizon with much better coverage than both T-Mobile and Sprint combined. I live on Long Island, outside NYC, and routinely travel from the city, all the way out to the hamptons and have good service.

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 10:44 4

16. Sniggly (Posts: 7305; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)

Lol. I saw this first on CNN and laughed. AT&T just made themselves look like a bad joke. Three years to catch up with Verizon on 4G? And then what? Look on in shock as Verizon rolls out an entirely built 5G network?

posted on 03 Jun 2011, 11:30 2

19. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

so they will take 5 years to do what VZW did in one or 2? Then when they roll that out, VZW will transition to LTE+ and get into true 4g.

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 00:43

32. duh (unregistered)

True 4g is a 100 megabits per second while true HSPA+ IS 84 megabits per second. Do u think cell phones companies well come close to producing this product at an acceptable price for the company and for clients.

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 07:14 1

33. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

why YES actually. Tmobile has/had plans to launch the 84mb/s HSPA+ next year. They are increasing their network to 42mb/s right now and its availible in many areas already. And concidering they do unlimited data cheaply... yea, its totally possible.

posted on 04 Jun 2011, 10:31

36. forsaken77 (unregistered)

I had read that T-Mobile actually uses alot of AT&T's towers instead of putting up their own. Though this might just be in my area because T-Mo has the absolute worst coverage of any carrier.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories