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
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

FEATURED VIDEO

45 Comments

1. Allday28

Posts: 335; Member since: Nov 19, 2010

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

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!

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

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??

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.

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

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.

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.

28. bossmt_2

Posts: 459; Member since: Oct 13, 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.

45. agent7

Posts: 19; Member since: Apr 20, 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?

7. simplyj

Posts: 406; Member since: Dec 23, 2009

Says the person who has never left Florida..

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?

25. lp_522

Posts: 46; Member since: May 31, 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!!

3. bossmt_2

Posts: 459; Member since: Oct 13, 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?

18. Gawain

Posts: 437; Member since: Apr 15, 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.

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.

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?

8. simplyj

Posts: 406; Member since: Dec 23, 2009

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

12. Dave FL unregistered

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

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)

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.

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!!

23. sscorp99

Posts: 40; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

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

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'

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.

16. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 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?

19. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 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.

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.

33. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 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.

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.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.