I don't think anybody argues the point that AT&T has the fastest 3G network. You can have the fastest network. It can have slightly more signal bars. It can also be the one that drops calls the most. These things are not mutually exclusive.
Exactly. The article is using speed measurements to declare AT&T's network as superior. AT&T's UMTS/HSPA technology IS faster than Verizon's EVDO, but what's the use if it's unreliable and most of their network is stuck on ISDN-speed-at-best EDGE?
There is also more than signal bars. AT&T works fine at and near my home, but it works awfully at one city I travel to. I get full 3g signal bars there, but websites time out, except at night time, and many incoming calls don't get through to me (going straight to voicemail).
So yes, technically I get great 3g signal there, but their network there simply can't handle it.
Also, AT&T may have more places with 75%+ signal strength, but who has more places with 50%+ signal strength, or more places with any signal strength?
All available evidence points to Verizon having better coverage, especially in outlying areas, including this article's focus on speed rather than coverage, and AT&T's commercials saying "What do you mean we don't have coverage? Pick any city. We have coverage in Boston. We have coverage in San Francisco..." Lame.
I recall reading rumors when AT&T's network quality first became an issue that they were upgrading the radios at base stations in major cities, but not the backhaul capacity. Not sure if it's true, but it would explain why you get full bars without any bandwidth.
Is there even a single other country where the iPhone has the problems it does on AT&T? I've been using my 3G on Rogers here in Canada since it was released. I've never seen a dropped call and Rogers' network is consistently faster than the phone.
I've had exactly the same experience over here (Toronto, Canada, and also on Rogers' 3G network).
I can't remember having ever dropped a call on my iPhone 3G and the network is absolutely rock solid, and very very fast (using the Xtreme Labs speed test app, for example).
The logic of this article in compelling at first but doesn't stand up to evidence that the iPhone is quite good outside of AT&T.
Surely, someone has asked people in other countries what their experiences are with their iPhones on their carriers. Given that the rest of the world is on GSM (Korea excluded), we should pretty well know whose fault it is.
Here's my anecdote. I'm an iPhone user in Canada o the Rogers network. My signal is very strong everywhere. I rarely see any less than a perfect signal, except when far away from metropolitan areas. Usually five bars, indoors and out. I may have had a dropped call over the last year, but I couldn't tell you when.
Last week I visited mountain view for Campfire One. In the three days I was there, I had two calls dropped on me. One of them was dropped while walkig around outside at the Googleplex. My signal often wavere between zero or two bars and five bars for no explicable reason. I would occasionally lose signal entirely inside buildings (my hotel room for one).
In my experience, a perfectly working iPhone in Canada becomes unreliable in California. Take from that what you will.
I've used my iPhone in San Francisco, Houston, Buenos Aires, Montevideo and Santiago. AT&T in the US, other carriers in South America (my phone is unlocked and I have different sim cards). I can say that AT&T worked much better in Houston than in SF. Claro in some parts of South America is better than AT&T in SF too (it varies from city to city).
I can't speak for mmastrac, but in general Rogers devices roam onto AT&T as their first choice. I've noticed similar lameness in AT&T's network while traveling...
I have a blackberry bold and most calls get dropped at least once during my conversation (obviously this isn't true for calls that are <2-3 mins).
The 3G coverage is also dreadful. The phone will say "3g", but will time out when opening webpages with the blackberry's browser, using google maps, or trying to run the blackberry twitter app.
I get absolutely no service at my house. AT&T has been talking about a portable cell station that you can buy, then pay a monthly fee to use (wtf, at&t? You're going to offload traffic to my network connection at home, then charge me for the privilege of it?) for about a year now, but it hasn't materialized (if it has, I haven't seen it).
I live in Phoenix, which is a pretty large city. I would understand these things if I lived in a small town, but i don't. AT&T's coverage and their unwillingness to admit that there is a problem and that they are fixing it is unacceptable.
My experience with AT&T has been that I have more problems in large cities, and less when I am in the suburbs. I suspect that this might be related to iPhone (or general smartphone) density.
From the review martey linked (http://paulstamatiou.com/review-att-3g-microcell), it looks like the price is currently either a one time $150 payment or $50 + $20/month for unlimited calls while connected to the femtocell. That seems really reasonable to me, and I'd love to get one of them (in my apartment in SF, where I have extremely spotty reception from AT&T).
iPhone user for 2 years, in the UK, on O2. Never had a single dropped call or issue.
I've been to the US several times, and each time I'm amazed at the unreliable nature of both mobile cellphone networks, and landlines :/ The infrastructure simply isn't there yet.
There are areas where I get great data service when nobody else is around. Then during peak hours data service is very slow or intermittent even though my signal strength stays the same. I'm not a telecom engineer, but it seems like they have too few towers for the number of subscribers in some areas or they don't have enough bandwidth in their backhaul.
Maybe both AT&T and the iPhone are bad, at least in my case.
When I travel to less populated cities, 3G data is always extremely fast; still I'd rather have a consistent 800 Kbps than 1500 when I'm lucky and 50 when I'm not.
But it's not just iPhone users. Wireless users in general are unhappy with AT&T's service. So if it's not the network, but a problem with the phones, AT&T must have a uniquely awful line-up of hardware. That sounds like just as big a problem for AT&T as network issues.
>He explained that his company’s tests of AT&T’s data network were done with handsets other than the iPhone, which does not allow non-Apple programs like his to run in the background.
Wow, that's a huge error.
The iPhone doesn't allow non-Apple programs to run in the background either. This is a big issue for app development actually and we've been clamoring for a background task API forever.
We get interrupted, and rerun fresh when a call comes in or a person leaves an app for any reason (such as "executing" a URL such as a tel: or twitteriffic:)
Wow. This is so contrary to my own personal experience. I have a droid and a non-iphone at&t phone. The quality of verizon over the at&t one is significant, and the coverage in the chicagoland area is vastly in favor of verizon. If this weren't NYT, I would think there is some astroturfing going on.
I get not signal in the house of my parents, my girlfriend and the most part of the village I'm from (which is in the middle of the 'Randstad'). T-Mobile's network sucks.
It doesn't matter if there are any shortcomings with the iPhone or not. ATT went into partnership with Apple over this and, if they can't handle what it delivers, they should have discovered this beforehand.
I don't think anybody argues the point that AT&T has the fastest 3G network. You can have the fastest network. It can have slightly more signal bars. It can also be the one that drops calls the most. These things are not mutually exclusive.