Inside iPhone 4S US mobile data: AT&T vs Sprint vs Verizon - Page 2

Whatever :P

You do know Apple went to Verizon when the iPhone was first introduced?

When Verizon turned them down they went exclusively to AT&T. Years later now apple finding it needs to be more competitive in the phone market has branched to various providers.

Anyway the point of all this is back when the iPhone first came out they went to Verizon first. You saying apple had it wrong? Why would Apple choose Verizon first? Could it be because of the service coverage?

Apple picked Verizon first! So are yah saying Apple or better yet Steve Jobs got it wrong?

http://articles.businessinsider.com/...denberg-iphone

First bullet point.

I have been waiting patiently for you to address my points. But I'll give you a hint about this post you've now trollishly made twice: That was a Verizon exec, not an Apple exec, which means it's just speculation and even if Apple told them that it doesn't mean it's true as you can lie in negotiations to better your position, but you have to be honest when it comes to writing up a deal.

I'll come at your silly point another way to make you cry yourself asleep tonight after you answer my previous queries. I doubt you'll answer them which my way of saving you from soggy pillow this evening.

This. I would argue that CDMA 1X speeds are unusable on a modern device. I swear my Android phone just gives up with 1X when I try to perform a simple Google search. It's incredibly slow.

I like GSM and the HSPA+ standard as they give you the fastest data for 3G and 2G, and then of course LTE being the standard of the future.

However I'm a really really budget user, so I'm with the Sprint network on Virgin Mobile. Yaay it's cheap and works mostly.

I don't think Verizon has had any 1x or 1xRTT for a couple years but EV-DO Rev. 0 may exist. I'm not sure about Sprint. I was never able to get a good handle on their '3G' coverage. I'd hope it's at least Rev. 0 but that's not really saying much.

Basically the iPhone was the innovator in excluding the provider from the phone experience, something that I'm most grateful for. You really can't underestimate the way the iPhone changed everyone's lives just by saying no to carriers' bad software. I think it's honestly one of the best things any company has done for the general public. Yeah, it's that awesome to me.

The funny thing is that it sparked the consumer smartphone revolution, something that enables the cell phone carriers to make much more subscription money per customer. Ironically it was the cell phone carriers themselves who were resisting this revolution by forcing cell phone companies to use just plain bad software and limit consumer freedom.

Now at least these companies realize that if you want to maximize profits, you give consumers freedom, but you charge them for it with a nice big data plan bill each month

On my Virgin Mobile phone (sprint network) I do get 1X coverage in some places, and like I said, it's basically unusable. It delivers my emails and push notifications and that's about it.

I don't know what VZW rolls with, but my VZW ghetto candy bar phone always says 1X on it (yeah I have two phones for some reason).

i just found this page which backs up your comments.

• http://shop2.sprint.com/en/stores/po...ds_popup.shtml

edit: Just discovered about Verizon, which also backs up your comments. They do still have 1x.

• http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/C...atorController (click on the Data radio button and refresh map to get legend)

It's interesting they now break out 1x from 3G on their map. I'm not sure if they are including 1xRTT with their 1x. I guess they count EV-DO Rev.0 as '3G'. It's good for them we don't rate the generation by the data speed of the technology or they'd be screwed.

So your saying that Steve lied about going to Verizon? Your full of it. Really.

Yeah sure he lied about it and said the media "hey we want to market our phones at a set price and have a minimum data plan" Verison says no...

What kind of bargaining chip do they hold for AT&T when that is what HAPPENED with them. It was the SAME PROPOSAL!! It doesn't make sense to say well just make up a lie about a meeting so AT&T will just agree.

Why go through such a charade when it sounds more probable that it ACTUALLY HAPPENED. Keep looping it around with your "conspiracy theories" while I keep shoving real information down your throat.

Download the Coverage Map app from the App Store to get a better picture of the four major carriers' coverage for voice and data (at a per-cell granularity). Even better run the tests using that app to contribute to their reports.

Not associated with the app in any way except that it's been a useful tool for crowdsourcing actual carrier performance which goes far beyond the limited tests we typically see in articles like this.

I'm not saying everyone should do one thing or the other, how would I even control that? I'm saying that the overall user experience on Verizon in LA is better because it's more reliable. To say that doesn't mesh with your LA experience is likely BS because I know a lot of people here with AT&T iPhones and they constantly struggle for service on 3G or edge. If att edge worked like verizon's "o" then AT&T would be better because edge is faster, but it fails constantly on both 3G and edge and drops calls or you get 1 useless bar that won't hold a call or get online.

Every time some AT&T cheerleader starts going on they talk about hardware issues and buildings and such. I had a 3G and a 3GS on AT&T and they both sucked on calls and Internet was unreliable. I got the 4 on Verizon and in the same places AT&T sucked it performs. True "o" mode is slower than edge, but it works pretty much all the time, and you dont see it that much anyway when edge was a regular occurrence. People don't live in labs like cell phone engineers, they work in buildings and some live by mountains, and many talk while in the car on headsets. Verizon works in real life, AT&T needs a better network. I hope they work out something with TMobile where they share towers but don't merge. Until att improves, Verizon's got me. I'm done, later.

...and it works great. True, my download speeds average just under 1Mbps, but I'm never without coverage, I have unlimited everything, and it's the cheapest by about $25/month.

The advantage of unlimited is that I keep my iPhone4s available with tethering over Bluetooth all the time, and use it for Internet everywhere with my Air, iPad 3G and MacBook Pro. While the iPad 3G is faster (with AT&T), I find that I'm out of service about 40% of the time. I text, download podcasts, stream Pandora, check e-mail and never even think about how much data I'm using. Turns out that I'm running around 25GB/month. My workplace doesn't allow personal devices on the network, so I do all my communications during the day over my tethered MacBook Air.

Also, call quality with Sprint is awesome. It really is crystal clear.

I'm giving serious thought to canceling my iPad's grandfathered AT&T unlimited 3G service at $30/month since I barely use it nowadays.

look at the pic, att upload is faster than verizon and sprint download combined.

When you say "these companies" your referring to cell carriers right? Apple decided who will carry their phone.

Back in 2007 when they decided to go with one crap carrier (AT&T) after the Verizon fall out. Now with the Drioid and HTC have had time to copy Apple's ground breaking software and touch screen and half-azz replicate it. In order to stay above the curve and market Apple they made a good move in allowing multiple carriers to provide the iPhone.

Immagine a Turd. Now try and blow that turd down the street with a small leaf blower. Now imagine that turd representing Sprint. You now have a good example of how to move data with something that is made to be rotten in the beginning.

Sprint = turd.

Why would you want to pay lots of money for a iPhone and unlimited data plan when all you are gonna get is a turd of a deal.

You're making a critical assumption....that these Fortune 1000 only use one carrier...which is not the case

Here's a link for you-
100% of fortune 1000 companies use AT&T.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oe...ing-181628.pdf

How'd it go? Bam! Bazinga?!?

I hate these comparisons. People should pick their network based on where they are going to be using their phones and what gives them the best coverage and speed combo. For me it is Verizon, but for others it may be AT&T Sprint or Tmobile.

And for the price conscious each major carrier in the US has plans that others can't beat depending on the plan that you best fits your usage needs.

I'll never understand these asshats that think their carrier is the only one that should exist.

More likely they wanted to sell you a microcell for one time charge of $100, not an additional $100 a month.
It allows your cell phone to use broadband internet connection for calls.

Oh yeah, Jobs chose Verizon first...as self-servingly claimed by the CEO of Verizon (posthumously of course, after Steve could no longer put the record straight), and reported by the unreliable, anti-Apple Business Insider. Gotta be true if you believe it, right?

That's not all the bunk you're full of either, is it. What about your totally erroneous claim that AT&T charges users $100 each and every month for its femtocell?

The Verizon exec stated what I'm sure was what Apple told him when Jobs was still alive. There is no evidence from Apple or Jobs on this matter.

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence showing that Apple's foray into new countries was by choosing the 2nd largest/most popular carrier before the iPhone had been established as a dominant force. This makes perfect sense because the most dominant carrier can dictate more terms than ones that are trying to look for an angle to increase their position in the market.

From the article he linked to (posting here because he messed up the link) it also states "Fortune suggests Apple didn't want a phone that was CDMA, because it couldn't sell it around the world." I suppose he conveniently wanted to ignore that data point.

I thinkiIt's most likely Apple told Verizon what they thought they wanted to hear while suggesting their vendor-focused terms, but had planned from the start to use a GSM-based carrier for the iPhone so they could maximize economics of scale by selling the device internationally, something they have great experience doing. Any negotiation with Verizon was just par for the course and likely used to compare offers, and possibly leak the information as to get AT&T to be more accepting of Apple's terms.

Sorry to break up the argument.

Unlocked iPhone. My Tmobile signal is strong throughout San Francisco. Albeit, it's 2G for data, but I save about $90/month for unlimited calls & data. 2G goes at about 1.0-1.5 MB/min...which I can live with..but some cannot. Siri works fine, phone is fine..email is great....it lags slightly with photos...but that's 2G.

Over the course of 2 years, I'll save...er...$90/month x 24 - $450 (because I had to buy the phone outright from Apple) = $1700 in savings.

Oh, and I'll have an unlocked GSM phone after 2 years...unlike AT&T's phone.

For the money, I'll live with 2G (heck, I'm on WiFi 95% of the time anyway).

I for one am so glad Apple didn't go with Verizon due to their very poor geographic coverage.

Signed the rest of the world.

I'm sure the T-Mobile plan you are talking about comes in below the other three carriers but I think your numbers are way off. Why not post what you pay per month and how much you paid for your iPhone, instead of this odd savings you've accounted for. I say this because even with taxes I pay less than $90's per month.

And why write some odd assumed speed per MINUTE. Just use the FCC or SpeedTest app and then post the results here as a screenshot.

I feel my family is a good testing and reference point in regards to service providers. My wife's hospital is with AT&T using a BlackBerry. My phone is an IP4 with Verizon, one of laptop's have a Verizon 4G embedded card while my other one has a Verizon 3G card. My son has a Pantech Breakout which is 4G. I see the whole gamut when comparing VZW and ATT. Thank god I don't have to deal with Sprint!

When my wife and I are moving around in the Atlanta area the biggest problem with ATT is of course reliability. I would say that I notice she drops almost 20 to 40% of the calls she is on. We will need to make a call and more times than not we have to use my phone because ATT is dead in most situations. When we travel by automotive we can tell a big difference when you get outside of a city into rear rural areas, even on the interstate in rural areas the ATT device simply is dead in regards to service.

I will have had my IP4 for a year in Jan 12. I can honestly say that I wish the speeds were a little faster, but that is when I look at Speedtest. I can hit an app that needs data and it works very quickly. Wierd, maybe we don't need high numbers to make the device work well? Unless we are transferring or emailing large documents.

My 3G laptop that I have setup in my work vehicle is so freakin stable on the VZW 3G. I can drive this entire city just about and I will always have full bars on my VZAM program. Even when traveling it's awseome.

Now comes my 4G laptop with VZW. Yes, it is very fast compared to using my 3G devices. Here is my normal or average speed in the Atlanta area.

http://speedtest.net/result/1599487514.png


http://speedtest.net/result/1476083352.png

It is simply mind blowing to work with such speed. I can't wait until all of the current 3G area to be 4G.

With all this being said, speed is a non factor if you simply can't make a phone call or download a work document. In this day and time if you are not "Connected" you are losing money as a businessman.

I will continue to use VZW as long as the coverage is still out there. Fow what I am paying VZW a month I sure hope it is there when I need it.

I gotta throw this one out there as well. Do some of you guys really think the reason people use a PC is because they are cheaper? As much as I like Apple, the Mac OS still is limited when it comes to programs.

And didn't you know that Verizon and AT&T are only wireless voice and data providers? When is the iPhone coming to Boost so we can get a fair comparison? The Internet wants to know.

So, I see this thread was overrun by carrier shills.

The TITLE of the thread says this:


You expected anything else?

What program types are you talking about?

"Games".

Touché. Definitely correct but what percentage of the consumer market is still using WIndows so they can play games? I have to think the number is low.

Well, you know, Purble Place is a BIG draw for the OS

I, uh, I think that's what it's called. I stripped the games folder from my Boot Camp install LONG ago.

Do you forget that the first iPhone does not support 3G?

Several business programs and software are windows only. Specifically ones that are designed for exclusive fields.

We are handcuffed to windows at my office simply because there is no program that allows you to print excel, word, and PDFs to a "printer driver" that acts as a place holder/ organizer to create into a large PDF. Pdfpen, etc doesn't do it. And before you say "print excel to PDF then merge"- our staff does hundreds and hundreds every day- youre adding a very time consuming step that would waste hours of productivity.

We aren't the only ones on that position either. Exclusive programs designed for systems are in the hundreds or thousands I'm sure.

Btw- if acrobat didn't take that feature out for OSX, I could use that to do it. Unfortunately, that feature only works on their windows version.



But I disagree with the original poster. I absolutely think people pick PCs because it's cheaper. Definately. A $299 15" Toshiba laptop or a $1049 13" MacBook pro. I know what I'd choose, but people buy cheap TVs, cars, etc for a reason. They're cheap (the product and the people )

That's actually a moot point in this instance because 3GPP(GSM/UMTS) '3G' is newer and more power hungry than the 3GPP2(CDMA/CDMA2000) '3G' so if Apple had foolishly gone with Verizon first the iPhone would come out as '3G'. However, as noted CDMA2000 '3G' had data rates that are below the GSM '2G' EDGE speeds.

Can't there be an AppleScript written to capture print commands and perform that action instead?

Macs aren't ideal for the enterprise. Even with Mac notebooks getting to a point of being cheaper than Windows-based OEMs with up front, if you consider bulk sales/leases and that most machines are still desktops the numbers just don't favour Macs.

The biggest obstacle for Apple which won't change is that when you go with Mac OS you also have to use Apple's HW. With Windows you can get OEMs to bid for your business. Until Apple addresses their OS licensing limitation I don't see how Apple will ever have a dominate share of the traditional 'PC' market.

Now embedded devices like smartphones and tablets they do seem to have an advantage. We might even see Apple be the most prolific vendor in the enterprise for computers when you count smartphones, tables and traditional 'PCs.' But perhaps the 'PC' will eventually be seen as just another embedded device and all the effort put into creating iOS apps will filter over to the Mac.

As for usage that sounds like a workaround, not an ideal setup for getting the job done.

I need a mobile hotspot for my laptop. I have unlimited Internet on my iPhone and didn't want to add the AT&T's mobile hotspot to it to lose the unlimited plan. Besides, the Verizon service is much faster.

I have noticed that the latency times for the speed test app are lower on Verizon than AT&T where I am over 90% of the time. You might have the same situation. For typical use, this makes up for the lower speeds.