Verizon to launch 4G LTE in 27 new markets, expand in 44 this week
Starting this Thursday, April 19, Verizon's high-speed 4G long-term evolution network will be available to more than two-thirds of the U.S. population.
Verizon's 4G LTE network will launch in 27 new markets this week, and it will also expand in 44 existing markets. Verizon Wireless said in a press release on Tuesday that the expansion of its 4G LTE footprint will bring coverage to 230 markets, covering more than two-thirds of the U.S. population.
The new markets where Verizon will be launching its 4G LTE coverage are Auburn and Tuscaloosa, Ala.; Pine Bluff, Siloam Springs and Van Buren, Ark.; Visalia/Porterville, Calif.; Fort Walton Beach and Ocala, Fla.; Brunswick, LaGrange and Macon/Warner Robins, Ga.; Peoria, Ill.; Kokomo/Logansport and Marion, Ind.; Dodge City, Garden City, Great Bend and Hays, Kan.; Salisbury, Md.; Cattaraugus/Allegany, N.Y.; Sandusky, Ohio; Ardmore and Ponca City, Okla.; Salem/Albany/Corvallis, Ore.; Pierre, S.D.; and Big Springs and Tyler, Texas.
Verizon will also expand its 4G LTE network on Thursday in Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz.; Bakersfield, Fresno, Modesto, Sacramento, Salinas/Monterey, San Diego, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo and Stockton, Calif.; Colorado Springs and Fort Collins/Loveland, Colo.; Sarasota/Bradenton, Fla.; Boise/Nampa, Idaho; Carbondale/Marion and Rockford, Ill.; Fort Wayne and Indianapolis, Ind.; Des Moines, Iowa; Boston and Worcester, Mass.; Detroit, Mich.; St. Louis, Mo.; Las Vegas and Reno, Nev.; Manchester/Nashua, N.H.; Albuquerque and Santa Fe, N.M.; Buffalo/Niagara Falls and New York, N.Y.; Akron, Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio; Oklahoma City and Tulsa, Okla.; Portland, Ore.; Providence/Pawtucket, R.I.; Nashville, Tenn.; El Paso, Texas; Provo/Orem and Salt Lake City/Ogden, Utah; and Olympia/Centralia and Spokane, Wash.
A thorough list of where Verizon offers 4G LTE coverage is available on the company's official website.
"Verizon Wireless 4G LTE is the premier wireless data service in the nation, with more than six times the geographic coverage of our nearest competitor's 4G LTE network and now available to more than two-thirds of the nation’s population," said David Small, chief technical officer of Verizon Wireless. "We will continue to introduce new markets and expand covered markets to ensure even more wireless users across the United States can take advantage of the benefits that 4G LTE brings to consumers, small businesses and enterprises."
Verizon Wireless now offers more than 20 4G LTE-enabled devices, chief among them the new iPad, which launched last month and is Apple's first-ever 4G LTE device. Last week, AppleInsider published an extensive breakdown comparing 4G LTE coverage on the new iPad with both Verizon and its chief competitor, AT&T.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
Verizon was "first" with 4G LTE.....again....a mess...4 national outages since December. Also, they are focusing too much on the map....and not on the backend connections. Hence, latest PC World Tests are already showing AT&T's 4G LTE as faster:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25380...html#tk.hp_new
Sprint was "first" with 4G...WIMAX...what a mess...they are now abandoning it.
Verizon was "first" with 4G LTE.....again....a mess...4 national outages since December. Also, they are focusing too much on the map....and not on the backend connections. Hence, latest PC World Tests are already showing AT&T's 4G LTE as faster:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25380...html#tk.hp_new
When AT&T has something other than a nearly empty network with comparable LTE concurrent connections, then compare. Otherwise none of the tests are worth anything, even then it lost on upload. Let's see how the tests look in December.
Sprint was "first" with 4G?WIMAX?what a mess?they are now abandoning it.
In favor of LTE, so I don't see the problem. They made a mistake. They made a HUGE mistake. Everyone knew it, even before the first WiMAX towers went up. Now they're paying for it.
http://allroadsat.com/the-ultimate-smart-phone-app
Everyone knew it, even before the first WiMAX towers went up.....
Oh, really ?? You did, did ya' ??
Satellite iPhone. Best coverage ever. Screw the cell providers we currently have.
http://allroadsat.com/the-ultimate-smart-phone-app
Except it costs $8–10 per MB. So, downloading a 3 minute song from iTunes would cost approximately $50 or about half of a traditional, month-long cell phone service subscription.
EDIT: Make that $8–10 per MB, plus a WEEKLY $99 rental fee. . . Um, I'm sticking with my old fuddy duddy cell provider, I think. . .
Oh, really ?? You did, did ya' ??
Yes. I knew that LTE was being adopted by the rest of the world and that nowhere else had any serious plans for WiMAX buildout in addition to that.
It was common sense.
Why? Well, besides the obvious LTE coverage:
I live in Florida near I4 now (it was NJ), and Verizon has that blanketed with LTE. For some unknown reason in my house I'm lucky to get 2 bars of Edge signal on my AT&T iPhone. Yes. Edge. I'm sorry but that's just unacceptable. My work iPhone (Verizon) gets 3-4 bars of 3G consistently.
One of my common trips is from Florida to NJ and back along 95. I've had both Verizon and AT&T phones with me on that trip and where AT&T dropped to Edge a lot Verizon was still kicking on 3G.
So yes, if I fall off of LTE on Verizon it will be slower than falling from LTE to 3G on AT&T, but I think I'll take the chance to get away from Edge forever.
Oh, really ?? You did, did ya' ??
If you find articles from AI about Sprint adopting WiMAX you'll see a lot of people saying that LTE was the future.
When AT&T has something other than a nearly empty network with comparable LTE concurrent connections, then compare. Otherwise none of the tests are worth anything, even then it lost on upload. Let's see how the tests look in December.
1) Low saturation resulting in higher throughput is a positive, not a negative.
2) No one set of results is meaningful in and of itself. Even if it's the same time of day at the exact location it still doesn't mean anything as one tower does not a network make. Then add to the fact that the nearest tower might be far away or through interference compared to a competitor, you simply can't make anything but a limited anecdotal analysis about any of these broadband wireless tests.
Sprint was "first" with 4G...WIMAX...what a mess...they are now abandoning it.
Verizon was "first" with 4G LTE.....again....a mess...4 national outages since December. Also, they are focusing too much on the map....and not on the backend connections. Hence, latest PC World Tests are already showing AT&T's 4G LTE as faster:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25380...html#tk.hp_new
PCW's test itself is a mess. Everyone I know in LA and SF gets way above the figures shown on that map. Buddy gets at least 15mbps in LA on his Thunderbolt.
No surprise that every single person I know at my school who was on AT&T has jumped ship for Verizon in the past 2 years.
PCW's test itself is a mess. Everyone I know in LA and SF gets way above the figures shown on that map. Buddy gets at least 15mbps in LA on his Thunderbolt.
No surprise that every single person I know at my school who was on AT&T has jumped ship for Verizon in the past 2 years.
I agree. An "everyone I know" and "buddy" test is much more scientific, much less a mess.
I agree. An "everyone I know" and "buddy" test is much more scientific, much less a mess.
Except that I never said my anecdotes were actual, scientific data from which we could draw definitive conclusions, and my anecdotes were never "proof" to PCW's findings, which isn't even a real "report" really when you think about it.
But that aside, try reading the author's methodology. They asked each company for phones without really considering whether those phones would be truly representative of latency and download/upload speeds. Not really the most well thought out index when you think about it. People in the PCW comments are reporting really high speeds even using USB LTE modems.
Sprint was "first" with 4G...WIMAX...what a mess...they are now abandoning it.
Verizon was "first" with 4G LTE.....again....a mess...4 national outages since December. Also, they are focusing too much on the map....and not on the backend connections. Hence, latest PC World Tests are already showing AT&T's 4G LTE as faster:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25380...html#tk.hp_new
Hogwash- AT&T appears only faster because no one is on it.
Sprint was "first" with 4G...WIMAX...what a mess...they are now abandoning it.
Verizon was "first" with 4G LTE.....again....a mess...4 national outages since December. Also, they are focusing too much on the map....and not on the backend connections. Hence, latest PC World Tests are already showing AT&T's 4G LTE as faster:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25380...html#tk.hp_new
I use AT&T LTE in NYC and its really fast. Dunno what the iPad can do with 29Mb/s. like others said, I hope it stays that way because they were kind enough to grandfather in to LTE my $30/mo of unlimited data. They haven't throttled me yet either and I use the sling player all the time.
What people fail to understand is Sprint had to use WiMax at the time because there was no LTE equipment ready at the time and the FCC put a condition on selling the spectrum to Sprint/Clear that a certain number of towers using the 2.5Ghz spectrum had to be in use by a certain date. So Sprint had to either install WiMax or lose that spectrum.
It actually will work out well in the end since the conversion to LTE is relatively inexpensive thanks to network vision. Switching WiMax towers over to LTE is far cheaper than starting from scratch. But please don't tell me that LTE is in any way superior to WiMax because it really isn't. If Verizon had all those 800Mhz LTE towers running the latest version of WiMax vers. 2 you would see similar speeds. WiMax is serving around 800 million people around the world as we speak. It can also work well as a backhaul solution for LTE networks.
On a side note, I live in one of these cities where Verizon just turned on their LTE switch. Even though AT&T wireless is headquartered in Atlanta, Verizon sure kicks their butts in coverage here in Georgia. The seven largest cities in the state now all have LTE while AT&T only offer it in Atlanta and Athens. Not to mention pretty much the entire state was covered with decent 3G speeds on Verizon where AT&T has far more areas of EDGE or no coverage at all than 3G.
Also as a few others have pointed out, current speedtest numbers don't mean jack. Wait until around this time next year after many people have upgraded to an iPhone LTE and many other Android LTE phones and the networks are really used and then you can compare numbers. And then a few years after that when everyone, even the flip phones, are using LTE for voice and I am pretty sure speeds will slow down quite a lot. Sufficient backhaul is the key to high speeds and all carriers tend to go cheap on backhaul.