A guy that works for at&t perception of verizon

[IOWA]

Wow, would this person happen to also be a loyal tea party supporter? Seems to have about the same logic and common sense as Palin

While I'm not a card carrying Tea Partier, I do support their goals.

And FYI, most tea partiers don't like Palin either.

Still not the politica forum.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[byteware]

Still not the politica forum.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

understood... and I apologize.

It just gets me that some people are bigoted like that against people with different political views.

Again, I apologize.

 

[IOWA]

Still not the politica forum.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

understood... and I apologize.

It just gets me that some people are bigoted like that against people with different political views.

Again, I apologize.

Yeah bothers me too. Especially ironic from people who call themselves "liberals". But, oh well. ATT stinks, and that's what matters in this thread.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[sergey]

Yes because personal perception and relativity which is often influenced by bias and personal preference is so much more reliable than scienticfic data.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

Scientific or not, for me Verizon > AT&T. Sorry I have no data, I guess my "perception" and "bias" that I can now make calls and surf the web is highly inaccurate and I should have stuck with AT&T/iPhone. But since I'm paying for the network, I think it is worth it based on my experiences. I don't give a damn what you say.

 

[Lemurion]

I've worked for AT&T, and used both services.

In my own experience, AT&T has an inferior implementation of a superior technology; while Verizon has a superior implementation of an inferior technology. AT&T can do things Verizon can't, simultaneous voice and data being one, and higher speeds being another. The problem comes from the fact that the average overall performance most AT&T consumers see provides an inferior experience.

That's what really matters.

 

[IOWA]

I've worked for AT&T, and used both services.

In my own experience, AT&T has an inferior implementation of a superior technology; while Verizon has a superior implementation of an inferior technology. AT&T can do things Verizon can't, simultaneous voice and data being one, and higher speeds being another. The problem comes from the fact that the average overall performance most AT&T consumers see provides an inferior experience.

That's what really matters.

This statement is incorrect. See my sig for why cdma pwns gsm.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[Lemurion]

This statement is incorrect. See my sig for why cdma pwns gsm.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

AT&T uses W-CDMA (UMTS), while Verizon uses CDMA2000.

W-CDMA not only allows higher transfer rates, but also allows simultaneous voice and data over W-CDMA, not simply GSM voice and W-CDMA data. It's this capability, which AT&T has and Verizon lacks that makes AT&T's technology superior.

It can do something Verizon can't.

However, AT&T has squandered that advantage because their network isn't as good - so for most consumers Verizon provides a better experience.

Please note: at no time in my original post did I mention either CDMA or GSM.

 

[IOWA]

AT&T uses W-CDMA (UMTS), while Verizon uses CDMA2000.

W-CDMA not only allows higher transfer rates, but also allows simultaneous voice and data over W-CDMA, not simply GSM voice and W-CDMA data. It's this capability, which AT&T has and Verizon lacks that makes AT&T's technology superior.

It can do something Verizon can't.

However, AT&T has squandered that advantage because their network isn't as good - so for most consumers Verizon provides a better experience.

Please note: at no time in my original post did I mention either CDMA or GSM.

Correct. You didn't mention it.

And a CDMA Voice & Data is already being tested for deployment:

http://www.evdoinfo.com/content/view/2861/64/

That, plus the emergence of 4G networks, quashes this thing that maybe 2% of users use currently, but I can see a great demand for it in the future.

And CDMA carriers need to deploy REV B already....

TIA-856 Rev. B
EV-DO Rev. B is a multi-carrier evolution of the Rev. A specification. It maintains the capabilities of EV-DO Rev. A, and provides the following enhancements:
Higher rates per carrier (up to 4.9 Mbit/s on the downlink per carrier). Typical deployments are expected to include 2 or 3 carriers for a peak rate of 14.7 Mbit/s. Higher rates by bundling multiple channels together enhance the user experience and enables new services such as high definition video streaming.
Reduced latency by using statistical multiplexing across channels -enhances the experience for latency sensitive services such as gaming, video telephony, remote console sessions and web browsing.
Increased talk-time and standby time
Reduced interference from the adjacent sectors especially to users at the edge of the cell signal which improves the rates that can be offered by using Hybrid frequency re-use.
Efficient support for services that have asymmetric download and upload requirements (i.e. different data rates required in each direction) such as file transfers, web browsing, and broadband multimedia content delivery.

 

[Lemurion]

Everyone I know with an AT&T smartphone does use simultaneous voice/data - it's a very handy feature to have.

 

[IOWA]

Everyone I know with an AT&T smartphone does use simultaneous voice/data - it's a very handy feature to have.

I'm going to LOL @ this and move on. Most people didn't even know it existed until the ATT Ad campaign.

 

[3devious]

I'm going to LOL @ this and move on. Most people didn't even know it existed until the ATT Ad campaign.

Yes, but you gotta admit that it would be nice to pretend to be paying attention to someone while you're playing Parallel Kingdom. Hey, I had a layover in Chicago on Tuesday and planted some flags. Go find 'em, IOWA.

When AT&T showed me that I could be playing networked games while people are talking to me on my phone, my life felt somewhat emptier.

I want to be able to "listen" to people and throw in the occasional "uh huh" while I am getting beat down by someone who has only been in the game for 2 days. When I yell "DAMN IT!" and they ask what the matter is, I can say "I can't believe you got fired/dumped/hit by a car."

See how much more attentive and caring of a person I could be if I had AT&T!?

 

[Lemurion]

Yes, but you gotta admit that it would be nice to pretend to be paying attention to someone while you're playing Parallel Kingdom. Hey, I had a layover in Chicago on Tuesday and planted some flags. Go find 'em, IOWA.

When AT&T showed me that I could be playing networked games while people are talking to me on my phone, my life felt somewhat emptier.

I want to be able to "listen" to people and throw in the occasional "uh huh" while I am getting beat down by someone who has only been in the game for 2 days. When I yell "DAMN IT!" and they ask what the matter is, I can say "I can't believe you got fired/dumped/hit by a car."

See how much more attentive and caring of a person I could be if I had AT&T!?

You could also be forwarding emails - checking directions online - you know, little things like that.

I like my current Verizon service better than AT&T, but simultaneous voice and data is the one thing I do miss.

 

[3devious]

I don't really do anything useful with my phone's internet connection, but I agree that people who actually do that sort of thing (like use it as a tool vs a toy that happens to have a phone in it) would like that.

I wasn't really trying to make fun, but that is probably what would happen if I had simultaneous voice and data.

 

[IOWA]

You could also be forwarding emails - checking directions online - you know, little things like that.

I like my current Verizon service better than AT&T, but simultaneous voice and data is the one thing I do miss.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not denying it's a useful feature. It definitely is very useful. But it's not something most people utilize. In fact, Most of ATT's network you can't even do Voice + Data on. Doesn't work on EDGE, only 3G. So as Sprint's and eventually VZW's 4G grows, they can make the same claims of ATT & Tmo of simultaneous voice + data, in fact, Sprint already can, if they wanted to.

 

[3devious]

Now you aren't being fair. Just because you can't always do VOICE on AT&T doesn't mean that we should feel badly about ourselves. If I were smarter, I'd never answer the phone and just use the excuse that I have AT&T. Now, I don't answer and tell people that I can't afford it. Instead of giving me that condescending nod because I am poor, I just get a ruefull smirk because they think I am cheap.

 

[IOWA]

Now you aren't being fair. Just because you can't always do VOICE on AT&T doesn't mean that we should feel badly about ourselves. If I were smarter, I'd never answer the phone and just use the excuse that I have AT&T. Now, I don't answer and tell people that I can't afford it. Instead of giving me that condescending nod because I am poor, I just get a ruefull smirk because they think I am cheap.

Sorry, but you should know I don't always play fair.

But in my defense, neither do you.

 

[ekyle]

I had never even heard of U-Verse until a few days ago. AT&T doesn't offer anything in my area except poor 3G

 

[bigbadwulff]

I fired AT&T about 6-7 years ago. The average person just figured AT&T out about a year or so ago.
All I can say is it took Europe quite a few years to figure out what Hitler was up to also...