I wonder whether AT&T’s preponderance of data-hungry iPhones on its network skews the results any.

Reply to this: comment | thread

please inform that i will be plaesed if you try to contact me becouse i work like a communication engineer please try to support me technical and thanks alot if you try to contact by using me email adress.

not that i work in 3g wireless feild so i ask for you help by sending me some quality management .
BR,
eng/ youssef omer

Reply to this: comment | thread

i have at&t and i have amazing 3G speed in baltimore but its just ok in long island and in NYC.

Reply to this: comment | thread

No duh ATT is gonna be slower with 8153 vs 856 testers from verizon
you also have to include the iphone into this, the iphone uses much more data than any cell phone out there, of course its gonna be slower in the ATT network because the traffic is much heavier through their network vs verizon.

Reply to this: comment | thread

AT&T doesn’t have 3G at all around here.  So the iphone speed is extremely slow.  My Droid just tested at 2208k down and 652k up.  Iphone is maybe 100k down.  Area’s like that will lower the iphone average.

Reply to this: comment | thread

What is really crappy, is how AT&T is going after this HUGE marketing campaign saying that Verizon is slower, and how good and fast AT&T is. What a bunch of lies. I have AT&T with the good old iPhone but sure wish I could be on Verizon’s larger, faster network.

Maybe AT&T is faster in theory but once you load millions of smart phone users on it, their network just can’t take the load and suffers. I travel across the country and some areas are worse than others. An example is Seattle. You think the larger metro areas would be fine. Not usually!

Reply to this: comment | thread

There’s a reason Verizon hasn’t used these results in any ad campaigns. They know the results are useless because the study is so flawed. It relied on the user to submit their carrier and network type. The results can be skewed if indignant or less knowledgable customers claim they are on 3G when they are really on EDGE, or if fanboys claim to be on 3G when they are really on WiFi.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Verizon’s network is not larger or faster buddy, it has less data usage so it appears faster. But in reality if you took every iPhone and put it on Verizon their network would run 10 times slower than AT&T’s.AT&T isn’t lieing and neither is Verizon, the problem is that the iPhone was way too much way to fast and nobody could have compensated fast enough to handle the boom without getting a bad rap. Both carriers have roughly 80 million customers and I work for AT&T i’m know plenty of our customers go to Verizon when they get pissed but we get just as many coming from Verizon complaining about service and coverage. It depends on where you live and what device you have and each company is going to have people for and against it.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Verizon does not have 3G. Their so called “3G” is equivalent to that of AT&T’s EDGE Network. Verizon just didn’t call it EDGE because it made it sound like AT&T was farther ahead in the game. So they call their’s 3G as well. They used to use CDMA internet towers and now switched to “3G”. That’s why they have a larger 3G network because its just EDGE speeds. And the iPhone does skew the data so the data is not useful. And 8000 compared to 900 testers will obviously skew the data too. Think about it, more people use AT&T so it has to go slower to support all of them. Only 900 people testing Verizon. Obviously it is going to seem faster. But it isn’t. And Verizon destroyed whatever chnce they had at getting the iPhone by cancelling unlimited data which is a requirement by the iPhone and Apple. That is where Apple gets a lot of their money. AT&T makes close to nothing on selling iPhones. But they will sell them because you get customers that way and is a good business practice to gain more customers.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Wow.  What a bunch of cr@p.  All the lamers defending AT&T’s horrible 3G networks.  The argument is “well, it’s because of the iPhone users, so it just LOOKS like it’s slower.”  OMG, the only thing that counts in this is how fast is the network on your phone.  Not the theoretical speed, but the actual speed!
Verizon IS faster.  It’s that simple.  The low response from AT&T users is most likely because they got so frustrated trying to use the web page that they stopped!
It’s like saying that I5 in Los Angeles is a faster highway than I70 in Wyoming because it’s six lanes!
Holy cow people, THINK.

Reply to this: comment | thread

AT&T’s speed looks pretty bad there. Kinda strange. I’m in San Francisco, said to be the second worst AT&T 3G city in the country. I just testing my 3G speed and got 3,454 kbps down. Thats almost twice what they tested with Verizon.

Reply to this: comment | thread

You’re right! Although at&t needs to expand there 3G coverage area their 3G HSPA is faster that anyone of the other 3 major carrier’s 3G. I’ve ran a 3G test on my iphone 3Gs and gotten up to 3400kbs. Now on my At&t 3G HSPA mini card for my Dell studio 15, I’ve gotten up to 4100kbs down, and 1100kbs up. It’s ridiculous that people would lie about speeds. I’m upset about some of At&t’s coverage too but not to lie about it. CDMA carriers; however, cover the rural areas a lot better for EVDO 3G but are no match for the speeds of 3G HSPA of At&t. T-mobile’s 3G is actually faster that CDMA EVDO 3G. It’s the technology, plus the tier of the network.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Don’t get me wrong though, Verizon has some pretty fast speeds, they also have more 3G coverage than At&t. They win the support and business of many rural #1 and metro customers. Great move for them when they acquired the majority of the rural Alltel Sites, same technology, less cost to expand.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Hey I live in the sticks no dsl no cable! DAIL UP-36.6 kbps or Satellite hughesnet-wildblue well I must say I have only two bars on my Verizon MIFI and we get constantly 1-1.2 mps. download and 100-130 upload which is awesome for us!

Reply to this: comment | thread

Course! When you stay in the sticks, you will almost always do essentially well with Verizon or Sprint which are both CDMA Qualcomm carriers.  There CDMA services of these carriers are identical in technology. The may not out perform GSM 3G but the offer more HIGH-SPEED data coverage making them better for people living in rural areas.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Well I am happy with my internet for now I would like $50 for unlimited from 9mps dsl, but I also like to go target shooting in my back yard with out police being called! lol

Reply to this: comment | thread

Ha ha ha I have to agree with you there. Why lose when you can gain with an alternative. I’m doing almost the same thing that you are for service right now. I live in a very small town. Get ready though, Verizon is rolling out their LTE network as we speak. They already have it in some areas and plan to cover their entire wireless map with this type of 4G. It is supposed to be way faster that DSL or cable, giving you over 5 mbps upstream and 12 mbs downstream with low latency and quick response. When living in rural areas, you have fewer people on a basestation giving you more spectrum and speed.

Reply to this: comment | thread

LOL. This made me laugh because this info is so false. Verizon even stated that they were a little slower than AT&T.
The REAL results are:
Verizon: 2.02 MB/s
AT&T 5.06 MB/s

Reply to this: comment | thread

U know Verizon Data Speed SUCKS! Try 0.5Mbps vs AT&T of 3.0Mbps ... Verizon is LYING ... and does not plan to do anything with their Crappy 3G network.  And AT&T is even bigger manuplator and lier for telling us that everyone is happy with their 2G limit ... what a crock!

Reply to this: comment | thread

I know that Verizon CDMA is slow. Check my first post. I’ve seen 5 megs downstream with at&t on my hspa mini card. All I was saying was CDMA EVDO is more widespread because it’s cheaper for them to upgrade. It cost at&t more. I tested evdo and hspa side by side. At&t wins. Check context before you attack man. More speed, less ping, the better. However, at&t has the most spectrum but let it shine. CDMA EVDO is more reliable at the time for a traveler or someone who lives in a rural area. At&t only give hspa to for metro area. That’s supposed to change this year. Let’s see? They still need to do something about those weak data plans. By the way check out the high latency ping version has on speedtest. I’ve see an average of 300 ms. That is horrible for remote desktop and voice over ip call. At&t works fine for both. I made a 60 mile ride voip call with at&t. It was perfect. With Verizon, you are a sentence and a half late after you start talking again. LTE has lower latency.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Check out my post to the other guy on our three topics.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Listen everyone has there own opinion , I know for a fact that where I live verizon is the best for me I have checked out everything. It all depends on where you live. If I lived close to a city I would not worry about internet Id use roadrunner or dsl.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Do you know why, it is better why you live. HSPA for At&t is connected to the broadband backbone. When you live in a rural are, you are not connected to this backbone, no advance data services. It costs them lots of money for these upgrades. There technology costs more than Sprint and Verizon’s Qualcomm technology which is cheaper to upgrade. It’s usually just a software upgrade and more broadband feed from their partners to widen the pipes. CDMA EVDO is more widespread and reliable that HSPA. You will usually find this to be the better choice for rural areas. Even if you can get GSM service in rural areas with full signal bars, they don’t offer 3G there because it costs them more that it does CDMA EVDO carriers like SPRINT AND VERIZON. I don’t want to argue with you. I just want you to know WHY. I know from working with different companies and vendors. I’ve seen the hardware, processors, much much more. You have signals, channels, distance, voltage dbm, frequencies. I’m not perfect and don’t claim to know everything. The time it takes for a round trip response from a CDMA EVDO data transmission is usually very high. That is latency. That causes a lag in gaming, VOIP calling, remote desktop, and other things that rely on responsiveness. That is the capacity of the networks technology. HSPA 3G of GSM has far less latency than this. EDGE and GPRS of GSM has high latency from travel distances and other factors. I’ve used them all. I’ve worked with several companies and vendors. This is not a debate. If you live is a non GSM 3G area. EVDO would likely be better. It wouldn’t cost them as much to put a base station in the woods or desert or whatever than it would T-mobile and at&t. GSM goes for the ares of population where they can make the money back to pay for that hardware and spectrum. By the way, DSL, Cable, and other companies sell broadband to carriers to widen the pipe at times.  At&t owns a big portion of the broadband spectrum. They own most of the telephone lines telephone poles, and telecommunication all together. The smaller companies have to pay them to get paid. They make you learn the history of these companies when you have certain titles. Thanks man for your post. Take care.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Do you know WHY it is better where you live? I often came to a small town where my relatives lived. The GSM network was very old and degraded. I know exactly what the problem was. I cannot post how I knew. several days later after a report technicians were repairing there and upgraded the backhaul because new oil and gas companies and other businesses moved in and overloaded the degraded network. Everybody complained but didn’t know what to say.  Thousands complained, but didn’t know. HSPA for At&t is connected to the broadband backbone of at&t’s network. When you live in a rural are, you are not connected to this backbone, no advance data services. It costs them lots of money for these upgrades. There technology costs more than Sprint and Verizon’s Qualcomm technology which is cheaper to upgrade. It’s usually just a software upgrade and more broadband feed from their partners to widen the pipes. CDMA EVDO is more widespread and reliable that HSPA. You will usually find this to be the better choice for rural areas. Even if you can get GSM service in rural areas with full signal bars, they don’t offer 3G there because it costs them more than it does CDMA EVDO carriers like SPRINT AND VERIZON. I don’t want to argue with you. I just want you to know WHY. I know from working with different companies and vendors. I’ve seen the hardware, processors, much much more. You have signals, channels, distance, voltage dbm, frequencies. I’m not perfect and don’t claim to know everything. The time it takes for a round trip response from a CDMA EVDO data transmission is usually very high. That is latency. That causes a lag in online gaming, VOIP calling, remote desktop, and other things that rely on responsiveness. Latency is different from transfer rate speed. It’s responsiveness. That is the capacity of the networks technology combined with spectrum. HSPA 3G of GSM has far less latency than this. EDGE and GPRS of GSM both have high latency from travel distances and other factors. I’ve used them all. I’ve worked with several companies and vendors. This is not a debate. If you live is a non GSM 3G area. EVDO would likely be better choice for mobile broadband. It wouldn’t cost them as much to put a base station in the woods or desert or whatever than it would T-mobile and at&t. GSM carriers go for the ares of heavily populated area first where they can make the money back to pay for that expensive hardware and spectrum. Then they start filling the gaps. By the way, DSL, Cable, and other companies sell broadband to carriers to widen the pipe at times. They feed right into their backhaul.  At&t owns a big portion of the broadband spectrum in the United States. They own most of the telephone lines telephone poles, and telecommunication all together. The smaller companies have to pay them to get paid, because they have to use these lines and spectrum. I don’t mean to ramble on, I just want you to know why. The HSPA 3G+ technology that AT&T and T-Mobil have today is capable of out performing CDMA EVDO. Just look a the HSPA+ that T-mobile and At&t are using. T-mobile is willingly by incorrectly calling it 4G, but it give the 4th generation for their speeds. All the did is put more broadband spectrum, provisioned it with software, and widened the pipe to let more flow to the people through the same HSPA technology of before. That’s because because the hardware was never being use at it’s maximum capacity from the beginning of it.
Now, do you remember CDMA 1xrtt, then came EVDO Rev 0 in the year 2000 which was CDMA first mobile broadband? Then they upped it to EVDO Rev A giving about a meg and a half more, and called it 3G. This is what you are using.  I know for a fact, and could bet on it, that you and no one has ever pulled 5 mbs downstream on it, because it can barely pull that on a good day what just a hand full of people on a particular tower with a speed burst. On average, you will get 1.4 mbs. The can every once in a while get a good 2.25 mbs and hold it for about 30 seconds before the fluctuation hits. I have both services for different ares. HSPA is more powerful. Even if you feed more spectrum into
an EVDO A network, it’ wouldn’t increase the speed for on person, it would just support more users per base station. EVDO A can give much more and the EVDO A radio in your device cannot pull much more beyond that burst capacity. They would have to create and distribute new hardware, (chips and radios.) That’s where Verizon’s LTE and Sprint’s WIMAX comes in…

That is why.
They make you learn the history of these companies when you have certain titles. Thanks man for your post. Take care.
I won’t be so long winded next time. This was just to prove a point. Marketing goes for the thinking pocket, not the brain. If someone tells me their’s is better, I ask them WHY.

Reply to this: comment | thread

I’ve been trying to say It’s form the books, studies, and tests. People will walk in a store and buy anything if you put a 3 and a G on it., but many people hate to read. That is why the truth is buried in books. Marketers know this. When a company says 3G, its the 3rd generation of their own technology, “what they call it.”  An old woman said to me the other day, “You know, the people here are so F’n stupid that I could probably s*** in a bag, wrap it in a pretty enough package and sell it to get rich. They probably buy it because they do care what’s inside, just how good the outside looks. That’s why people get robbed by clean cut red blooded white collar con artist. What do they usually say? “he didn’t look like the type to me.”  Not knowing that the con is in the mind. I walk in Retail store and hear tell people, “I don’t know. I just sell’em. This is 3G though” The people say, okay, that’s what I want then cause it looked good on tv. They don’t even ask about the bandwidth limited. They just complain about the charges later, IF they even notice it on the bill.

You are right! That 2 GB limit sucks. That’s why I’m glad that I’ve grandfathered over with my unlimited plan. I can tell that you know what you are talking about, if you’ve seen the difference first hand. I know you can’t tell the speed difference GON. That is what I’ve tried to explain to ROY

Reply to this: comment | thread