Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Testing 3G Networks Across the US

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the can-you-hear-me-now dept.

Wireless Networking 108

PCWorld recently tested the 3G networks of AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint in 13 different cities across the US. They've now posted the results, which show that Sprint and Verizon are neck-and-neck for reliability, while AT&T has consistently higher upload rates. From the article: "Across more than 20 testing locations in each of the 13 cities we tested, Verizon had an average download speed of 951 kbps. Verizon demonstrated good reliability, too; the network was available at a reasonable and uninterrupted speed in 89.8 percent of our tests. Sprint's 3G network delivered a solid connection in 90.5 percent of our 13-city tests. Sprint's average download speed of 808 kbps across 13 cities wasn't flashy (at that speed, a 1MB file downloads in 10 seconds), but dependability is an important asset. The Sprint network performed especially well, both in speed and in reliability, in our test cities in the western part of the United States. The AT&T network's 13-city average download speed in our tests was 812 kbps. Its average upload speed was 660 kbps. Reliability was an issue in our experience of the AT&T system: Our testers were able to make a connection at a reasonable, uninterrupted speed in only 68 percent of their tests." What have you noticed about the various carriers in your city?

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Help! My Computer is on fire! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586083)

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality,' which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

  • Linus Torvalds [microsoft.com] is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
  • Richard M. Stallman [geocities.com] , spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
  • Alan Cox [microsoft.com] is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual [goatse.fr] propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail [microsoft.com] , which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted [salon.com] on leftist commie propaganda site Salon.com as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo [comp-u-geek.net] slut [rotten.com] !

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual [goatse.fr] perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children [slashdot.org] . To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis [rotten.com] in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual [goatse.fr] terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual [goatse.fr] lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware [redhat.com] distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual [goatse.fr] practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake [slackware.com] product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals [goatse.fr] preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, [mandrake.com] an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis [rotten.com] , glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual [goatse.fr] 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual [goatse.fr] practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat [debian.org] is secret homo [comp-u-geek.net] slang for the tip of a penis [rotten.com] that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other [comp-u-geek.net] automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously/anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no/opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherit gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows [amiga.com] users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

Even the title 'Slashdot [geekizoid.com] ' originally referred to a homosexual [goatse.fr] practice. Slashdot [kuro5hin.org] of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals [goatse.fr] who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, http://www.eff.org/ [eff.org] .

The editors of Slashdot [slashduh.org] also have homosexual [goatse.fr] names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement [pboy.com] . (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis [rotten.com] discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot [notslashdot.org] runs on Apache!

The Apache [microsoft.com] server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual [goatse.fr] activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS [apple.com] is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'

FEEDBACK

What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo [comp-u-geek.net] -calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual [goatse.fr] child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus [slashdot.org] , Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina [bodysnatchers.co.uk] to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator [hitler.org] .

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson [rotten.com] causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism [zillabunny.com] .

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h [slashdot.org] , Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 [xbox.com] sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT [linux.com] is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church [atheism.org] . Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man [stileproject.com] . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee [slashdot.org] , Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl [python.org] (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

One scary thing about Perl [sun.com] is that it contains hidden homosexual [goatse.fr] messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual [goatse.fr] queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

And PHP [perl.org] stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase [slashdot.org] , Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual [goatse.fr] Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord [atheism.org] 's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation [slashdot.org] . Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity [catholic.net] that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman [geocities.com] .

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the fuck?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos [comp-u-geek.net] tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck right off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD [linux.org] , which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain [icopyright.com] . You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL [apple.com] (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted [rotten.com] cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat [adultmember.com] , but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual [goatse.fr] practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

Current changes: This version sent to FreeWIPO [slashdot.org] by 'Bring BackATV' as plain text. Reformatted everything, added all links back in (that we could match from the previous version), many new ones (Slashbot bait links). Even more spelling fixed. Who wrote this thing, CmdrTaco himself?

Previous changes: Yet more changes added. Spelling fixed. Feedback added. Explanation of 'distro' system. 'Mount Point' syntax described. More filth regarding `man` and Slashdot. Yet more fucking spelling fixed. 'Fetchmail' uncovered further. More Slashbot baiting. Apache exposed. Distribution licence at foot of document.

ANUX -- A full Linux distribution... Up your ass!

And then the commercials (4, Informative)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586099)

So based on the results of this test, I think we can expect commercials from all three carriers claiming that they are the fastest* 3g network around with the best reliability**.

Even as an owner of an iphone who knew what he was getting, Apple/ATT's commercials really get under my skin with their claims regarding the speed/capabilities of the phone. Of course, they get away with it with a 0.3 mS flash of text that informs us that the performance was artificially shortened. Comcast is another company whose commercials strike me as pure lies and misinformation based on a grain of truth***.

*For some definitions of fast
**The network will reliably not cause your phone to collapse into a singularity.
***Results from Brooklyn Bridge Sales LLC.

Re:And then the commercials (3, Interesting)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586141)

When I had AT&T, reliability was a problem. First, the 3G network wasn't as mature as it is now, so upload/download speeds were only slightly greater than EDGE (usually 400 kbps or so). Second, and most concerning, was that I frequently had issues getting HSDPA service; I was often on the EDGE (2G) network, which was disappointing considering how much I would have been paying for it.

Needless to say, I only had AT&T for less than the 14-day trial period. I tested all of this on a Treo 750.

Re:And then the commercials (2, Interesting)

sycodon (149926) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586339)

I have AT&T for my cell phone. Even though I live in a major urban area, it drops calls all the time. Their service and coverage sucks.

Re:And then the commercials (1)

spineboy (22918) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586605)

I live in Los Angeles, and have AT&T, and rarely if ever, have dropped calls. I get good coverage everywhere.

Now what are we supposed to do with this anecdotal data? The question seems poorly thought out.

Re:And then the commercials (4, Interesting)

sycodon (149926) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586667)

Ha!

The only thing you can do when in a two year contract. Bitch and moan.

BTW,
I can be in the middle of a call, stopped...not moving, 5 bars, great connection. Then nothing. Signal gone, can't connect again.

Seems like a brown out type of thing. I bet they don't have enough capacity.

Bad SIM can cause dropped calls (2, Interesting)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587389)

Not sure if this is your issue, but I had the same problem and I live in the Dallas / Fort Worth area. They tend to have excellent coverage. The problem was with my sim card. The contacts erode or become corroded or the card itself becomes warped. Replacing it resolved my drop calls issue. The AT&T folks may squawk but you can usually get a replacement for free if you suspect it's faulty.

Re:And then the commercials (3, Insightful)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586265)

Comcast is another company whose commercials strike me as pure lies and misinformation based on a grain of truth

As a general rule of thumb never trust claims made in an advertisement. One of the great things about the Internet is that there are a plethora of sites out there that you can turn to get a better idea of how products and services really work. I rarely buy an expensive product or service these days without checking it out first.

Re:And then the commercials (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586313)

Even as an owner of an iphone who knew what he was getting, Apple/ATT's commercials really get under my skin with their claims regarding the speed/capabilities of the phone. Of course, they get away with it with a 0.3 mS flash of text that informs us that the performance was artificially shortened.

It doesn't bother you too much.

Even as an owner of an iphone who knew what he was getting

You still gave them money and that's really why they get away with it.

Re:And then the commercials (4, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586545)

Comcast is another company whose commercials strike me as pure lies and misinformation based on a grain of truth

Well, the problem is they advertise "speed" and "availability", neither of which are really decent metrics. Speed is a crap metric because it's a scalar (math) quantity, and most often is measured by peak, rather than average, or worst-case. And "Availability" depends entirely on the service level agreement. If the power goes out, does that count toward availability? No, because "they" can't control it. Routine maintenance on their network? Nope. Lightning strike? Nah. So they can say almost whatever they want and get away with it because of some clever word-play. You'll be careful to note that in these endless commercials about high speed internet from any company they're careful to never put any number in it except the phone number to call. So it's not so much that they're lying -- it's really more that they're speaking sweet nothings, which is perfectly legal (and disingenuous).

Us geeks know that network performance isn't a scalar (math) quantity. Bigger numbers don't mean shit. It's the matrix of bandwidth (in bytes), latency (in milliseconds), packet loss (a percentage), all averaged over a long enough time-frame (hour, day, week, month, or billing cycle) to account for all systemic variables (bandwidth caps, network load averages, etc) is what matters.

I suppose you could derive from this information a weighted index, but it would still be largely useless to the average consumer. The problem is when you get down to brass tacks, different users have different needs. A heavy game player's internet needs will likely be low bandwidth, but low latency. A few milliseconds of extra time, or a few lost packets, will make that user's experience very poor. Someone who has an internet-TV has a large need for bandwidth, but latency is not an issue (even if the transfer is delayed by hours it might not matter). And then there's the little old grandma who doesn't do anything but check her e-mail and read CNN. If it wasn't for latency problems, she could be using a modem and never know the difference between either. Especially if she installed Vista -- god, network latency is nothing when it takes 8 seconds to render the downloaded page.

Comcast delivers an acceptable experience to a certain class of internet users and has crafted their service accordingly. The problem is that this service isn't tiered or can be adapted to serve several different markets. There is only one service, one market, and if you don't like it--you may not have any other options. Comcast is constrained by a need to maximize profitability, minimize costs, and is using an infrastructure which they are unwilling (or unable) to modify to deliver an acceptable experience to a larger user-base. There's no competition in most of its markets, and hence no reason to invest in doing so. The lack of competition ensures that Comcast's prices will continue to inflate while the number of customers who receive an acceptable experience will fall.

The bandwidth caps being imposed now are not the (direct) result of TV-over-internet competing with its internet offering, and instead the logical result of a lack of competition with its internet service. Any business in the same position and market(s) as Comcast would be doing the exact same thing, because Comcast doesn't exist to bring internet to the masses, so we can all celebrate the information age and live in peace, tranquility, and gigabytes of free porn. They exist to make money for their shareholders.

And the reason why service is shit in so many parts of this country isn't because of Evil BigCorp and their profiteering ways, but rather;

a) Infrastructure costs are a very high barrier to entry into the market. The United States is a big place with a low population density (taken as a whole) compared to other geographical regions like, say, Japan. The cost per customer is higher because there's a lot more wire and equipment outlay costs.

b) Municipalities create a byzantine and very expensive approval process that takes a very, very long time to get through. Time is money in business, and as much as the equipment costs -- this administrative overhead costs a helluva lot more. This means you'd better have a LOT of money to get into, or expand, your market. Comcast has already laid out all of these funds -- and it had to deliver crappy service to pay for the tariffs imposed by an exceptionally long line of government agents who all wanted their say and their pound of flesh.

c) And last, frankly, who gives a crap about infrastructure in this country anyway. Don't we have bigger problems, like unemployment, roads that are falling apart, bridges falling down, a health care crisis brought on by the poor spending habits and planning of an entire generation, and paying how much to bomb how many countries with unpronouncable names again? Please -- internet is a low priority for our government, and it's constituent population.

Re:And then the commercials (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28588607)

"c) And last, frankly, who gives a crap about infrastructure in this country anyway. Don't we have bigger problems, like unemployment, roads that are falling apart, bridges falling down, a health care crisis brought on by the poor spending habits and planning of an entire generation, and paying how much to bomb how many countries with unpronouncable names again? Please -- internet is a low priority for our government, and it's constituent population."

Infrastructure IS KEY to the economy. A better infrastructure leads to a stronger economy and communication is the key to that, at the for front, the internet (which is conveniently tied to most other communication anyway). If we were to work on improving our infrastructure things would get better.

Re:And then the commercials (1)

falconwolf (725481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588867)

You'll be careful to note that in these endless commercials about high speed internet from any company they're careful to never put any number in it except the phone number to call. So it's not so much that they're lying -- it's really more that they're speaking sweet nothings, which is perfectly legal (and disingenuous).

I have a big problem with ComCast's ads and junk mail. One thing that bothers me is their ads saying they're faster than DSL. Sure theoretically cable can be faster, but on a shared line, if a bunch of people are using net access at the same tyme it will slow down. DSL though is a dedicated line. Now if cable cos were to upgrade to DOCSIS 3 [wikipedia.org] they would have faster speeds.

Comcast delivers an acceptable experience to a certain class of internet users and has crafted their service accordingly. The problem is that this service isn't tiered or can be adapted to serve several different markets. There is only one service, one market, and if you don't like it--you may not have any other options.

No, ComCast offers different business class access [comcast.com] plans.

Any business in the same position and market(s) as Comcast would be doing the exact same thing, because Comcast doesn't exist to bring internet to the masses

As a corporation with limited liability ComCast is supposed to serve the common or public good, that is the only reason businesses were given limited liability by incorporating. See this post of mine [slashdot.org] for more.

And the reason why service is shit in so many parts of this country isn't because of Evil BigCorp and their profiteering ways, but rather;

a) Infrastructure costs are a very high barrier to entry into the market.

It's expensive for landlines not for wireless. The expense with wireless is the licensing.

b) Municipalities create a byzantine and very expensive approval process that takes a very, very long time to get through.... Comcast has already laid out all of these funds -- and it had to deliver crappy service to pay for the tariffs imposed by an exceptionally long line of government agents who all wanted their say and their pound of flesh.

Companies like ComCast and ATT were given natural monopolies [wikipedia.org] , exclusive rights to the use of right of ways, by those governments. And even now those corporations are trying to stop competition.

c) And last, frankly, who gives a crap about infrastructure in this country anyway. Don't we have bigger problems, like unemployment, roads that are falling apart, bridges falling down, a health care crisis brought on by the poor spending habits and planning of an entire generation, and paying how much to bomb how many countries with unpronouncable names again? Please -- internet is a low priority for our government, and it's constituent population.

An improved infrastructure can help the economy, whether it's bridges, broadband, or roads. And the "health care crisis", if there is one, is because there is not a free market in health care. As for attacking other countries, many of us were against the attacks. Other's fell for the lies told to sell war. The Taliban asked to see evidence bin Laden had anything to do with 911 but was told to get lost. And Iraq was invaded because Saddam was supposed to have WMDs. Well I've been waiting to see them, but haven't yet.

Now I'm not saying nothing should have been done about either the Taliban or Saddam, something should have been done. Such as not having supported the Taliban and Saddam to begin with. Yes the US supported both throughout the 1980s. The US supported the Mujahideen in Afghanistan [wikipedia.org] after the Soviet invasion there. Once the Soviet left US support was ended, after which the Mujahideen fractured into compeating interests. And first Reagan then Bush Sr supported Saddam with arms. After it came out in 1988/9 that Saddam was using chemical weapons against other Iraqis they still supported him. US support for Saddam only ended when he ordered the invasion of Kuwait. And why did he do that? Because Kuwait was slant drilling [wikipedia.org] from Kuwait into Iraq [rense.com] .

Falcon

Put uploading into context please. (0, Troll)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586139)

"while AT&T has consistently higher upload rates" Unless you are tethered, and even if you are, the upload rate is largely secondary. Have fun tethering that i-phone, anyway...

Wait, I'm confused... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586153)

Wasn't the rest of the world supposed to love us if we voted for the Affirmative Action candidate?

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE56302A20090705?sp=true [reuters.com]

http://news.scotsman.com/world/Obama-assured-of-a-chilly.5429112.jp [scotsman.com]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aR7yfqUwTb4M [bloomberg.com]

Re:Wait, I'm confused... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28588267)

That's right. Trolling for Truth since 2005, baby!

Verizon wins (3, Informative)

Lulfas (1140109) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586165)

Looking at the charts, Verizon wins pretty handily unless you're in specific cities looking for a phone. They are the fastest downloader in 7 of the 13 spots, and most reliable in 7 of the 13 spots. Kind of funny that the home of the iPhone doesn't manage a decent reliability in any city besides Boston. Only thing they really lose on is upload speeds. Although, it is weird they didn't test in Los Angeles.

Re:Verizon wins (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586239)

I'm not sure any of them really "wins". They all show trouble maintaining even "one 9" in reliability - in fact only one of them made that - and just barely at that.

It doesn't surprise me in the least though, as I live in a city of 120,000 - in a housing development, not out in the boonies, and right up the street from my house is "no signal" even for voice calls. Coverage and reliability on these carriers in the US is always a problem and with scores between 68% and 90.5% all you can really infer from that is, "these folks really shouldn't even be selling this service until they have it working.". (Perhaps they should have it in beta still.)

Re:Verizon wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586527)

120K? That's barely more than a village.

Re:Verizon wins (1)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586563)

A village? How do you figure? The county I live has ~36k.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_County,_Indiana [wikipedia.org]

Re:Verizon wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586597)

It was a joke. The metro area I live in has 5.8 million as of 2008. I find it funny for someone to say 120K as if it's such a huge number that phone companies would be clamoring to provide high-expense service.

Re:Verizon wins (1)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587023)

If it's in a compact enough area, only a handful of towers would be enough to cover it all, ie a good profit to tower ratio.

Re:Verizon wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28591919)

I live in a 400-inhabitant town. The nearest "big" city (well, it's something like 5k inhabitants) is about 25 km away. Cell phones work perfectly with any of the three carriers we have in France.

Re:Verizon wins (1)

Solandri (704621) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586793)

I tossed the numbers into a spreadsheet and figured out the median stats. Kinda sucks that each carrier wins one category: Carrier: download / upload / reliabiliy Verizon: 909 / 415 / 87% Sprint: 794 / 391 / 90% AT&T: 745 / 660 / 82% I started weighting it by population of the metro area, but they're missing several major population areas and their samples probably represent a few towers, not the entire metro area. So I realized it would be of dubious value. But it does give a boost to Verizon (due to their great NYC result), while AT&T plummets (again, due to their poor NYC result).

Re:Verizon wins (2, Insightful)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587055)

The problem with NYC skewing the averages is that on average most people in the US aren't in NYC.

COMMUNISM NOW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586175)

For the dictatorship of the proletariat!

It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (5, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586177)

In a mobile culture like America's, we live a significant portion of our lives on the road. On holidays like today, we aren't, like 19th century Europeans, stuck in our hovels waiting for Ebenezer Scrooge to hand deliver a Christmas duck. Rather, we get out and drive, drive, drive all over this great, goddamned country.

So there's only so far 3G networks can take us if the coverage is only within city limits. When our cars are hooked up to cellular networks for data services, what good is it to have exceptional coverage in town when you're 100 miles from the next town? Empty spaces and big skies just prove how big this place really is, and it's all about living and moving and getting out there and getting to the next place that is what it's all about, man.

Get me some coverage in Yosemite. Death Valley. Appalachia. Crater Lake. Yellowstone. Shasta. Mt. McKinley. Grand Canyon. From Blaine, WA to Miami, FL. San Diego, CA to Eastport, ME. Cover it all and let us get on with really living in this great big country of ours.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586227)

I have to agree with this.

I have 3g where I work, but not where I live and rarely where I travel. At home I have a choice between at&t and verizon and both have speeds close to dial-up. This article is fine if you stay in one area most of the time, but many of us don't. I want to know if I'm going to stay connected for 300mi drive I take every couple weeks.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587031)

But you have to wonder, if a carrier were to have terrible coverage in the city, would it be reasonable to expect that the in-between stuff is horrible as well?

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

falconwolf (725481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589009)

But you have to wonder, if a carrier were to have terrible coverage in the city, would it be reasonable to expect that the in-between stuff is horrible as well?

Maybe, maybe not. Structures like buildings block airwaves, so larger cities have to have more towers in order to cover the same area. However in rural areas that's scarcely populated it may not be cost effective to erect enough towers for good coverage.

Falcon

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (4, Interesting)

satsuke (263225) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586253)

While to believe the commercials from the larger players, there will never be absolutely seamless coverage across the nation because ..

1. There are places nobody lives (or it's economically unfeasible to cover)
2. Transmit powers are 1/12 of what they were in the analog era
3. They can't just throw a tower up anywhere

Back when analog bag phones were the norm, I never found anyplace without coverage .. why? Because on analog they had a nominal 3 watt transmit power on the phone, which let you have towers dozens of miles apart and still get a reliable signal. Today's mobiles operate at .25 of a watt or less, and since the 3G spec devices currently at or becoming the norm are based on CDMA technology (CDMA or WCDMA/HS?PA), the transmit power will only go down based on the load of the tower. (Under CDMA, the transmit power decreases when the load rises, lowering the noise floor and allowing more devices on the tower, with the net effect of creating islands of service if the network has hot spots and they don't plan accordingly).

As far as towers and stuff are concerned, I remember reading an article from upstate new york about a stretch of state highway that had pristine views, and a very high mortality rate in the winter because nobody had cell service up that way. The local government bodies sued and cajoled the cell carriers to build coverage, but wouldn't let them put the tall towers up to allow service in an economically feasible way. Net result, no coverage and more death, but the view was still great.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (2, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587147)

The local government bodies sued and cajoled the cell carriers to build coverage, but wouldn't let them put the tall towers up to allow service in an economically feasible way. Net result, no coverage and more death, but the view was still great.

It's interesting to compare that attitude (on both the part of government and the providers) to how AT&T was originally created and managed by the Federal Government. Universal coverage was mandated, as were QOS standards, and the old AT&T put in service to all kinds of places that weren't remotely "economically feasible". That was the price of their monopoly, and by and large they lived up to that end of the bargain.

Of course, there were a lot of things our government handled more intelligently back then.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588303)

AT&T was originally created and managed by the Federal Government

Come on. They regulated and allowed it to operate as a de facto monopoly, but there's no sane way you could twist the facts of history and claim they created AT&T. Prior to 1885, AT&T was called Bell Telephone, which was named after its founder Alexander Graham Bell. Perhaps you've heard of him.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28590259)

AT&T was originally created and managed by the Federal Government

Come on. They regulated and allowed it to operate as a de facto monopoly, but there's no sane way you could twist the facts of history and claim they created AT&T. Prior to 1885, AT&T was called Bell Telephone, which was named after its founder Alexander Graham Bell. Perhaps you've heard of him.

Correct. Here's the helpful citation [wikipedia.org] . The government had nothing to do with the creation of the Bell Telephone Company. The breakup in 1984 was required by the government antitrust authority, but even then, suggesting that the government created AT&T is like saying that Monsanto created corn. Mmmm.... Maybe that's a bad analogy, but you know what I mean....

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28590787)

Yeah that is the northway of the Andirondack highway. I drove along it a few years ago, indeed there was essentially no coverage for like 50 miles.

          No, the problem was NIMBYs. Even in the AT&T days, AT&T would not have given you service if you said "I demand universal service.. no, you can't put up a pole.. oh wait, of course you can't dig to bury your cable. No no no, that microwave dish looks awful!" Verizon especially has been JONZING to cover that area,they offered to make cell sites that blended in with the trees, place them in locations where they weren't right in the view, etc., and were still told "no." Technically it's "economics", but it's not like they were being tightwads, it'd takes hundreds of sites to cover even the main road with the restrictions that were being placed on them, versus the low 10s otherwise. No cell co can be expected to spend 10-100x the cost to cover an area.

          Well, now after a snowstorm a few years ago that killed quite a few people (they'd go into the ditch, get buried, and not be able to call for help), now things are loosening up, and service is going up in that area. I haven't been back but reportedly some of it's covered now, with plan for (more or less) full coverage in the next few years.

"it's the spaces in between" (2, Informative)

zogger (617870) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586261)

That's exactly what this new network is for [slashdot.org] , where you have good normal cell or wifi coverage, it will use that, outside that coverage, it will be using the satellite.

Re:"it's the spaces in between" (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588337)

Yeah, great. Let's hear it for an additional 500msec (that's half a second) signal delay while your communication makes a 44K mile round trip to geosync orbit and back.

as opposed to.... (1)

zogger (617870) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588741)

...no signal, nothing? What's your solution at that point?

    My guess is, a lot of people will go for the service if it is affordable enough. Just another option when you have no cell or wifi coverage, using the same handset.

Re:"it's the spaces in between" (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589803)

Yeah, great. Let's hear it for an additional 500msec (that's half a second) signal delay while your communication makes a 44K mile round trip to geosync orbit and back.

"Ray, the sponge migrated about a foot and a half."

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586337)

I live just outside Palo Alto, CA.... in the heart of Silicon Valley, but a few miles W into the hills... Still flat land, but more "country". No 3G coverage at all... The network is a sham.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (2, Interesting)

ChrisStrickler (1157941) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586543)

I was in Yosemite for the last week, and my blackberry had no connection (T-Mobile). My friends had the rest of the big carriers. AT&T (iPhone) had antenna coverage but dropped almost every call within the first minute after connection. Verizon (Razr2) would show no connectivity but we could still make calls out and have them stay connected for 10-15 minutes (we ended up calling our wives/families in shifts on the verizon phone). The Sprint (Samsung flip) phone had data and sms/mms but couldn't make a call - even though it was showing full connectivity.

Hardest thing for me is the payment rates between them. The Verizon phone with 900 minutes and no SMS/MMS was $115 a month. The Sprint phone was $79.99 a month, 400 minutes including an unlimited data plan, AT&T was $100+ and my phone (T-Mobile) is $80 a month for two phones with 700 minutes and unlimited data/mms/sms/email.

Anecdotal evidence, but from my brother at the Grand Canyon, on the surface, everyone had connection (same situation, bunch of carriers) except for the MetroPCS/Cricket users. In the Canyon AT&T showed full connectivity but would not connect, Verizon still connected as did Sprint and T-Mobile, but all 3 dropped consistently.

My biggest concern is El Paso. At any random moment I lose data connectivity as I am randomly connected to an antenna in Mexico that charges roaming data on my plan (I have my phone setup to disconnect data if it detects it will be roaming for data). Also, there are periods of no signal for all 4 carriers across parts of Texas from El Paso into San Antonio, but getting outside of Houston towards Louisiana and it is actually worse.

zoning laws (1)

p51d007 (656414) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587231)

I'm sure the wacko-environmentalist will do anything they can to keep the 3g towers out of Yosemite, Death Valley and other "wilderness" places. Even if they make the towers look like trees, I'm sure there are some goofy regulations to keep "progress" out of these areas. Not to mention the payoffs the cellular carriers would have to pay to federal, state & local officials to get "permission" to install these. It's expensive, and they have to look at the cost vs benefit to install towers in places like that. Maybe we can get Obama to come up with a cellular "stimulas" plan LOL.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

ScottPhill (1532089) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587517)

I actually had AT&T service at Plateau Point, 6 miles down the Bright Angel Trail in the Grand Canyon a few weeks ago. It was spotty, but I was able to receive a call and send a few texts. I guess you can take that one off your list. ;)

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1, Troll)

dlevitan (132062) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588243)

Get me some coverage in Yosemite. Death Valley. Appalachia. Crater Lake. Yellowstone. Shasta. Mt. McKinley. Grand Canyon. From Blaine, WA to Miami, FL. San Diego, CA to Eastport, ME. Cover it all and let us get on with really living in this great big country of ours.

No. Please no more coverage in Yosemite or death valley or any other part of the "great outdoors". I go to these places to get away from everything - not to listen to some stupid idiot blabbering away on his cell phone. The only legitimate use of cell phones in parks is emergencies. The only way I'd be in agreement with cell phone companies providing coverage in national parks/forests is if they charge $100/minute for calls except 911, which would be routed to the local ranger station. They can even do a 50/50 split with the NPS - win-win-win situation for the NPS, cell phone companies, and the public.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

falconwolf (725481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589139)

No. Please no more coverage in Yosemite or death valley or any other part of the "great outdoors". I go to these places to get away from everything - not to listen to some stupid idiot blabbering away on his cell phone.

I may say the same about voice communications but not for data. I'd love to be able to hike in the "great outdoors" with my camera and when my cards got full be able to upload the photos to my server. I'd like to do the same thing when I'm offshore scuba diving. Sending data could prove useful but I don't see much use for calling someone to talk to them.

Falcon

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (1)

falconwolf (725481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588975)

Get me some coverage in Yosemite. Death Valley. Appalachia. Crater Lake. Yellowstone. Shasta. Mt. McKinley. Grand Canyon. From Blaine, WA to Miami, FL. San Diego, CA to Eastport, ME. Cover it all and let us get on with really living in this great big country of ours.

Oh, I agree. I love hiking, scuba diving, and photography and I'd love to be able to upload my photos to a server while out hiking or after I surface from a dive.

Falcon

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28590687)

So there's only so far 3G networks can take us if the coverage is only within city limits. When our cars are hooked up to cellular networks for data services, what good is it to have exceptional coverage in town when you're 100 miles from the next town?

You must have AT&T. They have these islands of 3G. Sprint has a small-ish network but has EVDO on all of it. Verizon had nearly 100% EVDO pre-Alltel purchase; Alltel had quite a lot of their network upgraded to EVDO as well. I've ridden ~900 miles between eastern Iowa and eastern Pennsylvania, and only lost EVDO for about 50 miles of it (but, about 40 miles of that was in one county that just got EVDO a few months ago, so now it'd be like 890 out of 900 miles having EVDO.)

Get me some coverage in Yosemite. Death Valley. Appalachia. Crater Lake. Yellowstone. Shasta. Mt. McKinley. Grand Canyon. From Blaine, WA to Miami, FL. San Diego, CA to Eastport, ME. Cover it all and let us get on with really living in this great big country of ours.

Well, these are national parks so any signal is from the outside. That said you can get EVDO now in Appalachia, Crater Lake, and Shasta, and basically right outside Yosemite, Yellowstone (except to the east) and Grand Canyon. Actually it looks like you could at least get 1X data from McKinley too. Look at Verizon, Sprint, ex-Alltel, US Cellular, etc.'s indicated data coverage (especially with EVDO roaming included), and be surprised at the glacial 3G progress of AT&T.

Re:It's not the cities, it's the spaces in between (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28592015)

Say what you will about the 19th century, but here in the 21st century, I'm pretty sure the Europeans have us beat in terms of coverage. And yes, they do have huge amounts of land mass too.

hsg1@earthlink.net (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586201)

I don't agree with the analysis, particularly in DC. There when I use my Verizon wirelsss connection through a BB used as the modem (perhaps a dedicated card is faster), download speeds for updates such as the recent MS patch averaged 15 kbps- 6 hours to download 270 MB. I also notice that when I do get the higher bandwidths discussed, it is extremely spikey- bursts to the high speeds then back to the lower bandwidths for the majority of the session. Data from the cell phones (uplink) is even worse- typically 12-90 kbps bandwidth delivered, with bursts to higher bandwidths. The real average seems to be closer to 30 kbps for consistent delivery upstream. Which is why you can't send VOIP from a cell phone over cellualr as it requires a floor closer to 50-80 kbps for something like Skype. Believe the delivered bandwidth is highly depenedent upon the number of users on a given tower and what they are sending. Have yet to see a consistent broadband connection delivered as its hyped by the provider.

So crap speeds? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586207)

So Australia actually has significantly faster 3G networks than America... Wow!

Re:So crap speeds? (1)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586233)

and likely with significantly better 3g coverage too.

Re:So crap speeds? (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587029)

Not really. Compare a coverage map for Telestra [gsmworld.com] , Australia's carrier with by far the widest coverage, and a map of Verizon's coverage [verizonwireless.com] .

Re:So crap speeds? (1)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587833)

there seems to be some gigantic gaps when enhanced services bit is highlighted from verizon, I'm sure out west the population might be sparse enough for them to not care, but still, eastern spots have people there.

and also, you've forgotten something, where do people typically live?

Your link [gsmworld.com] compared with, Where aussies live. [eb.com] Notice that in order to not get 3g coverage, you basically have to be more than about 200km+ into absolute nothingness of desert, that's an effort.(alternatively just standing near faraday cage equivalent works)

Now This map (with enhanced etc selected when you get there, 3g does broadband, mms etc) [verizonwireless.com] vs US population distribution [columbia.edu]

From the looks of the maps you've linked, in the US the moment you drive out of a major city you've lost reception for data etc, but will pick it up again when you pass another town. with AU it seems to be the case that you can drive a fair way into nothingness before your reception dies.

Re:So crap speeds? (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588407)

and also, you've forgotten something, where do people typically live?

No, that' was entirely my point. The original assertion was that Australia has better coverage, when realistically it doesn't have any better coverage once you get a certain distance from civilization than the US does. The only difference is that in the US, the pockets of "nowhere" tend to be scattered, whereas the pocket of nowhere in Australia is essentially one big chunk there in the middle. Same thing, though. northern Nevada and southeastern California are about the equivalent of central Australia. It's all dirt and rocks and snakes.

Re:So crap speeds? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589811)

So Australia actually has significantly faster 3G networks than America... Wow!

Yeah, set faces to stun. Australia also has only 20 million people living almost completely on one coast. Show me consistent signal in the Outback, and you'll have something to crow about.

This information is useless. (3, Insightful)

areusche (1297613) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586213)

This information is useless unless we as consumers can get to use our service to its fullest. I don't care if I have 5 solid meg wireless connection up and down if I fill up my monthly quota of 5gb data transfer. If the carriers were more transparent about the softcap I think everyone would appreciate it. Say something like "We have a 5gb limit on our service. This means that if you exceed 5gb of data consumption in a billing cycle your internet speed will be slowed down to 200kbps." To seriously believe this is still going on today confuses me to whits end.

My results on ATT (4, Interesting)

Savior_on_a_Stick (971781) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586235)

I use an HTC - ATT Tilt branded smartphone.
I'd like to point out that the testing methodology is not remotely suited to use in selecting a carrier.

Average is useless.

Verizon's has coverage that is far and away the fastest in areas not within major metropolitan areas, whereas ATT does not.

Sprint has traditionally been known as Highway Wireless, meaning that they tend to have excellent coverage along interstate highways, but when veering more than a mile or two from the highway in search of a late night fuel up, you'll lose signal much more frequently than with Verizon.

In the Portland Oregon metro area. Verizon does have the most granular coverage, and ATT has the fastest HSPDA speeds.
It should be noted that hspda speeds are significantly higher than vanilla 3g, and if speed is your primary criterion, 3g only phones are out of the running.

Granular coverage notwithstanding, ATT has the best voice and data coverage in my employer's physical locations in Portland.

However, my experiences do agree with the report with respect to ATT data dropouts.
The reason for the dropsouts seems to be prioritization of voice traffic over data at peak times.

ALL of the carriers have issues with capacity during peak times - like 5pm rush hour.
Because of the tight convergence of cell using driver along major arterials, and the towers that serve them, it's not unusual to drop a call when moving from cell to cell.
Data is no different in this regard, but added is the fact that consumers are more sensitive to inability to place a call than they are to data not flowing, hence the prioritization of voice.

On my commute route,

Re:My results on ATT (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586963)

Average is useless.

Yeah, when I see averages like this, I am reminded of a report I read on world population growth. It said the average age of the world's population is 26.4 years. It's a perfectly cromulent calculation for tracking long term shifts in birth rate, but it does say squat about how old any individual I meet will be. Same thing here with 3G speed. If AT&T's average bit rate went up by a significant amount over last year, you could confidently say their 3G data network is improving.... but I would still have had to step outside onto the sidewalk just to get even a half-assed connection at 100kbps where I used to work.

Combination of AT&T + NYC = screwed (2, Informative)

nigel999 (883244) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586247)

So the numbers verify: If you live in New York City and have AT&T, you have the worst 3G service of any carrier in that city.
Not only that, you have the worst service of any city that AT&T covers.
Not only that, you have the worst service that ANY carrier provides in any city.

Screwed.

Re:Combination of AT&T + NYC = screwed (4, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586279)

Not only that, you also have to live in New York City.

Re:Combination of AT&T + NYC = screwed (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586469)

And the light at the end of the tunnel is new jersey.

Re:Combination of AT&T + NYC = screwed (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587223)

And the light at the end of the tunnel is new jersey.

Light from the glowing toxic waste?

Re:Combination of AT&T + NYC = screwed (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586661)

That's been true since 1999. Posting anonymously for obvious reasons, as I used to work for AT&T.

Around the time they went back into the local market in '99, Verizon started making life very hard for AT&T customers in New York by blocking access to Verizon cell towers.

Since Verizon has local utility rights on the rooftops, they get certain extra leeway in the coverage.

Put simply, you're never going to get good AT&T coverage in New York as long as Verizon holds all the cards.

European Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586315)

Hi!
I just know from Portugal... they spend millions on the 2G/3G/3G+/and others... but it never works well in every place, in the cities... they try but they never had capacity... and this is a very very small country and the operators don't have to pay high license fees to the goverment, so they can focus in the coverage and making a good service.

BITch (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586345)

dyi8g. All major was after a long

VZ software not so hot, network fine (1)

anomaly65 (765909) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586369)

you can get much better performance out of VZ's network if you change your connection settings. it defaults to 256kbps (little bps). up that to the max and it works better, but resets itself each time you disconnect.

if you're a windows user, create a dialup icon and use the modem directly. You'll be accessing the modem at 4x the speed (serial port) that the VZ software defaults to. And you'll have a more stable connection. Nothing wrong with VZ's software, it simply looks to protect the network and provide moderate speed to many people.

or just use ppp in linux, and all is good
dial #777
username: 10digitphonenumber@vzw3g.com

I don't live in a city, you insensitive clod. (1)

dolphinling (720774) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586397)

I don't live in a city, you insensitive clod. (And yes, that matters quite a bit in the context)

Re:I don't live in a city, you insensitive clod. (1)

Kamokazi (1080091) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587949)

Me neither. Live in a small rural town of 10k people. Verizon is the only carrier that will not drop a call driving across town. Hell with AT&T you can't get any signal on the east side at all. (And for the people that live far west of town, they can't get VZW, they can only get Sprint. Some people that travel for business have two phones to maintian coverage.)

That is why I shit a brick when about a year ago I woke up, and my phone said 'EV' on it. I restarted it 3 times just to be sure. I guess when 95% of a small town uses your service, it looks like a lot of users and they feel compelled to upgrade it.

Verizon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28586409)

Northeast Georgia, suburbs and rural areas...some almost uninhabited. Dead spots are rare...to the point where most local people know precisely where they are, EVDO signal in most places. Solid 1Mbps connection 95% of the time. 2-3Mbps at least 50% of the time. Degrades gracefully to 1xRTT, with measured 140Kbps no matter where you are. Atlanta to Athens, and up to the NC border, Verizon is rock solid for voice and data. Well worth the premium paid.

I live in NYC (2, Interesting)

hamburgler007 (1420537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586425)

And I wish I got half the speed on my iphone they claim for AT&T. Reliability is a big issue too.

The test seems to be bogus (5, Informative)

rwwyatt (963545) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586507)

Disclaimer: I work for a Data Card Manufacturer

Without the actual procedure for the tests, it is difficult to say if PCWorld'ss are any good. I am not familiar with the software used as no major industry provider uses it. The standard tool in the industry is Windcatcher

It really depends on the way the test is run. The problem actually relates to the TcpWindowSize as it should be increased to at least 128Kb for HSPA based networks and for CDMA as well.

Another major issue is that Data Cards don't inherently support streaming. Streaming is often used as a secondary PDP context and this will have a major negative effect. Were they in a handover region or not? On HSPA, every other cell is an interferer so throughput should be measured with a Single Carrier in the active set. It is still possible to be in a handover zone while in a parked car.

Did they use the carrier supplied good coverage locations? Randomly may not cross the panaroma of RSSI.

As well, the latest modem from Novatel Wireless is the USB760. I also believe the latest Sierra Wireless card is the compass something or other. Did they use a Y Cable? Did they use an external antenna? What model of PC did they use as TRP/TIS makes a huge difference in low coverage areas?

Without more data, I would still say there isn't sufficient evidence to form any conclusions from their article.

Re:The test seems to be bogus (1)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586591)

It really depends on the way the test is run. The problem actually relates to the TcpWindowSize as it should be increased to at least 128Kb for HSPA based networks and for CDMA as well.

is this something that can be done from the user end , and how would you do it on Linux ideally ?

Re:The test seems to be bogus (1)

rwwyatt (963545) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586655)

I don't think any changes are required for Linux or MacOSX because the RxWindowSize in Linux auto-tunes to the correct value.

The following is the default in Fedora 11 2.6.29.5-191.fc11.x86_64: [rwwyatt@rwwyatt ipv4]$ more /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_rmem 4096 87380 4194304

Re:The test seems to be bogus (1)

karnal (22275) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587209)

I understand that sometimes testing methodology for getting these networks up and running makes it important to use the proper tools and tweaks. I do this for our wireless network where I work, and it only makes sense to have an idea that you'll have good coverage before users show up.

Obviously, PCWorld's testing methodology wasn't totally revealed. I would have to say that the typical user of the service is not going to have the tools or specifically limit the types of traffic they attempt to run across that network. They're going to use it as they see fit, and get pissed if it doesn't meet their expectations.

Long post short, if I buy a data card and it doesn't work for every application that I'd see to use it for, then I'd probably complain about the network too.

Re:The test seems to be bogus (1)

vyrus128 (747164) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588211)

Unless any of this is documented anywhere that _I_ the consumer can read it, it's all useless bullshit distinctions to me. I just want to know whether my data will work. All your factors are irrelevant to me unless it's documented somewhere what they are, so I can control for them. Otherwise the article's approach of testing randomly is a better and more realistic approximation of the conditions I will actually _get_.

Disclaimer: I have T-Mobile, so all the information in the article is useless to me anyway. :-P

Re:The test seems to be bogus (1)

rwwyatt (963545) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588347)

The network providers actually contain visible disclaimers about the total speed.

There is extensive documentation available concerning additional accessories to the devices. If I recall correctly, some of these devices are even shipped with the Y Cable.

Road warrior perspective (2, Interesting)

cybrchld (229583) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586659)

I'm constantly on the road traveling and have had all three services, i can tell you Verizon has had the best coverage around the county, specially rural areas, whats the point of having the fastest network if when you need it you cant connect. this is where ATT and sprint fall short on.

Volunteer... (0, Troll)

Crimson Wing (980223) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586699)

I'd be more than happy to test and compare the services here in my town, if someone will send me an iPhone, a Palm Pre, and whatever Verizon's top-of-the-line smartphone is. The latter two will need to be pre-activated and provisioned, but I've got an AT&T simcard already.

AT&T (4, Funny)

paimin (656338) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586765)

Well, I'm posting this from an AT&T 3G connection, and I can say it's absolutely relia[[&2$188:..NO CARRIER

AT&T vs Sprint or Verizon (2, Interesting)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586875)

I've noticed other important differences between AT&T and the others: when I go outside the US, my phone isn't a fucking useless brick. I'm also not stuck driving to a tech support office if my phone craps out, I can just put the SIM card in a different phone. I can also order phones with interesting features from foreign countries and they work.

I wonder why they left T-Mobile out. I'm with AT&T currently would love to see where the other major GSM carrier stands.

Re:AT&T vs Sprint or Verizon (1)

Protoslo (752870) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587955)

This is not entirely accurate--I just switched from AT&T to Verizon (and from an OpenMoko Neo Freerunner to a Blackberry Storm). While the Storm still has bugs, it is about 1000% more reliable than the Freerunner, and it is nice having more than about 18 hours of battery...on standby (though the week after I switched, they issued a recall for the buzzing issue--one bug down, a few hundred to go), even considering the dearth of Storm-optimized (and free) software. Anyway, so far I have roamed over much of Ohio, Central New York, and Western Pennsylvania, and I can confidently say that there Verizon has ridiculously better coverage than AT&T (I had AT&T for many years, and a Freerunner for only a few months, so all of my data is not based on its dubious GSM antenna). But wait, why did I spent time blathering about my Storm? Aha! It has a SIM card as well, and is capable of GSM roaming! Of course, if I drive over to Canada it will probably be like $.50 a minute, but it would be the same with AT&T (and I don't even want to contemplate data charges...); I could hypothetically get a Canada or global roaming plan from Verizon to alleviate that.

So, you might want to keep that in mind if you find yourself chained to AT&T. Verizon CSRs are pretty evil (and I have heard they are the worst), but in my experience AT&T CSRs were hardly incompetent at ruining your day either.

Re:AT&T vs Sprint or Verizon (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588619)

This is not entirely accurate--I just switched from AT&T to Verizon...to a Blackberry Storm..It has a SIM card as well, and is capable of GSM roaming!

The Storm 9530 is nothing more than a GSM-only Storm 9500 with a Verizon CDMA module shoehorned in along with a Euro frequency only GSM module. You still do not have a SIM card you can swap to a different CDMA phone if your Storm craps out, as the SIM is just a jury-rig solution to solve the problem of CDMA phones being bricks in Europe. My original objection still stands: there are no Verizon phones that their Grand Viziers haven't given the royal seal of approval to. You can't (for example) mail order something like an HTC Diamond2-- a phone the US probably won't see until 2010-- or an HTC Magic-- the latest Google Android phone-- and stick your SIM in it and go. In fact, good luck finding anything for Verizon that's not that same insipid drool-proof "buy ringtones now!" Verizon OS other than a Crackberry or Palm.

Re:AT&T vs Sprint or Verizon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28591305)

Umm... T-mobile uses the ATT network.

They get second priority.

So, there is your answer.

It's a good thing they didn't test T-Mobile's 3G (2, Interesting)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 5 years ago | (#28586941)

It would have been a laughingstock.

T-Mobile's 3G is like Swiss cheese here in Miami.

And when it does work, it's usually less than a megabit.

Re:It's a good thing they didn't test T-Mobile's 3 (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587179)

It would have been a laughingstock.

T-Mobile's 3G is like Swiss cheese here in Miami.

And when it does work, it's usually less than a megabit.

It's all relative, I suppose. My experience with T-Mobile's 3G here in Illinois for the past few months has been excellent (on a G1, just FYI.)

Re:It's a good thing they didn't test T-Mobile's 3 (2, Interesting)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587817)

Thats because while tmobile has almost zero 3g coverage nationally, they also have few users with 3G phones.

Re:It's a good thing they didn't test T-Mobile's 3 (1)

Danny Rathjens (8471) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588155)

Same thing in Fort Lauderdale despite the T-mobile coverage map showing solid green for 3G everywhere it's always bouncing between 3G, Edge, off - even within my bedroom. I only kept it because I am moving away in a few weeks and hoping for better results in New York.

Results of my own 3g test (1)

firegate (134408) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587379)

The company I work for keeps a pool of aircards for employees who travel (mostly sprint, but we also have two verizon and two at&t). I took one from all three providers on a trip to run my own speed test about a year ago - tested them on a drive up from Las Vegas through Los Angeles, Monterey, San Francisco to Sacramento. The Sprint was consistently the fastest (I'd usually get download rates around 1.2-1.4mbps - did not test for upload) and seemed to get the best reception in most places (particularly while on the move and not in a major city, it would still remain on their 3g network). The AT&T was the true speed king, topping out around 1.8mbps downstream as I recall, but only in the middle of Los Angeles and San Francisco - anywhere else, it had spotty connectivity and would frequently drop down to the EDGE network. I never got past 900kbps on the Verizon and it also seemed to drop to "2.5g" quite often. I now carry one of the Sprint aircards with me at all times, and you'd have to pry it from my cold dead hands.

One other thing I found - not all aircards are alike. I tested through 4 of the Sprint aircards from the same location and found that two of them were consistently much faster than the other two to the tune of around 250kbps on average. All were the same model (Novotel EX720).

Testing was all done on my Macbook Pro.

Mike (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28587491)

I have had Verizon WWAN for more than 3 years now. It has been reliable for most of that time and across the US when traveling. My average speeds down were around 400-700Kbps and up were 90-120Kbps Recently I upgraded to the Rev-A network card and got even better speeds. 1.2MBPS down and around 120-130Kbps up. BUT the service went to crap when they discontinued an agreement with a local cell tower partner. Their answer to me was tough after hours on the phone and requests for technical support. My solution was to build an antenna and install Andrews cell site coax to the roof. I went from a signal at the card of -102dBm to a consistent -57dBm. I am still considering adding a wilson 3G amp so as to overload the front end of the cell tower I have the Yagi aimed at and generally make life hell for them in return. As a plus my data rate went up to around 2.6-2.8Mbps down and 140-160 up. Dealing with Verizon for the most part sucks though. They have a take it or leave it attitude towards their customers. The only reason I stay with them is because I have no 5GB cap grandfathered in, otherwise I would have left them after they told me tough luck, take it or leave it the second time. Now I just hammer their network all I the time and shoot for 10GB of transfer per month.

Reliability more important than speed (3, Insightful)

PhrackCreak (136718) | more than 5 years ago | (#28587855)

I have AT&T. I live in San Francisco. AT&T regularly drops calls. I cannot make calls from home without dropping them a minute or two into the conversation. I could not make calls from work until they installed an expensive repeater. Notice that AT&T lost EVERY SINGLE reliability comparison.

For my needs, that makes them the worst provider.

NYC as well (1)

dachshund (300733) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588643)

I just spent a couple of weeks in the Big Apple, and the performance there is absolutely miserable. Constant dropped calls, 3G that's so slow it barely works. I have to switch 3G off to get a somewhat reliable calling/data service. Of course, in NYC every third person has an iPhone or Blackberry and AT&T clearly isn't provisioning to handle it.

Los Angeles, just switched to ATT, DISAPPOINTED! (1)

hofmny (1517499) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589523)

I live in Los Angeles, the South West Side (commonly referred to as The South Bay). I just ditched Verizon and switched to AT&T because I wanted the iPhone 3GS (it's a phone and iPod and I no longer have to use a CD Walkman when running outside)!

Well, I got home with my new iPhone 3GS, all excited, and decided to call Verizon to make sure they canceled my account when my number got ported over at the AT&T store. Well, lets just say they should use my call for a commercial against AT&T.... After getting in touch with an operator in under 1 minute (Verizon customer service is great), I attempted to ask a few simple questions (I ported over my number, is my account canceled, is it pro-rated, how much do I owe, etc...), but instead I am aggravated and embarrassed. The signal quality was horrible. Every other sentence was garbled and I had to keep asking the Verizon Rep to repeat herself. When I talked, she couldn't understand me either. I was like, "I am calling on my AT&T iPhone right now, I already switched, and I just want to make sure my account is canceled." I couldn't even make out what she was saying. Finally after repeating enough times I finally got the information I needed and said thank you and hung up.

Seriously, it's that bad at my house, and I live 4 blocks from the AT&T store. My Verizon service was great at home, but AT&T keeps switching between the Edge Network and 3G. First I have full bars, then I have 2, then I have none. WTF!?

I call up AT&T after hours support, and I get a human, right away (+1 AT&T, but their score has already lost 100 points today). He checks the tower near my house and says I should have full 3G signal and that it is very strong. He suggest I go back to the AT&T store to exchange my phone. So I go back to the store right away, and they can't give me a new 3GS because they are out of stock, but suggests going to the Apple store to switch it. However, he suggests I try a new SIM card first. So he replaces my old one and gives me a new one. I go back home, hard boot my phone (something the tech suggested), and my reception was better, but still muffled in some situations. Sometimes my internet connection would just stop working and pages would time out. App Store, Facebook, all wouldn't work. Ughh.

I call up the tech again, and he asks me how often I leave my house and how often I hard boot my phone. I tell him I leave my house all the time and I rarely turn off my phone completely and turn it back on. Why should I? Well he says that when I leave my house and come back, the tower information isn't updated so I need to hard boot my phone, at least ONCE a day, especially if I leave the house and come back. OK, really... REALLY!? The reception problem is still not as bad after getting the new SIM, but it is still an issue at my house. Driving around town seems to be OK.

In the end the tech submitted a ticket for service issues at the tower near my house. I dunno who to blame this on, AT&T, Apple, or both... Today i made a call and the reception was fine. Yesterday it was muffled. I am not sure WTF is going on anymore.

And for the last aggravation... I have the iPhone docked near my MS wireless mouse adapter and the iPhone radio interferes with my wireless mouse. If I am on a call I can hardly even move my mouse! WOW!

Re:Reliability more important than speed (1)

paimin (656338) | more than 5 years ago | (#28591527)

Yeah, it's pretty bloody pathetic. It's a tiny city, 7x7 miles, and what's more it's right next to Apple HQ, and is the site of the flagship Apple Store. You would think that, at least in SF, the shit would work right.

I guess it must be rocket science.

Average is hardly useful (1)

Brian Feldman (350) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588423)

I don't see how average coverage is useful except for people that spend all their time traveling -- which is not terribly common in terms of cell phone users, now ks it?

In any case, I have Sprint now (with a Pre) and I consistently get T1 speeds in both directions in the DC area. It absolutely destroys the speed of both my DSL at home and leased line at work, unfortunately...

90% (3, Insightful)

bugi (8479) | more than 5 years ago | (#28588857)

Since when is 90% reliability even remotely acceptable?

Re:90% (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589843)

Since when is 90% reliability even remotely acceptable?

Considering how radio technology works, cities are arranged, and all of the things that interfere with it, since it's inception.

Anybody who's ever had to manually tune the channel on a TV should understand this inherently.

AT&T Reception in LA... (1)

hofmny (1517499) | more than 5 years ago | (#28589549)

AT&T reception in Los Angeles is like the fucking Bermuda Triangle

F* AT&T (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28590009)

I'm pretty pissed at AT&T right now. My elderly father has been with them since he first got a cellphone a couple years back. Only one problem: he doesn't get reception at his own house. Never having had a cell before he wasn't too bothered by this. Worse still, when I found out about this situation, it was after he'd gone in for renewal and told them about the problem a good one year and eleven months into his contract and what did the salesperson do?

They convinced him that the best solution would be this shiny new phone, surely it would work at his house, and hey, it's free if he re-ups his contract. So, they lock him in for another two years and it still doesn't work there. So, even after complaining roundly, talking to AT&T tech staff who confirmed that his phone isn't receiving a signal for large hours of the day, they still would not pro-rate his contract to let him out (contract was over a year old now). They wouldn't do it, even though they pro-rate all new contracts!

These AT&T bastards will NEVER see me as a customer again. Their own tech staff showed the phone didn't receive a signal. But, because there's 'green coverage' in his area, they were unwilling to do a damned thing for us. So screw them. No one should buy an AT&T cellphone, and I can see by this survey that they suck on a much larger scale as well.

Screw you AT&T. Stop defrauding people, take down your 'Best coverage in America' slogan and cram it up your ass.

read as: Segweay2iPhone Tethering (AT&T unread (1)

DrStoooopid (1116519) | more than 5 years ago | (#28592983)

Though it does put into perspective why AT&T wants to charge for tethering. They're not ready for people even with standard tethering, just think if you get all those iPhones. I hear "Well my tethering works..." yeah for YOU..not many people are smart enough to know how to update their carrier files so they can.

I also discovered that one of the main reasons AT&T disabled MMS...you can also send .MOV files via MMS (ala Verizon style)..and apparently that's what their worried about.

Still...way to release a product that's not complete, Micro$oft...I mean AT&T...I mean Apple...AT&T has the WORST customer service (I've been on the phone with them everyday for the last week), and their support staff is lackluster at best, some of them knowledgeable (read as 1 or 2), so when tethering and MMS do launch it's going to be a "let's credit your account" extravaganza or "haha you can't get though, because the call center is as bogged down as your connection".

Next thing you know, car manufacturers will be selling cars missing important features. "OH seatbelts? We were going to put those in 2 years from now, but you can still use it in the meantime."

Inter-City Problems (1)

sampson7 (536545) | more than 5 years ago | (#28593849)

To me the test of a good wireless carrier is whether I can travel from Washington, DC to New York City by train and maintain a wireless connection. I'll even give them the tunnels. I am a business traveler and basically work up and down the east coast. The fact that I cannot maintain a wireless internet connection on either T-Mobile or AT&T up and down the Northeast Corridor is nuts. If competion is such a driver of innovation, why has no one capitalized on the ultimate high-dollar captive market???

Sprint Detroit Test (1)

Greg_J7 (1590811) | more than 5 years ago | (#28594197)

Coincidentally, I was at my Sprint store West of Detroit last week and tested the download speed of the laptop they had out. It was about 220 kbits/sec. It must have been bursty, because the delays I was experiencing I judged to be "no chance I'm going to pay for this."
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?