[BryanHarig]

^^ Yeah. At least here in the tristate area AT&T seems much faster then it otherwise should as Sprint and Vzw are badly limited by insufficent backhaul connections.

But, in general terms AT&T uses a technology that is capable of higher speeds while Vzw and Sprint have deployed their 3g networks over a much larger area.

[numetheus]

Originally Posted by Dawgfan

This is so dependent on so many variables it is almost not worth arguing....

Yeah ... but everyone that runs speed tests using laptop connect cards always posts higher speeds with HSPA than EVDO. There is a HUGE difference between theoretical limit and what you actually get, but the theoretical limit of HSPA is not just a little bit faster ... its a lot faster. BOTH are slower than the theoretical limit, and HSPA SHOULD have a higher speed advantage than it does .... but is still faster.

Max theoretical:
EDGE - 473.6 kbit/sec
EVDO RevA - 3.1 mbit/sec
HSPDA - 14.4 mbit/sec

The speed difference between EDGE and EVDO is comparable to the speed difference between EVDOrevA and HSPDA. Saying that there are too many factors to argue that HSPDA is faster than EDGE is like me saying that you can't argue that EVDO is faster than EDGE because there are too many factors.

[numetheus]

Originally Posted by bakerfall

The question was between 3G and EVDO, so comparing an EVDO Pearl to an EDGE Curve isn't really the comparison that was requested.

You definitely came off as snippy and it was unnecessary considering the fact that your comparison is not what was asked. It was a fair question for someone to turn around and ask you to clarify, since it was you brought EDGE to the table.

Getting back to the topic at hand, ATT's 3G network is most certainly faster than EVDO, however current devices (the Bold not withstanding) are hampered by their processor even with the faster connection. That's why Blackberry's connected via WiFi (certainly capable of being faster then any of the cell networks) still don't perform that much better.

Exactly! You can't use the BB devices to determine which network technology is faster. Thats just silly.

[TheBigNewt]

A lot of Bold users won't have access to the ATT 3G network, and ever fewer will connect with Tmob's 3G when their Bold comes out (August??). But download speeds even on EDGE and WiFi will be lots faster as mentioned in this thread. The device is just faster by itself.

[numetheus]

Wirelessly posted

Originally Posted by TheBigNewt

A lot of Bold users won't have access to the ATT 3G network, and ever fewer will connect with Tmob's 3G when their Bold comes out (August??). But download speeds even on EDGE and WiFi will be lots faster as mentioned in this thread. The device is just faster by itself.

Excuse me for not understanding what your message meant, but ATT has a very large 3G network. Its among the largest. So why would you say a lot of Bold users won't have 3G support? HSPDA buildout is comprehensive in the US for ATT, and they will have HSUPA in all markets in June supposedly.

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by bakerfall

You definitely came off as snippy and it was unnecessary considering the fact that your comparison is not what was asked. It was a fair question for someone to turn around and ask you to clarify, since it was you brought EDGE to the table.
.

No this is snippy. I could care less what you think.

It should have been obvious that I wouldnt compare a VZ curve to a pearl and then state something about ATT.

[Cory Scheuer]

oh dawg, your a funny guy!

[test54]

Originally Posted by numetheus

Wirelessly posted


ATT has a very large 3G network. Its among the largest. So why would you say a lot of Bold users won't have 3G support? HSPDA buildout is comprehensive in the US for ATT, and they will have HSUPA in all markets in June supposedly.

Simply not true, look at the ATT map for 3G and it is nowhere near comprehensive or even close. They have been painfully slow in getting it rolled out. If I'm a device manufacturer I'm pushing them to get it done because customers want 3G phones but their coverage for the 3G data stinks outside of the 275-325 major markets.

[bakerfall]

Originally Posted by Dawg

No this is snippy. I could care less what you think.

It should have been obvious that I wouldnt compare a VZ curve to a pearl and then state something about ATT.

However when someone asks about 3G vs. EVDO, you would compare EVDO to an EDGE phone. You also said nothing about ATT:

"I have compared my 8130 on verizon to my friend curve and there isnt that much difference"

Perhaps you were talking about your friend Curve, not someone else's phone on an unnamed provider.

Also, last time I checked, Verizon and ATT were not the only providers in the world.

Finally, while I called your response snippy I think you've graduated into worse territory than that with this one. I'm not sure what the rules are about "personal" attacks, so I'll leave it at that.

[Dawg]

Get a grip, I havent personally attacked anyone in this thread. Telling you I could care less what you think is not a personal attack. You called me out so I responded. If you dont like what I have to say ignore me plain and simple.

I speak my mind I wont appologize for that.

[bakerfall]

Originally Posted by Dawg

Get a grip, I havent personally attacked anyone in this thread. Telling you I could care less what you think is not a personal attack. You called me out so I responded. If you dont like what I have to say ignore me plain and simple.

I speak my mind I wont appologize for that.

I "called you out" because you were wrong from the get go. Someone asked the difference between 3G and EVDO, presumably because they wanted to know if the Bold would be faster than Verizon or Sprint's options. Your response of "I have compared my 8130 on verizon to my friend curve and there isnt that much difference" says absolutely NOTHING to answer this question since the Curve is not a 3G phone on any network. I believe that is the root cause of any confusion, your incorrect response to the original poster by talking about an EDGE phone when they are asking about 3G speed. It's an irrelevant response.

Look, I wasn't even the target of your attack, but it seemed so unnecessarily harsh that I had to call you out on it. Your response of "I don't care what you think" just make you looks like more of an a$$.

If you want to call yourself a Blackberry God and unapologeticly throw your opinion around, at least get your facts (and if at all possible your grammar and spelling) right.

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by brownhead

@ wabbit - I remember reading that 3.5 is simultaneous data/voice - which means you WILL be able to receive emails while talking on the phone. Currently with EVDO that is not the case - I use Sprint and sometimes its annoying to see a bunch of emails after a phone call but its not that much of a big deal - but it would be cool to be able to get on the web and search for a few things while talking on the phone.

thats what i really want.

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

Voice will still travel over the same frequencies as before. 3G HSDPA operates on a separate frequency that is just for data. And I do believe they can both be used simultaneously.

i hope so!

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by bakerfall

Look, I wasn't even the target of your attack, but it seemed so unnecessarily harsh that I had to call you out on it. Your response of "I don't care what you think" just make you looks like more of an a$$. I didn't attack any one you are the one attacking so chill out I don't even consider what i said harsh at all

If you want to call yourself a Blackberry God and unapologetically throw your opinion around, at least get your facts (and if at all possible your grammar and spelling) right. I didn't call myself a BB god need to get your facts straight because now your the one looking like an A$$

And I am not here for your grammar Nazism. Again you are carrying this way to far. So back off

[TheBigNewt]

Originally Posted by numetheus

Wirelessly posted



Excuse me for not understanding what your message meant, but ATT has a very large 3G network. Its among the largest. So why would you say a lot of Bold users won't have 3G support? HSPDA buildout is comprehensive in the US for ATT, and they will have HSUPA in all markets in June supposedly.

What I meant is that if you are out of the ATT 3G network, you're still going to download data faster with the Bold than with a Curve or Pearl. I'd like to think every ATT customer will have 3G everywhere by next week but somehow I don't think that's a go. And sometimes you roam onto Tmobile's network (not much 3G love there). That's what I meant.

[PPCMD]

Originally Posted by test54

Simply not true, look at the ATT map for 3G and it is nowhere near comprehensive or even close. They have been painfully slow in getting it rolled out. If I'm a device manufacturer I'm pushing them to get it done because customers want 3G phones but their coverage for the 3G data stinks outside of the 275-325 major markets.

Its tough to say exactly where Verizon offers EV-DO vs 1xrtt coverage since their map is pretty lacking, it is I attached it below. AT&T on the other hand does list out their coverage cities but they also will scale their speeds quicker than Verizon will with up to 20MB by 2009, of course if they get half of that it would be great.

[atuarre]

Originally Posted by bakerfall

I "called you out" because you were wrong from the get go. Someone asked the difference between 3G and EVDO, presumably because they wanted to know if the Bold would be faster than Verizon or Sprint's options. Your response of "I have compared my 8130 on verizon to my friend curve and there isnt that much difference" says absolutely NOTHING to answer this question since the Curve is not a 3G phone on any network. I believe that is the root cause of any confusion, your incorrect response to the original poster by talking about an EDGE phone when they are asking about 3G speed. It's an irrelevant response.

Look, I wasn't even the target of your attack, but it seemed so unnecessarily harsh that I had to call you out on it. Your response of "I don't care what you think" just make you looks like more of an a$$.

If you want to call yourself a Blackberry God and unapologeticly throw your opinion around, at least get your facts (and if at all possible your grammar and spelling) right.

Alright...everyone can play fair here. No need to "call anyone out". This isn't the ghetto. This is a discussion.

[bakerfall]

I only used that term because he did, I thought it was a bit over the top.

Regardless, I'll drop it. I think I made my point.

[DallasFlier]

Originally Posted by test54

Simply not true, look at the ATT map for 3G and it is nowhere near comprehensive or even close. They have been painfully slow in getting it rolled out. If I'm a device manufacturer I'm pushing them to get it done because customers want 3G phones but their coverage for the 3G data stinks outside of the 275-325 major markets.

Simply not true?? C'mon, test. He said "among the largest." With Verizon arguably being larger, tell me who else has a larger 3G network than AT&T? If he had said "THE largest" than your "simply not true" comment would be appropriate. But if its in the top two, or even top three, than I think "among the largest" fits. As for coverage for 3G "stinking" outside of 275-325 major markets - when you get down to the 325th market, I believe you've hit the 95th percentile for US population. Covering 95% of the population at minimum is pretty darn comprehensive and doesn't exactly qualify for "coverage stinks."

[test54]

well you look at their 3G compared to their EDGE and see the difference, the point was that alot of BOLD users would not get 3G and that is the case. I didn't care about the "among the largest" because they are all lacking in comparison to Verizon as far as coverage for 3G type data. They by in no means cover 95% of the population with 3G, think you should check you math. I'm sure they have internal numbers that would show their 3G pop coverage and it would in no way be close to 95%, I would think it would be closer to 55%-70%