| Bullplop! They endlessly launch useless tech without really building up the predecessors. 3G coverage barely covers large portions of the population, 4G barely covers half, 4GLTE only covers certain very tiny spots (You're actually better off with Wifi in most cases, in fact most cellphone stores use wifi to demo 4G and 4LTE services).
At this point, you're better off just driving to your local starbucks and using their wireless internet. It'll certainly have better speed and probably have better range than this "TD-LTE" garbage they're pushing out.
...And you thought Verizon 4G was expensive. |
|
|
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Uh...you're the one who's full of BS. The LTE on ym iPad (VZW) will beat 99% of WiFi hotspots to pieces, as long as I'm in an LTE coverage area (any big city in the Lower 48, plus lots of medium-sized ones) Coverage is reasonable, too.
We aren't talking about Clear WiMAX here, which admittedly has coverage issues, particularly if you're using a mobile device to access their network.
Speaking of Clear, the point of their TD-LTE system will be to deliver breakneck speeds to a small area, offloading users who would normally be clogging up the macro-cellular network at large events, schools, airports and the like. So that way, when you walk into /name of team/ stadium, your service will get better instead of failing altogether. |
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
·AT&T Midwest
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to BBandB
Yeah, no. 75% of the population has access to VZW LTE. 371 markets.
»gigaom.com/mobile/verizons-lte-j···ulation/
And personally, I pay $50 plus tax for a smartphone with VZW after loyal customer and employer discounts. |
|
| Population by percentage? Maybe, though i doubt that number. Population by geography? Not even close. My entire county as well as most of the area west of me is without 4G LTE. Don't get me wrong I like Verizon, but articles like that really skew the numbers. I can drive 100 miles in any direction from my house and at least half the time i'll be in 3g. Oh and i live in NJ.
--
Root your Kindle Fire HD! |
|
| reply to iansltx
The problem is clears crappy 2.6ghz spectrum which can't penetrate buildings for crap. If lte will be in the same range its going to be just as crappy. |
|
 whfsdudePremium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
 ·T-Mobile US
| said by banananaz :The problem is clears crappy 2.6ghz spectrum which can't penetrate buildings for crap. If lte will be in the same range its going to be just as crappy.
It's crappy but at the same time very good spectrum. It's geared towards very dense deployments. Imagine if they are able to come to an agreement with the cable MSOs and deploy on cable lines (sort of like WiFi ap's are today).
You might even look at some situations of where they could deploy on street poles etc. There is a lot of potential if clearwire can keep it's Wimax spectrum holdings (the broad spotty coverage).
Then they could really build out a dense LTE-TD network in a few cities and really own those cities. Almost all the congestion is in urban areas and they plan to make a significant chunk of their cash selling excess capacity to other carriers.
I'm curious if they plan to offer a retail solution to customers directly or keep the LTE-TD network strictly wholesale. |
|
| Clear could do that without the MSOs. They just need to go to the cities and power companies and get access to the street lights. They could create a HUGE Network without any issues. An AP every X amount of poles, and all backhauled to the tower. They'd give any DSL and MSO a run for their money. Especially since it'd be totally wireless. They could do mobile that way and fixed. |
|
