Verizon vs. AT&T iPhone 5: Data

[DannyMichel]

I made a pretty broad assumption in a previous thread, so I'd like to be more clear and break it down with one aspect of the Verizon vs. AT&T iPhone 5s; data in areas where the signal strength between Verizon and AT&T are equal. This blog post highlights the reasons the iPhone 5 will remain inferior to AT&T's as data is concerned, at least until 2013. How valid is this? I happen to be a Verizon iPhone user, only because i don't have a choice IMO, which I'm sure some of you from my previous threads already know. I can't help but feel like I'm not getting the full iPhone experience now and I won't even be getting it when the 5 comes out.

 

[Alli]

What do you mean by

the iPhone 5 will remain inferior to AT&T's as data is concerned, at least until 2013.

Are you trying to compare AT&T's and Verizon's LTE networks?

 

[jsntrenkler]

If your talking about 3G speeds then yes AT&T will have the speed advantage in some markets. However verizon has a huge head start with LTE.

 

[Rusty Shackelford#IM]

Yet another example of why it all depends on where you have service, and with what provider. I'm sure in many markets AT&T will dominate, but in my area and the areas I travel to frequently it is the bandwidth that will translate into actual speed for the end user every time. Though benchmark tests in my area show that AT&T's speeds are faster, the end user experience is quite different as the Verizon network in these areas is much larger and not as prone to the network congestion that translates into slower speeds for the end user on these areas on AT&T.

Just because you run a speed test on an AT&T iPhone and see a faster connection does not mean that when you get to downloading large files and streaming media that you are going to have a better experience on one network or another as those apps measure the connection speed, not the bandwidth and maximum load the network can handle.

Thus it remains a matter of personal preference, user experience and network strength (bandwidth), more than what speedtest.net results may be.

 

[Peligro911]

Oh not again !!

 

[Rusty Shackelford#IM]

Oh not again !!

I know. Haven't we done this enough?

 

[Fausty82]

I know. Haven't we done this enough?

apparently not... *sigh*

 

[kch50428]

I know. Haven't we done this enough?

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over with an expectation of different results.

The OP's citing a blog post full of opinions and assumptions and passing it as inalienable, self evident truths... smh.

 

[DannyMichel]

What do you mean by

Are you trying to compare AT&T's and Verizon's LTE networks?

att's iphone 5 will support hspa+, verizon's most likely wont support lte. and even with the slight chance that it does, lte is in it's infant stage. even when lte is offered, att's iphone will be able to bounce from lte to hspa+(which is slower than lte, but much faster than verizon's 3g). this happens in 2013 when verizon will bounce from lte to the slower than at&t 3g, which means their internet will still be faster. again, for those who live in areas where the signal is the same with both carrier's, this is very important.

Yet another example of why it all depends on where you have service, and with what provider. I'm sure in many markets AT&T will dominate, but in my area and the areas I travel to frequently it is the bandwidth that will translate into actual speed for the end user every time. Though benchmark tests in my area show that AT&T's speeds are faster, the end user experience is quite different as the Verizon network in these areas is much larger and not as prone to the network congestion that translates into slower speeds for the end user on these areas on AT&T.

Just because you run a speed test on an AT&T iPhone and see a faster connection does not mean that when you get to downloading large files and streaming media that you are going to have a better experience on one network or another as those apps measure the connection speed, not the bandwidth and maximum load the network can handle.

Thus it remains a matter of personal preference, user experience and network strength (bandwidth), more than what speedtest.net results may be.

again, that's just your area. were not accounting for that variable here. we're talking 'imagine the signal strength is the same'.

Oh not again !!

no, not again. as i said, this is specifically about data

im looking for actual information here. that's why i come here and that's what i thought was provided here

 

[Rusty Shackelford#IM]

again, that's just your area. were not accounting for that variable here. we're talking 'imagine the signal strength is the same'.

How can you not account for the area variable if you are seeking actual information on performance? If you "imagine" all things being equal, you are going to get feedback that is not only worthless in real world application, but you get a skewed view of what the feedback and data actually mean. (ie. the carriers all labeling their coverage as 4g when I'm reality the technology is a revision of their existing 3G tech)

If you eliminate any of the variables you are not getting an accurate picture, thus rendering your entire goal of collecting real information an unsuccessful one.

 

[DannyMichel]

How can you not account for the area variable if you are seeking actual information on performance? If you "imagine" all things being equal, you are going to get feedback that is not only worthless in real world application, but you get a skewed view of what the feedback and data actually mean. (ie. the carriers all labeling their coverage as 4g when I'm reality the technology is a revision of their existing 3G tech)

If you eliminate any of the variables you are not getting an accurate picture, thus rendering your entire goal of collecting real information an unsuccessful one.

ok, i apologize about not eliminating that variable in the original post. i want to eliminate it here, because in fact, it is eliminated in my area. at&t and Verizon's signal is equal in my area.

i've modified the original post

ok, where are we when it's eliminated as data is concerned?

 

[Rusty Shackelford#IM]

Here is the problem I see.

Signal strength = the connection between the closest cell site and the device

Network speed = a combination of 2 things:
1- the actual rate data can be transferred to/from the device
2- bandwidth - or the amount of data that can be handled by the network before bogging down

Best way to visualize this is the freeway concept. If you have a 3 lane freeway that has a speed limit of 100 mph and a 6 lane freeway that has a speed limit of 70 mph, the speed limit of the freeways is a factor if there are only a few cars on it. Now put rush hour traffic with the same amount of cars on each freeway. The people going through the rush hour traffic are going to have "faster" speeds on the 6 lane fwy (even with a slower speed limit) at a certain number of cars because the capacity of the 3 way is much less and bog it down. Take away the cars and yes, the 3 lane 100 mph freeway will blow the 6 lane away. Fill them with equal capacities maxing out the 3 lane and those on the six lane will have a breeze of a drive.

Cell providers advertise their network "speeds" (speed limits) based on their rate of data transfer, not their bandwidth capacity (how many lanes). This is why in some areas, AT&T has a "faster" network (hspa), but a verizon device could still be faster on 3G when comparing similar downloads side by side. This is why there is so much confusion about whose network is faster. The providers are playing a ruthless and cheap advertising game that hurts one person, the consumer.

4G, as advertised by the carriers means little as it does not describe what it used to, a generation of technology. None of the upcoming "4G" networks will be true 4G. It is unfortunate that the carriers have chosen to so badly confuse the consumer with a combination of omissions and misinformation.