Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Wireless Networking United States Hardware

Testing 3G Networks Across the US 108

Posted by Soulskill
from the can-you-hear-me-now dept.
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?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Testing 3G Networks Across the US

Comments Filter:
  • 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.

  • by areusche (1297613) on Sunday July 05 2009, @10:18AM (#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.
  • by Luscious868 (679143) on Sunday July 05 2009, @10:30AM (#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:Verizon wins (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dun Malg (230075) on Sunday July 05 2009, @01:12PM (#28587055) Homepage
    The problem with NYC skewing the averages is that on average most people in the US aren't in NYC.
  • by PhrackCreak (136718) on Sunday July 05 2009, @03:20PM (#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.

  • 90% (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bugi (8479) on Sunday July 05 2009, @05:44PM (#28588857)

    Since when is 90% reliability even remotely acceptable?

I've run DOOM more in the last few days than I have the last few months. I just love debugging ;-) (Linus Torvalds)

Working...