AT&T Upgrading 3G/HSDPA Upload Speeds

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSL2520685320070925' target='_blank'>http://www.reuters.com/article/reut...520685320070925</a><br /><br /></div><i>"AT&amp;T Inc. plans to announce in coming weeks that it has upgraded its mobile network to let customers send photos or video from their phones to the Internet up to six times faster than before, a top mobile executive said on Monday. Richard Burns, president of AT&amp;T's wireless network services, also said in an interview that the company expects to carry out most of its planned 2007 high-speed wireless upgrades in October and November."</i><br /><br />I love how they word this. "Faster photos or video." :roll: That said, I'm guessing this highly optimistically-worded article means that AT&amp;T's HSDPA rollout is progressing, and more users should be able to enjoy the corresponding 500-800kbps upload performance. What do PPCT readers think? Are you happy with AT&amp;T HSDPA footprint's growth and speeds? Last I checked, the coverage in the NYC metro area was only in Manhattan and parts of the surrounding boroughs, which is barely enough.

[Rod3]

It is absolutely never in my lifetime coming to me. I live in SC, and we will always be out of the loop. That being said, EDGE works really rather well here, and AT&amp;T is the only carrier that can reach to my house. So, I'm not unhappy with them, although I wish I could have 3G one of these days. Not gonna happen. :cry:

[PDADoc]

While it sounds great on paper, I guess being a New Yorker, I'll believe it when I see/experience it.

I must admit, though, I'm constantly in and around the NY/NJ/CT area, and with few exceptions I'm consistently getting around 540mbps download speeds. The upload boost will be welcome, though, especially since sometimes I need to upload a PowerPoint presentation to someone before I speak at a medical conference.

Now, where are all these HSUPA devices that we'll need to take proper advantage of it all??? :wink:

[Mark Larson]

So they're finally catching up with EV-DO Rev A speeds (3.1/600), but Rev A devices (modems) have been out for ages now. I'm guessing HSUPA phones are a long ways off. :lol:

[Jason Lee]

So they're finally catching up with EV-DO Rev A speeds (3.1/600), but Rev A devices (modems) have been out for ages now. I'm guessing HSUPA phones are a long ways off. :lol:

Most HSDPA phone do or can support HSUPA. It is the exact same radio.

[compboss17]

So they're finally catching up with EV-DO Rev A speeds (3.1/600), but Rev A devices (modems have been out for ages now. I'm guessing HSUPA phones are a long ways off. :lol:

So? HSDPA has been around longer and has 4x the speed of Rev A where it counts: Download. Besides, how many of your Rev A. phones can do simultaneous voice and data? Oh that's right...

So they're finally catching up with EV-DO Rev A speeds (3.1/600), but Rev A devices (modems) have been out for ages now. I'm guessing HSUPA phones are a long ways off. :lol:

Most HSDPA phone do or can support HSUPA. It is the exact same radio.

That's not true

[Cybrid]

So? HSDPA has been around longer and has 4x the speed of Rev A where it counts: Download. Besides, how many of your Rev A. phones can do simultaneous voice and data? Oh that's right...
EVDO Rev-B (http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Nov2005/2236.htm) So uh...yeah...


That's not trueHigh Speed Downlink Packet Access and High Speed Uplink Packet Access are sisters in HSPA.
After which the GSM roadmap progresses to WCDMA=EVDO Rev C. Or atleast that's what I've understood.
Feel free to correct me.

Rev B is a software upgrade. (http://www.airvananet.com/technology/technology_348.htm)Low-cost Upgrade
EV-DO Rev A base station channel cards can be easily upgraded to Rev B, thereby protecting an operator’s Rev A hardware investment. In some cases, the entire upgrade to Rev B can be achieved without adding any new hardware. Rev C is not.

So is HSDPA. (http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/print/telecom_hsdpa_gsms_long) HSDPA can be implemented mostly as a software upgrade in UMTS networks, though some hardware might be required in other cases. “It impacts the channel card, base station and base station controller, so it depends on the UMTS platform the carrier has deployed,” Leonard said, adding that Lucent could upgrade its own UMTS equipment to HSDPA completely through software enhancements. The technology also requires HSDPA-enabled handsets.
W-CDMA LTE is not.

Both will require new handsets.

Rev B is capable of 14.7Mbps? (http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/April2006/2912.htm)

Source here ;) (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=54386)

[compboss17]

So? HSDPA has been around longer and has 4x the speed of Rev A where it counts: Download. Besides, how many of your Rev A. phones can do simultaneous voice and data? Oh that's right...
EVDO Rev-B (http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Nov2005/2236.htm) So uh...yeah...


That's not trueHigh Speed Downlink Packet Access and High Speed Uplink Packet Access are sisters in HSPA.
After which the GSM roadmap progresses to WCDMA=EVDO Rev C. Or atleast that's what I've understood.
Feel free to correct me.

Rev B is a software upgrade. (http://www.airvananet.com/technology/technology_348.htm)Low-cost Upgrade
EV-DO Rev A base station channel cards can be easily upgraded to Rev B, thereby protecting an operator’s Rev A hardware investment. In some cases, the entire upgrade to Rev B can be achieved without adding any new hardware. Rev C is not.

So is HSDPA. (http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/print/telecom_hsdpa_gsms_long) HSDPA can be implemented mostly as a software upgrade in UMTS networks, though some hardware might be required in other cases. “It impacts the channel card, base station and base station controller, so it depends on the UMTS platform the carrier has deployed,” Leonard said, adding that Lucent could upgrade its own UMTS equipment to HSDPA completely through software enhancements. The technology also requires HSDPA-enabled handsets.
W-CDMA LTE is not.

Both will require new handsets.

Rev B is capable of 14.7Mbps? (http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/April2006/2912.htm)

Rev B isn't even close to being out yet...

HSPA can be implemented as a soft upgrade to the towers but the handsets require new chips for the most part.

I'm not sure why you brought Rev. C or LTE into this. That's not even close to what this conversation is about.

And after HSPA the next step is 4G which is LTE.

[Cybrid]

Rev B is even close to being out yet...

HSPA can be implemented as a soft upgrade to the towers but the handsets require new chips for the most part.
Didja miss the part where Rev B is also a software upgrade? :D

[compboss17]

Rev B is even close to being out yet...

HSPA can be implemented as a soft upgrade to the towers but the handsets require new chips for the most part.
Didja miss the part where Rev B is also a software upgrade? :D

No I didn't [miss it], but thanks for pointing that out [again].

[DaleReeck]

I'm in Buffalo NY and when was buying my AT&amp;T Tilt, the two guys there (who seemed pretty knowledgable) said that high-speed was coming Oct 15th and that the regional manager was so sure it was a true date that he said he would resign if it didn't happen :D

[Cybrid]

No I didn't [miss it], but thanks for pointing that out [again].No problem. :D Just wanted to be sure you got your facts straight. That there wasn't really any significant advantage to HSPA.

[compboss17]

No I didn't [miss it], but thanks for pointing that out [again].No problem. :D Just wanted to be sure you got your facts straight. That there wasn't really any significant advantage to HSPA.

Yeah I mean you're absolutely right...

Who cares about the fact that HSPDA has 4 times the download speed of EVDO Rev. A AND it's been that way for over a year. I mean I would MUCH rather just have slower internet. People who want faster internet are wusses...

Oh and let's not forget simultaneous voice and data. Something EVDO will NEVER be able to do, which means (among other things) no video calling for you!

[cholcomb]

They Kaiser (Titl) has HSDPA/HSUPA. It wasn't listed on the Spec sheet of the device, but it is listed on the spec sheet of the processor.

[Cybrid]

Who cares about the fact that HSPDA has 4 times the download speed of EVDO Rev. A AND it's been that way for over a year. I mean I would MUCH rather just have slower internet. People who want faster internet are wusses... Until Rev B which will roll out faster than HSDPA ever will.



Oh and let's not forget simultaneous voice and data. Something EVDO will NEVER be able to do, which means (among other things) no video calling for you!
Until Rev B.
Didja miss that part too? or is the higher latency of GSM networks slowing your thought processes. :roll:
Also...video calling would be a VOIP type deal therefore as far as thats concerned...a DATA only device could do that. Read a little. I mean...
I can at this moment use MS portrait and do a Video call over EVDO Rev 0.
Again get your facts straight.

[Cybrid]

Below is why.
"If its CDMA (1XRTT) or WCDMA, it's still all based on CDMA," he says. "By choosing to go CDMA, we chose to evolve ourselves in an efficient manner to 3G."

WCDMA, or Wideband CDMA, offers data rates of 384K bit/sec and is planned for implementation in 2003. Its counterpart in the GSM/GPRS world is Universal Mobile Telecommunications Service (UMTS).


"In order for us to achieve the higher data rates of 144K bit/sec peak with 1XRTT, all we have to do is go into the base station and plug in a card," he says. "In addition, the next 3G 1x release, due around 2003, will only require us to perform a software upgrade. Those GSM/GPRS network operators will have to turn up new frequencies, another 10 MHz of spectrum just to maintain the customers they've got while they perform the upgrade." That's why 1xRTT has a much larger footprint than EDGE.


Capital expenditure (Cap-Ex) is low because 1xEV -DO can be deployed as a channel card upgrade to existing CDMA base stations. No
new spectrum, cell sites or radio equipment is required. (http://cdg.org/resources/white_papers/files/Airvana_EVDO_Rev_A.pdf) Again Software upgrade* in many respects.
CDMA-->1xRTT-->EVDO was for most parts software upgrade and addition of channel cards. It is a far smaller cost of deployment.

The Rev A upgrade is a fairly simple process, involving a circuit pack replacement and new software. (http://www.cdg.org/technology/3g/resource/Pru_on_CDMA_9-18-06.pdf) Again channel card and software.

Rev B I've already given links to as a purely software update.

For an overview of cost analysis CDMA vs GSM for operators. (http://www.wirelessdevnet.com/channels/wireless/training/mobilewirelesstomorrow6.html)

CDMA2000 and WCDMA networks are capable of delivering new, revenue-generating voice, multimedia and broadband data services while at the same time delivering superior economics. GSM may offer a low-cost of entry, but it also represents a stranded investment. (http://www.cdg.org/technology/3g/resource/3GWorldUpdate_9-06.asp)

GSM costs the operators more. It needs a larger customer base to support it. And finally when all is said and done they go to OFDM based w-CDMA LTE which is a proprietary variant of EVDO Rev C.
So...enjoy the scenic route...we'll wait for you to catch up. :lol:

[compboss17]

Who cares about the fact that HSPDA has 4 times the download speed of EVDO Rev. A AND it's been that way for over a year. I mean I would MUCH rather just have slower internet. People who want faster internet are wusses... Until Rev B which will roll out faster than HSDPA ever will.

Really Rev. B doesn't even exist anymore. Sprint is going WiMax and Verizon is going LTE. Even if in THEORY it did, it's NOT out yet and no one has even discussed the POSSIBILITY of it coming out soon. Hell, at this point the ONLY carrier who could use Rev. B, Verizon, JUST finished upgrading to Rev. A. But since Verizon is going LTE, your argument about "future potential" fails.


Oh and let's not forget simultaneous voice and data. Something EVDO will NEVER be able to do, which means (among other things) no video calling for you!
Until Rev B.
Didja miss that part too? or is the higher latency of GSM networks slowing your thought processes. :roll:
Also...video calling would be a VOIP type deal therefore as far as thats concerned...a DATA only device could do that. Read a little. I mean...
I can at this moment use MS portrait and do a Video call over EVDO Rev 0.
Again get your facts straight.

Sure VOIP makes sense, if you want to use a DIFFERENT PHONE NUMBER... IP Based calling won't be available till 4G. If you're talking about trying to forward numbers or some nonsense like that...well then... nonsense is a good word to describe that.

As for the higher latency of GSM, I got an easy 100ms latency on my old Cingular 8525 sometimes as low as 75ms. What do YOU get? I'm sure it's not that fast. That's almost as fast as cable (30-50ms)

So as for who is being left in the dust I ask: If you CAN do video calling WHERE is it? WHERE are these super great data speeds you keep talking about?

I know, I know they COULD happen...well I don't think anyone really cares about that. And then as for GSM vs. CDMA, just look at all the devices out on the market. There's no question that GSM is a better technology to be behind right now and anyone who isn't (like yourself) is just mad that they signed a 2 year contract with Verizon or Sprint. Or work for those companies.

Speaking of better devices on GSM, I think I'm gonna go back to playing with my iPhone.

[compboss17]

Below is why.
"If its CDMA (1XRTT) or WCDMA, it's still all based on CDMA," he says. "By choosing to go CDMA, we chose to evolve ourselves in an efficient manner to 3G."

WCDMA, or Wideband CDMA, offers data rates of 384K bit/sec and is planned for implementation in 2003. Its counterpart in the GSM/GPRS world is Universal Mobile Telecommunications Service (UMTS).


"In order for us to achieve the higher data rates of 144K bit/sec peak with 1XRTT, all we have to do is go into the base station and plug in a card," he says. "In addition, the next 3G 1x release, due around 2003, will only require us to perform a software upgrade. Those GSM/GPRS network operators will have to turn up new frequencies, another 10 MHz of spectrum just to maintain the customers they've got while they perform the upgrade." That's why 1xRTT has a much larger footprint than EDGE.
[

Oh and that's the most retarded thing I've read. Once again we weren't even talking about that....

1xRTT = GPRS NOT EDGE

EDGE at it's peak is about 2-3 times faster than 1xRTT and has almost universal coverage on ATT's network at this point.

[Cybrid]

EDGE compatible transceiver units must be installed and the base station subsystem (BSS) needs to be upgraded to support EDGE. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Data_Rates_for_GSM_Evolution)


UMTS was developed mainly for countries with GSM networks, because these countries have agreed to free new frequency ranges for UMTS networks. Because it is a new technology and in a new frequency band, whole new radio access network has to be build. (http://www.umtsworld.com/umts/faq.htm) Needs the purchase of larger bandwidth spectrum purchases and New! radio access networks. $$$$$

HSPA may be a software upgrade but you'll never see it outside the metropolitan areas. It relies on the aforementioned UMTS network to be built. Joe Farmer will never see it. Far less so HSOPA.


The problem with OFDM is that, as a different modulation scheme from W-CDMA, it would require new radios and hardware. The only way to protect the operators' investments would be to combine OFDM and W-CDMA in handsets, a difficult and expensive endeavor. Still, integrating multiple radios in handsets has been done with interfaces like Wi-Fi, and multimode phones are expected to become more common. (http://www.wirelessweek.com/article.aspx?id=89464)

The build of the WCDMA network will commence in late 2007 and will cost approximately $300 million in capital expenditure over the next two years. This is approximately $200 million more than would have been spent over the next five years under a CDMA-only path. (http://blogs.pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/techsploder/2007/06/telecom_confirms_hybrid_wcdmau.html)
It costs more.

Next-Generation Mobile Technology Target Attributes
LTE Downlink (20MHz allocation)
100 Mbps
UMB Downlink (20MHz allocation)
288 Mbps
(http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/110/26764)The facts about LTE vs. UMB


Now the good news for you. What it really boils down to is who has the most money wins. GSM with wider adoption may win this yet simply out of mass worldwide adoption. Verizon Wireless to join Vodafone in upgrade to LTE (http://wirelessview.blogspot.com/2007/09/verizon-wireless-to-join-vodafone-in.html)

[Cybrid]

Oh and that's the most retarded thing I've read. Once again we weren't even talking about that....
1xRTT = GPRS NOT EDGE
EDGE at it's peak is about 2-3 times faster than 1xRTT and has almost universal coverage on ATT's network at this point.

Yeah. But as I said. EDGE to UMTS is a new network vs 1xRTT to EVDO to REV A is software/ channel cards. Rev B is software. So to leverage an existing investment....Wouldn't you go that route? Rev A is here. Rev B isn't that far away. As I said Rev B would roll out faster than HSPA (inclusive)

[compboss17]

Oh and that's the most retarded thing I've read. Once again we weren't even talking about that....
1xRTT = GPRS NOT EDGE
EDGE at it's peak is about 2-3 times faster than 1xRTT and has almost universal coverage on ATT's network at this point.

Yeah. But as I said. EDGE to UMTS is a new network vs 1xRTT to EVDO to REV A is software/ channel cards. Rev B is software. So to leverage an existing investment....Wouldn't you go that route? Rev A is here. Rev B isn't that far away. As I said Rev B would roll out faster than HSPA (inclusive)

Are you a f*in idiot? In any of my previous 3 posts have I even started to mention how easy/hard it is to upgrade from/to the various technologies? NO...it's COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

What I AM saying is that however easy it might be to upgrade to Rev. B it's not even coming in the near future for ANYONE. And CLEARLY Rev. B isn't going to be rolling out faster since HSPA is coming out THIS MONTH and HSDPA has been out for the PAST YEAR. Seriously if you respond to this with some more bullsh*t completely irrelevant to what we're talking about I'm just going to ignore you AND your retardedness.

The fact is that GSM is way farther ahead and has way more marketshare which means that it's got the most support and is the best technology to be behind. Any more copy and paste quotes from some technical article detailing the upgrade path from Analog to 1xRTT /sarcasm/ will be ignored.

[Cybrid]

Really Rev. B doesn't even exist anymore. Sprint is going WiMax and Verizon is going LTE. Even if in THEORY it did, it's NOT out yet and no one has even discussed the POSSIBILITY of it coming out soon. Hell, at this point the ONLY carrier who could use Rev. B, Verizon, JUST finished upgrading to Rev. A. But since Verizon is going LTE, your argument about "future potential" fails. Since Rev A to B is a simple software upgrade. Do you really think that they'll suddenly abandon the network investment? More fool you.
Yes. Verizon is going LTE. Which you have yet to concede as a proprietary variant of Rev C. Oh well. Qualcomm investors grow richer. (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/freitasm/1203)
Nothing new to report? moving right along.



Sure VOIP makes sense, if you want to use a DIFFERENT PHONE NUMBER... IP Based calling won't be available till 4G. If you're talking about trying to forward numbers or some nonsense like that...well then... nonsense is a good word to describe that. Huh? I'm not sure what you are saying or have inferred. Perhaps a refund on the speed reading course?



As for the higher latency of GSM, I got an easy 100ms latency on my old Cingular 8525 sometimes as low as 75ms. What do YOU get? I'm sure it's not that fast. That's almost as fast as cable (30-50ms)
You might have. Most dont. Google (http://www.google.com/search?q=latency+issues+in+gsm&amp;rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8&amp;sourceid=ie7&amp;rlz=1I7ADBS)




So as for who is being left in the dust I ask: If you CAN do video calling WHERE is it? WHERE are these super great data speeds you keep talking about? Why video calling isn't here in the US yet. The fact that it can be done on even EVDO rev 0 speeds is the point. Were well past the needed bandwidth there. :?:



I know, I know they COULD happen...well I don't think anyone really cares about that. And then as for GSM vs. CDMA, just look at all the devices out on the market. There's no question that GSM is a better technology to be behind right now and anyone who isn't (like yourself) is just mad that they signed a 2 year contract with Verizon or Sprint. Or work for those companies. Perhaps with your iPhone, that question could be more laughable reversed. :lol:



Speaking of better devices on GSM, I think I'm gonna go back to playing with my iPhone. And right there you lost a large part of your upto now reasonable credibility. A device that doesn't have UMTS/HSDPA! (http://www.intomobile.com/2007/06/05/att-cingular-improving-edge-speeds-for-apple-iphone-launch.html) That can't use third party apps without hacks. That can't use BT headsets. That can't...Oh. wow dude. You thought that was a burn? 8O

[Cybrid]

Are you a f*in idiot? Funny that you can't stay civil and continue the arguement. I'd edit that before this thread gets locked. Not that I mind profanity. I'd rather continue the conversation



In any of my previous 3 posts have I even started to mention how easy/hard it is to upgrade from/to the various technologies? NO...it's COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. Sure, those cell companies are non profit. What it costs them is what you pay. If it costs them less we pay less and get more. Simple math. Couldn't understand the articles?


I'm just going to ignore you AND your retardedness. Funny that you can't stay civil and continue the arguement. I'd edit that before this thread gets locked. Not that I mind profanity. I'd rather continue the conversation.



The fact is that GSM is way farther ahead and has way more marketshare which means that it's got the most support and is the best technology to be behind. Any more copy and paste quotes from some technical article detailing the upgrade path from Analog to 1xRTT /sarcasm/ will be ignored.
Market share?yes. worldwide. US? No http://www.3gwirelessjobs.com/web/news/getnewsitem/608

Ahead? slightly. temporary lead doesn't mean race is over.

More technologically advanced? no.
LTE is REV C!

[Cybrid]

What I AM saying is that however easy it might be to upgrade to Rev. B it's not even coming in the near future for ANYONE. And CLEARLY Rev. B isn't going to be rolling out faster since HSPA is coming out THIS MONTH and HSDPA has been out for the PAST YEAR. Seriously if you respond to this with some more bullsh*t completely irrelevant to what we're talking about I'm just going to ignore you AND your retardedness.
And this is where it is crucial you take notes. While it is out and introduced. It will always remain a metropolitan area service only. It needs the UMTS backbone to be built. Cost! There will never ever be a full blanket coverage of it.

Whereas anywhere there is CDMA there is EVDO availability possible. BIg network. Less money. Just cause you happened to be in a lucky few cities...don't mean squat.