Posted on 03 July 2008, at 10:32 am, by Christopher Spera
OK… before the RUSH and nasty lines start forming over the weekend for all of you early adopters, let’s take a look at AT&T’s TOTAL 3G coverage in the US… The blue areas below, show just where all of their 3G networks are up and running.
So what exactly does this mean?? As I said before, about 90-95% of the country does NOT have 3G coverage and is therefore NOT going to get the full iPhone 3G experience (i.e. network speeds). If you live in one of these uncovered areas and already have an iPhone, I wouldn’t jump on the iPhone 3G wagon. I’d stick with my current iPhone (WITH my grandfathered data plan) and save $200-$300 bucks. With the original iPhone getting the iPhone 2.0 ROM update, you’re going to have the same experience with your original iPhone as you would with an iPhone 3G in your non-3G covered area.
Its going to take years…YEARS for AT&T to fully build out their 3G coverage area to support the iPhone 3G. If they can move fast and cover all of the Darge Orange (EDGE) areas with 3G, they are still going to have a long way to go to get the country covered from coast to coast. There are a lot of internal areas (like between Memphis, TN to Charlette, NC and Atlanta, GA to Jacksonville, FL that still have to be built out with AT&T’s own GPRS and EDGE coverage. (don’t get me started about the interior states and coverage for North Dakota to Kansas (North to South) and Nevada to Kansas (West to East). It may be YEARS before they get simple GPRS/voice coverage, let alone a cellular data network.
My point here is to urge everyone to NOT get caught up in the hype and to spend wisely. The economy really sucks right now, and the last thing we need to do is to spend frivilously. Again, if you are an existing iPhone user outside a 3G coverage area, you might be better off just upgrading your device to the new firmware and waiting for AT&T to build their 3G network out before getting the new iPhone. You’re not going to gain much with the new iPhone if you fall in this camp.
However, please join us in the discussion area and give us your thoughts. I’d love to hear what everyone has to say…
[...] Diary has a good post up highlighting just how much of the US is *NOT* currently in an AT&T 3G coverage area, and [...]
[...] Geardiary No Comments, Comment or [...]
[...] Image Source: Barry Yanowitz’s Flickr photostream [...]
[...] Gear Diary created a minor stir Thursday when it posted the map at left (click to enlarge) purporting to show the extent of AT&T’s current 3G coverage. On the map, blue represents 3G, dark orange is AT&T’s old EDGE network and light orange its original GPRS data service. [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 3rd, 2008 at 10:39 am
Yep! If you do not live in a 1st, 2nd or 3rd tier city, you will NOT get 3G anytime soon. I’m good living in Dallas but you go 40 miles in any direction from the city and that game ends.
Now, that said Chris, at least AT&T IS working on it and has a plan. T-Mobile? Not so much….
July 3rd, 2008 at 11:41 am
The extra $10 a month will also get you GPS, and according to apple “significantly improved audio experience”. That alone might be worth the upgrade price for some.
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
82% of the US population lives where there is at least one provider of 3G coverage.
Moron.
-Russ
July 4th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Down here in Ozz.. 98% of Australians have 7.2 HSDPA coverage via Telstra.. This was achieved in 1 year..
Just turned off that pesky CDMA nonsense too..
That said, a physical map isn’t of much value, its really a population perspective over the geographical.. Doesn’t make a lot of sense to have huge coverage between Kansas City and Denver for example..
If Telstra can do it.. AT&T can do it.. I remember when I bought a Sierra Aircard with EDGE on it and it was HSDPA capable. The salesman told me HSDPA was right around the corner.. It was over a year before it made it to Denver..
We would all need to say no to the 3G phone to truly send a message.. Not much chance of that..
July 5th, 2008 at 12:31 am
A couple of interesting things here - a lot of the “tech” blogs and sites will give you all kinds of figures about what percentage of the population has access to 3G coverage, but fail to consider how many of those people are in fringe area - common in suburban settings - where reliability becomes the issue. The other false assumption is that people don’t move. Telling me that a high percentage of people have access is no good if people are mobile. Then moving between coverage areas becomes a problem. How come Europe and Australia can get the coverage done (with similar average users/tower stats to the US) yet carriers in the US can’t seem to get it done. They claim that population density is the issue, but that’s been shown more than once to be a nonsense argument. Coverage should be ubiquitous - period.
The other thing is that at least one of the talkbacks here points to an article that takes the coverage map to task. They suggest looking instead at the data coverage map, but guess what? The data coverage map, while showing the EDGE coverage to be pretty good, still shows the same 3G coverage areas as the voice map. Why? Because 3G is 3G!
July 5th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
All telcos have to have a network growth plan based on a forecasting plan.. These planning efforts started back in the old days of landlines when explosive growth occurred in housing and the telcos got caught flatfooted with new exchanges to be built, and many switches to be implemented.
In the mobile space, its all towers and one tower deployed can cover quite a bit of space. Most companies have several different brands of GSM technology and it makes it even more difficult with that sort of environment. But there is no excuse for not having a planned forecast that can cover +95% of your current customer base..
Just wondering if competition is so keen that capital investment in the network just isn’t a top priority and only gets the cursory investment. But until AT&T shows the strength of their network and its superiority it will always get caught in the price wars..
Verizon seems to have the best coverage and touts their strength in their adverts.. But doesn’t seem to have the desired result..
Interesting conundrum for the US telcos..