Verizon Wireless' Express Network Named 'Best of What's New'

If that's the best of what's new, I don't wanna see the worse

 

Good luck outfitting that TDMA network with GSM and GPRS...then EDGE...maybe you will have the same data speed as CDMA 1XRTT by 2004!!!
Good luck getting every customer to buy a new phone so you can shut down that TDMA network and free up some spectrum!
Too bad GPRS does squat for network capacity!

"What, my trusty TDMA phone won't work on your GPRS network? I'm not going to buy a new phone"

->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now you've seen "what's worse"

 

GPRS (General Packet Radio Services), claims a theoretical maximum speed of 115kbps. In the real world this translates into 30-50 kbit/s for the end-user using the packet mode.
CDMA2000 1xRTT, has a theoretical maximum speed of 153Kbps, according to Qualcomm. The typical speed for 1xRTT is 40Kbps - 60Kbps, though you might get much faster speeds in "bursts." Verizon and Sprint claim about 50 - 70kbps as typical speeds.

EDGE (Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution), which can be introduced over GPRS networks and claims top speed data rates of up to 384kbps. Normally, it can deliver about 120-150Kbit/s for the end-user using the packet mode.
CDMA2000 1xEV-DO, is a data-only system and has a maximum data rate of 2.4M bit/sec according to Qualcomm. In the real world you should be able to get data rates above 100Kbps. Some very optimistic cellular operators are hoping for 500Kbps. A more down-to-earth figure would be about 250kbps.

UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System), a fully mobile multimedia standard that will boost data bit rates to up to 384 Kbit/s in FDD mode and up to 2 Mbit/s in TDD mode. CDMA2000 1xEV-DV claims about 3-5 Mbps. Don't expect megabit speeds from either flavor at least in the beginning.

So it looks like the CDMA2000 path has a slight advantage at least on paper, but for practical purposes in the real world, whatever path chosen looks like will deliver about the same speed.

 

Chris54R

Good luck on getting all your billing systems consolidated...and converting all your analog areas...and hoping that the Express network gets turned on nationwide.

 

First, they have to figure out why their little "roam" lights don't come on in supposedly non-Verizon areas on the A/C plan (I've heard stories of this happening in Alltel markets as well as Canada!). Once they can figure out how to make the A/C plan to work reliably, then they can focus on bringing all of their network up to speed. Then maybe they can work on a nice way for the phones to actually USE express network. Why is there no 3G web service? Why only this "pay a fee for the privilege of playing a game for 30 days" business? At least Sprint gives you a web to go with that other crap.

 

Oh, by the way...your company's spectrum is crowded by Analog too Also, GPRS DOES equal the speed of 1xRTT. I don't know why I'm defending it. I use CDMA. I just hate the arrogant type of Verizon defenders. Your company is good, but not divine.

 

Crane, I am with you on Express Network.....see my post in General. I want to know why there is no Vision like service with "3G" web...some on Verizon!

 

My opinion on Verizon's express network and Sprint's vision is that they are both extremely slow. It takes forever to check e-mail and "surf" the web. Many times you just can't get on the web or e-mail because of system time-out problems.

Bottom line: Both companies spent too much money marketing 3G and not enough spent developing a truly business tool.

 

Petnukie

If you think data is slow now, maybe you would be happier with a Motorola bag phone, a portable cellular connector and a 10k connection that was the only truly nationwide data option available just five years ago.

CDMA 1Xrt is very robust and currently offering 50-70 K througput and 144k peak speeds... the delay you are probably experiencing is in the phone you are using...your wireless phone is not designed to process information that quickly.

So the network is there...the slow down you are seeing is most likely from the equipment you are using.

 

Wirelessbeachbum:

Your point well taken. My cell phone (4900) and others are not PC's. Therefore, they don't work as fast.

I've tested the T-Mobile sidekick and that is the future of hand-held internet devices. The sidekick is really fast and comes closest to being a business-centric machine.

 

Also, CDMA1XRTT is not a 3G technology....it's 2.5G. 1XRTT is just CDMA on steroids and makes the most of every bit of bandwith available just like GPRS does to GSM. A true 3G technology is a whole new approach at efficiently transmitting wireless data, not just a glorified version of the existing architecture.

 

Bobilito.

According to Newton's Telecom Dictionary:

CDMA 1xrt (or IS-95a) is the first 3G approach to be introduced... CDMA2000 3xMC, the high speed version operating at 2 Mbps will be the second 3G CDMA based solution &

Edge is the TDMA varient of IMT-2000 and also considered 3G.

GPRS is the only solution that is technically considered 2.5G

CDMA 1xrt is a whole new approach, verses using circuit switched 2G connection at 14.4, 1Xrt is using packet switching, that in my opinion is a whole new approach.

 

Hehe...I guess Newton works for Qualcomm

 

Wireless, help me to understand your point.

Albeit, I am not confusing my phone with a PC, yet at the same time, Vision is supposed to be faster; faster than the 2G network. Now you just stated to Petnukie that the wireless phone is not designed to process information quickly, so why did we spend $200 on a phone for which Vision speeds are supposed to be obtained with?

Personally, everything was faster for me before the switch.

 

ScandaLEX

Most of the phones being offered right now are the first Vision capable phones to hit the market...in the past the processors did not have to handle as much data so quickly because generally on most phones graphics were not downloaded only text, so I can understand where you would see a slow down in speeds. My opinion is that the next crop of Vision phones to hit the market will most likely come with more memory and faster processors.

We'll see.

 

No company is devine.

*CDMA 2000 is another name for 1xRTT. 1xRTT is backwards compatible for CDMA IS-95, so your new and old phones work on the same network. EVDO is the same way. EVDO, 1XRTT and IS-95 (all CDMA) co-exist on the same network, same spectrum and can be on the same handset/modem. This is one of the reason Sprint decided to go away from GSM (everyone remember Sprint Spectrum which became VoiceStream/T-Mobile) and chose CDMA. Sprint saw this coming...but they took a beating as they needed to move their subscribers onto their PCS plans which required a new phone.

**Analog is a spectrum hog, but 1XRTT handsets still support it.

***I'd rather have the problem of consolidating billing systems than RF networks that are incompatible and whose future technologies are difficult to implement.

****Verizon's Express Network is already more "national" than Sprint PCS (check the current service availabilities of both networks)...it just takes longer to upgrade a larger network to make it 100% upgraded.

*****GPRS is not as fast as 1XRTT...not even close. www.gsm.org can't even defend the speed limitations of GPRS. From today's handsets with small sized downloads, the speed difference is negligable, but from a PocketPC or Windows environment, they don't compare

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

But I agree that 3G services need to be used on the handsets themselves. BREW and web services should be over 1XRTT (and it will happen soon...but I don't know why it wasn't that way from the beginning). And handsets need to get more advanced. They are truly becoming miniture computers (so that explains why there are so many more bugs in getting them working correctly). If you have seen any of the handsets from Korea or Japan...you know they are coming. For some reason or another American consumers are just not as ready.

Also, I'm not sure I agree either with the subscription platform for BREW (or at least the prices), but that decision was a business decision made by people who know more than I about making a buck in this industry. We'll see how that turns out. But maybe that is why Verizon is the only carrier who is profitable, finances its operations off of revenue instead of venture capital or its parent company, and reinvests billions every year into improving its network. We'll see?

I really don't want to knock companies or individuals, but I will argue technology any day. Unfortunately companies have to make technology choices...

Healthly competition only makes everyone stronger!!! Hope everyone has a great holiday!

 

You quoted earlier that it's too bad GPRS does nothing for capacity, so far, CDMA 1X with Sprit has done nothing for capacity either. In my area, people still get the same capacity problems, drop calls, network busy, etc. I have to call my friend like 3 times just to get through to him, and he has Sprint.
On paper, CDMA 1x is suppose to free up more than half of the current capaity, but in reality, it has done nothing.

 

You are referring to Sprint. They use CDMA 1xrtt also, but their network coverage/quality has always been suspect...so that is the first reason your friend would not see added capacity.

But the main reason is that there are not enough customers with 1XRTT handsets yet. The network and handset must both be using 1X to reach the upgrade in capacity. Example: If Verizon were to replace all of the handsets on its network with 1x handsets (no data usage at all needed) it could double the number of subscribers on its network without sacrificing capacity/quality.

Overall it still will come down to the network you are on.

 

I see, thanks for the info. Makes sense.

 

Their network coverage/quality has always been suspect, just like Verizon's.

Sprint's network is backwards compatible so the new 3G cards do handle 2G voice calls, effectively adding capacity. The network and handset only have to both be using 1X to reach the 3G data speed. So it does come down to the network you are on And the area you are in. The area I am in CO, the Sprint network kills the Verizon network.

aiwapro, where is your friend when you try to call him (is he long distance)? What is the message you get or is it just a fast busy when you can't get through? Are you calling from your mobile or landline?

There are a few reasons you may not get through to him, such as the LEC trunks are too busy (local or LD). Also T-Mobile's or Sprint's trunks may be too busy. Or as stated before, capacity could be the problem, and again it could be T's (if your calling from your mobile) or Sprint's.

 

I get that all circuits are busy and to please try your call again later. I thought for a second it could be my phone too, but I tried in-between my calls to hi, to call someone else and it worked fine, but then I tried calling him again, and I got the same error.

By the way, he was right next to me, he was testing his ring/vibrate feature.

 

AT&T and Sprint have that same problem here in NYC

 

i agree 100% the speed difference was clearly noticable when i went from Sanyo 4900 to Sanyo 5300.