<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: AT&amp;T&#8217;s Less-Than-Transparent 4G Coverage Map</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:28:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sharon</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-615478</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sharon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Apr 2011 03:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-615478</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think putting so much technologies and including features in a coverage map is useless because these new features will confuse the drivers instead providing additional information. Include what is really needed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think putting so much technologies and including features in a coverage map is useless because these new features will confuse the drivers instead providing additional information. Include what is really needed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim in SF</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-604594</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim in SF]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 04:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-604594</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A coverage map is useless if you can be in a 5 bar area and still dropping phone calls constantly.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A coverage map is useless if you can be in a 5 bar area and still dropping phone calls constantly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-604107</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 07:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-604107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[4G, 5G... 10G.. they&#039;ll still find a way to say you&#039;re outside coverage areas and pump up your bill.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>4G, 5G&#8230; 10G.. they&#8217;ll still find a way to say you&#8217;re outside coverage areas and pump up your bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nick</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-603887</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[nick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2011 19:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-603887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t understand why you are confused. There is no LTE right now so they don&#039;t show it, simple enough. Second, stop writing, for ever. Why even bring an iPhone into the mix when you are talking about 4G.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t understand why you are confused. There is no LTE right now so they don&#8217;t show it, simple enough. Second, stop writing, for ever. Why even bring an iPhone into the mix when you are talking about 4G.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-603780</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jay]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2011 15:34:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-603780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Did I read this right? Stacey Higginbotham tried to test AT&amp;T&#039;s &quot;4G&quot; HSPA+ or LTE networks on an iPhone that DOESN&#039;T WORK on HSPA+?  Isn&#039;t that like testing the Chevy Camaro by driving a Malibu?

People really want to know what the newer HSPA+ network can do versus a real-world LTE network.  This article doesn&#039;t help at all.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did I read this right? Stacey Higginbotham tried to test AT&amp;T&#8217;s &#8220;4G&#8221; HSPA+ or LTE networks on an iPhone that DOESN&#8217;T WORK on HSPA+?  Isn&#8217;t that like testing the Chevy Camaro by driving a Malibu?</p>
<p>People really want to know what the newer HSPA+ network can do versus a real-world LTE network.  This article doesn&#8217;t help at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Plunkett</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-603501</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Craig Plunkett]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 23:14:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-603501</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The real problem is that the radio connection from the tower to the computer may be upgraded to support higher speeds, but the tower is still connected to the network by a bendy straw, not backhaul that can support the higher wireless connection speed.  ATT says that they will only get to 60% fiber backhaul by the end of 2011. 

It is the same situation as having a wi-fi access point in your house that can support over 100 Megabit speed, but is only connected to a 10 Megabit or less broadband connection.  Your computer will tell you it&#039;s connected at 100 Meg, but you&#039;ll only be able to get 10 Meg.

This obviously leads to a mismatch of customer expectation and customer experience.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The real problem is that the radio connection from the tower to the computer may be upgraded to support higher speeds, but the tower is still connected to the network by a bendy straw, not backhaul that can support the higher wireless connection speed.  ATT says that they will only get to 60% fiber backhaul by the end of 2011. </p>
<p>It is the same situation as having a wi-fi access point in your house that can support over 100 Megabit speed, but is only connected to a 10 Megabit or less broadband connection.  Your computer will tell you it&#8217;s connected at 100 Meg, but you&#8217;ll only be able to get 10 Meg.</p>
<p>This obviously leads to a mismatch of customer expectation and customer experience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2011/03/02/atts-less-than-transparent-4g-coverage-map/#comment-603347</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[steve]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 18:28:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=303989#comment-603347</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Try a speed test on an Atrix or Inspire (the supposed 4G phones), both downloads and uploads are slower than the 7.2 mbps capable iPhone 4 and Captivate...

There is a petition on groubal about this, everyone should sign it...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Try a speed test on an Atrix or Inspire (the supposed 4G phones), both downloads and uploads are slower than the 7.2 mbps capable iPhone 4 and Captivate&#8230;</p>
<p>There is a petition on groubal about this, everyone should sign it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
