Voice over 4g lte

**Trentoncc24** · 05-17-2012, 10:56 PM

Just wanted to get some opinions. Am I the only one who thinks voice over 4g is a stupid idea? I mean verizon is always talking about how they're is only so much bandwidth they can allow on their system, yet they want to go ahead and funnel millions of voice conversations over it. They claim clearer conversations, but how important is this? To me whatever they're currently using is working perfectly fine. Any input?

**OhioG** · 05-18-2012, 01:07 AM

All I know is when I get a skype call on my thunderbolt, the clarity is impeccable and when I get it normally, people have trouble hearing me.

But Verizon's stance about bandwidth is total BS. They can afford VoLTE on their network currently with not much problems.

My opinion is Verizon is leveraging their current infrastructure on future customers so they dont have to make more improvements as they pick up more people. What better way to do that than to limit data.

**Forgetful** · 05-18-2012, 01:37 AM

V lte is going to suck literally (battery). Think how much battery Burns using 4g data, now our phone calls will be like that? Say hello to 1 hour talk times

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

**Synycalwon** · 05-18-2012, 09:29 AM

I don't really have an opinion on it at this point without knowing more about how it's going to be setup and how it's suppose to work. I can say though that Verizon knows that VoLTE has to be reliable like their existing voice service. This can only happen when LTE has the same footprint as their current 3G coverage as alluded to recently by their CFO. See page 13 of the transcript of the recent Verizon Investor Conference:

Fran Shammo - Verizon Communications Inc. - EVP & CFO
So the question was around the voice component of LTE. So you are talking about VoLTE and the critical piece of VoLTE is this. As we continue to build out the coverage, obviously the Verizon brand has been built around reliability of our network and coverage and the least dropped calls and ineffective attempts in the industry. And that is something that is very, very important to us. And the fact of VoLTE is VoLTE only works on LTE technology. So it is not backwards-compatible. So you need to have the coverage map that a customer would experience the same as 4G versus 3G because if we don't, we are going to have a lot of dropped calls and ineffective attempts and our customers will not understand why our network is not as reliable as the 3G network. So I think we are going to launch VoLTE at the end of this year, but you probably won't see us really push it until mid-'13 when we have that footprint.

By then, you'll also have new generation LTE phones that are going to be much more efficient in battery use than our Thunderbolts. And of course, there will be a lot of other older non LTE phones out there that will still require the older existing voice network. So, it's going to be a while before VoLTE fully supplants that existing network. So basically, it has yet to be seen how VoLTE will play out.

**realitydigg** · 05-18-2012, 12:59 PM

VoLTE should use less battery as you would only need one radio live at the time, just 4G instead of data over 4G and voice over 3G and it should be more efficient to manage all the data on one network type. Overall bandwidth from the cell towers should be the same or better since you are transferring a data load (voice) from one over the air transfer method to another, but still sending it back together, so this isn't new data, you are asking teh cell tower to do less, and could be managed and compressed more effectively.

**Trentoncc24** · 05-22-2012, 03:33 AM

Does they currently use 3g for voice now? I know there's area's where I get no 3g data at all but I still get phone signal to make calls.

**Synycalwon** · 05-22-2012, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by Trentoncc24

Does they currently use 3g for voice now? I know there's area's where I get no 3g data at all but I still get phone signal to make calls.

3G and LTE are for data only. Voice calls (and texts) use the 1x (old 2G) network.

**Mortiel** · 05-22-2012, 02:51 PM

VoLTE has a lot of potential for being a solid replacement for 1xRTT (2G) voice services.

If Verizon successfully migrates all cellular transmissions on to LTE (which by then it will likely be LTE Advanced), it means less maintenance cost, less towers needed, stronger coverage, faster speeds, BETTER battery life, better call quality... the list goes on.

Sadly, I would not expect the lessened cost to trickle down to the customers, but rather help investors build that Olympic-sized 24k gold swimming pool they always wanted. :P

**dms76** · 05-31-2012, 06:38 AM

I don't see them spending money on places like upper peninsula of Michigan. I barely get signal now, i literally can move 10ft in a direction and lose signal. Your telling me they are going to put money in small towns and upgrade to lte? I realize not anytime soon. I had better service with my old analog Motorola bag phone. Lol

Sent from my A100 using Tapatalk 2

**Jude526** · 06-08-2012, 12:48 AM

I live in Cave Creek. Rural town in As. Now have 4g

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk

**kedesa** · 06-13-2012, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by realitydigg

VoLTE should use less battery as you would only need one radio live at the time, just 4G instead of data over 4G and voice over 3G and it should be more efficient to manage all the data on one network type. Overall bandwidth from the cell towers should be the same or better since you are transferring a data load (voice) from one over the air transfer method to another, but still sending it back together, so this isn't new data, you are asking teh cell tower to do less, and could be managed and compressed more effectively.

Exactly. We lose a lot of efficiency powering different radios for voice/data.