Welcome to the Android Central Forums Create Your Account or Ask a Question Answers in 5 minutes - no registration required!
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. Thread Author  Thread Author    #1  
    ksb63's Avatar

    Posts
    92 Posts
    Global Posts
    165 Global Posts

    Default 4g live in Central Tx

    Noticed 4g went live this morning Temple/Killeen
  2. #2  
    bugg77's Avatar

    Posts
    98 Posts
    Global Posts
    388 Global Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ksb63 View Post
    Noticed 4g went live this morning Temple/Killeen
    Congrats... but Argh!!! This is a source of endless frustration for me. How they can go live on LTE in DFW, Houston, San Antonio, and then skip Austin to go live in Temple/Killeen, Bryan/College Station, and Port Arthur/Beaumont just drives me batty.

    Hell, I'd just be happy if they said that Austin was on the list for 2011 and those other small areas still got LTE this year.
  3. #3  

    Default

    agreed. It makes no sense that they would skip over Austin. So frustrating!
  4. #4  
    bugg77's Avatar

    Posts
    98 Posts
    Global Posts
    388 Global Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phantomog View Post
    agreed. It makes no sense that they would skip over Austin. So frustrating!
    Here's the email I sent to VZW. I received a BS response that didn't provide any answers. It just simply said, "sorry".

    I don't understand how VZW can plan to expand their 4G LTE coverage in Texas in 2011 and leave out the Austin Metropolitan Area. Can someone tell me when Austin will make the list for LTE coverage? The Austin Metro area has 1.7M people and a large base of technology users (potential customers). But instead of activating LTE in Austin in 2011, VZW is going to turn on LTE coverage in Temple/Killeen (400K people), Bryan/College Station (215K people), and Beaumont/Port Arthur (380K people). I just don't understand how VZW can overlook the 35th largest metropolitan area in the US, the state capitol of the 2nd most populated state in the US, and home of the fifth largest university in the US. I doubt I'll get any serious response, but I'd love to know why those other small areas were chosen over Austin and when Austin can expect to see 4G LTE.

    Thank you for your time.
    I'm not trying to bash the other areas that are getting it. I'm happy for them, but I just don't get the reasoning behind it.
  5. Thread Author  Thread Author    #5  
    ksb63's Avatar

    Posts
    92 Posts
    Global Posts
    165 Global Posts

    Default

    I agree, all of the I-35 corridor should have been included Waco stays 1x most of time hardly ever have 3g there also just south of DFW had no service at all (Waxahachie) a month ago. At least phone calls go through on my route and at home which was always a crap shoot with the death star.
  6. #6  

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ksb63 View Post
    I agree, all of the I-35 corridor should have been included Waco stays 1x most of time hardly ever have 3g there also just south of DFW had no service at all (Waxahachie) a month ago. At least phone calls go through on my route and at home which was always a crap shoot with the death star.
    Your phone must be having issues, because I can go all along the I-35 corridor, including both I-35E and W, and have no less than 3G coverage, from the Mexican border to the Oklahoma border. I actually travel that area frequently being a truck driver. Granted, I don't keep my eyes glued on my phone's screen, every time I have looked at it, it says 3G.

    I'll be excited when parts of the I-45 corridor (where I live) gets 4G.
  7. #7  

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HighHandicap View Post
    Here's the email I sent to VZW. I received a BS response that didn't provide any answers. It just simply said, "sorry".



    I'm not trying to bash the other areas that are getting it. I'm happy for them, but I just don't get the reasoning behind it.
    My only guess is those smaller cities have far fewer towers than the Austin and surrounding areas so its a quicker/cheaper/easier upgrade. Still doesn't make sense that they wouldn't even announce plans for Austin.
  8. #8  

    Default

    I'd say it's because Austin probably has a huge smartphone per capita compared to other cities. They are probably scared we'd take the network down like what happened the other day
  9. Thread Author  Thread Author    #9  
    ksb63's Avatar

    Posts
    92 Posts
    Global Posts
    165 Global Posts

    Default

    We were off hi-way by a couple of miles and friends sprint phone had 1 bar att phone had 2 the 2 verizon phones flipped between 1 and none. I am always good at finding dead zones like the hotel we stayed in Rockport at least wifi worked but we had to walk to back side of parking lot to get signal (was that way with all carriers).

Posting Permissions