T-Mobile's HSPA+ network expanded to 9 additional cities

By on Aug 31, 2010 at 7:00 PM
General August 31, 2010

Just a quick note, T-Mobile has released a short press announcement to let you know that their HSPA+ network (for which there are not HSPA+ phones… yet) has just been expanded to nine additional cities. If you live in Boston, MA; Erie, PA; Fresno, CA; Palm Springs, CA; San Diego, CA; Miami, FL; Richmond, VA; Spokane, WA; or Topeka, KS you are now covered by the HSPA+ goodness. Here is the official announcement:

Today, T-Mobile USA, Inc. announced the continued expansion of its super-fast mobile broadband network to 100 million Americans in more than 55 major metropolitan areas.

T-Mobile’s HSPA+ network – which offers theoretical peak throughput speeds of 21Mbps – is now available in Boston, Mass.; Erie, Penn.; Fresno, Palm Springs and San Diego, Calif.; Miami, Fla.; Richmond, Va.; Spokane, Wash.; and Topeka, Kan.

“Our new network offers today’s available 4G speeds to more people than any other wireless network in the country and we’re not done yet.  We are now on pace to more than double our HSPA+ footprint – reaching more than 200 million people by this year – with plans to offer 42Mbps theoretical speeds in 2011,” said Neville Ray, chief network officer for T-Mobile USA.

For more information, please visit http://t-mobile-coverage.t-mobile.com/coverage.

Read

Tags:
, , , , , ,
58 Comments

Related Articles

  • JFA

    HSPA+ is REALLY nice. Im lovin’ it on my Nexus One, and it doesn’t fully take advantage of the network. However, i want T-Mobile to REALLY work on their coverage. It sucks when im in some buildings and my phone’s 3G drops and EDGE is barely existant. However, i know people on Sprint & Verizon who only get 1 bar of signal in those same buildings. Still one bar is way better than NO bars.

    They just really need to build out the coverage map. I feel that with the right marketing and excellent coverage, T-Mobile can be on top.

    • Chris

      Part of their problem is spectrum. Even if they own the exact same number and placement of towers as AT&T/VZW/Sprint, they’ll never have as good coverage due to the fact they don’t have the ability to offer higher quality 700/850MHz band spectrum in rural areas, where longer range is required, or downtown areas, where building penetration is a problem. What they need is a lot smaller, tighter cell grids and a lot more towers, which isn’t always possible due to NIMBY attitude about the aesthetic of cell phone towers. I love the idea of T-Mobile, and they could totally win me over as a subscriber, if they could just get capital to buy quality spectrum and improve their network. I’d love nothing more than for them to outright purchase AT&T, fire nearly everyone there, and take over the network, reprogramming their towers to operate correctly.

  • Dave

    I live in Arkansas which is officially not large enough for cell service providers to care much about, ATT just happens to have 3G coverage that sorta overlaps into where I live because of large population centers within about 100 miles but TMO probably never will.

    Now they’re working on 4g? Who cares, I don’t, I’ll probably never see it. It means nothing to me. It’s like espousing the benefits of air travel if you don’t live near a decent airport. It doesn’t matter how nice the newest planes are, I’d like the old ones in a location near me.

    Rant end.

    • Chris

      If it’s that bad, why not move? As far as 4G never being available, don’t be so pessimistic. VZW hopes to have 100% total network overlay by year’s end 2013. That means even rural areas, such as yours.

  • AShley

    @Dave who cares about you not getting t-mobile service the topic is clearly about t-mobile so if you don’t have the service why even comment…and how about you move out of the middle of nowhere so you have something to do besides comment on things that don’t even concern you.

  • http://www.news24.com Daniel

    Rollbots

1 2
blog comments powered by Disqus