Complain about a product or service

Wireless Broadband Still Expensive, Service Still Spotty

Sprint Tops Our Test, Cingular Still Trying to Get Into the Race

By Joseph S. Enoch
ConsumerAffairs.com

November 30, 2006

Broadband Access • Congress Passes Broadband Data Improvement Act • Report: Metered Broadband Bad For Consumers, Businesses • FCC Votes to Punish Comcast for Content Blocking • Comcast Tries to Polish Its Image • Communications Industry Urges Congress to Act on Broadband • Comcast Cuts Deal With Vonage on Internet Traffic • Court Upholds FCC's Video Rules • Report: U.S. Broadband Adoption Slowing • Critics: FCC Inaction Slows Economic Development • Few Are Neutral in Net Neutrality Battles • Google Petitions FCC Over Verizon's Use of Wireless Spectrum --- More ...

American consumers looking for broadband wireless service basically have three choices: Verizon, Sprint and Cingular. All three are fast, at least sometimes, all three are expensive and all three advertise unlimited downloads.

Over the past two years wireless providers have been developing and rolling out their national wireless Internet services. These services, which send and transmit data using cellular frequencies, are a portable wireless connection for laptops and cell phones that can, under the right conditions, reach broadband speeds.

Many of the latest cell phones, such as Blackberries and other PDAs, can connect to these services. But mostly, the services are used by laptops that are equipped with an easily-installed PCMIA card.

At ConsumerAffairs.com, we have been testing and using all three services for three months. What we learned is that each service has its advantages but overall, Sprint was the most likely to deliver a fast, usable signal. We subscribe and pay for both Verizon and Cingular services; Sprint provided us with a free test for three months.

All three services cost roughly the same: Cingular and Verizon are $60 per month with a qualifying voice plan or $80 per month alone. Sprint now offers its service for about $60 regardless of whether you have a voice plan.

Although Sprint did the best in our tests, none of these services is truly nationwide so it's best to perform thorough testing before committing to one plan. Because the service is so expensive, the companies will usually let you demo the product before committing. It's important to take advantage of that demo.

Be sure to check each company's wireless coverage map -- Verizon, Cingular and Sprint -- to make sure they can deliver a signal in the spots you're most likely to be. After all, at $80 a month, it's essential you get as much out of the service as possible.

The services all claim about 400-700 kilobytes per second downloading with bursts of more than 2 megabytes per second. Upload speeds flutter around 200 kb per second. So if you get a good signal in your home or office, this service could replace existing broadband connections such as DSL or cable.

However, it would not be wise to replace a standard broadband connection with a wireless one if you don't travel or work away from home or office. Wireless is slower than DSL or cable and costs about double those services. Wireless broadband is really intended for business people -- road warriors who need to be in touch 24/7.

At ConsumerAffairs.com, we're fairly typical business users. We use wireless broadband to connect from the U.S. Capitol and other points around Washington, D.C., as well as when traveling and as a back-up if the office T-1 goes down.

The Tests

Using the free ConsumerAffairs.com broadband test, we were able to test the services throughout various parts of the country.

In Washington, D.C., and in Manhattan, all three services tested well, reaching speeds close to, and in the case of Cingular, above 2 mb per second.

But outside those urban jungles, the services varied wildly. Sprint and Verizon, which use the faster and more reliable EVDO service, tested well in many rural locations.

Sprint in particular did well, surfing the web at about 400 kb per second in Reno, Nev., Scarsdale, N.Y., Indianapolis, Ind., Buffalo, N.Y., and even Uniontown, Pa., a town of about 14,000 people, located an hour south of Pittsburgh.

In most of those locations, Cingular had absolutely no signal. In Scarsdale and Indianapolis there were weak signals that yielded unbearably slow speeds and browsing times.

In our D.C. office Cingular reached the record download speed of 2.8 mb per second. However, using Cingular as a "nationwide" Internet provider is not practical and, as of this writing, Cingular's EDGE and 3G service simply can't compete with Verizon and Sprint's EVDO.

As far as services go, Sprint and Verizon were similar. Although Sprint is slowly unveiling a faster EVDO technology than Verizon, both performed well in various locations.

However, there is a catch with Verizon: it advertises its service as "unlimited," but in reality, if you download too much, as ConsumerAffairs.com found out, Verizon will cancel your account. It's a convenient way to end your contract but not so convenient if you're trying to do work away from the office.

Both Cingular and Sprint advertise their service as unlimited and representatives assured us that there are no limits on downloading. During our extensive tests of their service, this proved to be the case.

Another point to consider is the physical card you use to receive the service. Verizon and Sprint's cards are sturdy. But Cingular's card includes a required external antennae that is very flimsy. Although it has not broken during our testing period, it seems like it's only a matter of time.

Big Bucks

For most consumers, the current generation of wireless broadband is too expensive, too unreliable and too slow to be practical. There are enough Wi-Fi hotspots to satisfy most occasional travelers and wireless broadband is not really a suitable substitute for a hard-wired DSL or cable connection.

For dedicated business travelers who absolutely, positively need to be in touch and are willing to pay the big bucks, our tests give the nod to Sprint, with Verizon second and Cingular still trying to get into the race.

Long-Term Verizon Test

As he has recounted at great length, our somewhat irascible editor-in-chief, James R. Hood, has been using Verizon's wireless broadband service almost since the day it was introduced in the Washington, D.C., area. His first review -- in July 2005 -- pronounced it "the most shiftless, unreliable service we have ever paid good money for."

"At about $90 a month, it's far from cheap but we found it to work so poorly it would be overpriced at any price," Hood fumed.

Since then, however, the price has come down and service has improved notably as Verizon equips more and more of its towers with the EVDO technology, Hood reports.

Here are Hood's crude notes from his various travels over the last year. Like a comet, he tends to go to the same places, thus limiting the scope somewhat.

Gangbusters

So-so

Really Rotten

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Back to the top |