Follow Us:
32

Rogers expanding LTE coverage to 28 additional cities by the end of 2012

By on July 9, 2012 at 9:01am in Mobile News, Rogers Wireless News


Rogers went live with their LTE network on July 7th, 2011, first in Ottawa, then expanded to other Canadian cities such as Montreal, Toronto, Halifax, St. John’s, Calgary and Vancouver. Today they are marking the 1-year LTE anniversary by announcing plans to expand coverage into 28 additional locations by the end of 2012, this is an increase of 3 cities from their previous announcement in January.

The complete list of cities to be graced with LTE are below, this also confirms the previous rumoured of both Hamilton and Cambridge:

Abbotsford, Ajax, Barrie, Burlington, Cambridge, Edmonton, Guelph, Hamilton, Kelowna, Kingston, Kitchener, London, Moncton, Niagara, Oakville, Oshawa, Pickering, Regina, Saskatoon, Sherbrooke, St. Catharines, Sudbury, Waterloo, Windsor, Winnipeg, Trois-Rivières, Quebec City and Victoria.

The Rogers LTE network will reach 20 million Canadians by the end of the year, which represents about 60% of the Canadian population. Rogers also noted that “More cities will be launched in 2013.”

Source: Redboard

  • WP74Life

    Québec City!
    Finally.

  • lukeiphone

    Good job!

  • Sean

    Excellent news hopefully Bell and Telus also continue to have aggressive roll outs.

    Well only two and a half years until I can experience LTE.

    • Kanjana

      Alex 10.01.2008Леха, в IE6 и ниже использование expression будет вызывать информационную панель, т.к. это japvicrsat и при этом код будет не валидным, причем если в браузере поддержка скриптов отключена, то это не сработает (подробнее ). Также есть варианты без использования expression, используя обертывающие div и отрицательные отступы. Посмотри и .Удачи

  • doug

    St. Catharines yesss!

  • Henaway

    Still nothing within a 4 hour drive of me. But I’m sure it’s great for those who can get it.

  • Shaggyskunk

    And yet, LTE coverage in Ottawa is still sketchy, why is that rogers? Too fast, too thin?

    • Eluder

      LTE coverage in Toronto is phenomenal, so must be something odd about Ottawa I guess.
      Don’t think it’s too fast too thin, that’s for sure.

    • Androidforlife

      Take Eluder’s comments with a gigantic grain of salt regarding Rogers. They could take his house for service, provide no service at all, break his contract all day long and he would still defend them. Check him over at howardforums some time. he has quite the reputation.

  • weetigo

    Winnipeg \o/

  • nightzone

    yay for Victoria!!! I can finally use my S3 to it’s full potential

    • RIPROBELLUS

      Just talked to your mom and she said you won’t be living up to full potential until you finally move out of the basement. Don’t be scared 30 is a good age to leave the nest better late then never !!!

  • Digs

    So every other town except red deer Alberta in the surrounding area?

  • TETHERMYFEATHERS

    I’m waiting on Fido to announce their LTE coverage. COME ON FIDO!!!!

  • joe

    the places that still don’t have 3g are ignored by lte as well. A rogers first indeed.

  • Shaggyskunk

    What’s odd about Ottawa? Let’s see, in the past half hour my phone has dropped from LTE to Edge & now back to 4g…. All the while, I haven’t moved more than 30 feet. Rogers Tech says that it’s because of the load on the network…. So yeah, too fast & too thin.

    • Androidforlife

      Again, it’s Eluder. You are wasting you breath trying to explain things to him.

  • metoo

    It’s Rogers people. Faster LTE, with the reliability that Rogers is famous for, effectively means no LTE.

    • Dee Zee

      I live in and area of Calgary that, according to the map, gives me LTE coverage. Have yet to see anything on my SG Note…

    • Rogers_Chris

      Hi Dee Zee, we’d like to look into this if you’ll let us. Tweet us @RogersHelps or leave us a comment on Facebook.com/Rogers and we’ll be happy to investigate.

  • Ryan

    Looking forward to LTE in Victoria. Hopefully it’s available outside the downtown core.

  • GrapeApe

    28 cities…?

    Yeah, if you start breaking out little tiny municipalities.

    Ajax & Pickering? Burlington & Cambridge? Niagara & StCatherines? Kitchener & Waterloo?
    Same essential coverage, and they aren’t really separate ‘cities’ except to local pride.

    This would be like breaking out North York, East York, Toronto, Scarborough and Etobicoke again.

    Talk about stretching to make it sound more substantial than it is.

    At least when Verizon launched LTE the ‘ 30 cities ‘ were truly seperate NFL cities. This is more like a handful of cities and then their adjunct municipalities.

    It makes it sound like they are expanding all over the country and massively, when really it’s still very concentrated.

    • Jordan

      You almost have a point about Ajax and Pickering but the other four are definitely distinct cities. Are you grumpy that they aren’t putting LTE coverage in Wiarton?

    • GrapeApe

      KW, and Cambridge & Burlington are not Geographically significant enough differences to warrant a list.
      Sarborough and Etobicoke, North York and Downtown T.O. are further apart, and far more significant in tower density.

      I’d prefer a more realistic #, the addition of those conjoined twins is just to over-inflate the stat, like all other tech #s. And what do you want to bet it’s maybe 2 towers in that city to call it LTE coverage, not actually multiple towers.

      Put a tower at the border of the two cities and on a good day you’lll get LTE in either.

      Paper launch or what’s likely underwhelming news. Like I said, verizon’s NFL cities launch got little press, but it was 30 distinct cities geographically dispearsed, with just Oakland and NY/NJ being even close, and they’re further apart than the list above.

  • Delz

    GrapeApe: it’s still 60% of the population.

    • GrapeApe

      Yeah, and so is Wind, but I still wouldn’t base getting service based on that little amount of coverage. It’s still a paper launch of a small footprint. News? Pfft. Not that anyone’s better, but this reporting of non-news is just bad all around.

  • Nick

    Pfft…maybe they should focus on expanding their coverage in Saskatchewan instead of adding addtional speed to two locations. If you aren’t in Regina or Saskatoon you’re basically screwed if you’re on the Rogers network.

    • Some Guy

      Something you may want to consider then is trying to buy a phone that is not Rogers. Just a thought, but it might work.
      As an additional note, in one meeting with a Roger’s rep ( I sell cell phones for a living so this meeting was with someone who knew a lot about Rogers ) and from my memory they explained that there was some difficulty with any of the carriers (Bell, Telus and Rogers ) getting into Saskatchewan at all, it has something to do with Sask Tel and government issues. Right now–from my understanding– neither of the Big Three have towers in Saskatchewan, they have merely brokered a deal in which their subscribers can roam.

  • More Coverage is a Good thing

    Wow they are increasing coverage, yet complaints keep rolling in, all those people complaining about LTE dropping probably don’t know how to set auto LTE or your phone is defective.

  • metoo

    ^Yeah, it must be defective phones.

    Please read lots of dripping sarcasm into my comment.

  • Matt

    Rogers has its own towers in Sask as does Bell. Bell and Telus do have a tower sharing agreement with Sasktel As well. Rogers has no excuse for the pitiful coverage in Saskatchewan. Only having HSPA in Regina and Saskatoon is a joke and the coverage can be very spotty even in the city. I have posted on Rogers Red board asking why they would put LTE in the major cities and not fill in the EDGE coverage with HSPA but still have not received a response.

  • joe

    you didn’t get the usual they’re always expanding like when i ask them on twitter.