Sprint/Softbank deal has someone upset - Sprint Samsung Galaxy S III

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Starts-Whining-About-Sprint-SoftBank-Deal-121688

AT&T tried to do worse and buy out T-Mobile, which would have created a GSM monopoly. AT&T is only mad cause it would lower sprints prices, forcing them to lower theirs. This is awesome for the consumer, seeing as the prices have only been skyrocketing.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app

I don't think AT&T were whining at all. They never once said the deal would be negative. They said it would change the competitive nature of the wireless marketplace. Basically, they're telling the regulators to start being more lenient for the entire industry, including them. They're saying that there's no more risk of any monopolies now that a third competitor is gaining ground.
This wasn't a jab at the Sprint deal. It was a jab at the regulators. They want to get the FCC off their backs next time they want to buy spectrum or another company. This letter was very carefully worded to send that exact message; no more, no less.

ATT needs to stfu and start putting money into their network. even their DSL infrastructure sucks and outdated. their wireless network may survive but their days as a local telco and ISP are numbered. i remember years ago having to pay around $45 for basic phone service and each additional feature was extra.. $6 for callerid, $4 for call waiting, and didn't even include any long distance calling. A couple years later comcast added digital phone via cable lines for $39/mo. includes unlimited nationwide long distance, and every single calling feature included.
after switching ATT, they started sending us letters begging us to come back. they finally realized they lost the monopoly they once had and started lowering their prices, but they still haven't put a dime into improving their network. heck, you can't even get ATT uverse here and their main CO is only a couple miles away!
this is why i give Sprint a lot of credit. sure they might have some issues, but at least they don't sit on their ass waiting for money to fall from the sky.

tft;33024684
this is why i give Sprint a lot of credit. sure they might have some issues said:
Yea, which is why only 10 people have LTE right now, with 10 more people to be added by next year.:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

mrg02d said:
Yea, which is why only 10 people have LTE right now, with 10 more people to be added by next year.:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
before LTE sprint was already dumping money into 4G before any other carrier (WiMAX/Clearwire) IIRC they started building out Wimax in 2008 or earlier. the problem came when they decided to switch LTE technology, basically they started from scratch again. most think the reason for the switch was marketing and they didn't want to be the only WiMax "odd-ball". if it wasn't for this switch they would of had the most 4G coverage out of all the carriers.
anyway, once sprint fully rolls out LTE and LTE advanced using overlapping 800Mhz antennas,etc. and eliminating a lot of dead spots, they will have the most coverage compared to the rest.. Sprint probably has more towers than vzw and ATT combined.. the key is how quick they'll get all those Nextel antennas converted to CDMA/LTE.

tft said:
ATT needs to stfu and start putting money into their network. even their DSL infrastructure sucks and outdated. their wireless network may survive but their days as a local telco and ISP are numbered. i remember years ago having to pay around $45 for basic phone service and each additional feature was extra.. $6 for callerid, $4 for call waiting, and didn't even include any long distance calling. A couple years later comcast added digital phone via cable lines for $39/mo. includes unlimited nationwide long distance, and every single calling feature included.
after switching ATT, they started sending us letters begging us to come back. they finally realized they lost the monopoly they once had and started lowering their prices, but they still haven't put a dime into improving their network. heck, you can't even get ATT uverse here and their main CO is only a couple miles away!
this is why i give Sprint a lot of credit. sure they might have some issues, but at least they don't sit on their ass waiting for money to fall from the sky.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Their days as an ISP are far from being over. They provide backbone to most isp's out here. Comcast being one of them. AT&T won't be going any where any time soon.

Nevell said:
Their days as an ISP are far from being over. They provide backbone to most isp's out here. Comcast being one of them. AT&T won't be going any where any time soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they only have that backbone because they took over BellSouth which had most of the infrastructure. while they do have a few data center and they're interconnected with many other ISPs, im almost positive they aren't a major comcast bandwidth provider.. Sprint's backbone could be bigger than AT&T's. their internet subscribers.
At least VZW competes with Comcast putting out Fiber.. and by the way, the only reason AT&T has a wireless network, is because they took over another company many years ago, not because they built it.. so yeah, ATT still sucks when it comes to network building, expanding and investing money into it. :laugh:

tft said:
they only have that backbone because they took over BellSouth which had most of the infrastructure. while they do have a few data center and they're interconnected with many other ISPs, im almost positive they aren't a major comcast bandwidth provider.. Sprint's backbone could be bigger than AT&T's. their internet subscribers.
At least VZW competes with Comcast putting out Fiber.. and by the way, the only reason AT&T has a wireless network, is because they took over another company many years ago, not because they built it.. so yeah, ATT still sucks when it comes to network building, expanding and investing money into it. :laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To add to that both verizon and att said they are done rolling out uverse and fios which i think is dumb. Both of them are stifling advanced broadband going to rural areas which is crap but i understand that if those same places can be covered by lte then why use fiber but it is sooo much more reliable and consistent than lte

I remember cingular. What att bought and merged with there network. I do feel all in all that sprint will come out on top. Yes we all are waiting but i feel in the end we will be laughing at the others
Sent from my phone

I personally am glad to see both Sprint and t mobile looking like they are in a good position for solid growth over the next few years. Having four viable national carriers is good for the average consumer - at least I think it is a good thing.
But I can see this as both sour grapes and a ploy by AT&T. The sour grapes is obvious.
The ploy hear though is to play to what is left of the angry white guy xenophobia in this country. The Wireless spectrum in the US is looking like it is going to become the most valuable commodity ever with wireless traffic expected explode over the next five to seven years. See when Sprint takes back over clearwire they don't only hold the most wireless spectrum they hold the MOST wireless spectrum. As in if I'm not mistaken they hold as much or more than AT&T and Verizon combined.
So I'm thinking AT&T is hoping that the angry white xenophobes here will realize that the largest chunk (of what is about to become such a ridiculously valuable commodity) is about to be taken over by the Japanese. This to either put a halt to this takeover, or earn AT&T some kind of break as the government is organizing another chunk of spectrum for auction here in the next couple of years.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using XDA Premium HD app

dayv said:
I personally am glad to see both Sprint and t mobile looking like they are in a good position for solid growth over the next few years. Having four viable national carriers is good for the average consumer - at least I think it is a good thing.
But I can see this as both sour grapes and a ploy by AT&T. The sour grapes is obvious.
The ploy hear though is to play to what is left of the angry white guy xenophobia in this country. The Wireless spectrum in the US is looking like it is going to become the most valuable commodity ever with wireless traffic expected explode over the next five to seven years. See when Sprint takes back over clearwire they don't only hold the most wireless spectrum they hold the MOST wireless spectrum. As in if I'm not mistaken they hold as much or more than AT&T and Verizon combined.
So I'm thinking AT&T is hoping that the angry white xenophobes here will realize that the largest chunk (of what is about to become such a ridiculously valuable commodity) is about to be taken over by the Japanese. This to either put a halt to this takeover, or earn AT&T some kind of break as the government is organizing another chunk of spectrum for auction here in the next couple of years.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They don't want to stop this deal. They want it to go through because it gives them leverage next time they want spectrum or if they happen to want to buy up another company. As it stands, they are too large compared to Sprint and T-Mobile for the FCC to just give AT&T a free ride. But if Sprint can gain more ground on AT&T and Verizon, then the FCC can't play the antitrust card like they did with the T-Mobile deal.
I don't think AT&T cares what country SoftBank is from. Both of AT&T's other main competitors are controlled by foreign interests. If anyone else really cared if a company is 100% American, Verizon wouldn't have such a large share of the market.

EndlessDissent said:
I don't think AT&T cares what country SoftBank is from. Both of AT&T's other main competitors are controlled by foreign interests. If anyone else really cared if a company is 100% American, Verizon wouldn't have such a large share of the market.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think AT&T cares what country either. But I do think AT&T aware that there are enough xenophobic national protectionist people in this country to try and play that angle to get something out of this.
And believe me the spectrum that Sprint has is going to be a huge asset come sometime around 2016 (not that it isn't a huge asset now, it is just the value of this asset is going to go way up). The spectrum carried by the other telcos is dwarfed in comparison. And this spectrum is the big reason Softbank is interested in Sprint.
Hopefully Sprint and Softbank will take this opportunity and grow Sprint 's network. The big downside for us the average consumer would be if the only thing of value they see is the spectrum and they don't do anything other than a token upgrade wait for the value of the spectrum to grow and then just sell the spectrum off in chunks.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using XDA Premium HD app

jbadboy2007 said:
To add to that both verizon and att said they are done rolling out uverse and fios which i think is dumb. Both of them are stifling advanced broadband going to rural areas which is crap but i understand that if those same places can be covered by lte then why use fiber but it is sooo much more reliable and consistent than lte
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They stopped because all the Cable companies Lost a huge percentage of their customers and this was the first time DirecTv has lost customers, which was a fraction of what cable lost.
US homes drop pay-TV as DirecTV, Comcast, Time Warner lose subscribers
Meanwhile, UK officials recommend eliminating broadcast TV entirely.
by Jon Brodkin - Aug 2 2012, 8:15pm EDT
Information Technology
Large numbers of US homes have dropped pay-TV services, with big losses for satellite provider DirecTV, and cable companies Time Warner and Comcast. Rounding up the latest quarterly earnings results issued by major TV providers, Reuters reported today that Comcast lost 176,000 subscribers, Time Warner lost 169,000 customers, and DirecTV lost 52,000.
While Reuters said these losses total about 400,000 American homes dropping pay-TV service since the beginning of the year, it's still a small minority. Time Warner Cable has more than 12 million customers, for example, and many customers simply switched services, as Verizon's FiOS TV and AT&T's U-verse added 275,000 subscribers in the second quarter. The second quarter is traditionally weak because of people moving before summer and college students leaving campus.
But this quarter's losses were stark for DirecTV, which lost customers for the first time ever, and for Time Warner, who lost customers for the tenth straight quarter and lost more than analysts expected. Comcast's loss of 169,000 customers was actually an improvement over previous quarters. The losses were chalked up more to the economy rather than "cord-cutters" dropping TV service entirely.

As an interesting tidbit to throw into the mix...
I was talking with my company's Sprint account rep yesterday morning, and he said a couple of interesting things about the purchase.
One of which was that there were some persistent rumors going around internally that with the cash infusion, Sprint is taking a long, hard look at US Cellular. The reason being that they have such a strong 3G footprint, all they'd have to do is update our PRL's and it would be an instant fix for Sprint's 3G network in the midwest and the northern coasts.
He also mentioned, to my dismay, that Wisconsin is (for now) practically last on the list for LTE and Network Vision and we really shouldn't expect anything until 3rd or 4th quarter next year.

Dalmus said:
As an interesting tidbit to throw into the mix...
I was talking with my company's Sprint account rep yesterday morning, and he said a couple of interesting things about the purchase.
One of which was that there were some persistent rumors going around internally that with the cash infusion, Sprint is taking a long, hard look at US Cellular. The reason being that they have such a strong 3G footprint, all they'd have to do is update our PRL's and it would be an instant fix for Sprint's 3G network in the midwest and the northern coasts.
He also mentioned, to my dismay, that Wisconsin is (for now) practically last on the list for LTE and Network Vision and we really shouldn't expect anything until 3rd or 4th quarter next year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As much as I hate to say this about my home state, it's understandable. US Cellular has a pretty big hold on CDMA outside Verizon. I think those two pretty much own Wisconsin in that area. I spend a lot of time there around Madison and Lake Wisconsin, so I wouldn't mind having Sprint buy them too. It would certainly help the 3G situation around here without question, and I'm saying that from the Suburbs of Chicago where NV is well underway. I read somewhere that Sprint officially announced Chicago as an upgraded market, which is great, because they've been putting LTE towers all over the place.
I'm just hoping they don't slow down the rollout around this area because while it's certainly better than it's been previously, it's not good enough yet.

JBakey said:
AT&T tried to do worse and buy out T-Mobile, which would have created a GSM monopoly. AT&T is only mad cause it would lower sprints prices, forcing them to lower theirs. This is awesome for the consumer, seeing as the prices have only been skyrocketing.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice pun.

hayzooos said:
As much as I hate to say this about my home state, it's understandable. US Cellular has a pretty big hold on CDMA outside Verizon. I think those two pretty much own Wisconsin in that area. I spend a lot of time there around Madison and Lake Wisconsin, so I wouldn't mind having Sprint buy them too. It would certainly help the 3G situation around here without question, and I'm saying that from the Suburbs of Chicago where NV is well underway. I read somewhere that Sprint officially announced Chicago as an upgraded market, which is great, because they've been putting LTE towers all over the place.
I'm just hoping they don't slow down the rollout around this area because while it's certainly better than it's been previously, it's not good enough yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting news article yesterday that US Cellular is exiting the Chicago/Illinois market and selling those users and spectrum to Sprint. They're getting 20MHz of 1900MHz spectrum, and a little over half a million of USC's subscribers.
The odd thing is that Sprint did NOT purchase USC towers in the deal... So even though Sprint claims that the extra spectrum will improve the end-user experience, won't an extra 500,000 users on Sprint's already stressed towers cause a degradation?
I always heard that Sprint's problems were tower capacity, not spectrum crowding.

Dalmus said:
Interesting news article yesterday that US Cellular is exiting the Chicago/Illinois market and selling those users and spectrum to Sprint. They're getting 20MHz of 1900MHz spectrum, and a little over half a million of USC's subscribers.
The odd thing is that Sprint did NOT purchase USC towers in the deal... So even though Sprint claims that the extra spectrum will improve the end-user experience, won't an extra 500,000 users on Sprint's already stressed towers cause a degradation?
I always heard that Sprint's problems were tower capacity, not spectrum crowding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought I read 30 MHz. Regardless, I think the spectrum crowding and capacity problems were actually somewhat related. I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe the amount of spectrum they have dictates how they allocate tower capacity.

EndlessDissent said:
I thought I read 30 MHz. Regardless, I think the spectrum crowding and capacity problems were actually somewhat related. I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe the amount of spectrum they have dictates how they allocate tower capacity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We're both right. 20MHz in the Chicago market, and 10MHz in the St Louis market for a total of 30MHz.
I wonder if this was the deal that my Sprint Rep at work was referring to, or if there is something else in the works?

Related

AT&T buys T-Mobile US - uh-oh

I wonder what that means for us HD7 WP7 users. I also wonder if the bands will remain the same forever, or if there will be changes down the road. Could this be one possible reason for the delay of updates on WP7? My guess is yes, because two WP7 carriers in such talks would push everything else aside to complete them.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/20/atandt-agrees-to-buy-t-mobile-from-deutsche-telekom/
MartyLK said:
I wonder what that means for us HD7 WP7 users. I also wonder if the bands will remain the same forever, or if there will be changes down the road. Could this be one possible reason for the delay of updates on WP7? My guess is yes, because two WP7 carriers in such talks would push everything else aside to complete them.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/20/atandt-agrees-to-buy-t-mobile-from-deutsche-telekom/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The acquisition or merger will not be complete till sometime next year.
There is nothing to suggest that this news will hinder the update plans.
lqaddict said:
The acquisition or merger will not be complete till sometime next year.
There is nothing to suggest that this news will hinder the update plans.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only thing, though, as was the case with Sony and RIM, when two companies are involved with other dynamics, current affairs tend to take a back seat. That's how it was with Sony while they were in legal proceedings with RIM over some issue I can't remember. But when the proceedings were completed, RIM started putting out all manner of new devices and Sony started putting out some new portable stuff.
This blows. I currently have the HD7 on T-mobile. I hate At&T and would want to move to Sprint if this goes through.
thats until verizon buys sprint.. then we will have to choose virgin mobile or metro pcs
vHatch said:
This blows. I currently have the HD7 on T-mobile. I hate At&T and would want to move to Sprint if this goes through.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only thing bad about AT&T compared to T-Mobile is the pricing, and the fact that T-Mobile has free roaming to make up for their terrible Voice Coverage (Data Coverage is still pretty crappy).
AT&T Actually has been putting up new towers here, T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon haven't been adding anything and none of them get any coverage here: T-Mobile Roams and that's free so if you only need voice coverage I guess it works. AT&T put up a new 3G tower a mile away.
It won't mean anything for AWS Band phone users.
The same thing happened when AT&T Brought Cingular, and Sprint brought Nextel. There are still iDen phones out there working, almost a decade or so later...
HoorayBeer said:
thats until verizon buys sprint.. then we will have to choose virgin mobile or metro pcs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Metro PCS practically doesn't exist around here, and Virgin/Boost are both terrible around here because Sprint has terrible coverage. Almost as bad as T-Mobile, with only 1/3rd the 3G speeds and worse phone choices.
Hopefully the influx of customers into AT&T and the larger infrastructure leads them to compete more rigorously with Verizon when it comes to pricing, since in about 2 years or so they can mitigate a lot of the coverage differences...
HoorayBeer said:
thats until verizon buys sprint.. then we will have to choose virgin mobile or metro pcs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MetroPCS is a subsidy of Sprint.
Not sure who owns Virgin though.
Sent from my Bionix powered Vibrant
1 GSM provider, damn.
AT&T phone selection sucks.
lqaddict said:
MetroPCS is a subsidy of Sprint.
Not sure who owns Virgin though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you get that information? I knew Boost was a part of Sprint, but MetroPCS?
xmckinzie said:
Where did you get that information? I knew Boost was a part of Sprint, but MetroPCS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad, I was thinking of Boost Mobile. The PCS in the name suggested that it was Sprint (Sprint PCS with the red wings and a pin )
Any way MetroPCS footprint is sooooo small they might as well get under Sprint.
vetvito said:
1 GSM provider, damn.
AT&T phone selection sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Compared to T-Mobile's selection, AT&T's selection is much better...though I do agree their selection could be much better with more desired smartphones.
Metro PCS, and Cricket are all under Leap Wireless, I think. Yes they are small.
I hope AT&T grandfather us T-Mobile users in. AT&T plans are outrageous.
vetvito said:
1 GSM provider, damn.
AT&T phone selection sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? AT&T actually has a better selection of phones than Verizon. The only thing that sucked was their selection of Android phones, but that was remedied quickly after they lost iPhone exclusivity.
They have the best selection of Blackberries.
They've generally carried more Windows Mobile and Symbian Phones than the competitors.
They have the iPhone, and they have both mid-range and high end Android phones.
They carried the Pre and Pixi Plus.
Now that they've lost iPhone exclusivity, their phone selection actually got better.
One has to be blind to actually say AT&T's phone selection sucks. They are the only carrier without a clear bias when it comes to smartphone OSes. Yes, they pushed their exclusive iPhone, but they carry/carried literally everything else from Android to WP7... Verizon and T-Mobile (and now even Sprint) all seem to care pretty much only about Android. Verizon cares about the iPhone because they wanted to leech customers from AT&T, but I guess that didn't work as planned since the lines were embarassingly thin when that launched...
Also, LTE is a GSM technology so eventually every major carrier will migrate to that. AT&T (GSM) buying T-Mobile (GSM) just makes it easier for them to transition to LTE, gives them greater capacity, and gives them the largest 4G LTE coverage area of all the major carriers.
Also, I believe Virgin is owned by Sprint as well.
I got away from Cingular/AT&T as fast as I could in the past. I despised their service, their pricing, and their overall level of customer support. I could not stand the position I was in with them, and honestly, I've never had a single problem with T-Mobile...
However, I am not as pessimistic about this announcement as the rest of the T-Mobile world is. I see this as a potential win-win for both parties, which will eventually become one. T-Mobile has the right idea for everything plan oriented in my eyes, but they've never had the superior budget and revenue that AT&T and Verizon have. This allows them to have the cash flow to implement ideas. I do think AT&T has seen T-Mobile's success, which is obviously why they went after them. I do believe they will incorporate the best of both worlds... these companies aren't juggernauts because they've made the wrong decisions their entire existence... I promise you that. It also gives them both a much stronger spectrum and coverage. There are places I have perfect service and an AT&T user didn't, and vice versa... This eliminates that... It'll obviously take a great deal of time, but it's going to improve the service.
I won't be 'jumping ship' like the Magenta lovers on TmoNews are announcing... I'm looking forward to the positives. I'm also looking forward to the decrease in Android superiority in my handset selection. I guess time will tell all.
FiyaFleye said:
I got away from Cingular/AT&T as fast as I could in the past. I despised their service, their pricing, and their overall level of customer support. I could not stand the position I was in with them, and honestly, I've never had a single problem with T-Mobile...
However, I am not as pessimistic about this announcement as the rest of the T-Mobile world is. I see this as a potential win-win for both parties, which will eventually become one. T-Mobile has the right idea for everything plan oriented in my eyes, but they've never had the superior budget and revenue that AT&T and Verizon have. This allows them to have the cash flow to implement ideas. I do think AT&T has seen T-Mobile's success, which is obviously why they went after them. I do believe they will incorporate the best of both worlds... these companies aren't juggernauts because they've made the wrong decisions their entire existence... I promise you that. It also gives them both a much stronger spectrum and coverage. There are places I have perfect service and an AT&T user didn't, and vice versa... This eliminates that... It'll obviously take a great deal of time, but it's going to improve the service.
I won't be 'jumping ship' like the Magenta lovers on TmoNews are announcing... I'm looking forward to the positives. I'm also looking forward to the decrease in Android superiority in my handset selection. I guess time will tell all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Problem is if this is the kind of thing you get from at&t now, how much worse will it be when they have more customers and have to throttle everybody: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KupMmHfRWzQ&feature=player_embedded#at=12. Tmobile has been good with not messing with phone capability or trying to hoodwink customers, with only at&t as the sole GSM provider there is no choice for anyone who travels a lot and wants to avoid ridiculous roaming fees.
efjay said:
Problem is if this is the kind of thing you get from at&t now, how much worse will it be when they have more customers and have to throttle everybody: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KupMmHfRWzQ&feature=player_embedded#at=12. Tmobile has been good with not messing with phone capability or trying to hoodwink customers, with only at&t as the sole GSM provider there is no choice for anyone who travels a lot and wants to avoid ridiculous roaming fees.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AT&T has proven to take good qualities and utilize them... Like Rollover when they acquired (re-aquired?) Cingular. You have to understand, they are going to have T-Mobile towers now, already running HSPA+ which keeps getting better... I'm sure in this year they are going to be getting their HSPA up to T-Mobile standards so when they switch happens its perfect. Then you have an amazing infrastructure to establish your LTE network. I'm personally being optimistic here... You gain nothing in life being pessimistic, especially about a service you're bound to.
Unsatisfied with the customer service and network stability of AT&T... Not sure what would happen when T-mobile users are added in.
Also I'm worried if AT&T would have less motivation to build tower after T-Mobile is acquired.
amtrakcn said:
Unsatisfied with the customer service and network stability of AT&T... Not sure what would happen when T-mobile users are added in.
Also I'm worried if AT&T would have less motivation to build tower after T-Mobile is acquired.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AT&T & T-Mobile aren't the only competing mobile providers... AT&T still has a variety of other carriers to compete with. To think they're going to stand around and do nothing now is ridiculous, and honestly, Verizon is their bigger competition... this just gives AT&T more towers and more power to implement features... Also provides T-Mobile's know-how and very well created/handled HSPA+...
This is great news for me as a AT&T customer where I work which is in an Automotive Paint shop AT&T barely comes in but T-Mobile comes in great so hopefully the towers will share the same signals...
We do however have a contract with Verizon and they have equipment within our facility that boosts the CDMA signal which we have found does sometimes cancel out the GSM network but on rare occasions...
I just prefer AT&T as I use Uverse and love it and really like the rollover minute plan and how I can use the free wifi everywhere through AT&T...
My main concern is since AT&T bought T-Mobile how long will it take before AT&T will be able to start accessing the T-Mobile towers and vice versa?

Understanding Sprint's Strategy

Today’s Sprint strategy meeting revealed a significant amount of information about the future of the Now Network. Sprint has began the rollout of its new network and the rapid deployment of LTE on their 800 and 1900MHz frequencies. In fact, the “Network Vision” deployment is going so well that Sprint is expecting to be completely finished by the of end of 2013, rather than the speculated 3 to 5 years.
Sprint is investing $4 to $5 billion into “Network Vision,” with an expected net return of $10 to $11 billion by 2017. Sprint is expecting to launch it’s first LTE device by mid-2012 (posibly an LTE EVO device) and close the year with 15 LTE devices in it’s lineup. The agreement between Clearwire and Sprint is set expire at the end of 2012. Sprint will sell WiMax devices all the way through til the end of 2012, but support for WiMax devices will continue for an unspecified period beyond 2012.
Sprint is progressively turning over the Nextel 800MHz spectrum for use on CDMA. The 800 and 1900MHz spectra are owned and operated by Sprint, and will provide for voice, data, and 4G as per “Network Vision.” Pending FCC approval due to GPS interference, LightSquared’s 1600MHz spectrum will also be used exclusively for LTE on Sprint, in addition to the 800 and 1900MHz frequencies. There are no plans to use Clearwire or their 2.5GHz spectrum after 2012. However, Sprint is waiting to see what happens with their network change to LTE.
Many of you have numerous questions such as: “Why is LightSquared paying Sprint to use their LTE network?”, “Where is Sprint getting the money to invest in “Network Vision?”, “What is going to happen to my WiMax device?”, or “How does this effect me?” Keep reading for answers to all these questions.
http://briefmobile.com/understanding-sprints-strategy
My question is why do they need so many frequencys of lte
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
gtuansdiamm said:
My question is why do they need so many frequencys of lte
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because it answers spectrum issues while allowing for building penetration when needed.
gtuansdiamm said:
My question is why do they need so many frequencys of lte
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1900MHz will be the primary LTE usage. 800MHz will be used by around 20% of users, and that's mainly deep in buildings and in extremely rural areas. 1600MHz is basically a bonus that came with LightSquare. There is still a chance the FCC might not pass it's usage of the frequency because it is so close to the GPS frequency. It's only 20MHz of spectrum in the 1600MHz realm, so it's no big deal. It's the money that Sprint needs.
Does this mean that our Wimax devices will be worthless? I hate that we have to pay an up charge for 4g devices using a technology that will not be in service in two years and Sprint really dragged their butts in trying to implement in the first place. I will probably upgrade to a new device by this time, but it is really pissing me off that they do this and cancel the one year upgrade.
Not that my Wimax is really doing anything in the first place, whenever I go to a place that has Wimax coverage (per Clearmax's maps) I can get just enough signal for my phone to tell me it has 4g. I get excited and then find out that its not strong enough and this is with two different phones (Epic & Epic Touch) and then the phone gives up on connecting to 4g anyway.
I paid the 3g up charge around 2006 when I lived in a town that did not have 3g coverage. I did not mind as Sprint upgraded their towers and eventually got me 3g. I would be pissed to pay this fee on phone using technology that they will abandon requiring me to buy something else to take advantage of newer technology that I have subsidized through a charge that I have never really taken advantage of.
Thanks Sprint for selling us devices with an up charge for a technology that you will abandon in a few years.
mag44 said:
Does this mean that our Wimax devices will be worthless? I hate that we have to pay an up charge for 4g devices using a technology that will not be in service in two years and Sprint really dragged their butts in trying to implement in the first place. I will probably upgrade to a new device by this time, but it is really pissing me off that they do this and cancel the one year upgrade.
Not that my Wimax is really doing anything in the first place, whenever I go to a place that has Wimax coverage (per Clearmax's maps) I can get just enough signal for my phone to tell me it has 4g. I get excited and then find out that its not strong enough and this is with two different phones (Epic & Epic Touch) and then the phone gives up on connecting to 4g anyway.
I paid the 3g up charge around 2006 when I lived in a town that did not have 3g coverage. I did not mind as Sprint upgraded their towers and eventually got me 3g. I would be pissed to pay this fee on phone using technology that they will abandon requiring me to buy something else to take advantage of newer technology that I have subsidized through a charge that I have never really taken advantage of.
Thanks Sprint for selling us devices with an up charge for a technology that you will abandon in a few years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WiMax will be supported for around 2 to 3 years after 2012. I will bet on that.
newalker91 said:
Stop it. You're not paying any fee for 4G, you're paying for having a data intensive smartphone. So tired of hearing people whine about $10 saying it's for a service they don't get. It is not a charge for 4G. Go price a plan on another unlimited carri- oh wait you cant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, corporate double speak from from Sprint. They did the exact SAME THING during the 3G roll out. I remember I had a Samsung A900 phone at the time. You are paying to subside their 4G roll out and I personally don't care about this if they didn't bungle it with this Wimax crap that they are abandoning in a few years.
Data intensive is just a joke after they realized that they weren't going to get 4g into many markets and even the markets that they got into implemented it in the coverage was too spotty.
Anyway If they really wanted to tax "data intensive" phones why didn't they do this earlier, they had phones that sucked up data before this whole charge.
I'm not complaining about the charge itself, I would appreciate it if it was used like the 3G charge. Which I believe helped the speed of the 3g implementation. I have been with Sprint since 2002 moved from a big city to a smaller town since then and was impressed with their service upgrades in the 2006~2007 time period.
mag44 said:
Yes, corporate double speak from from Sprint. They did the exact SAME THING during the 3G roll out. I remember I had a Samsung A900 phone at the time. You are paying to subside their 4G roll out and I personally don't care about this if they didn't bungle it with this Wimax crap that they are abandoning in a few years.
Data intensive is just a joke after they realized that they weren't going to get 4g into many markets and even the markets that they got into implemented it in the coverage was too spotty.
Anyway If they really wanted to tax "data intensive" phones why didn't they do this earlier, they had phones that sucked up data before this whole charge.
I'm not complaining about the charge itself, I would appreciate it if it was used like the 3G charge. Which I believe helped the speed of the 3g implementation. I have been with Sprint since 2002 moved from a big city to a smaller town since then and was impressed with their service upgrades in the 2006~2007 time period.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what if you are? They have to pay for it some how!
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
newalker91 said:
Stop it. You're not paying any fee for 4G, you're paying for having a data intensive smartphone. So tired of hearing people whine about $10 saying it's for a service they don't get. It is not a charge for 4G. Go price a plan on another unlimited carri- oh wait you cant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, it's not worth it.
It's been discussed and proven 10000000000000000000000000000 times on this boards.
They're trolls.
They should honestly get a ban for not reading and just trolling.
Korey_Nicholson said:
So what if you are? They have to pay for it some how!
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The whole point is they picked the wrong 4g technology. They decided to charge people for 4g initially, then realized that they messed up and decided to call the extra charge to a "data intensive" fee to cover their butts so people would not complain about not having 4g. And people like me would get labeled as whiners for even bringing up the issue. I travel a lot and even when I am in 4g cities the coverage is spotty at best. Now Sprint has changed paths, along with their upgrade offer, potentially leaving people in the dust with their extra fees.
Like I said in my earlier post I paid the extra fee to have a 3g phone when they first came out, but I would be pissed if they changed to some new 3g technology and my phone lost one of its selling points. I didn't mind that I got no 3g service at first in my home town but it eventually came.
mag44 said:
The whole point is they picked the wrong 4g technology. They decided to charge people for 4g initially, then realized that they messed up and decided to call the extra charge to a "data intensive" fee to cover their butts so people would not complain about not having 4g. And people like me would get labeled as whiners for even bringing up the issue. I travel a lot and even when I am in 4g cities the coverage is spotty at best. Now Sprint has changed paths, along with their upgrade offer, potentially leaving people in the dust with their extra fees.
Like I said in my earlier post I paid the extra fee to have a 3g phone when they first came out, but I would be pissed if they changed to some new 3g technology and my phone lost one of its selling points. I didn't mind that I got no 3g service at first in my home town but it eventually came.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) At no point was it ever labeled a 4g fee.
2) By the time the Wimax network is shut down no one on XDA will have one and most of the rest of the population will have moved on as well.
See newalker91....its pointless.
Its literally the same pointless and rehashed arguments that have been used the last year and a half
newalker91 said:
They have openly stated that the Premium Data fee is to help carry the costs of both 4G roll-out and 3G backhaul improvements. The reason they need to do these things is because of the fact that a smartphone can now burn through 5-10 GB of data in a month without much effort at all. With the increase in data streaming/file hosting/social networking applications, it will only get higher. Add in the addition of the iPhone, the network cannot handle it. People want more than what they pay for, it's a rule of thumb with any service, it just gets really frustrating after hearing it day in and day out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I keep hearing the iphone will take down your network argument but how is an iphone any different than any top line android phone. They run the same or similar applications.
Anyway, I don't think anyone understands my frustration or bothered to read my posts. I DO NOT MIND PAYING THE EXTRA DATA FEE. I just feel used by having to pay to subsidies for some crappy "4g" technology that Sprint is abandoning and changed their phone upgrade policies to screw people who are attempting to take advantage of at the moment.
I have been a Sprint customer since 2002 and like their service for the most part, they provide value that I have not seen with the other carriers. I also love move Epic Touch it is a great phone its just stuff like this that gets me pissed off.
---------- Post added at 01:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:53 AM ----------
mattykinsx said:
1) At no point was it ever labeled a 4g fee.
2) By the time the Wimax network is shut down no one on XDA will have one and most of the rest of the population will have moved on as well.
See newalker91....its pointless.
Its literally the same pointless and rehashed arguments that have been used the last year and a half
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay not a 4g data fee but a PREMIUM DATA FEE. The 4g was not the total decider but it was a major decision point in their implementation of this fee. And I think that you are missing the point, I honestly don't care about the fee if they were using this to improve their Wimax. As far as phones using more data, they've had plenty of smartphones on the network before they did this, it was the 4g that allowed them to charge people.
http://androidandme.com/2010/05/new...s-mandatory-10-premium-29-for-mobile-hotspot/
Argument is also not "rehashed" as Sprint didn't decide to abandon their technology until this week but reading comprehension is beyond you so I will have to forgive you.
Again not complaining about the fee itself, I'm complaining about Sprints Wimax wasteland. If you read my posts I paid a $10 fee for my Samsung A900 3g and did not care because it garnered results. But here it ends up subsidizing some worthless and eventually abandoned technology. But, I am just a troll so what do I know.
And saying that nobody will have a wimax phone by the time they are phased out is an excellent argument. First, Sprint has changed their upgrade polices so many people NOT ON XDA (I do care about people not on this website) will be stuck on second tier wimax crap. Next, if you have a 4G phone right now you are paying for 4g wimax coverage (Yes you are also paying for the great camera on the phone and your facebook usage but if you read Sprint's statement this is mainly driven by 4g). I know that Sprint's official statements say that this extra charge is to cover the amount of data used by these phones but they decided to wait until their 4g phones were release and their poorly implemented 4g roll out. Its not smart to say its okay because by the time it comes through "we'll all have new phones".
And one more question, "Is the regular user burning through 5~10 GB of Data of their phone?". The only people that I know doing this are people who stream Netflix or something similar, who are not in the majority and Nextflix is not on every phone yet. I understand that there are users using an healthy amount of data on their phones but these people are NOT in the majority.
Although take my words for what its worth I just a troll though I've been here longer than the people who think that I am
newalker91 said:
They have openly stated that the Premium Data fee is to help carry the costs of both 4G roll-out and 3G backhaul improvements. The reason they need to do these things is because of the fact that a smartphone can now burn through 5-10 GB of data in a month without much effort at all. With the increase in data streaming/file hosting/social networking applications, it will only get higher. Add in the addition of the iPhone, the network cannot handle it. People want more than what they pay for, it's a rule of thumb with any service, it just gets really frustrating after hearing it day in and day out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except we were just sold shiny new $600 phones, of which 4G is a prominent selling point... and now the majority of us in the country who don't currently have WiMAX are now hung out to dry for 2 years because we have no hope of ever GETTING 4G unless we want to fork out ANOTHER $600 for a new phone.
If I knew I was going to benefit by eventually being able to use 4G with this device, or even get reasonable 3G speeds in the major city I live in, I wouldn't be resentful of the fee at all. However, I will never be able to use 4G on this phone, and they could triple my current average 3G speeds and I'd be up to a whopping .5mbps.
Dalmus said:
Except we were just sold shiny new $600 phones, of which 4G is a prominent selling point... and now the majority of us in the country who don't currently have WiMAX are now hung out to dry for 2 years because we have no hope of ever GETTING 4G unless we want to fork out ANOTHER $600 for a new phone.
If I knew I was going to benefit by eventually being able to use 4G with this device, or even get reasonable 3G speeds in the major city I live in, I wouldn't be resentful of the fee at all. However, I will never be able to use 4G on this phone, and they could triple my current average 3G speeds and I'd be up to a whopping .5mbps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More like 1.5 mb/s consistently
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Dalmus said:
Except we were just sold shiny new $600 phones, of which 4G is a prominent selling point... and now the majority of us in the country who don't currently have WiMAX are now hung out to dry for 2 years because we have no hope of ever GETTING 4G unless we want to fork out ANOTHER $600 for a new phone.
If I knew I was going to benefit by eventually being able to use 4G with this device, or even get reasonable 3G speeds in the major city I live in, I wouldn't be resentful of the fee at all. However, I will never be able to use 4G on this phone, and they could triple my current average 3G speeds and I'd be up to a whopping .5mbps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the gimmick that is "4g" is that big of a deal to you then sell your phone, go back to whatever phone you had and use that money when the LTE devices are available.
When Sprint Vision is released the 3g will be plenty fast.
Believe it or not, I know Verizon has convinced people of otherwise, you don't need 20mbit/s on your phone.
Or any speed close.
Christ, most people don't even have 20 mbit/s in their home!
Is that a server in your pocket? Didn't think so...
Nice XDAdvertisement, Mr. Nicholson.
k0nane said:
Nice XDAdvertisement, Mr. Nicholson.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hehe , attack strategy
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I am fine with 400-600KB/s
I must say I'm sad that I bought the ET4g and will never in its lifeget to turn on the 4g radio... seriously though its a little saddening I see both side of the story. When I got my evo4g I had 1.2Mb/sec download which is less than half of verizons 3g speeds on kauai and now in the last 6 months I'm at .3-.2 Mb/sec. Just makes me sad is all. I have a ferrari of a phone with a moped engine of a network hahahaha
mattykinsx said:
If the gimmick that is "4g" is that big of a deal to you then sell your phone, go back to whatever phone you had and use that money when the LTE devices are available.
When Sprint Vision is released the 3g will be plenty fast.
Believe it or not, I know Verizon has convinced people of otherwise, you don't need 20mbit/s on your phone.
Or any speed close.
Christ, most people don't even have 20 mbit/s in their home!
Is that a server in your pocket? Didn't think so...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, 4G isn't a big deal to me... And no, I don't need 20 mbits. You are right.
However, when I'm paying a "premium data fee" and the vast majority of the locations I go in the large city I live in have data speeds of about 15-20 kbytes/s, I get irritated. That's 1xRTT speeds. Three blocks from a tower. How do I know? Because I can force roam onto Verizon and get the same data speeds as I do native on Sprint.
If I lived in the middle of nowhere, I would expect bad 3G coverage, but I don't. I'm three freaking blocks from a Sprint tower, in a top 20 city in the country. I get the same speeds at 4am as I do at 4pm when all the 15 year olds get home from school and play on their phones.
And now, I get to wait until some mysterious time between now and the end of 2013 for them to implement their Network Vision plan in my area. Then my speeds can triple, and I'll get and average of 60 kbytes, which is still slower than Verizon, AT&T, and even Billy Bob's Cellular Emporium.
Believe me, I stay because I get a 25% discount from work, so my monthly bill is far cheaper than anything Verizon or AT&T can offer. But that is the ONLY reason. I generally discourage people from moving to Sprint, which in the long haul is worse for Sprint than if just left for Verizon.
Maybe Network Vision will result in finally getting the same, or at least similar, 3G speeds as everyone else on the planet... I'll be a happy camper. But with Sprint's history of a decreasing network footprint and decreasing data speeds, I'm not going to count on it.

Any news on the Galaxy Nexus coming to T-mobile?

Now that verizon has the Samsung galaxy nexus, I was wondering if anyone heard or knows any sort of news for the release on tmobile? I was thinking to import it but I don't want to go through the hassle of sending it back and forth if something were to happen to it.
No , nothing flying around anywhere about that. If it ever does, it will be a while. The ATT GSM variant passed through the FCC a while back, so ATT is def getting it. You might be in for a looong wait if you decide not to import, that is if Tmo even gets it, which I doubt we will.
I'd be very wary of signing a contract with T-Mobile right now. They are looking to get out of the US market as quickly as possible. If the rumors about selling contracts to Leap Wireless, or the DirecTV deal are true, I'm not sure I'd want to be under contract knowing that I might be stuck in limbo once the company decides their long term plans.
I just got off of them after being a customer since 2002 after the Voicestream buyout. It feels good!
triStateMindgate said:
No , nothing flying around anywhere about that. If it ever does, it will be a while. The ATT GSM variant passed through the FCC a while back, so ATT is def getting it. You might be in for a looong wait if you decide not to import, that is if Tmo even gets it, which I doubt we will.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong, that was the Telus version that passed the FCC just like how the Bell Mobile passed the FCC a few weeks before that. There has yet to be a GNexus for GSM USA carriers that has even been hinted at with filings.
edgeicator said:
Wrong, that was the Telus version that passed the FCC just like how the Bell Mobile passed the FCC a few weeks before that. There has yet to be a GNexus for GSM USA carriers that has even been hinted at with filings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well initially the GT-i9250T was hinted to come to ATT, so if this one is headed for Canada instead of ATT now then there ya have it. It's gonna be a while if ever.
as of right now there is no reason to expect a TMO USA launch anytime soon.
the device exists but there is no reason to expect it.
an AT&T launch will probably be in the spring however.
If your a tmo customer, your best bet is to just import the phone like most of us here did. it's a lot more money, but it's worth it.
and as far as TMO dying. tmo isn't going away for a few more years. i've been with them for 10 years and i'll stay with them for as long as i possibly can. don't feel like giving up my nice cheap plan with unlimited data.
If the Galaxy Nexus were to come to att, would I be able to unlock it for tmobile? Would hspa+ work work with an att phone?
Sent from my Samsung galaxy tab 10.1
Mitchmoney said:
If the Galaxy Nexus were to come to att, would I be able to unlock it for tmobile? Would hspa+ work work with an att phone?
Sent from my Samsung galaxy tab 10.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The International version features pentaband. If the AT&T version is pentaband then yes it will work.
neok44 said:
as of right now there is no reason to expect a TMO USA launch anytime soon.
the device exists but there is no reason to expect it.
an AT&T launch will probably be in the spring however.
If your a tmo customer, your best bet is to just import the phone like most of us here did. it's a lot more money, but it's worth it.
and as far as TMO dying. tmo isn't going away for a few more years. i've been with them for 10 years and i'll stay with them for as long as i possibly can. don't feel like giving up my nice cheap plan with unlimited data.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly! TMO is actually a great company for customer service and for phone/data service, as long as you live in an area that they cover. I have to be honest, people keep bragging about LTE and all that. Who needs 40Mbps on their phone?? Unless you're tethering, 2Mbps suffices.
Now that TMO inherited a nice $4 billion cash bonus and spectrum from AT&T, we might see them continue to roll out even more bandwidth. They're already enabling 3G over the 1800mhz band, so iPhones are able to latch on in certain markets. They're not going anywhere...yet.
The $700 price I paid for this phone was well worth it. Keep in mind (because I did not know this) that you will only have a warranty through the company who bought it for you (Expansys, Negri, etc). Samsung will not give you a warranty.
I hope that tmobile does expand but I'm just not sure if it's worth paying 640 on negro electronics.. I will try to sell my vibrant for 200 but that is still 440 that I need to spend on this phone... Is it really worth it for a phone?
Mitchmoney said:
I hope that tmobile does expand but I'm just not sure if it's worth paying 640 on negro electronics.. I will try to sell my vibrant for 200 but that is still 440 that I need to spend on this phone... Is it really worth it for a phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
YES! .......
allen099 said:
Exactly! TMO is actually a great company for customer service and for phone/data service, as long as you live in an area that they cover. I have to be honest, people keep bragging about LTE and all that. Who needs 40Mbps on their phone?? Unless you're tethering, 2Mbps suffices.
Now that TMO inherited a nice $4 billion cash bonus and spectrum from AT&T, we might see them continue to roll out even more bandwidth. They're already enabling 3G over the 1800mhz band, so iPhones are able to latch on in certain markets. They're not going anywhere...yet.
The $700 price I paid for this phone was well worth it. Keep in mind (because I did not know this) that you will only have a warranty through the company who bought it for you (Expansys, Negri, etc). Samsung will not give you a warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, i live in one of their 42Mbps locations, and honestly, i get pissed that i walk into a tmo store and see them getting 25-30Mbps down and i can't get over 5Mbps.
and then theres the lack of 3G in my home unless i walk outside, and signal cutting out in the hockey stadium, but considering my family is paying about $50 less per month than if we were with another company, we put up with it.
i'm 99% sure my signal issues are due to my plan or some other bull**** though. gonna go to a store with my Gnex and switch sim cards with someone in the store and see what happens, because i know the nexus is capable of 21mbps down. so if they're getting 30 i should be getting around 15, not 1-5.
Same here. I'm in NYC where we should be getting those super-fast data speeds, but the best I've ever gotten is about 5Mbps. Florida is more flat so I assume you should be getting better speeds than me, especially if the phones in the store are reaching that high. It's most likely your SIM, as you said.
Even still, getting 2Mbps and paying much less for the data plus having the capability to tether for free (with or without root) is a huge plus. Comes in real handy when tethering.
allen099 said:
Same here. I'm in NYC where we should be getting those super-fast data speeds, but the best I've ever gotten is about 5Mbps. Florida is more flat so I assume you should be getting better speeds than me, especially if the phones in the store are reaching that high. It's most likely your SIM, as you said.
Even still, getting 2Mbps and paying much less for the data plus having the capability to tether for free (with or without root) is a huge plus. Comes in real handy when tethering.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh yeah the tethering alone is enough of a reason to stay. me and my girlfriend go up to orlando a lot, and even though the hotels give you free internet, a lot of times it sucks, like 1Mbps or less (probably damn people torrenting lol) so i usually get around 3-5 up there so i toss on the wifi tether and we both have internet. her on her netbook and me on my transformer.
comes in handy at my school too when their crappy wifi kicks out lol.
I actually have changed my sim cards, and even had tech support take a look at our account and they said they fixed it. I'm getting better DL speeds on the GN than my N1 though so thats at least nice.
neok44 said:
well, i live in one of their 42Mbps locations, and honestly, i get pissed that i walk into a tmo store and see them getting 25-30Mbps down and i can't get over 5Mbps.
and then theres the lack of 3G in my home unless i walk outside, and signal cutting out in the hockey stadium, but considering my family is paying about $50 less per month than if we were with another company, we put up with it.
i'm 99% sure my signal issues are due to my plan or some other bull**** though. gonna go to a store with my Gnex and switch sim cards with someone in the store and see what happens, because i know the nexus is capable of 21mbps down. so if they're getting 30 i should be getting around 15, not 1-5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because your phone is HSPA+ (21Mb) ready, doesn't mean that you're gonna get 21Mb!!!!!!!!
keep in mind that HSPA is an advanced 3G network, depending on where you are,
and the connection to the closest tower etc., the numbers are gonna vary. I'm in NYC and around, I average 4-9 Mb, which realistically unless you're tethering to multiple devices, what more do you need??
Oh and I would love to see that 25-30Mb download, really........ That's usually what I get at home when connected to my FiOS router , of course that's Mb, not MB.. So when I hit 25-30 with FiOS, I realistically top off at 4Megs/Sec Download, which is effin fast........
The Galaxy S2 is the fastest device currently in the store, with its HSPA++ (42Mb) Radio, that device averages 5-13Mb, even when the Thunderbolt came out on Verizon being one of the first LTE if not the first LTE device, I ran tests in was hitting 12-19Mb, now, after millions more hopped on the network, it hardly breaks 10-12....
One more thing, even if you can pull 100Mb/Sec, I'f the server you're pulling from only allows 10Mb/Sec Upload, your 100Mb doesn't mean squat ..
triStateMindgate said:
Just because your phone is HSPA+ (21Mb) ready, doesn't mean that you're gonna get 21Mb!!!!!!!!
keep in mind that HSPA is an advanced 3G network, depending on where you are,
and the connection to the closest tower etc., the numbers are gonna vary. I'm in NYC and around, I average 4-9 Mb, which realistically unless you're tethering to multiple devices, what more do you need??
Oh and I would love to see that 25-30Mb download, really........ That's usually what I get at home when connected to my FiOS router , of course that's Mb, not MB.. So when I hit 25-30 with FiOS, I realistically top off at 4Megs/Sec Download, which is effin fast........
The Galaxy S2 is the fastest device currently in the store, with its HSPA++ (42Mb) Radio, that device averages 5-13Mb, even when the Thunderbolt came out on Verizon being one of the first LTE if not the first LTE device, I ran tests in was hitting 12-19Mb, now, after millions more hopped on the network, it hardly breaks 10-12....
One more thing, even if you can pull 100Mb/Sec, I'f the server you're pulling from only allows 10Mb/Sec Upload, your 100Mb doesn't mean squat ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first off, be nicer in the future, you see I've been here for a long time and have contributed a lot around the forums, that generally means i know what i'm talking about so you don't have to repeat the obvious and add all the exclamation points, it just makes you seem like a bit of a douche.
NOW. if you don't believe me i'll go back and take a damn picture. I saw two guys at a local t-mobile store one with an HTC Amaze and the other with a Galaxy S 2. The HTC Amaze hit 23Mbps download 7Mbps upload. the GS2 hit 33Mbps download, 10Mbps upload. these weren't results, they did it right in front of me and i watched the whole thing.
My Nexus One, which features a 7.1Mbps max chip, in the same store, in the exact same spot, got 1.5Mbps. i've yet to test my galaxy nexus in that store.
now obviously as you said, the amount of people on the network and location makes a difference. But when i see phones hitting 20+ and my 21Mbps capable device isn't getting over 1.5, there's an issue.
so far, best i've gotten on my GN is 5.5Mbps. which i'm perfectly happy with, i just want that all the time, not this 1.5mbps BS when i'm in a 42 area.
and from the sounds of it, you live in an area that has really crappy signal, because most of the GN LTE speed tests i've seen are 30Mbps+ Saw one that hit 75Mbps, though not sure if i believe that one.
neok44 said:
first off, don't treat someone like a dumb ass when they might know (or in my case know) what they're talking about. all it does is make you seem like a ****.
NOW. if you don't believe me i'll go back and take a damn picture. I saw two guys at a local t-mobile store one with an HTC Amaze and the other with a Galaxy S 2. The HTC Amaze hit 23Mbps download 7Mbps upload. the GS2 hit 33Mbps download, 10Mbps upload. these weren't results, they did it right in front of me and i watched the whole thing.
My Nexus One, which features a 7.1Mbps max chip, in the same store, in the exact same spot, got 1.5Mbps. i've yet to test my galaxy nexus in that store.
now obviously as you said, the amount of people on the network and location makes a difference. But when i see phones hitting 20+ and my 21Mbps capable device isn't getting over 1.5, there's an issue.
so far, best i've gotten on my GN is 5.5Mbps. which i'm perfectly happy with, i just want that all the time, not this 1.5mbps BS when i'm in a 42 area.
and from the sounds of it, you live in an area that has really crappy signal, because most of the GN LTE speed tests i've seen are 30Mbps+ Saw one that hit 75Mbps, though not sure if i believe that one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not treating you like a dumb ass, I don't even know you....
I live in NY, and in MY experience with the THUNDERBOLT, I never seen it hit more that 20...I don't even hit more that 40Mb/Sec on my Fiber Optic Landline service, most times its 25-35, but realistically my download rate tops off at 3.5 megs....
So if a phone hits 75, that means a Netflix movie should be fully buffered in around 15-20 secs, damn that's impressive, I would love to see that, maybe then I'd change to Verizon and start paying $150/mo.
I do believe you bro, Iv'e seen posts here on XDA with people hitting upwards of 50, but I don't think that's the realistic speed that the device is getting during use.
I don't think the GN will ever come to carriers that have the GS2.
You might be right because I was watching about 2 months ago of an interview with samsungs ceo in the USA on cnbc and he said that verizon is the only one without a SGII so the galaxy nexus will be their own version of the SGII... I hope they still bring it to a carriers!

Come to JC meeting

Okay everyone, I feel like this a time for those of us that have to decide to renew our contract with Sprint...to make a real informed decision. I'm going to try and keep this short.
Read this first- here
I've been with every carrier EXCEPT Verizon and twice with Sprint. I always knew that Sprint's data network wasn't that great, but I found it usable (barely and often times frustrating). With my contract date ending on 5/3, I started looking at other carriers. I have friends on Verizon, TMo, and ATT. In a very non-scientific way, I decided to test the 3G & 4G speeds on those networks...later comparing them to Sprint. I always found my Sprint speeds to be the slowest...on both. Let me mention that I live in Kansas City...which is in Sprint's backyard...didn't even matter.
With the direction mobile technology is going...LTE is definitely here to stay. However, the battery powering the device is not improving (except for the Razr Maxx). And we all know that 4G...albeit LTE or WiMax, sucks the life out of the standard mAh battery in the device. Which is why, I use 3G most of the time...again, which is not that good on Sprint's network.
Even with the sexy Evo 4G LTE dropping soon, I am starting to reconsider my tenure with Sprint. Even with a good LTE network, 3G still plays a role...at least for me. Paired with my tests and the above article, it proves that Sprint needs to get their sh*t together. A great device means nothing on a sub par network.
I guess I'm angry right now and I don't plan to sit on the curb either. I really want to give Sprint a chance...have been for nearly 2 years. But, I don't want to be optimistic, only to be let down 2 more years later. So my question to my comrades is simple. Are you all going to stay with Sprint or look elsewhere?
Don't worry, I'm a big boy and I can take straight up responses. Sorry for the dissertation.
Regards,
sag
***Mods, feel free to move this to general discussion. I think it may belong there.***
You go to another carrier and get less data for more money, better speeds less quality. Sprints LTE roll out is bringing network vision with it which is enhanced 1x and 3g networks as well as LTE everywhere there is now 3g coverage within 2 years. I'll be sticking with sprint as I have been with every carrier and sprint has the best customer service and actually works with their customers. Vzw doesn't give a rats ass how badly they screw you and will even directly lie to your face to get you to change your plan, device, contract etc. ATT lte is spotty at best TMO is just a joke in alot of areas, and sprints network vision will far surpass all the other carriers by the end of 2014.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I'm sticking with Sprint. The price plans for Verizon are so much more expensive than what I'm currently paying, and I'm not sure the benefits warrant the cost. Also, I'm optimistic that Sprint is at least trying to get better. Their venture into WiMAX set them back, but they've been moving to correct that. Lastly, I'll be spending the next four years in college where I'll have WiFi available nearly constantly.
See there are so many things I am weighing right now...in no particular order
Devices offered...to include future device offerings
Data Speeds
Customer service
Coverage
Rate Plans
Tethering (the XDA way ;-))
Time to upgrade
I have been following the development of Sprint's network and it really DOES look promising. However, I do not want to wait for nothing. I'm trying not to let impulse or frustration get the best of me right now...really difficult. I love my Evo and I am hoping the love will continue with the Evo LTE. I just want to love the network as well.
Thanks for responding and I hope this continues to create dialog.
Brilliancy said:
I'm sticking with Sprint. The price plans for Verizon are so much more expensive than what I'm currently paying, and I'm not sure the benefits warrant the cost. Also, I'm optimistic that Sprint is at least trying to get better. Their venture into WiMAX set them back, but they've been moving to correct that. Lastly, I'll be spending the next four years in college where I'll have WiFi available nearly constantly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By the time network vision is fully deployed sprint is targeted to have the best network in the country. HD voice, consistent 1.8-3mb 3g speeds and LTE with coverage everywhere they currently have 3g with the same signal quality and building penetration as the current 3g network means they will have LTE in a bigger market than any other carrier while having the same or better 3g as well and far superior voice quality, with the customer service they currently have sprint will be poised to be the top dog once again.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
here are a few things floating in my mind on why to switching carriers ( other than having NO COVERAGE aka im runnin in airplane mode just to save battery cuz there is no point on leaving radio on unless i like looking at the x over my signal bars lol)
-boy do i miss sim cards it was WAYYY easier to switch phones imo (yea yea you can even switch sprint phones by talking to them online but still swap a sim and wait sounds like fun)
-i mean the faster speeds would be nice and the limits on amount of data might be hassle but... i really dont find myself downloading roms over the 3g/4g radio (well ok maybe 4g but i dont have that in my particular area either but i get that could be nice) and tethering could be an issue (and i mean by other means not the manufacturers app) since there are caps butttt yeah there is wifi so many places and at the rates the size of phones are coming who needs to tether a lappy lol
-i guess im so over customer service where unless it is really really really really really need im just gonna try to fix it myself just cuz.
andddd to be honest i know this sounds like a stupid thing or maybe just dumb but att has this 50 unlimited plan for the go phone (annnd a sim only costs like 4 bucks or something like that which means no need to hack away with cdma workshop to get my phone on boost or something). downside is yesss you have to buy a phone off plan and yes you still will get throttled (right ? wasnt that what they are doin to unlimited plans?) but id rather shell out for a phone i want that im not stuck with due to contract annnd have my 50 dollar plan throttled than a $100+ plan throttled lol anyways those are some of my thoughts just thought i'd share

Exclusive: Testing Sprint's New 4G LTE Network

For well over a year now Sprint customers have been dealing with sluggish 3G and 4G WiMAX data speeds. Network woes for America’s third largest wireless carrier have worsened over the past six months or so, as the carrier’s outdated WiMAX 4G offerings were halted in an effort to focus on building a new 4G LTE network. While this decision has good intentions, it has left the bulk of Sprint’s customers stranded on its old, overcrowded CDMA 3G network. However, all hope may not be lost for Sprint and its customers, as the troubled carrier has pledged to deploy its new LTE services by mid-2012, which is literally a couple of weeks away. Set to hit Atlanta, Baltimore, Houston, Dallas, Kansas City, and San Antonio, the question remains if Sprint’s new network setup can hold its own with already established 4G LTE from its competition.
In an effort to answer this burning question, PCMag recently spent some candid time with Sprint’s new LTE network and ran several tests comparing it to both Verizon’s and AT&T’s LTE services. The tests were conducted in Atlanta, Georgia in five different locations using a “specially provisioned” LG Viper 4G LTE phone and a PC Mag’s in-house Sensorly app, along with Ookla’s Speedtest.net app.
The results reveal that Sprint’s LTE is indeed fast, but not quite as fast as peak speeds seen on AT&T’s and Verizon’s networks. This is to be expected, due to Sprint decision to use 5MHz channels band instead of the 10MHz channels that its competition uses. However, the networks still appear to be very competitive. Using the Sensorly speed test app in four different test locations, PCMag found that Sprint’s network produced an average download speed between 9 and 13Mbps, which is on a par with AT&T’s 5MHz channel LTE. Sprint’s download speeds peaked at 26.5Mbps, which also remained competitive with AT&T’s peak 5MHz speeds of around 27.8Mbps.
Surprisingly Sprint’s network speeds were comparable to Verizon’s 10MHz setup, but keep in mind that Verizon’s network is already used by its customers, while Sprint’s was near empty and in a controlled testing environment. In regards to upload speeds, Sprint’s LTE averaged 2.19Mbps, which remained consistant with its own WiMAX 4G, AT&T’s LTE, T-Mobile HSPA+, but was still slower than Verizon.
Obviously focused on LTE, Sprint is aggressively pushing new LTE-capable phones such as the Galaxy Nexus, LG Viper, and HTC EVO 4G LTE, but as it stands these new devices are stuck in the mud on Sprint’s 3G network until its 4G LTE network goes live for customers. While Sprint has committed to a midyear LTE deployment, the carrier has remained coy about its complete network release schedule. This restrictive strategy places a great deal of Sprint’s customers in the dark about their network’s future, and the carrier runs the risk of losing customers to existing LTE networks offered by its competitors.
While Sprint continues to remain in network limbo, its biggest beacon of hope for its customers is its noted commitment to true unlimited data. This is something that its major competitors have abandoned and will likely be Sprint’s saving grace if the carrier’s data speeds are attractive to consumers. However, if Sprint doesn’t deliver on its promises sooner than later, the only speed the carrier will be experiencing is a rapid loss of existing customers.
Source:http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2405675,00.asp
Good article and nice find, but...
Did you paraphrase the article?
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
squshy 7 said:
Good article and nice find, but...
Did you paraphrase the article?
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The article is from techno Buffalo but they were not the actual testers so I put the original source if somebody wanted to read the full article
Sent from my GS2 the next big thing
Well its a win win when lte is live everywhere it will be easing congestion but otherwise if people leave in droves it will still free resources LOL
But unlimited data is the only thing keeping anyone here anyway
I rather have slow steady unlimited than capped super sonic speeds
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA
If those are the speeds they're getting with nobody on the network, then that's poor.
Imagine when it actually launches, even in only the 6 initial markets and millions actually start using it...
LordLugard said:
If those are the speeds they're getting with nobody on the network, then that's poor.
Imagine when it actually launches, even in only the 6 initial markets and millions actually start using it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it will hold up
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
revamper said:
I think it will hold up
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think so too. The network is still growing so I doubt it'll be that slow.
Plus, once your above a consistent 4-5Mbps that holds while actually moving itll only ever make a noticable difference whike downloading ROMs, and that will still be WiFi recommended.
Those speeds arent good at all though, my WiMAX is right there with it. The difference will be in the connectivity while mobile.
auau465121 said:
For well over a year now Sprint customers have been dealing with sluggish 3G and 4G WiMAX data speeds. Network woes for America’s third largest wireless carrier have worsened over the past six months or so, as the carrier’s outdated WiMAX 4G offerings were halted in an effort to focus on building a new 4G LTE network. While this decision has good intentions, it has left the bulk of Sprint’s customers stranded on its old, overcrowded CDMA 3G network. However, all hope may not be lost for Sprint and its customers, as the troubled carrier has pledged to deploy its new LTE services by mid-2012, which is literally a couple of weeks away. Set to hit Atlanta, Baltimore, Houston, Dallas, Kansas City, and San Antonio, the question remains if Sprint’s new network setup can hold its own with already established 4G LTE from its competition.
In an effort to answer this burning question, PCMag recently spent some candid time with Sprint’s new LTE network and ran several tests comparing it to both Verizon’s and AT&T’s LTE services. The tests were conducted in Atlanta, Georgia in five different locations using a “specially provisioned” LG Viper 4G LTE phone and a PC Mag’s in-house Sensorly app, along with Ookla’s Speedtest.net app.
The results reveal that Sprint’s LTE is indeed fast, but not quite as fast as peak speeds seen on AT&T’s and Verizon’s networks. This is to be expected, due to Sprint decision to use 5MHz channels band instead of the 10MHz channels that its competition uses. However, the networks still appear to be very competitive. Using the Sensorly speed test app in four different test locations, PCMag found that Sprint’s network produced an average download speed between 9 and 13Mbps, which is on a par with AT&T’s 5MHz channel LTE. Sprint’s download speeds peaked at 26.5Mbps, which also remained competitive with AT&T’s peak 5MHz speeds of around 27.8Mbps.
Surprisingly Sprint’s network speeds were comparable to Verizon’s 10MHz setup, but keep in mind that Verizon’s network is already used by its customers, while Sprint’s was near empty and in a controlled testing environment. In regards to upload speeds, Sprint’s LTE averaged 2.19Mbps, which remained consistant with its own WiMAX 4G, AT&T’s LTE, T-Mobile HSPA+, but was still slower than Verizon.
Obviously focused on LTE, Sprint is aggressively pushing new LTE-capable phones such as the Galaxy Nexus, LG Viper, and HTC EVO 4G LTE, but as it stands these new devices are stuck in the mud on Sprint’s 3G network until its 4G LTE network goes live for customers. While Sprint has committed to a midyear LTE deployment, the carrier has remained coy about its complete network release schedule. This restrictive strategy places a great deal of Sprint’s customers in the dark about their network’s future, and the carrier runs the risk of losing customers to existing LTE networks offered by its competitors.
While Sprint continues to remain in network limbo, its biggest beacon of hope for its customers is its noted commitment to true unlimited data. This is something that its major competitors have abandoned and will likely be Sprint’s saving grace if the carrier’s data speeds are attractive to consumers. However, if Sprint doesn’t deliver on its promises sooner than later, the only speed the carrier will be experiencing is a rapid loss of existing customers.
Source:http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2405675,00.asp
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll have to disagree on a couple points. The truly unlimited data was the first enticing thing to bring me to Sprint in the first place. Second, was the fact that they have the least demanding credit assessment. AT&T wanted me to pay a deposit of $146+, more or less, asking for my landline that I owe them on still. Verizon? Don't get me started there.. after my credit assessment through them, they wanted over $1G for the deposit.. I laughed and immediately went to AT&T's go phone at that time. Limited in data, yes, but the only way I could get on a cell with poor credit, as Sprint was wanting a $100 deposit, not bad, but being unsure of where my next funding was coming from, this did not bode well. It was a couple years before I tried Sprint again, and found out, not only did I have no deposit this time, I could trade in my old AT&T go phone, and got a nice credit towards a descent phone within my price range, the Nexus S 4G. On top of that, Sprint works with several companies to offer an employment discount, mine being 17%, something AT&T has abandoned for a LOT of employers.
Now, let's talk about customer service. IMHO, Sprint is unmatched in providing excellent customer service (in fact, I just found out recently, they've been ranked #1 in this department). Something you won't find with the other 2. They let me know of services they offer, that in order to get it out of AT&T or Verizon, you have to go through an area manager - not something a LOT of people want to deal with. Verizon? The sales rep that ran my credit couldn't understand half of what I was saying. With Sprint, I have only gotten a foreign rep* ONE time (out of the maybe, 15, times, I've had to call in), and they STILL were able to CLEARLY understand the problem I was having and easily helped me to resolve it.
So the bottom line here is, they have too many ups to have the down of their technology being a little behind, to lose too much of a customer base.
I know your article is put together from research and comment follow-ups to the testing articles, but it is still a good write-up, nonetheless.
BTW, if you've looked a little more recently, July 15th is the rollout date for the above mentioned cities, for LTE. Fortunately, I just happened to be in Metro ATL.
Well, that sums up my rebuttle. (however, that's spelled) Please don't take it personally. I'm just preaching from personal experience.
Peace,
~WickiD_D~
* edited to add: I mean no disrespect, no racism, and no stereo-typing in any way. I just think that there are a LOT of people who will agree that there is a natural language barrier that can occur when calling a customer service line, and it makes it very difficult to resolve customer service issues, at those times, for both the caller and the rep, because of it. I sincerely apologize if I offended anyone in any way, because I know we all come from different parts of the world in this forum, and would never intentionally want to hurt anyone here..

Categories

Resources