Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[tyroned3222]

Either Sprint had the most people using data or they were not prepared.

I think sprint was prepared, but a lot of factors play into this as you mentioned maybe sprint did have the most data users. Did sprint get 3 channel carrier aggregation upgrades to the phones in time. I think all the other 3 were able to invest a bit more im sure.. also, how many customers that were at the event had 3 carrier aggregation capable phone... lot of factors

[Terrell352]

I think sprint was prepared, but a lot of factors play into this as you mentioned maybe sprint did have the most data users. Did sprint get 3 channel carrier aggregation upgrades to the phones in time. I think all the other 3 were able to invest a bit more im sure.. also, how many customers that were at the event had 3 carrier aggregation capable phone... lot of factors

Considering only the gs7/edge and the htc bolt are the only ones with it enabled probably not many. Upload speeds I expected to be the worst until 2xCA upload is in place and even then the other carriers would have it too. Sprints network is simply not designed to win the upload war. Either way a lot of factors can play into this but that much of a difference tells me that Sprint didn't do enough.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[BlueAngel]

That seems fake lol.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[nexgencpu]

That graph is hilariously disproportionate.

[RedSpark]

Final result from the inauguration yesterday

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you share the source link for this?

[tyroned3222]

Can you share the source link for this?

https://twitter.com/NevilleRay/status/822964887781572608

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[caspar347]

Yeah that's some pretty creative scaling there. Actual graphs looks like this. T-Mobile is not, in fact, 10x faster than sprint.

 

 

All I did was 0-align the data.

[Dkoellerwx]

Considering only the gs7/edge and the htc bolt are the only ones with it enabled probably not many. Upload speeds I expected to be the worst until 2xCA upload is in place and even then the other carriers would have it too. Sprints network is simply not designed to win the upload war. Either way a lot of factors can play into this but that much of a difference tells me that Sprint didn't do enough.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

That's not entirely correct. The LG G5 and LG V20 had profile updates pushed on Wednesday that enabled 3xCA. My brother's HTC 10 got an update as well, however the engineering screen is not entirely clear if 3xCA is enabled. 

[greenbastard]

Yeah that's some pretty creative scaling there. Actual graphs looks like this. T-Mobile is not, in fact, 10x faster than sprint.

 

 

All I did was 0-align the data.

Same values. What's the difference?

[Flompholph]

Same values. What's the difference?

Yes same values tmobile started at 10Mbps then counted by 2 to twist the graph. It only takes 8Mbps to stream hd video so sprint should have been ok most of the time.

[Dkoellerwx]

Same values. What's the difference?

 

Misrepresentation of data. Manipulating the number to make them look better or worse. Yes they're the same, but the original graph skewed the differences, they are not as great as the first graph would suggest.

[caspar347]

Same values. What's the difference?

Notice the data spread differences.

[Tengen31]

Misrepresentation of data. Manipulating the number to make them look better or worse. Yes they're the same, but the original graph skewed the differences, they are not as great as the first graph would suggest.

Does TMobile look at Sprint as a Threat? They wanna make themselves look good, make Sprint look bad while at the same time making VZW and, att look good.

Notice the data spread differences.

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

[greenbastard]

Data is the same. I don't see what the freakout is about. Any rational person would have looked at the range of the values first.

 

If anything, the T-Mobile chart gives you a better idea of the actual values since it's scaled better. Using increments of 4 (blue/white chart) is a bit of a stretch considering the maximum value seems to be ~21 Mbps for download.

 

Settle down. This is unnecessary outrage.

[caspar347]

Data is the same. I don't see what the freakout is about. Any rational person would have looked at the range of the values first.

 

If anything, the T-Mobile chart gives you a better idea of the actual values since it's scaled better. Using increments of 4 (blue/white chart) is a bit of a stretch considering the maximum value seems to be ~21 Mbps for download.

 

Settle down. This is unnecessary outrage.

I'm not outraged. I just thought it might be interesting to see what the data looked like when zero-indexed so I threw together a graph. The scaling doesn't matter as long as it's consistent and shows the entire data range. (4 was just the Google Sheets default.)

 

It's T-Mobile's marketing department's job to skew stuff like this in their favor.

[Dkoellerwx]

Data is the same. I don't see what the freakout is about. Any rational person would have looked at the range of the values first.

 

Settle down. This is unnecessary outrage.

Freakout? No. But it's still manipulation of data. Unfortunately, the majority of people will not look at the range on the graph, rather they will just see the tiny yellow bar compared to the giant pink one. Reason and common sense are not as common place as we would hope.

 

Sent from my LG G5

[Arysyn]

That was a long post, I only want to address your comment on Clear sites. The vast majority (all?) of Clear sites still on air are running 2xCA B41, and I've seen some of the best results (130-140Mbps) from Clear sites in the KC area. Clear sites that did not support 2xCA have been replaced with Nokia mini-macros. These sites are still providing beneficial coverage for the network. I do not feel this is a major issue for Sprint to address at this point in time.

 

As additional capacity is required (3 or more carriers), they'll be replaced with Sprint equipment. Right now Sprint needs to focus on getting B41 on more sites, and increasing capacity through small cells. Not replacing already functional sites.

 

 

Sent from my LG G5

Sorry to everyone for having gone through so much at once, instead of breaking things down a bit, which had I dobe that would have made the post shorter. It is sonething I've been trying my best on for quite some time, and hopefully I've done better at doing so for the most part. The post I wrote basically was an overview consisting much of what I've learned here regarding Sprint operations, along with my own experiences.

 

I definitely did not mean what I wrote as a criticism of Sprint, and I know there are some good things going on in the company. Also, I agree with people who want Sprint to continue adding B41, etc to the sites. Yet, I've read here there still are issues/drawbacks from the older sites that can't be fitted with new equipment without other necessary upgrades.

 

I'm not too concerned about the details of what this entails, so long as its done, since it'll help Sprint. I'd rather see Sprint spend the money to do this. Take out loans for this if needbe, rather than loan financing for an acquisition attempt with T-Mobile. I understand the business benefits are greater with the acquistion, but it isn't the main thing Sprint needs. The main thing is money.

[tyroned3222]

Sorry to everyone for having gone through so much at once, instead of breaking things down a bit, which had I dobe that would have made the post shorter. It is sonething I've been trying my best on for quite some time, and hopefully I've done better at doing so for the most part. The post I wrote basically was an overview consisting much of what I've learned here regarding Sprint operations, along with my own experiences.

 

I definitely did not mean what I wrote as a criticism of Sprint, and I know there are some good things going on in the company. Also, I agree with people who want Sprint to continue adding B41, etc to the sites. Yet, I've read here there still are issues/drawbacks from the older sites that can't be fitted with new equipment without other necessary upgrades.

 

I'm not too concerned about the details of what this entails, so long as its done, since it'll help Sprint. I'd rather see Sprint spend the money to do this. Take out loans for this if needbe, rather than loan financing for an acquisition attempt with T-Mobile. I understand the business benefits are greater with the acquistion, but it isn't the main thing Sprint needs. The main thing is money.

I think sprint is investing the right amount of money where it is most affective for them. Still speeding a billion dollars on roaming agreements with verizon isn't helping either. But just upgrading existing sites just isn't enough anymore...

 

sprint needs to add marco sites to allow them to add volte. Current network plans have small cells as a priority.. are they doing anything besides that... sprint has done some really good marketing that there network is now acceptable and customers have been switch, but they need to be more aggressive

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

One quick thing I want to mention, though separate from what I said earlier and have discussed lately. Some people may not agree with me about this, but I'm also fruatrated at both Sprint and T-Mobile, though mostly at T-Mobile for starting this, which is the introduction of BingeOn, followed by T-Mobile One's usage of 1.5mbps to define the streaming speed of their 480p content delivey.

 

My opinion is that despite 1.5mbps being fast enough for 480p, it really isn't ideal. Again, this is my opinion and I know some of you believe slower speeds are just fine for certain things. Yet, there is a higher chance for buffering and slow frames. My thinking is if T-Mobile really wanted to do this, and if Sprint really needed to follow T-Mobile's bad example, increase the speed.

 

Optimally, 1.5mbps is good for 360p. I found a link to an article containing some really good charts showing what I believe is fairly accurate information.

http://www.lighterra.com/papers/videoencodingh264

Their info of 480p HQ is listed at 2.5mbps. I'd say best is 3.0mbps. I use to believe 3.0mbps was good for 1080p, which while its generally sufficient, its not optimal. No, My opinion is 360p at 1.5mbps, 480p at 3.0mbps, 720p at 6.0mbps, 1080p at 9.0mbps, 1440p at 12.0mbps, and 2160p at 18.0mbps.

[Arysyn]

I think sprint is investing the right amount of money where it is most affective for them. Still speeding a billion dollars on roaming agreements with verizon isn't helping either. But just upgrading existing sites just isn't enough anymore...

 

sprint needs to add marco sites to allow them to add volte. Current network plans have small cells as a priority.. are they doing anything besides that... sprint has done some really good marketing that there network is now acceptable and customers have been switch, but they need to be more aggressive

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

It has been a while sine I've heard of any definitive plans from Sprint. Those defending Sprint claim that the reason for the near-silence from Sprint is part of some secret master plan, simply known as "Under-Promise Over-Deliver". Of course I want Sprint to succeed, but I really don't see it the same way people who make this vlaim tend to believe.

 

I remember when all the excitement here on S4GRU was about actual major Sprint projects that would fulfill the advancements Network Vision brought, by adding thousands of towers I understood at the time meant several, perhaps hundreds of high-performing macro towers.

 

This is what Sprint very much needs and if fullfilled alongside the advanced equipment and technology people here often discuss, 8t8r, mimo, 3xca+, etc., implemented on at least 85% of its major market network sites, Sprint's network would be vastly better than every other carrier in the U.S. and not need to pay Paul to explain to people how its within 1℅ of Verizon.

 

Instead, Sprint could become the bad-ass super carrier, whatever awesome dlogan they'd use to advertise how its over 100% better. Thats the Sprint I'd like to see and I imagine others here would like to as well, rather than having Marcelo pinching pennies talking about soccer all the time because he's bored from not having the money around to properly invest in Sprint, while he waits on Masayoshi Son who pretty much acts as he's given up on Sprint since not having been able to buy T-Mobile along with it.

 

This is why I'd prefer if Sprint were still run by Dan Hesse. The guy wasn't perfect, but at least things were progressing and we'd here about it. Sure, Sprint still wasn't in great shape, but at least he was trying to improve Sprint, not just bemoan the state of things over his investment as Masayoshi Son sure seems to do in between sudden spurts of excitement he seems to have about Sprint whenever he's about to spend big money buying another company instead of investing in Sprint.

[bigsnake49]

I think sprint is investing the right amount of money where it is most affective for them. Still speeding a billion dollars on roaming agreements with verizon isn't helping either. But just upgrading existing sites just isn't enough anymore...

 

sprint needs to add marco sites to allow them to add volte. Current network plans have small cells as a priority.. are they doing anything besides that... sprint has done some really good marketing that there network is now acceptable and customers have been switch, but they need to be more aggressive

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

You'd think that by now they would have figured out that spending $1B in roaming for the last ten years instead of spending that same $1B in improving your network might be not be the best thing to do but who am I to suggest they do something different.

[Terrell352]

This might explain why Sprint was slower than the rest. http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/sprint-users-increasingly-eschewing-wi-fi-for-cellular-now-chomping-through-101-mb-per-day

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[tybo31316]

This might explain why Sprint was slower than the rest. http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/sprint-users-increasingly-eschewing-wi-fi-for-cellular-now-chomping-through-101-mb-per-day

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

I wonder why people aren't using wifi as much.

[Hypeo]

I wonder why people aren't using wifi as much.

A More reliable network!

 

Sent from my 2PS64 using Tapatalk

[tybo31316]

A More reliable network!

 

Sent from my 2PS64 using Tapatalk

The network must be really good or the public WiFi is really bad.