Jump to content
joshuam

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

Recommended Posts

I've seen it on Howard forums.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

"Howard's forum" LOL
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Howard's forum" LOL

Exactly it's haters who only believe what is only in there crazy heads. Some people are not willing to forget the past. I've had them qoute me with articles talking about Sprint having LTE all over 3G by end of 2014 or whenever. It's there I've heard that before.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Howard's forum" LOL

I was thinking the same thing. haha

 

Reminds me of what Tim Cook said recently. "Don't listen to the trolls, and for God's sake do not be one." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of those four states only one can have a large ignored area as only one is a large enough to have a large area at all. You are also assuming that density of population has anything to do with profit. All of those four states are also have one thing in common. Higher than average per capita income. Most are not looking for a deal and are probably going to stick with the big two.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

 

 

I am in western mass and sprints coverage is very "spotty". Voice works but there are many areas where data is just well .... I have many friends who have all tried sprint and ran back to att/vzw now Tmo as sprints coverage as well as reputation just doesn't cut it. Many who are on sprint is strictly to save $$$ because of that they deal with coverage. I myself have been a sprint customer for over 15 years and recently activated a att account. I can tell you first hand they all have places where reception is so-so but sprint by far has the most in the springfield area. If sprint could prove they had the coverage and reliability people would run. No one is happy paying the high prices of the big 2. Some of the people with the highest incomes are the most frugal

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in western mass and sprints coverage is very "spotty". Voice works but there are many areas where data is just well .... I have many friends who have all tried sprint and ran back to att/vzw now Tmo as sprints coverage as well as reputation just doesn't cut it. Many who are on sprint is strictly to save $$$ because of that they deal with coverage. I myself have been a sprint customer for over 15 years and recently activated a att account. I can tell you first hand they all have places where reception is so-so but sprint by far has the most in the springfield area. If sprint could prove they had the coverage and reliability people would run. No one is happy paying the high prices of the big 2. Some of the people with the highest incomes are the most frugal

Many of the highest earner get cell service from their employers. I would also argue that Sprint service in those areas is still probably better than say Verizon's in say northern MN. There are areas larger than RI that have no service from any provider. Get out to day Northome MN and see what spotty service really is. It's an expectation game. You simply expect more.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the highest earner get cell service from their employers. I would also argue that Sprint service in those areas is still probably better than say Verizon's in say northern MN. There are areas larger than RI that have no service from any provider. Get out to day Northome MN and see what spotty service really is. It's an expectation game. You simply expect more.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Sprint service in northern MN it's not better than VZW.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sprint service in northern MN it's not better than VZW.

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

What. That isn't even close to what I said.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What. That isn't even close to what I said.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Think I misunderstood what you said. I wonder if areas like that if Sprint could just do small calls then just volte?

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think I misunderstood what you said. I wonder if areas like that if Sprint could just do small calls then just volte?

 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I would say so. I meant that Sprint sevice in the aforementioned States is still better than any provider even Verizon in much of northern Mn. Areas around Red Lake, Northome, Big fork have no service from any provider. The square miles of that are is larger than some of the states mentioned.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the highest earner get cell service from their employers. I would also argue that Sprint service in those areas is still probably better than say Verizon's in say northern MN. There are areas larger than RI that have no service from any provider. Get out to day Northome MN and see what spotty service really is. It's an expectation game. You simply expect more.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

My expectations are based off what the other carriers have in my immediate area, not someplace across the country. This is where I use my phone 80% of the time. Myself and many others like me don't expect to NOT have usable service In highly populated areas here in the northeast. Sprint should have better coverage period. In places where they do the experience is great. Sprint just needs to step up and they will be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This conversation isn't about T-mobile. So don't bring them in. If you don't like Sprint then walk the fuck away. No one will miss you in Overland Park.

Considering Sprint fell from the solid #3 national carrier to distant #4, I beg to differ. Sprint wants as many subscribers as it can have.

 

As a matter of fact, based on the recent free service promo that Sprint is offering, you're statement is not only inaccurate, but 100% false.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Out of those four states only one can have a large ignored area as only one is a large enough to have a large area at all. You are also assuming that density of population has anything to do with profit. All of those four states are also have one thing in common. Higher than average per capita income. Most are not looking for a deal and are probably going to stick with the big two.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

And a larger cost of living.

 

And just because someone is considered "well-off" doesn't mean they don't like saving money. The former CEO I used to work for made close to 7 figures and rocked a cheap Samsung promo phone from Cricket.

 

People just love to save money (or at least feel like they)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Spoken like an honest troll, I'd classify you as the persistent debate troll:

 

This type of troll loves a good argument. They can take a great, thoroughly researched and fact-based piece of content, and come at it from all opposing discussion angles to challenge its message. They believe they're right, and everyone else is wrong.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

To be fair to him, his response was to a very hostile one. You can't drop the F-bomb and expect the conversation to continue to be civilized.

 

This board does a good job of tolerating criticism. But there comes a time when you've made your point and you should just move on. And fanboys should also stop taking everything so personal. At the end of the day Sprint, Verizon, At&t and T-Mobile's loyalty belongs to the almighty dollar and not to their customers.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tidal x sprint commercial is not something I'd expect from Sprint... Feels more like a tmo spot, but it is refreshing

 

https://ispot.tv/a/wZ47

I like it and Playboi Carti makes it even better!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoken like an honest troll, I'd classify you as the persistent debate troll

 

 

I'm a troll because I don't agree with the other user's blatant bias? Got it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope your not the only one, /s. Sprint has 59 million customers.

 

And Sprint is now handing out free service, so what's your point again?

 

I travel throughout New England for my job and live in Rhode Island. What parts of RI are being ignored? Multiple of tbeir 3g only were converted to lte over the last couplr weeks. What oarts of MA or CT?

 

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

 

http://imgur.com/a/mPEZy

 

I circled the trouble areas. There are still large areas of CT/MA/RI being ignored. Same with other New England states, such as New Hampshire and Maine.

 

I am in western mass and sprints coverage is very "spotty". Voice works but there are many areas where data is just well .... I have many friends who have all tried sprint and ran back to att/vzw now Tmo as sprints coverage as well as reputation just doesn't cut it. Many who are on sprint is strictly to save $$$ because of that they deal with coverage. 

 

My expectations are based off what the other carriers have in my immediate area, not someplace across the country. This is where I use my phone 80% of the time. My and many others like me don't expect to NOT have usable service In highly populated areas here in the northeast.

 

100% agree.

Edited by WiseGuy321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a troll because I don't agree with the other user's blatant bias? Got it.

You are the "bias".  In case you didn't "get" it. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the people waiting on the next iPhone. https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/The-iPhone-8-Wont-Support-Gigabit-LTE-139740

Sent from my 2PYB2 using Tapatalk

There isn't a Gigabit network deployed anywhere yet I don't think. New Orleans, maybe?

 

This review for the HTC U11 said this:

http://www.pcmag.com/news/353698/htc-u11-is-sprints-first-gigabit-phone

 

"At launch, the U11 will be the fastest phone on Sprint's network, but the carrier isn't playing up the U11's gigabit capabilities because it hasn't built out much of that network yet. Gigabit speeds will roll out over the next 12 months, at which point there will be several Sprint phones on the market capable of running at maximum speed, Sprint execs told me."

 

If I had to choose between HPUE or Gigabit LTE right now, give me HPUE.

 

Just Apple doing what it does best. Leaving stuff out for the next upgrade.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a troll because I don't agree with the other user's blatant bias? Got it.

You're a troll because you come to a Sprint board, post almost exclusively negative Sprint comments and constantly provoke our members. That's why you're a troll.

 

Now that the Site Administrator calls you out as a troll, you are a bonafide troll. And we will moderate you through that lens. So we can stop with the argument of semantics or whether not you're a troll.

 

Please go troll Sprint and Sprint customers somewhere else. Thanks.

 

Signed,

Management

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the people waiting on the next iPhone.

 

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/The-iPhone-8-Wont-Support-Gigabit-LTE-139740

 

Sent from my 2PYB2 using Tapatalk

 

 

Not surprised. This must be the fall-out from the Qualcomm-Apple lawsuits. It's going to be a great once CDMA is finally gone. All the major smartphone makers can finally dump Qualcomm and substantially improve the performance of their phones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disappointing that Apple again is not pushing the envelope with technology.  I feel they should either go solely with Qualcomm or inform Intel to step up their development if Apple is dedicated to two suppliers.  I do not understand Apple's supplier contracts. if a supplier cannot meet your market needs, you go with the one or the ones that can.  Simple economics.

 

Apple's lack of initiative in the short term does hurts them as seen with the flat results in the market.  With their long term vision to deploy upgraded models every year does help to an extent for those who need the latest and greatest when they arrive.  If they know that normal phone buyers will hold on to their phones for three years, make the phone very enticing where more people will want it.  But again, what will be missing from the next iPhone in the 2018 release?  Who knows...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disappointing that Apple again is not pushing the envelope with technology.  I feel they should either go solely with Qualcomm or inform Intel to step up their development if Apple is dedicated to two suppliers.  I do not understand Apple's supplier contracts. if a supplier cannot meet your market needs, you go with the one or the ones that can.  Simple economics.

 

Apple's lack of initiative in the short term does hurts them as seen with the flat results in the market.  With their long term vision to deploy upgraded models every year does help to an extent for those who need the latest and greatest when they arrive.  If they know that normal phone buyers will hold on to their phones for three years, make the phone very enticing where more people will want it.  But again, what will be missing from the next iPhone in the 2018 release?  Who knows...

 

Maybe Apple has been testing Iphones with gigabits chips and the battery performance sucks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised. This must be the fall-out from the Qualcomm-Apple lawsuits. It's going to be a great once CDMA is finally gone. All the major smartphone makers can finally dump Qualcomm and substantially improve the performance of their phones.

 

 

Maybe Apple has been testing Iphones with gigabits chips and the battery performance sucks. 

 

The article is speculating on the availability of gigabit LTE based on Apple choosing to source chips from both Qualcomm and Intel. One company has the technology currently available while the other does not. No lawsuits involved or battery performance testing. Just an assumption based on Apple's history of lowering the capabilities of one chip to not allow an unfair batch of iPhones. The article even discusses how minor an issue this is due to the lack of gigabit LTE networks and with Apple making yearly iPhone upgrades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is subpar once you consider that T-Mobile went from zero to 300+ million POPs of LTE in less time than Sprint has been deploying LTE.

Coverage is an issue across the US. I'm not sure how one could deny that. They need to upgrade all those EVDO-only sites to LTE....

I disagree.

For ME Sprint's native coverage is excellent where:

I work

I live

I travel

For that reason, there is simply no reason for me to consider T-MO, Verizon, or AT&T, or any other carrier.

Sprint is a company I must give money to in exchange for a service.  I don't like giving my money away.

If Sprint provides an excellent service for a better price than the other carriers, there is zero need for me to consider the things you cite in your post.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Because you simply have to plug it in to a power outlet near a window. 
    • Except for a soft hand off to thw macro network. It can't do that, but other than that, there exactly the same. 
    • Because public WiFi has an ongoing maintance cost, plus the cost to set it up and properly isolate it from your network. The magic box is just easier. You aren't responsible for it. The magic box (via LTE) also has vastly superior QoS so that one person won't bog it down.

      My parents house is one place where a magic box works amazingly. Their only internet option is 3 mbps DSL. B26 only on phones, and that's upstairs only. The magic box latches on to b25 and provides 15-30 Mbps consistently. They actually use it now with a Sprint mobile broadband plan. For some people, the magic box is a better solution than an Airave or wifi calling (which won't work well on 3 mbps DSL if someone is using the internet). For businesses, it's a $0 cost, easy deployment to help customers. And they aren't responsible for what people do on it.

      Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

    • Because if you're not offering public WiFi, why would you go out of your way to set up a Magic Box??
    • I really don't see why it is that you think that if you don't have public wifi then you wouldn't use an MB. The MagicBox is a repeater for Sprint's network requiring essential zero exposure or expenditure for the retail provider beyond electricity. It is also zero maintenance or setup. It's a highly superior solution in my view.
  • Recently Browsing

×