Jump to content
lilotimz

T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion V2

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone!

 

It is the belief of myself and of the staff that it is time to reopen a new T-mobile LTE and Network discussion thread due to the implementation of "network prioritization" that tmobile is doing to its subscribers. 

 

As Sprint has similar language in its TOS, we believe that it is worthy of being discussed here as Sprint may do something similar on a site by site basis.

 

This thread will be strictly for discussing T-mobiles LTE network and technologies and not about personalities, their followers, and etc etc which may be better suited for S4GRUs sister site for T-mobile T4GRU. 

 

As a result this thread will be heavily moderated to stay on topic but I view the S4GRU member base very favorably and trust that we won't have much problems here.

 

 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here's their ToS language

 

To provide a good service experience for the majority of our customers, and minimize capacity issues and degradation in network performance, we may manage network traffic through prioritization. This means that customers who use more data than what is used by 97% of what all customers use in a given month, based on recent historical averages, might in some cases have their data usage prioritized below the data of other customers during times and in places of network contention. (Customers who use data in violation of their Rate Plan terms or T-Mobile's Terms and Conditions may be excluded from this calculation.)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious to see what and how the technology operates. Good or bad it may still be cool to learn about.

 

If you have a great experience still and it blunts the speed testers, well I guess something about just dessert applies. If it blows and is applied (apparently) bluntly it is gonna suck.

 

Also, I am excited for the gentle wordsmithetry associated with this discussion. The last one was a bit grinder out there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you call the problem on T-Mobile where you get like 0.01 to 0.10 megabits down/up and occasionally give or take 1 megabit? All with a good signal, outdoors (for this example), good ping, but not throttled/over your limit? DSL backhaul :lol: ?

 

But really, I saw it a million times when I tried them. The towers were not under load (if under any load at all because no one in my area uses T-Mobile). Only a couple areas had "functional" HSPA+ (even though practically all their coverage was marked as LTE, 95% of it wasn't). 3 pm or 3 am; wouldn't matter. 

 

Ironically the one area I'd get good HSPA+ speeds from had like two outages over the 2 months I used T-Mobile for 1-2 days at a time. 

Edited by cortney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why but I am not surprised about this.

 

I personally think it's because of the massive subscriber adds they're having quarter after quarter.

 

I've noticed in a few rootmetrics reports that t-mobile speeds have decreased. It's not unusable by any means but they've decreased overall so it may be cause for concern from the tmobile engineering department who may be raising alarms early and then tmobile preemptively attacking the issue head on via applying the TOS to the top 3% of data users. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sucks. Despite Sprint having something similar in their terms and conditions I haven't seen any real reports of it going on. Well I guess we just learned who caved in first in the Unlimited War.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sucks. Despite Sprint having something similar in their terms and conditions I haven't seen any real reports of it going on. Well I guess we just learned who caved in first in the Unlimited War.

Yeah I was going to ask here, has anyone actually proved or even suspected Sprint enacting any of the top 5% or 1mbps video throttling stuff everyone was freaking out about back when it was discovered?

 

I wonder if this may change Sprint's plans in regards to this issue.

Lots of unhappy people in that Reddit thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think it's because of the massive subscriber adds they're having quarter after quarter.

That makes sense to me... T-Mobile was going to have a scaling problem at some point due to over-saturation. And while giving a data pass to speed tests & streaming music is so rad, it still puts a strain on the network, regardless of whether it comes out of a data stash or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you call the problem on T-Mobile where you get like 0.01 to 0.10 megabits down/up and occasionally give or take 1 megabit? All with a good signal, outdoors (for this example), good ping, but not throttled/over your limit? DSL backhaul :lol: ?

 

But really, I saw it a million times when I tried them. The towers were not under load (if under any load at all because no one in my area uses T-Mobile). Only a couple areas had "functional" HSPA+ (even though practically all their coverage was marked as LTE, 95% of it wasn't). 3 pm or 3 am; wouldn't matter. 

 

Ironically the one area I'd get good HSPA+ speeds from had like two outages over the 2 months I used T-Mobile for 1-2 days at a time. 

 

I'd love to know which area of NYC was this, and how many months/years ago did you experience this? I'll be willing to test it out myself.

 

That behavior is nothing like what I've been seeing in NYC as all sites have 40Mbps max rate set on LTE sectors, and that's at the very minimum. Most of them are at 80Mbps.

 

It doesn't make very much sense, especially since you're saying that the latency stayed low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this holds to be true, will the average consumer see their speeds decrease not unless they are on they 3 and 5gb plans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think it's because of the massive subscriber adds they're having quarter after quarter.

 

I've noticed in a few rootmetrics reports that t-mobile speeds have decreased. It's not unusable by any means but they've decreased overall so it may be cause for concern from the tmobile engineering department who may be raising alarms early and then tmobile preemptively attacking the issue head on via applying the TOS to the top 3% of data users. 

 

 

I don't have an issue with throttling but I'm not like the approach being taken.  I feel carrier's need to be more transparent.  They're throttling the top 3% of user's but they don't define or provide you with what usage places you in that tier, and why start at 3%, why not 2%, or even 1%?  

 

They throttled the user down .02MBPS.  Wouldn't throttling the connection to 1-5Mbps be enough to manage their network while allowing the user continued use of their phone?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to know which area of NYC was this, and how many months/years ago did you experience this? I'll be willing to test it out myself.

 

That behavior is nothing like what I've been seeing in NYC as all sites have 40Mbps max rate set on LTE sectors, and that's at the very minimum. Most of them are at 80Mbps.

 

It doesn't make very much sense, especially since you're saying that the latency stayed low.

People constantly misconstrue that metro doesn't mean just the city, but the entire area as a large.

 

I apologize for the confusion. No, I don't live in NYC; I'm in the suburbs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how much more data the top 3% use compared to other 97.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this holds to be true, will the average consumer see their speeds decrease not unless they are on they 3 and 5gb plans?

 

Metered plans (1gb/3gb/5gb) do not appear to be effected in any way, at this time.

 

In fact, if anything, metered plans may get slightly faster in areas of congestion. (Since unlimited users are being slowed down, that would theoretically free more bandwidth for metered users).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this sure doesn't sound like a very 'uncarrier' type of thing to do.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Tmo discussed their average per user data consumption lately?    That would be interesting to know, given how they've grown and invited data hogs.  (Remembering Legere's porn comment a year or two ago).    Would like to know what kind of consumption the top 3% are doing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Tmo discussed their average per user data consumption lately?    That would be interesting to know, given how they've grown and invited data hogs.  (Remembering Legere's porn comment a year or two ago).    Would like to know what kind of consumption the top 3% are doing. 

 

I'd have to imagine the top 3% are using obscene amounts of data. I used to routinely use 25GB+ when I was with T-Mobile and I know many others who also did. Of course, that's nothing compared to the 70GB+ that others are claiming in the Reddit thread. I think when T-Mobile brought back their truly unlimited data offering four years ago, they started receiving all of the Sprint abusers who use their phones' data connections as home Internet plans. It's unfortunate. Even now, I typically use between 6GB and 20GB on Sprint each month, but with no issues. Glad I came back to Sprint from T-Mobile - the experience is far better from a service standpoint now in Richmond, VA.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legere has learned a lesson that Sprint did a few years ago. It is better to have your extreme unlimited data hogs churn. Tmo is making it painful for them, that's why they are making the speed extremely low.

 

They want them to go back to Sprint. Because carriers lose money on the Unlimited abusers who use their wireless service as their personal ISP. Even Legere doesn't want them.

 

Sprint was happy to lose them, and is praying they don't get them back. Because these customers cause pain and consternation to the customers they do want. I wouldn't be surprised if Sprint just follows Tmo here and does the same thing to prevent the abusers from coming back.

 

We predicted this very thing happening. Some vocal abusers said the fact that Tmo allows unlimited without hindrance was evidence that abusers didn't impact the networks and should be allowed to continue to use data at any unreasonable amount as they deem fit. Well, if that was true then, then this is indeed evidence of what abusers do to a network if allowed to. Shut down everyone else's ability to enjoy a robust network and possibly really high consumption occasionally.

 

Well, the Tmo buffet is being shut down. And this is probably not the time to celebrate Sprint's more open unlimited tolerances. Even though they may have more breathing room because of B41, they do impact B25/B26 terribly and causing early capex burn for more B41 capacity before even finish rolling out is terribly impactful to everything. Sprint will also likely join suit in some regard.

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think it's because of the massive subscriber adds they're having quarter after quarter.

 

I've noticed in a few rootmetrics reports that t-mobile speeds have decreased. It's not unusable by any means but they've decreased overall so it may be cause for concern from the tmobile engineering department who may be raising alarms early and then tmobile preemptively attacking the issue head on via applying the TOS to the top 3% of data users. 

Very good argument. I wonder once this practice gets more publicity how it will effect the Tmo appearance.

 

I understand they don't have more spectrum to move to but perhaps this move was a little preemptive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what does everyone consider the threshold for being an "abusive" data user on an unlimited plan to be?

 

i myself use around 20 to 30 gig per month and consider that not to be abusive. I would consider anything 60 gig or more per month to be abusive. most of my data usage comes from streaming videos, and i stream a lot. getting to 60+ would take a lot of streaming and/or you are using it in place of home internet.

 

i did see a few comments in that reddit thread where people on tmobile mentioned having to switch back to their home wifi because of throttling..... that i don't get, if you have home internet/wifi already why would you not be using it???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what does everyone consider the threshold for being an "abusive" data user on an unlimited plan to be?

 

i myself use around 20 to 30 gig per month and consider that not to be abusive. I would consider anything 60 gig or more per month to be abusive. most of my data usage comes from streaming videos, and i stream a lot. getting to 60+ would take a lot of streaming and/or you are using it in place of home internet.

 

i did see a few comments in that reddit thread where people on tmobile mentioned having to switch back to their home wifi because of throttling..... that i don't get, if you have home internet/wifi already why would you not be using it???

 

I would say that the abusive level is approaching the 50 to 100GB level monthly, but that is my opinion.  At times I have read in threads or blogs of what I will call "super abusers" where they are reaching the 1TB range monthly.

 

It is strange that if they have internet and do not use it unless their home service is limited as well.  I have seen some with Deathstar u-verse having 200GB monthly plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what does everyone consider the threshold for being an "abusive" data user on an unlimited plan to be?

 

i myself use around 20 to 30 gig per month and consider that not to be abusive. I would consider anything 60 gig or more per month to be abusive. most of my data usage comes from streaming videos, and i stream a lot. getting to 60+ would take a lot of streaming and/or you are using it in place of home internet.

 

i did see a few comments in that reddit thread where people on tmobile mentioned having to switch back to their home wifi because of throttling..... that i don't get, if you have home internet/wifi already why would you not be using it???

 

 

I average anywhere between 5-10GB a month, depending on what I'm doing. All of my data usage is smartphone only, Youtube, Netflix, iTunes Radio, etc. 

 

As for T-Mobile customers using their LTE all the time, it's a byproduct of the marketing campaign offering the fastest network. They are using to just seeing LTE everywhere, so switching to WiFi doesn't really occur to them.

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


  • TAPATALK VERSION
    BACK ONLINE

  • PROGRESSIVE RAFFLE
    FOR AN iPHONE 8

    iphonexiphone8.jpg

    WHICH CAN PROGRESS TO AN iPHONE 8+ OR AN iPHONE X
    **or an Android device of equal or lesser value**

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By DesignGuy
      Fierce has a poll posted... and is utilizing a bracket style contest to find out who their readers think is the most powerful person in the telecom industry. Between Marcelo and the pink clad Chihuahua of a man... I give it to Marcelo. I think the final winner should be Masa, it's is a name people know and will get to know more in the coming years worldwide. But for the current poll, it's an easy decision for me!  
       
      http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/vote-now-to-decide-who-most-powerful-person-u-s-telecom-industry
       
       
       
    • By lilotimz
      T-mobile Ericsson Cell Equipment
       
      For Ericsson markets t-mobile uses what is known as AIR antenna units which have the radio unit integrated with the antenna. This type of setup significantly reduces signal loss from the radio to the antenna since they're both practically next to each other and not sepearated by coax jumper cables like that of a remote radio unit.
       
      Basic Ericsson AIR21 setup
      (Note typically there are 2 Ericsson AIR per sector)

       

       

       
      Ericsson AIR21 + Band 12 700 mhz Equipment
       
      Note the addition of a new low band 700 mhz capable antenna + Ericsson RRUS11 B12 (remote radio units) in addition to new TMA (tower mounted amplifiers) connected to the AIR antenna. The new Ericsson RRUS11 B12 + Antenna addition is for tmobiles band 12 700mhz (L700) deployment. 

      (Credit: tmo.rocks)
       
      Credit for the photographs belong to whoever took it. You know who you are!
    • By derrph
      With the introduction of the new plans Sprint has announced. I told one of my friends about the $60 unlimited plan and she was shocked yet happy about it. She currently has T-Mobile and there has been times where my Sprint service has out performed her service even in the city with puling up information and out of town...well... you already know how that went. She was talking about switching and stuff but then she sent me a typical article bashing Sprint and I got irritated by it and I had to explain to her that Sprint is not bad at all. These articles are based on past experiences from 3+ years ago. I told her I'm pulling 60+ mbps on LTE but she's worried about Sprint being slow ( because of what she read). Guys give me some advice on persuading her to give Sprint a chance. 
       
      I feel like articles that are being posted is what keeps away customers.  It makes no sense that T-Mobiles 2g network is not spoken about when they are in the news for changes to plans and such. But good ol Sprint makes changes and articles that get posted rips Sprint apart for filth. 
    • By belusnecropolis
      http://ces.cnet.com/8301-35284_1-57616761/how-i-got-t-mobiles-ceo-kicked-out-of-at-ts-ces-party/
      Roger Cheng @cnet appears to have had the most fun out of this, it kind of wrote the story for him I guess, so there is that. Also, just noticed the extra title Q, that is gonna drive some people nuts today. Top lel.
    • By Paynefanbro
      Am I the only one that likes to look at Verizon's coverage comparison tool. I think it gives a good idea of a carrier's generalized coverage as far as those cities that have been announced. However, it takes a while for it to get updated. I look at Verizon's map and think, no one will ever build an LTE network of that size. When I look at T-Mobile, I see a spotty, spread out network. AT&T is also spotty with a few highways covered here and there. Sprint seems to be more put together as in even if it is spotty, they are in blobs rather than random remote areas.
       
      I've also found a few places that Sprint has coverage in but not Verizon such as in southern Texas.
       
      http://www.verizonwireless.com/wcms/consumer/4g-lte.html
  • Posts

    • Existing sites have all been upgraded, but the network around here was not designed to blanket LTE.  I recognize that the coverage maps often indicate that coverage is acceptable, but that just isn't the case.   Attaching a pic below that has a blue square.  Illinois Route 47.  Its not an interstate, but still a busy state highway.  This is an area where placement of one additional tower would ensure contiguous LTE coverage from Dwight down through Forrest.  It is equally as bad as you travel farther south on Route 47 south of Forrest.  Phones hang onto LTE for dear life, but drop down to 1x and 3g as the town of Strawn is approached.  From Strawn south nearly all the way to Gibson City is 3G or 1x. Site spacing is great for 1x voice coverage, but its just not there for full-time LTE coverage (no matter which band is being discussed.) Every time I'm in one of these areas, I'm reporting the issues in the Sprint Zone.  At one point in time Sprint was working with Illinois Valley Cellular through the Rural Roaming Partner deal - but I have yet to see any indication of connecting to IVC Equipment.  The partnership started in 2014, and it is now nearing the end of 2017, and I am fairly confident that IVC has not held up their end of the deal in moving their network to LTE.  All of that being said, it is not a big deal at this moment.  It will be a big deal at the point in time that a decision is made to shutter CDMA, if the holes are not fixed.     edit:  relevant to this thread - even a Sprint/Tmo merger would not fix this problem without filling in gaps.  
    • I don't think so... the radio in the S8 just performs way better in low signal based on my tests. My coworker did similar tests on a TMO V30 and has similar results as well. It might be a software issue with the phone...

      Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

    • It is on the expansion map that was released recently... when I'm not sure. As far as I know it's still 3G up there... outside Marquette they added some unlimited US Cellular roaming based on the latest map update.

      Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

    • Completely wrong thread or market but it looks like sprint plans to bring LTE to the upper peninsula aka Marquette MI. Can anyone confirms this ? I see some marginal activity in the Sensorly app


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    • Anything new to report about band 26 for SoCal or is this all a pipe dream hoping it gets cleared for rollout before 2027 ?


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×