always_learner

I got only one about 12 hours after ota.

On Reddit, I read that the new maximum upload speed would be 9 with maximum theoretical up to 300. If this is true, I wonder how this will effect Rootmetrics results (if upload/download are weighted evenly).

Volume may matter just to signify that a provider is capable of handling that amount of volume. Verizon/AT&T do a decent job considering the amount of customers they have. I'm curious when Sprint starts attracting more customers, would its network be able to keep up with all the new volume?

Mine is working fine, but I'm afraid that it will start having problem after the one year warranty expires. Hopefully, this does not happen as I have to return the phone to Sprint at the end of the lease.

This is a good point. This plan would definitely be comparable for many people. However, the person in question only has three lines. It would be $190 on AT&T (60+40+40+40). It would be $180 on Sprint (110+20+20+10+10+10). That $190 would not include the AT&T U-Verse $20, would it? U-Verse may not be an option for everyone. Personally, I pay $240 for 5 lines ($48 per line) on ED1500. The minutes are unlimited (loyalty promotion offer from last year) and there is no de-prioritization that I know of (as of now at least).

This is very true. It isn't a non issue for you because you don't need unlimited data. It is, however, a non issue for the person you replied to. That person does need unlimited data. He pays about $60 per line for unlimited. There's no other provider that can match that value, subsidized phone included or not. If and when legacy users get their subsidized phones and loyalty credits taken away, they're going to decide how much they value their unlimited data. Given how often most people are on Wi-Fi, the majority of those on Sprint legacy plans may opt to leave Sprint. There are other providers and MVNOs that have better plans than ED1500 for those who don't need unlimited data.

Yes, it's definitely interesting that the results were almost exactly the same in 1H2015 and 2H2015. Also interesting: Sprint's download went from 13 to 22. Everyone else, it seemed like their download speed decreased or stayed the same, and their upload increased. For example, Verizon's download speed decreased from 27 to 25, and their upload went from 16 to 22. I think it's easier to say that Sprint improved the most even though the numbers say otherwise. This of course has to do with how Rootmetrics gives little to no preference for download speed over upload speed. Favorite part was how competitive Chicago was. I mean, is there any market more competitive in that a 'city dweller' could easily hop from network to network and still have an awesome experience?

Yeah, I see what you're saying. AT&T seems to be doing an impressive job from what you said. I might add though that cell phone providers are always improving. You mentioned that AT&T recently bumped up B2 to 10x10. Well Sprint also barely started bumping up the second B25 carrier to 10x10; there's also 2xCA on B41 that still has a while to be even close to fully deployed. Thus, both AT&T and Sprint Rootmetric results will not exactly match current real world performance, but it's the best we have.

Personally, High: 90-110 Average: 10-20 Low: 2-5 Sprint may not be as good as AT&T when considering how many subscribers each has on its network, but Sprint is definitely a viable option. Really, all the carriers in Chicago do a pretty good job. Give it a couple weeks: Rootmetrics is going to be releasing 2H2015 report. That would be the best way to answer your question.

Isn't the first B25 carrier staying 5x5 and the second becoming 10x10?

So in Chicago there's going to be one 5 MHz B25 carrier, one 10 MHz B25 carrier, plus B26, and plus B41?

I'm not sure if this will stop all of them. Whether a good or bad thing, there are places like my home with clearwire CA, 2xB25, and Sprint B26/41 all converging in one area, which really does not allow for congestion and hence would not allow for de-prioritization. That just makes me wonder if there should be a hard cap of say 100GB that slows a person down to 2G speeds regardless of congestion?

In theory, this de-prioritization for 23GB+ users seems great. However, the theory of a tri-band network is also great, yet it sometimes feels like Sprint handles band prioritization less than adequately. Again though, if Sprint can properly prioritize 23GB+ people, then this bodes well for the network. Also, why 23 and not something different? To copy T-mobile?

I agree. In the future, hopefully it will be just as easy as buying any Sprint 'branded' device and going into a store to activate it. No hassles, no contracts

That definitely applies to new Sprint phones. Used Sprint phones (e.g. those bought from eBay), sometimes (usually?) don't have them. With a no subsidy cell service model, the used cell phone market may become more popular.