Jump to content

Network Vision/LTE - New York City Market

Ace41690

By Ace41690
in Markets

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 11.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

nexgencpu
nexgencpu

Its finally happened!!!! Sprint overtook Tmobile on Netindex in Manhattan!!     Next...Verizon!!

Palan
Palan

I was on lunch today at tmobile checking out their plan prices. One of the reps came up and asked what service you on? I said Sprint and she immediately went on this rant on how sprint is slow, ouch

lilotimz
lilotimz

First off. You need to read up a bit more before you start complaining about speeds.Sprints 5x5 has a maximum theoretical output of 37.5mbps DL and ~ 14 mbps UL. The theoretical maximum is the absolut

Posted Images

LTEBrooklyn Member Level: eHRPD

LTEBrooklyn

Posted
Posted

I have a poll for everyone. I wasn't going to start a new thread.

 

If sprint started throttling users let's say after 3gb, how much interest would you actually have in Nv, etc?

 

 

I think speed to the point of spark is really useless and actually not beneficial at all if they ever start with slow downs.

 

Did you know if you downloaded at a full 60mbps for 8-9 minutes, you would already be at 3GB!!!

 

I know I would go straight over to TMobile. What do u guys think?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paynefanbro Member Level: LTE Advanced

Paynefanbro

Posted
Posted

I could never switch to T-Mobile. They work great in the city, but their horrible outside of it. Signal drops like a sack of bricks and data is slower than legacy 3G. They can throttle me to 1.5mbps, but lower and I would switch to Verizon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTEBrooklyn Member Level: eHRPD

LTEBrooklyn

Posted
Posted

I could never switch to T-Mobile. They work great in the city, but their horrible outside of it. Signal drops like a sack of bricks and data is slower than legacy 3G. They can throttle me to 1.5mbps, but lower and I would switch to Verizon.

Chances are if the throttle, it would be at 2g speeds. I have the s4 with tmobile right now and the speeds all over ny are amazing. Was also in jersey and most places had lte at 25-30mbps speed. Occasionally it went down in some areas to 4g hspa which still gave me a solid 5mbps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nexgencpu Member Level: LTE Advanced

nexgencpu

Posted
Posted

Chances are if the throttle, it would be at 2g speeds. I have the s4 with tmobile right now and the speeds all over ny are amazing. Was also in jersey and most places had lte at 25-30mbps speed. Occasionally it went down in some areas to 4g hspa which still gave me a solid 5mbps.

T mobile has done a commendable job in marketing and also deploying their LTE in the places they already had HSPA+ support. But, yes, outside of the city its useless for the most part, and indoor performance leaves much to be desired. With NYC already at 35% on B41, and B26 turning on any day sprint will be quite difficult to beat. I dont see T mobile having a fighting chance without a low frequency band.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dkoellerwx Member Level: LTE Advanced

Dkoellerwx

Posted
Posted

I have a poll for everyone. I wasn't going to start a new thread.

 

If sprint started throttling users let's say after 3gb, how much interest would you actually have in Nv, etc?

 

 

I think speed to the point of spark is really useless and actually not beneficial at all if they ever start with slow downs.

 

Did you know if you downloaded at a full 60mbps for 8-9 minutes, you would already be at 3GB!!!

 

I know I would go straight over to TMobile. What do u guys think?

 

No real point in discussing something that isn't going to happen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
IsaiahL Member Level: 4G WiMax

IsaiahL

Posted
Posted

Well, unlimited, unthrottled is in the contract. However, they do reserve the right to limit video streams to 1Mbps. But only video streams, nothing else. 

Is that why, when I have full blown LTE and I try to stream a YouTube video the quality should be 720p but instead its crappy 240p pixalated disgustingness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nexgencpu Member Level: LTE Advanced

nexgencpu

Posted
Posted

Is that why, when I have full blown LTE and I try to stream a YouTube video the quality should be 720p but instead its crappy 240p pixalated disgustingness?

No, there is no cap on data and there is no throttling, the reason you get low res is that the YouTube app detects you are on the carrier wireless and not wifi, and defaults back to low res. You can still manually enable HD while playing or just force the option for all times.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
IsaiahL Member Level: 4G WiMax

IsaiahL

Posted
Posted

No, there is no cap on data and there is no throttling, the reason you get low res is that the YouTube app detects you are on the carrier wireless and not wifi, and defaults back to low res. You can still manually enable HD while playing or just force the option for all times.

I have an iPhone , so how do i do that.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nexgencpu Member Level: LTE Advanced

nexgencpu

Posted
Posted

I have an iPhone , so how do i do that.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You'll notice that a small button with three vertical dots in the upper-right corner of a video's playback controls. Tap this button when playing a video and it will call up three options: video quality

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IsaiahL Member Level: 4G WiMax

IsaiahL

Posted
Posted (edited)

You'll notice that a small button with three vertical dots in the upper-right corner of a video's playback controls. Tap this button when playing a video and it will call up three options: video quality

 

Yeahh ik bout that , thats only for when on Wi-Fi , Google put restrictions on iOS YouTube app to help with Data usage. I surely would have preferred they give people an option to stream HD over Cellular, rather than restrict us iOS users from the get go.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by IsaiahL
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nexgencpu Member Level: LTE Advanced

nexgencpu

Posted
Posted

Yeahh ik bout that , thats only for when on Wi-Fi , Google put restrictions on iOS YouTube app to help with Data usage. I surely would have preferred they give people an option to stream HD over Cellular, rather than restrict us iOS users from the get go.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thats quite amazing, this is one of the many reasons why Im not on any sort of apple device, but from what ive read it looks like its somehow restricted on cellular. People have mentioned an app called Mctube for HD videos on youtube, you might want to give it a try. Oh apple... :zip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IsaiahL Member Level: 4G WiMax

IsaiahL

Posted
Posted

Thats quite amazing, this is one of the many reasons why Im not on any sort of apple device, but from what ive read it looks like its somehow restricted on cellular. People have mentioned an app called Mctube for HD videos on youtube, you might want to give it a try. Oh apple... :zip:

Smh , It's Google not Apple cause I can stream HD on Netflix over LTE lickity split. McTube no longer exist in the App Store, well I didn't find it at least.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paynefanbro Member Level: LTE Advanced

Paynefanbro

Posted
Posted

Smh , It's Google not Apple cause I can stream HD on Netflix over LTE lickity split. McTube no longer exist in the App Store, well I didn't find it at least.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's obviously not Google if Google has been able to port nearly all of its system apps flawlessly to iPhone's and Apple hasn't done the same for Android devices.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sonic13 Member Level: 1x Advanced

Sonic13

Posted
Posted

It's obviously not Google if Google has been able to port nearly all of its system apps flawlessly to iPhone's and Apple hasn't done the same for Android devices.

It is Google, it's their app. When you try to change the quality settings it says "manual quality selection over cellular networks is not supported", that isn't Apple's doing.

 

Not that HD streaming matters to me, I can't even watch anything on 3G using the app, but the restriction exists. In my experience, the mobile site works way better (on both cellular and wifi), for whatever reason.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
IsaiahL Member Level: 4G WiMax

IsaiahL

Posted
Posted

It is Google, it's their app. When you try to change the quality settings it says "manual quality selection over cellular networks is not supported", that isn't Apple's doing.

 

Not that HD streaming matters to me, I can't even watch anything on 3G using the app, but the restriction exists. In my experience, the mobile site works way better (on both cellular and wifi), for whatever reason.

Facts !

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dkoellerwx Member Level: LTE Advanced

Dkoellerwx

Posted
Posted

It is Google, it's their app. When you try to change the quality settings it says "manual quality selection over cellular networks is not supported", that isn't Apple's doing.

 

Not that HD streaming matters to me, I can't even watch anything on 3G using the app, but the restriction exists. In my experience, the mobile site works way better (on both cellular and wifi), for whatever reason.

Actually, if it's not supported, it's more than likely an Apple restriction. Google supports it just fine on Android, and if they could they would on iOS. Apple likely didn't let them add it.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Paynefanbro
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By Paynefanbro · Posted

      Kind of amazing that T-Mobile is still holding onto that speed title despite Verizon all but killing off lowband 5G on their network. While Verizon is mostly being evaluated on mmWave and C-band performance, T-Mobile and AT&T's average 5G speeds include their massive lowband 5G networks that are significantly slower.
    • schmidtj
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By schmidtj · Posted

      5G in the U.S. – Additional Mid-band Spectrum Driving Performance Gains T-Mobile holds on to it's lead in 5G Speed
    • RedSpark
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By RedSpark · Posted

      Yup. Very true. We were originally on an Everything Data 1500 Plan, which got Unlimited Minutes thanks to Marcelo's "Loyalty Benefits" offer. We then switched to Unlimited Freedom (with the Free HD add-on that Sprint originally wanted $20/month per line for.... remember that?) because the pricing was better with "iPhone for Life", vs. the "Loyalty Credit" for staying on a Legacy Plan. After that, I ran the numbers and switched us over to Sprint MAX, especially for the international travel benefits. There's absolutely no reason for us to switch to Go5G Plus or Go5G Next if we're going to do BYOD by purchasing from Apple/Samsung/Google directly as we've been doing. These new plans aren't priced for current customers to switch to. They're priced for new customers, where they throw in a free line, etc. It's gone from "Uncarrier" to "Carrier". What a shame.
    • dkyeager
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By dkyeager · Posted

      Strange business model that they keep around all these pricing plans. 1000s of plans per carrier is reportedly not uncommon.  Training customer support must be a nightmare. Even MVNOs have legacy plans. A downside of their contract mentality I guess. Best to change contracts during a recession. But then all carriers try to squeeze out legacy plan benefits as they grow old.  
    • RedSpark
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By RedSpark · Posted

      Everything "Uncarrier" is becoming "Carrier" again. Because of the Credit Limit that T-Mobile put on our account for no reason at all (and wouldn't change/update the last time I checked all the way up to the CEO), I don't plan on buying/upgrading our iPhones through T-Mobile. I'm going through Apple directly. Looks like I'll be going through Google and Samsung directly for our other lines for upgrades. Also, we're staying on Sprint Max given the ridiculous pricing for Go5G Plus. On Sprint Max, we currently pay for our Plan: $260 for 7 Voice Lines $25 for two Wearable Lines. (One is $10/Month. The other is $15/Month because the AutoPay discount only applies up to 8 lines.) Total: $285/Month vs. Go5G Plus (Per the Broadband Facts "nutrition label" on the T-Mobile Website): https://www.t-mobile.com/commerce/cell-phone-plans $360 - ($5 AutoPay Discount x 7 Voice Lines) = $325 The Watch Plans show as either $12/Month or $15/Month: https://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans/affordable-data-plans/smartwatches So this is about the same for the wearables as what we're paying now. Overall, it's quite more than we're paying now to switch plans. Ridiculous....

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...