Network Vision/LTE - Columbus Market

[WiWavelength]

I'll just say that whatever I'm using my paid for data to do at the time is my business as long as I'm not breaking any laws. It's what is important to me at the time. Nobody has any business telling me what I can or can't do with something that I've paid for. On principle alone you have it wrong. It's like buying a sandwich, but only allowed to eat half because there are starving people in the world.

 

No, your analogy is off.  It is more like you pay a flat rate for "unlimited" sandwiches.  So, you scarf them down -- not because you are that hungry, simply because you can -- without thinking about there being a feasibly finite supply of sandwiches for you and everyone else.  And it is precisely that attitude why "unlimited" sandwiches should go way up in price or may be eliminated altogether.  So, digest that for a while.

 

AJ

[amcferrin90]

So you have a case of data envy? You can't use as much as data as the rest of us so shame us? Draw some conclusions there. I'm going to run a speed test right now and post it in honor of you AJ.

[nexgencpu]

I'll just say that whatever I'm using my paid for data to do at the time is my business as long as I'm not breaking any laws. It's what is important to me at the time. Nobody has any business telling me what I can or can't do with something that I've paid for. On principle alone you have it wrong. It's like buying a sandwich, but only allowed to eat half because there are starving people in the world.

[WiWavelength]

So you have a case of data envy? You can't use as much as data as the rest of us so shame us? Draw some conclusions there. I'm going to run a speed test right now and post it in honor of you AJ.

 

Now, you are just grasping at straws.  Your post has no pertinence.

 

And, everyone, go ahead, keep using "unlimited" data for many frivolous speed tests that now can consume upwards of 100 MB of data per test.  It will come back to bite you in the ass with higher prices, slower speeds, or Sprint's outright demise.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

 

AJ

[Deval]

I'll just say that whatever I'm using my paid for data to do at the time is my business as long as I'm not breaking any laws. It's what is important to me at the time. Nobody has any business telling me what I can or can't do with something that I've paid for. On principle alone you have it wrong. It's like buying a sandwich, but only allowed to eat half because there are starving people in the world.

 

I disagree, your analogy implies many sandwiches available, while I am stating as a true apples to apples, that there is one sandwich, and we all have to share bites from it. That is the nature of wireless networks, we all eat from the same dish.

 

Would you rather be sensible, or a glutton? 

 

For the record, I consume a ton of data based on my usage, 15-20GB monthly, but I can assure you that almost none of it is for speedtests.

[AppleFanBoy]

I disagree, your analogy implies many sandwiches available, while I am stating as a true apples to apples, that there is one sandwich, and we all have to share bites from it. That is the nature of wireless networks, we all eat from the same dish.

 

Would you rather be sensible, or a glutton? 

 

For the record, I consume a ton of data based on my usage, 15-20GB monthly, but I can assure you that almost none of it is for speedtests.

Well actually...with the nature of TCP/IP networks, the dish is filled with unlimited amounts of sandwiches...but the more people eating the slower we all have to eat or we outpace the cook.

Edited August 25, 2015 by AppleFanBoy

[Deval]

Well actually...with the nature of TCP/IP networks, the dish is filled with unlimited amounts of sandwiches...but the more people eating the slower we all have to eat or we outpace the cook.

 

yes, that's an even better analogy.

 

At the end of the day, there is a finite amount of users that a single cell site can support. While I applaud T-Mobile for all of their moves to change the industry, the need to advertise peak speeds as a competitive advantage without context is the worst.

 

Just today I lowered my Time Warner Cable internet from the Ultimate 300 (300mbps/20mbps) to Ultimate 200, saving quite a bit of money in the process. I honestly could go with the basic Ultimate 100 (100/10) but it's the same price. There is no discernible difference between the tiers, other than posting kickass speedtest.net results.

[UPdownLoAD]

First off, let's get a better anology going. Many places offer buffets for a flat rate, but also offer a menu you can order off of as well. Depending on how hungry people are, they may or may not get the buffet. Many times the buffet is more expensive then just ordering off the menu, and if I'm not that hungry, ordering off the menu is a better way to go because it's cheaper. However, many people that buy the buffet don't eat enough to make it worth while.

 

Either way, the restaurant doesn't tell me I am taking food away from other hungry mouths if I eat more from the buffet then the next guy. They also benefit when I order the buffet and don't eat much. If I decide to eat just meat off of the buffet, their costs do rise. But my mother isn't there either to stop me if I just want to eat desserts; I have paid for all I can eat, and as long as I'm not walking out with doggie bags under my shirt, it's my choice what I eat.

 

What concerns me is you are implying that occasional speedtests are hurting other users. Can you tell me by how much a speedtest umbrellas/slows the network down? Am I going to take an average speed of 50mbs at a tower and make it so everyone else gets unusable data from a speedtest or 2? Should I no longer stream radio/music?

 

If a restaurant serves lousy food, the restaurant either goes out of business or makes changes to correct it. This is precisely what Sprint did. Sprint was serving lousy data and lost a lot of business. They now have great data for most people in many markets.

 

All of the big 4 carriers also realized 3 things:

1) People would order the buffet just because it was there.

2) If they kept pushing/offering the buffet, it would not be viable long-term.

3) They also realized very few people got their money's worth at the buffet and now try to help you order off the menu what you really need.

 

I'm the guy that keeps ordering the buffet and just has 2 pieces of cake. Sorry I cut in line in front of the people eating dinner first, but cake is what I wanted. Do I overpay based on usage? Yup. Does the resturant tell me I can't have dessert if I don't eat a salid first? Nope. But I keep paying for the buffet because I never know when I may want to eat a bit more.

[amcferrin90]

First off, let's get a better anology going. Many places offer buffets for a flat rate, but also offer a menu you can order off of as well. Depending on how hungry people are, they may or may not get the buffet. Many times the buffet is more expensive then just ordering off the menu, and if I'm not that hungry, ordering off the menu is a better way to go because it's cheaper. However, many people that buy the buffet don't eat enough to make it worth while.

 

Either way, the restaurant doesn't tell me I am taking food away from other hungry mouths if I eat more from the buffet then the next guy. They also benefit when I order the buffet and don't eat much. If I decide to eat just meat off of the buffet, their costs do rise. But my mother isn't there either to stop me if I just want to eat desserts; I have paid for all I can eat, and as long as I'm not walking out with doggie bags under my shirt, it's my choice what I eat.

 

What concerns me is you are implying that occasional speedtests are hurting other users. Can you tell me by how much a speedtest umbrellas/slows the network down? Am I going to take an average speed of 50mbs at a tower and make it so everyone else gets unusable data from a speedtest or 2? Should I no longer stream radio/music?

 

If a restaurant serves lousy food, the restaurant either goes out of business or makes changes to correct it. This is precisely what Sprint did. Sprint was serving lousy data and lost a lot of business. They now have great data for most people in many markets.

 

All of the big 4 carriers also realized 3 things:

1) People would order the buffet just because it was there.

2) If they kept pushing/offering the buffet, it would not be viable long-term.

3) They also realized very few people got their money's worth at the buffet and now try to help you order off the menu what you really need.

 

I'm the guy that keeps ordering the buffet and just has 2 pieces of cake. Sorry I cut in line in front of the people eating dinner first, but cake is what I wanted. Do I overpay based on usage? Yup. Does the resturant tell me I can't have dessert if I don't eat a salid first? Nope. But I keep paying for the buffet because I never know when I may want to eat a bit more.

So when you go to Frishe's you get the buffet and not the big boy? Because the big boy isn't on the buffet. Of course that was a silly question because you go for the cake and Frische's charges per slice for cake. Unless you steal the cake? To which you suck because their cake is not worth paying for but stealing the cake is still law breaking.

[COZisBack]

Mmmmmmmmm.... Cake ???? and cheeseburgers ????.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[Deval]

First off, let's get a better anology going. Many places offer buffets for a flat rate, but also offer a menu you can order off of as well. Depending on how hungry people are, they may or may not get the buffet. Many times the buffet is more expensive then just ordering off the menu, and if I'm not that hungry, ordering off the menu is a better way to go because it's cheaper. However, many people that buy the buffet don't eat enough to make it worth while.

 

Either way, the restaurant doesn't tell me I am taking food away from other hungry mouths if I eat more from the buffet then the next guy. They also benefit when I order the buffet and don't eat much. If I decide to eat just meat off of the buffet, their costs do rise. But my mother isn't there either to stop me if I just want to eat desserts; I have paid for all I can eat, and as long as I'm not walking out with doggie bags under my shirt, it's my choice what I eat.

 

What concerns me is you are implying that occasional speedtests are hurting other users. Can you tell me by how much a speedtest umbrellas/slows the network down? Am I going to take an average speed of 50mbs at a tower and make it so everyone else gets unusable data from a speedtest or 2? Should I no longer stream radio/music?

 

If a restaurant serves lousy food, the restaurant either goes out of business or makes changes to correct it. This is precisely what Sprint did. Sprint was serving lousy data and lost a lot of business. They now have great data for most people in many markets.

 

All of the big 4 carriers also realized 3 things:

1) People would order the buffet just because it was there.

2) If they kept pushing/offering the buffet, it would not be viable long-term.

3) They also realized very few people got their money's worth at the buffet and now try to help you order off the menu what you really need.

 

I'm the guy that keeps ordering the buffet and just has 2 pieces of cake. Sorry I cut in line in front of the people eating dinner first, but cake is what I wanted. Do I overpay based on usage? Yup. Does the resturant tell me I can't have dessert if I don't eat a salid first? Nope. But I keep paying for the buffet because I never know when I may want to eat a bit more.

 

Great post, and you make valid points. 

 

I think my frustration, and AJ shares it to an extent, is the need to constantly run speedtests as a validation of choice of network provider. It just fosters an unhealthy attachment to "my network is faster than yours" because of an arbitrary speedtest at a single location. The better gauge of the network should be if it actually works or not, which is what it used to be, till our friend in magenta deemed otherwise.

[imex99]

Right.... Most sensible users in our Columbus market when we get new sites, 10mhz , b41 2nd carrier's, etc.... Our occasional speed test isn't warranted the Aj lecture on speedtests, Save that for the users you see abusing it or looking at changing carrier's bc I don't believe any of us are leaving anyone soon.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[derrph]

I feel bad I kinda got all this started up. I don't normally do speedtests but I noticed a noticeable change in a area that wasn't the best. I ran a speedtest to see what had changed data wise. But I see nothing wrong with a test here and there which AJ said a few posts up in reply to my original post. But doing speed tests all day is not worth it and you can't even enjoy the new sprint network because you're hung up on tests.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

Look, folks, I never directly accused anyone of running repeated speed tests.  I only advised against that practice.  Then, others jumped in, asserting their rights to do what they want with their "unlimited" data.  And that brought on this kerfuffle.

 

I do not spend much time in any Columbus focused threads.  But what caught my attention is an update to the Ookla Speedtest app that displays data usage per test -- on both links.  I was actually happy to learn of this new metric.  From what I have seen and what others have said, it did not exist a few months ago.  But it is a sobering feature.

 

Singular speed tests now are consuming as much data as some users consume in an entire week.  If you think that you and lots of other people mashing the speed test button -- because you have "unlimited" data -- are not affecting other users, think again.

 

AJ

[Dkoellerwx]

What concerns me is you are implying that occasional speedtests are hurting other users. Can you tell me by how much a speedtest umbrellas/slows the network down? Am I going to take an average speed of 50mbs at a tower and make it so everyone else gets unusable data from a speedtest or 2? Should I no longer stream radio/music?

 

No one has said you can't run a speedtest or two from time to time. For wireless nerds like us, that is to be expected. If you actually read AJ's posts, he is referring to those that feel the need to run several speedtests, over and over every day or so just to prove a point about network speeds. Those people are causing undue strain on the network, and are being unfair to other users. Whether they paid for unlimited or not.

[UPdownLoAD]

No one has said you can't run a speedtest or two from time to time. For wireless nerds like us, that is to be expected. If you actually read AJ's posts, he is referring to those that feel the need to run several speedtests, over and over every day or so just to prove a point about network speeds. Those people are causing undue strain on the network, and are being unfair to other users. Whether they paid for unlimited or not.

Who are these people that are doing this? I'm not aware of any in our Columbus market Group

[Gmotif6]

I didn't know speed test hogged data. I would think that streaming music all day is the same effect. But hey..you pay for it every month so forget those who don't use those services

[Dkoellerwx]

Who are these people that are doing this? I'm not aware of any in our Columbus market Group

 

Again, read his posts. I don't believe anyone was named guilty. It was a general observation that degraded into the old unlimited argument. 

[WiWavelength]

Our occasional speed test isn't warranted the Aj lecture on speedtests,

 

Please read this discussion more carefully.  I never put forth a "lecture on speed tests."  They can be useful tools occasionally.  But with the amounts of data that they can consume now, they should not be done frequently.

 

AJ

[Dkoellerwx]

I didn't know speed test hogged data. I would think that streaming music all day is the same effect. But hey..you pay for it every month so forget those who don't use those services

 

One speed test at 100Mbps uses well over 100MB of data. That is the reality we have now that CA is active on many sites across the network.

[Gmotif6]

Please read this discussion more carefully. I never put forth a "lecture on speed tests." They can be useful tools occasionally. But with the amounts of data that they can consume now, they should not be done frequently.

 

AJ

Gotcha. I hope we have more reports on more upgrades than this topic that I really know nothing about. [emoji108]

[WiWavelength]

I didn't know speed test hogged data. I would think that streaming music all day is the same effect. But hey..you pay for it every month so forget those who don't use those services

 

Audio streaming is more of a slow trickle.  Running 128 kbps amounts to just under 1 MB/min.  If multiplied by enough constant users, though, that slow trickle can be a problem, too.  These are all reasons why "unlimited" data is out of date.

 

As for speed tests, I would encourage any "Speed Racer" with multiple Sprint lines to go to a location, run a speed test on one line, then a speed test on the other line, then a speed test simultaneously on both lines.  Tell us that the last test does not result in reduced speed/capacity for both.  Do the test multiple times if need be.  That is fine -- it is in the interest of science.

 

Watch the Japanese anime "Oh!" come across your face...

 

 

AJ

[amcferrin90]

How about we accept the fact that Sprint has network priority and management in place and that it does it's job. So who cares if someone runs a speed test or someone is watching YouTube. Network management prioritizes the packets as it sees fit for the defined profiles. So let's argue about another metric...my network has greater cell density than yours.

[amcferrin90]

@GMotif you live south of Waterloo right? Have you seen the fiber being installed by on your south?

[Gmotif6]

@GMotif you live south of Waterloo right? Have you seen the fiber being installed by on your south?

waterloo? I'm near 70 and James. The only thing I've noticed is that the signal around the Walmart in Whitehall is great now