Debate on whether you should offload smartphone data on WiFi, even though you pay for "unlimited"

[WillieFDiazSF]

No, no, not this. Every time you keep your smartphone on EV-DO or LTE at home while you have Wi-Fi, the Baby Jesus cries.

 

While that may be a humorous exaggeration, it contains more than a kernel of truth. Folks, some of you just do not get it. You have to offload. Or you have no justification to complain about slow speeds. Sprint cannot offer unlimited data and competitive speeds unless most subs use relatively little data and/or offload to Wi-Fi. That is part of the deal.

 

So, if you have Wi-Fi at home and are not offloading, you better have a really good reason why. Otherwise, I would like to punch you. And "LTE is faster than my home broadband connection is not a 'really good reason why.'" You do not need greater than 1-2 Mbps on your smartphone for any legitimate purpose, bar none. If you want Sprint to maintain unlimited data, then offloading is your responsibility.

 

That may be tough, but sometimes you people need some tough love to set you straight...

 

AJ

 

That sounds more of a moral issue than a contractual issue.

 

The way I look at it is like this... I pay for unlimited use on my phone, and I should use as much or as little as I chose, for whatever apps I want to. Matter of fact, a lot of the music I like to listen to, TuneInRadio no longer works over WiFi signals, and ONLY works over 3G or 4G networks. Because of this, I have to turn off my WiFi when I want to listen to music at home. With respect to watching movies or YouTube videos, I may occasionally watch them over 3G or 4G, especially if I am in strong 4G areas, I will 90% of the time use the network. WiMAX is dead, so I have pretty much used all I can before upgrading to an LTE device. Since LTE is not offered where I live, (well it is but not at my house, work, or any part in between), I continue to offload to WiFi. Not for the sake of anyone else, but for the sake I want my data to stream fast, or in HD.

 

The moral issue here is should someone who has the opportunity, offload their data onto WiFi if it is available, for the sake of others? Others will use that as a reason we should do so for their benefit so they can use more data, speedy data, or even drive prices lower, unfortunately, this is extremely lopsided. If you pay for it, you should use it as you see fit. Anytime you see fit. It would be like telling a car owner not to drive in-town and take a bus so that way other people can use the roads and prevent traffic. When you look at it like that, it simply does not work. Roads will get bigger the more people travel on them, same with wireless, the more people using it, the more there may be measures taken to ensure traffic flows normally, but also the larger the lanes will be. So if you are paying for it, you are paying for the upgrades for the future. Why do you think Verizon and AT&T have been able to expand so fast? More people paying, more people using the network. Until recently, majority of Sprint users did not use the network as much as we do (since the EVO launch), now that we are, Sprint has to scramble to upgrade the network for the usage. Something they could have done a long time ago, had we been using it all along. So no, offloading to WiFi is not my idea of something to do, unless you REALLY feel obligated to do so, but contractually no, its not required. Sprint however is making it easier for the consumer by having Optimization Managers in new phones to allow offloading, 3G or 4G connectivity when and where it is strongest, that way it is fair, blindly managed by the carrier. However, I think if Sprint REALLY cared that much about offloading, they would pull an AT&T and T-Mobile and opt for WiFi in many high traffic areas, and have the phones automatically, seamlessly authenticate and connect to their O&O WiFi hotspots. They can still monitor the usage of where new towers and sites need to be, but offload heavy usage in high traffic areas to them instead. Of course, none of this matters if it is not a seamless experience, and WiFi to Cell and vice versa is definitely far from that.

 

Will I be obligated by someone elses issues to offload, absolutely not. I pay for what I think should be unlimited, offered as unlimited and definitely I manage myself for myself, not for others.

[S4GRU]

That sounds more of a moral issue than a contractual issue.

 

The way I look at it is like this... I pay for unlimited use on my phone, and I should use as much or as little as I chose, for whatever apps I want to. Matter of fact, a lot of the music I like to listen to, TuneInRadio no longer works over WiFi signals, and ONLY works over 3G or 4G networks. Because of this, I have to turn off my WiFi when I want to listen to music at home. With respect to watching movies or YouTube videos, I may occasionally watch them over 3G or 4G, especially if I am in strong 4G areas, I will 90% of the time use the network. WiMAX is dead, so I have pretty much used all I can before upgrading to an LTE device. Since LTE is not offered where I live, (well it is but not at my house, work, or any part in between), I continue to offload to WiFi. Not for the sake of anyone else, but for the sake I want my data to stream fast, or in HD.

 

The moral issue here is should someone who has the opportunity, offload their data onto WiFi if it is available, for the sake of others? Others will use that as a reason we should do so for their benefit so they can use more data, speedy data, or even drive prices lower, unfortunately, this is extremely lopsided. If you pay for it, you should use it as you see fit. Anytime you see fit. It would be like telling a car owner not to drive in-town and take a bus so that way other people can use the roads and prevent traffic. When you look at it like that, it simply does not work. Roads will get bigger the more people travel on them, same with wireless, the more people using it, the more there may be measures taken to ensure traffic flows normally, but also the larger the lanes will be. So if you are paying for it, you are paying for the upgrades for the future. Why do you think Verizon and AT&T have been able to expand so fast? More people paying, more people using the network. Until recently, majority of Sprint users did not use the network as much as we do (since the EVO launch), now that we are, Sprint has to scramble to upgrade the network for the usage. Something they could have done a long time ago, had we been using it all along. So no, offloading to WiFi is not my idea of something to do, unless you REALLY feel obligated to do so, but contractually no, its not required. Sprint however is making it easier for the consumer by having Optimization Managers in new phones to allow offloading, 3G or 4G connectivity when and where it is strongest, that way it is fair, blindly managed by the carrier. However, I think if Sprint REALLY cared that much about offloading, they would pull an AT&T and T-Mobile and opt for WiFi in many high traffic areas, and have the phones automatically, seamlessly authenticate and connect to their O&O WiFi hotspots. They can still monitor the usage of where new towers and sites need to be, but offload heavy usage in high traffic areas to them instead. Of course, none of this matters if it is not a seamless experience, and WiFi to Cell and vice versa is definitely far from that.

 

Will I be obligated by someone elses issues to offload, absolutely not. I pay for what I think should be unlimited, offered as unlimited and definitely I manage myself for myself, not for others.

 

You cannot use the AT&T and Verizon explanation. That is not what they did. They didn't make fatter data pipes for everyone just to continue doing whatever the hell they want, they instituted caps to limit the amount of data people consume. And if people consume as much data as possible, even when they can offload with no net effect, they are saying they are looking forward to the same data caps on Sprint. Period.

 

That is extremely short sighted.

 

Robert

[CriticalityEvent]

That sounds more of a moral issue than a contractual issue.

 

You are correct; you are absolutely under no contractual obligation to use Wi-Fi. What we are advocating here is the promotion of offloading for the benefit of everyone, including you.

 

The way I look at it is like this... I pay for unlimited use on my phone, and I should use as much or as little as I chose, for whatever apps I want to. Matter of fact, a lot of the music I like to listen to, TuneInRadio no longer works over WiFi signals, and ONLY works over 3G or 4G networks. Because of this, I have to turn off my WiFi when I want to listen to music at home.

 

This is…strange. It sounds like an issue that should be posted in XDA, but for now, I would agree that you should do what you could to use the services that you want.

 

With respect to watching movies or YouTube videos, I may occasionally watch them over 3G or 4G, especially if I am in strong 4G areas, I will 90% of the time use the network. WiMAX is dead, so I have pretty much used all I can before upgrading to an LTE device. Since LTE is not offered where I live, (well it is but not at my house, work, or any part in between), I continue to offload to WiFi. Not for the sake of anyone else, but for the sake I want my data to stream fast, or in HD.

 

Once you do get LTE again, and you are in a trusted Wi-Fi area, why use LTE? I know you are of the mentality that “you paid for it, therefore you should use it,” but what of your home internet connection? Did you not pay for that as well?

 

The moral issue here is should someone who has the opportunity, offload their data onto WiFi if it is available, for the sake of others? Others will use that as a reason we should do so for their benefit so they can use more data, speedy data, or even drive prices lower, unfortunately, this is extremely lopsided.

 

No, it’s not lopsided. You are offloading when you can so others can use the cellular network when they cannot offload. When they have the ability to offload, they will, which will free up the network to allow you to use it when you don’t have the ability to offload.

 

If you pay for it, you should use it as you see fit. Anytime you see fit. It would be like telling a car owner not to drive in-town and take a bus so that way other people can use the roads and prevent traffic. When you look at it like that, it simply does not work. Roads will get bigger the more people travel on them, same with wireless, the more people using it, the more there may be measures taken to ensure traffic flows normally, but also the larger the lanes will be. So if you are paying for it, you are paying for the upgrades for the future. Why do you think Verizon and AT&T have been able to expand so fast? More people paying, more people using the network.

 

Looking at metropolitan areas, we have hit the limit on road area, just as we are hitting the limit on spectrum. You’re going to have an easier (and cheaper) time getting around Manhattan in the subway than you are on the roads. The last wireless revolution (3G) didn’t come about from congestion, and the next will come about regardless of how the networks are treated. Treat them badly, and you end up with Sprint's 3G circa 2008-present and data caps.

 

Until recently, majority of Sprint users did not use the network as much as we do (since the EVO launch), now that we are, Sprint has to scramble to upgrade the network for the usage. Something they could have done a long time ago, had we been using it all along. So no, offloading to WiFi is not my idea of something to do, unless you REALLY feel obligated to do so, but contractually no, its not required. Sprint however is making it easier for the consumer by having Optimization Managers in new phones to allow offloading, 3G or 4G connectivity when and where it is strongest, that way it is fair, blindly managed by the carrier. However, I think if Sprint REALLY cared that much about offloading, they would pull an AT&T and T-Mobile and opt for WiFi in many high traffic areas, and have the phones automatically, seamlessly authenticate and connect to their O&O WiFi hotspots. They can still monitor the usage of where new towers and sites need to be, but offload heavy usage in high traffic areas to them instead. Of course, none of this matters if it is not a seamless experience, and WiFi to Cell and vice versa is definitely far from that.

 

Will I be obligated by someone elses issues to offload, absolutely not. I pay for what I think should be unlimited, offered as unlimited and definitely I manage myself for myself, not for others.

 

Most of these arguments have been made before, read these:

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...3557#entry73557

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...4043#entry74043

[WiWavelength]

Pardon my crude analogy, but plenty here and elsewhere treat Sprint like a battered woman. "She" may stay with you out of economic necessity and tell you that your behavior is okay, but that DOES NOT make it okay.

 

AJ

[CriticalityEvent]

Pardon my crude analogy, but plenty here and elsewhere treat Sprint like a battered woman. "She" may stay with you out of economic necessity and tell you that your behavior is okay, but that DOES NOT make it okay.

 

AJ

 

But if she knew what was good for her, she'd stay in the kitchen making us our Ice Cream Sandwich. Because, you know, she's asking for it otherwise.

 

http://www.s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/2626-Jelly-Bean-for-our-HTC-EVO-4G-LTE??

 

[bookertdub]

Good news AJ, my work improved the WiFi noticeably. Now I might have a chance of using less than 7 gigs a month on Sprint's network!

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[nahum365]

This would be called "abuse":

 

 

That's actually my phone, but I can assure you I didn't tether 102 terabytes of data in two months.

 

EDIT: Umm Apple needs to fix this:

 

 

Keeps on glitching...

[WillieFDiazSF]

You are correct; you are absolutely under no contractual obligation to use Wi-Fi. What we are advocating here is the promotion of offloading for the benefit of everyone, including you.

 

 

 

This is…strange. It sounds like an issue that should be posted in XDA, but for now, I would agree that you should do what you could to use the services that you want.

 

 

 

Once you do get LTE again, and you are in a trusted Wi-Fi area, why use LTE? I know you are of the mentality that “you paid for it, therefore you should use it,” but what of your home internet connection? Did you not pay for that as well?

 

 

 

No, it’s not lopsided. You are offloading when you can so others can use the cellular network when they cannot offload. When they have the ability to offload, they will, which will free up the network to allow you to use it when you don’t have the ability to offload.

 

 

 

Looking at metropolitan areas, we have hit the limit on road area, just as we are hitting the limit on spectrum. You’re going to have an easier (and cheaper) time getting around Manhattan in the subway than you are on the roads. The last wireless revolution (3G) didn’t come about from congestion, and the next will come about regardless of how the networks are treated. Treat them badly, and you end up with Sprint's 3G circa 2008-present and data caps.

 

 

 

Most of these arguments have been made before, read these:

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...3557#entry73557

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...4043#entry74043

 

I do pay for internet at home, it is WiFi, however, I dont have LTE at home, nor will I likely have it in the next few years anyway, regardless of Network Vision plans. Sprint told me "Oh yes, you WILL for sure have WiMAX indoors at your home location today, but we also are expanding so you will have it even stronger than you do already." verbatim only a few weeks after my trial was over to say "Oh, sorry, we arent expanding WiMAX so you will only get it a few blocks from your house now." So with that, I know Sprint wont really bring LTE to my house anytime soon, and if they do, Ill have to purchase a new device full price to get LTE on 800 ESMR anyway if I want to go that route.

 

As for the internet at home, yes I do pay for it, yes, I do use it, though it is slower than LTE (being far enough away from the CO) at only 8-10mbps, however, I pay next to nothing for it. Yes, it is unlimited as well, no throttle, no caps, just good old independent DSL company in my area. My issue is that if my mobile bill costs double my home bill (of internet, phone, electric, gas, etc combined) then yes, I want to get my values worth and use the shit out of it.

[koiulpoi]

I do pay for internet at home, it is WiFi, however, I dont have LTE at home, nor will I likely have it in the next few years anyway, regardless of Network Vision plans.

Years?

 

LTE's going on nearly every single tower, so unless you're in a fringe area, you'll get it eventually.

 

What's your RSSI (signal strength in dBm) at your home? If it's better than -95, you should be able to get an LTE signal once available.

 

This isn't the WiMAX deployment, by the way. The two have nothing to do with each other, and, to be blunt, you should not use it as a basis for your expectations for LTE.

[S4GRU]

 

I do pay for internet at home, it is WiFi, however, I dont have LTE at home, nor will I likely have it in the next few years anyway, regardless of Network Vision plans. Sprint told me "Oh yes, you WILL for sure have WiMAX indoors at your home location today, but we also are expanding so you will have it even stronger than you do already." verbatim only a few weeks after my trial was over to say "Oh, sorry, we arent expanding WiMAX so you will only get it a few blocks from your house now." So with that, I know Sprint wont really bring LTE to my house anytime soon, and if they do, Ill have to purchase a new device full price to get LTE on 800 ESMR anyway if I want to go that route.

 

As for the internet at home, yes I do pay for it, yes, I do use it, though it is slower than LTE (being far enough away from the CO) at only 8-10mbps, however, I pay next to nothing for it. Yes, it is unlimited as well, no throttle, no caps, just good old independent DSL company in my area. My issue is that if my mobile bill costs double my home bill (of internet, phone, electric, gas, etc combined) then yes, I want to get my values worth and use the shit out of it.

 

It's posts like this that make me realize that unlimited's days are numbered...because people like you are going to use 'the shit' out of LTE even in places they could offload with no net effect on performance. I hope you enjoy 'the shit', because you won't have it for much longer. But don't forget to wash it off your hands.

 

Wireless networks are a shared resource. When you over use when you could off load (even when you paid for it), you just are impacting someone else who is away from WiFi who cannot offload (and they paid for it too). I don't need LTE in my home. I need LTE where I go. You folks who think you need LTE in your home so you can get your monies worth are pathetic. I can sympathize with people who live in a rural area with no options, or low speed options. But you people who have a reasonably fast WiFi connection at home but want to use 'the shit out of LTE' in lieu of WiFi are extremely short sighted. Bet you won't be using 'the shit' out of it when Sprint institutes data caps. Idiocy.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 on Tapatalk

 

 

[CriticalityEvent]

I do pay for internet at home, it is WiFi, however, I dont have LTE at home, nor will I likely have it in the next few years anyway, regardless of Network Vision plans. Sprint told me "Oh yes, you WILL for sure have WiMAX indoors at your home location today, but we also are expanding so you will have it even stronger than you do already." verbatim only a few weeks after my trial was over to say "Oh, sorry, we arent expanding WiMAX so you will only get it a few blocks from your house now." So with that, I know Sprint wont really bring LTE to my house anytime soon, and if they do, Ill have to purchase a new device full price to get LTE on 800 ESMR anyway if I want to go that route.

 

As for the internet at home, yes I do pay for it, yes, I do use it, though it is slower than LTE (being far enough away from the CO) at only 8-10mbps, however, I pay next to nothing for it. Yes, it is unlimited as well, no throttle, no caps, just good old independent DSL company in my area. My issue is that if my mobile bill costs double my home bill (of internet, phone, electric, gas, etc combined) then yes, I want to get my values worth and use the shit out of it.

 

So, because your phone costs more, you’re going to use it more? I mean, that makes sense to a point, but it makes no sense if you’re at home because the increased cost of your phone’s service ensures that you can take it ANYWHERE. I think that most home ISPs plans are cheaper than a standard smartphone plan these days.

 

When you do get LTE at your home (and you WILL), and it clocks in at 25-35 Mbps, are you still going to use that over your 8-10 Mbps Wi-Fi connection? Like I asked someone else before, given that your latency will more than likely be lower over your home connection, what can you do with 25-35 that you can’t do with 8-10?

 

Years?

 

LTE's going on nearly every single tower, so unless you're in a fringe area, you'll get it eventually.

 

What's your RSSI (signal strength in dBm) at your home? If it's better than -95, you should be able to get an LTE signal once available.

 

This isn't the WiMAX deployment, by the way. The two have nothing to do with each other, and, to be blunt, you should not use it as a basis for your expectations for LTE.

 

Right? I wish more people understood what WiMAX was really about: http://s4gru.com/ind...otection-sites/

 

But you people who have a reasonably fast WiFi connection at home but want to use 'the shit out of LTE' in lieu of WiFi are extremely short sighted. Bet you won't be using 'the shit' out of it when Sprint institutes data caps. Idiocy.

 

I can still see people of this mentality not being able to connect their irresponsible abuse with the instituted data caps. It’ll just be another thing to blame Sprint for. That’s going to irk me more than the P!nk lyric asking “where’s the rock n’ roll?” in reference to music on the radio these days (though that’s like bin Laden asking “what happened to the NYC skyline?”).

[newboyx]

 

It's posts like this that make me realize that unlimited's days are numbered...because people like you are going to use 'the shit' out of LTE even in places they could offload with no net effect on performance. I hope you enjoy 'the shit', because you won't have it for much longer. But don't forget to wash it off your hands.

 

Wireless networks are a shared resource. When you over use when you could off load (even when you paid for it), you just are impacting someone else who is away from WiFi who cannot offload (and they paid for it too). I don't need LTE in my home. I need LTE where I go. You folks who think you need LTE in your home so you can get your monies worth are pathetic. I can sympathize with people who live in a rural area with no options, or low speed options. But you people who have a reasonably fast WiFi connection at home but want to use 'the shit out of LTE' in lieu of WiFi are extremely short sighted. Bet you won't be using 'the shit' out of it when Sprint institutes data caps. Idiocy.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 on Tapatalk

The sad part is, no matter how many times this is stated people still won't get it. The fact that people can read this entire thread and still think that not off loading is the way to go blows my mind.

 

Sent from a phone using an application. That's pretty cool.

 

 

[Hugo]

The sad part is, no matter how many times this is stated people still won't get it. The fact that people can read this entire thread and still think that not off loading is the way to go blows my mind.

 

According to psychologist Martha Stout, one in twenty-five (4%) people are sociopaths. There is no cure.

[ChadBroChillz]

Data caps are inevitable. Unlimited data is on borrowed time. There are more people with the mentality of" I pay for it, so I am going to use it as much as I want" over people thinking of other people who are on the network. I doubt Sprint will let their network get to the crippling point as it did previously to keep unlimited data. They will cap data long before that become a problem. I just hope sprint is nicer with price and caps than ATT/Verizon.

[centermedic]

That sounds more of a moral issue than a contractual issue.

 

The way I look at it is like this... I pay for unlimited use on my phone, and I should use as much or as little as I chose, for whatever apps I want to. Matter of fact, a lot of the music I like to listen to, TuneInRadio no longer works over WiFi signals, and ONLY works over 3G or 4G networks. Because of this, I have to turn off my WiFi when I want to listen to music at home. With respect to watching movies or YouTube videos, I may occasionally watch them over 3G or 4G, especially if I am in strong 4G areas, I will 90% of the time use the network. WiMAX is dead, so I have pretty much used all I can before upgrading to an LTE device. Since LTE is not offered where I live, (well it is but not at my house, work, or any part in between), I continue to offload to WiFi. Not for the sake of anyone else, but for the sake I want my data to stream fast, or in HD.

 

The moral issue here is should someone who has the opportunity, offload their data onto WiFi if it is available, for the sake of others? Others will use that as a reason we should do so for their benefit so they can use more data, speedy data, or even drive prices lower, unfortunately, this is extremely lopsided. If you pay for it, you should use it as you see fit. Anytime you see fit. It would be like telling a car owner not to drive in-town and take a bus so that way other people can use the roads and prevent traffic. When you look at it like that, it simply does not work. Roads will get bigger the more people travel on them, same with wireless, the more people using it, the more there may be measures taken to ensure traffic flows normally, but also the larger the lanes will be. So if you are paying for it, you are paying for the upgrades for the future. Why do you think Verizon and AT&T have been able to expand so fast? More people paying, more people using the network. Until recently, majority of Sprint users did not use the network as much as we do (since the EVO launch), now that we are, Sprint has to scramble to upgrade the network for the usage. Something they could have done a long time ago, had we been using it all along. So no, offloading to WiFi is not my idea of something to do, unless you REALLY feel obligated to do so, but contractually no, its not required. Sprint however is making it easier for the consumer by having Optimization Managers in new phones to allow offloading, 3G or 4G connectivity when and where it is strongest, that way it is fair, blindly managed by the carrier. However, I think if Sprint REALLY cared that much about offloading, they would pull an AT&T and T-Mobile and opt for WiFi in many high traffic areas, and have the phones automatically, seamlessly authenticate and connect to their O&O WiFi hotspots. They can still monitor the usage of where new towers and sites need to be, but offload heavy usage in high traffic areas to them instead. Of course, none of this matters if it is not a seamless experience, and WiFi to Cell and vice versa is definitely far from that.

 

Will I be obligated by someone elses issues to offload, absolutely not. I pay for what I think should be unlimited, offered as unlimited and definitely I manage myself for myself, not for others.

You have offered some great examples that actually bolster the argument for off-loading. Roads have a physical and monetary limit to how big they can get. Also, in some areas drivers HAVE been asked not to travel to a certain destination or have been motivated not to drive through the use of fees(tolls). The wirless infrasctructure also has a physical and monetary limit to how big it can get. Those of us who argue in favor of offloading are trying to avoid the situation where we no longer have unlimited data, where we are compelled to limit our use through higher fees.

[WillieFDiazSF]

It seems that people here all want unlimited data, but at the same time want to do the wireless provider a favor by offloading. Trust me, Sprint does not care if you offload or not, they will do what they want to do regardless if you offload and show there is less network resources used, likely by implementing caps. If you are going to offload, and not want to use the network for what you pay for (by the way, I do not feel I abuse the network because I chose to use it extensively for a lot of different purposes), then why not move to another carrier that offers higher data speeds as well as a data cap of 2GB, 3GB, 4GB, 5GB, 10GB? I mean, after all if you are only going to offload, why worry if your data is going to be unlimited, right?

 

This is like saying, people at home should think about Comcast, or AT&T and maybe not watch Netflix until after 11PM just so everyone else on the block can enjoy some internet. Well in the real world, it isnt quite like that. Many people, majority in fact, in my city, and neighborhood in particular happen to use AT&T and Verizon as their provider. There is more stress and strain on those networks (which by the way outperform Sprint in 10 out of 10 data tests) than there is on Sprint. Reason I have crappy service is the towers I use happen to be placed next to a major highly congested freeway, and Sprint has admitted that since that tower is mainly used in bursts, the normal capacity is limited since the only time it needs it is at certain times of the day... With that said, if I am using a ton of data, the physical amount per month is irrelevant, just how long and how much of it I use during a crunch time for freeway travelers does - really again, does not matter since I am expendable since voice (something MOST drivers are using over data anyway) takes priority, moving my data connection to the back seat of priority. Also, since the tower in off-peak time isnt really being used, I take priority - and not many other people in the neighborhood (by comparison of Sprint to AT&T and Verizon users) are doing the same. Its not like Im taking up the whole city capacity. So in essence, you are asking me to offload to wifi for something that I really need not, in hopes that I give others capacity, when in fact, they do not need it, already have priority to it when they need it, and Sprint wont add extra just cause I want to use a little more - which I understand. That is to say, why would Sprint see the need to add extra capacity in my city, if the incumbant network Duopoly has majority share of subs (68% of all wireless subs), in addition that was another thing they mentioned to me. They have no reason to boost capacity more if they feel the network is working fine under the conditions it is set, with limited capacity, and slower speeds, because they rarely get complaints on it anyway. Yes, they said that.

None of my data usage however affects anyone else in any other site in the city. So me going hog-wild on data, really is fine. In high traffic areas, like Downtown, where there is a ton of people, many tourists and non-locals that may be using Sprint as well as AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile, there is a major boost in capacity, but then again, there is also a site on every corner and every other tall building, so I can understand capacity in those places, but again, Sprint built their network with data in mind that people in these areas would use it, and the promote themselves as "Unlimited Data No Caps No Throttles" in my area, in high traffic areas. I think your guys complaints is null and void.

Edited December 14, 2012 by WillieFDiazSF

[koiulpoi]

I'm really starting to think this thread should be locked. It has run its course, and the arguments are going in circles. And not just that, we have newcomers to the thread and the forum giving the same arguments that have been debunked 22 pages ago, or worse, ignore arguments to the contrary. How long should we let this go? 100 pages of the same thing?

 

Maybe a sticky? Part of the FAQ? I have no idea.

[newboyx]

I'm really starting to think this thread should be locked. It has run its course, and the arguments are going in circles. And not just that, we have newcomers to the thread and the forum giving the same arguments that have been debunked 22 pages ago, or worse, ignore arguments to the contrary. How long should we let this go? 100 pages of the same thing?

 

Maybe a sticky? Part of the FAQ? I have no idea.

If the thread is locked the how will people who are wrong have the opportunity to show how wrong they are?

 

Sent from a phone using an application. That's pretty cool.

 

 

[koiulpoi]

That being said...

Trust me, Sprint does not care if you offload or not

So, you're in contact with Sprint policymakers, then? Why should we trust you?

 

And if that's true, why then, has Sprint been making a big "WiFi" push? Automated text messages, bill inserts, adverts on Sprint.com, push notifications on Android from the Sprint Zone app, and directions to store reps to push for WiFi to be turned on when it's around? Clearly, Sprint does care. They care a lot. They want to you to offload, quite badly.

[WiWavelength]

It seems that people here all want unlimited data, but at the same time want to do the wireless provider a favor by offloading. Trust me, Sprint does not care if you offload or not...

 

<edited for length, much incoherent rambling removed>

 

 

AJ

[pyroscott]

I'm really starting to think this thread should be locked. It has run its course, and the arguments are going in circles.

 

Exactly my thoughts as I was reading through the most recent troll post.

 

Thread locked

[WiWavelength]

Exactly my thoughts as I was reading through the most recent troll post.

 

Those who obstinately refuse to see the overall network benefits of offloading are best summed up by this selfish attitude:

 

"I'll do what I want..."

 

 

AJ