Jump to content

Apparently sprint is only deploying LTE in small towns *INSERT SARCASTIC EMOTICON HERE*


Recommended Posts

This guy should have consulted S4GRU b4 writing this article and then maybe he would know better than to write unresearched garbage...

 

http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/03/13/verizon-to-begin-using-its-aws-band-spectrum-for-lte-this-summer-start-selling-aws-friendly-phones-soon/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people just don't get it. Seems like no matter what sprint does right there's always going to be that focus on the negative. The majority of articles and comments are based on personal opinions and not facts and have no knowledge of how f'ed up Sprint was before Hesse took over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The journalist, writer, guy in his underwear living at his moms who doesnt even pay for his own cell service. that wrote the article is a hater and probably doesnt have anything ever good to say about anything. or if an original thought was ever made by him it would probably die of loneliness

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, there is no way to appease everyone. We all know what Sprint is doing, we all see the importance of Network Vision. Let's not get sucked into clickbaits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not journalism. That's an editorial about Verizon's network. No mention about how Verizon LTE is dropping to 2-4Mbps in many places and this AWS spectrum is their only chance to save their network before it completely disintegrates. Also, no mention of the millions of Verizon LTE customers that will be stuck on a degrading LTE 750 network until enough people buy AWS LTE capable handsets. It will take years before the 750 and AWS LTE carriers can support even loads. Years!

 

Although the same can and will be said of Sprint LTE 800, at least we will not sugar coat or bullshit everyone in our article about it.

 

Robert

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not journalism. That's an editorial about Verizon's network. No mention about how Verizon LTE is dropping to 2-4Mbps in many places and this AWS spectrum is their only chance to save their network before it completely disintegrates. Also, no mention of the millions of Verizon LTE customers that will be stuck on a degrading LTE 750 network until enough people buy AWS LTE capable handsets. It will take years before the 750 and AWS LTE carriers can support even loads. Years!

 

Although the same can and will be said of Sprint LTE 800, at least we will not sugar coat or bullshit everyone in our article about it.

 

Robert

 

Robert, around here Verizon's LTE network hasn't really slowed down since it launched in 2011. My dad's work uses Verizon so I will play on his phone sometimes. It seems to consistently get 30+ Mb's speeds around the Baton Rouge and surrounding areas. It was also really fast in Houston when we were there a few months ago. That's about the only experience I have, so it's a limited sample size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, around here Verizon's LTE network hasn't really slowed down since it launched in 2011. My dad's work uses Verizon so I will play on his phone sometimes. It seems to consistently get 30+ Mb's speeds around the Baton Rouge and surrounding areas. It was also really fast in Houston when we were there a few months ago. That's about the only experience I have, so it's a limited sample size.

 

I have two VZW LTE devices. A personal hotspot, and a work phone. VZW LTE speeds have dropped dramatically in the places I have been to in New Mexico, Colorado and Texas. VZW is the market leader here in NM, and probably contributes to their LTE network strain.

 

Sites in ABQ that were 25Mbps last summer are down to 3-6Mbps at peak times, and they consistently drop a little more every month...no end in sight. Our site here in Los Alamos can drop down to 1-3Mbps at peak times. The VZW site next to my house stays steady 18-25Mbps 24 hours a day. But that's a rural site.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not journalism. That's an editorial about Verizon's network. No mention about how Verizon LTE is dropping to 2-4Mbps in many places and this AWS spectrum is their only chance to save their network before it completely disintegrates. Also, no mention of the millions of Verizon LTE customers that will be stuck on a degrading LTE 750 network until enough people buy AWS LTE capable handsets. It will take years before the 750 and AWS LTE carriers can support even loads. Years!

 

Although the same can and will be said of Sprint LTE 800, at least we will not sugar coat or bullshit everyone in our article about it.

 

Robert

 

Having less subscribers is finally a plus for something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the final analysis what is going on with Big Red and it's speed drops is eventually going to happen to all; it's just phsyics; you just can't have everyone streaming videos on their handsets all day long; there is tower, spectrum and power hard stops to all of this and Sprint (us) will benefit for awhile when NV is eventually rolled out but even Sprint won't be able to keep unlimited data plans in the end; too many people will stream over to join the party; capped data plans are in all our futures, IMHO. Really now, who wants to run Netflix on their S4 to watch the last season of Weeds? Some might...not me.. some need the speed for work I'll grant but the majority just want faster facebook /YouTube downloads

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's a rural site.

 

With maybe you and 2 others using LTE on it. I'm sure the VZW LTE in Pahrump has dropped from the 30+Mbps it started out at in the year it's been on now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for seeing Verizon's LTE speeds drop as time has gone on. What was 20-35 Mbps is now 8-15 in Austin. Still not bad, but on the other hand I can hit that with 5x5 LTE without issue. Or DC-HSPA+. Then again, DC=HSPA+ is a bit slower at peak times in certain areas of Austin as well.

 

Which is why I wouldn't even think of getting a Chromebook Pixel if it couldn't do AWS LTE (assuming getting the LTE version)...Verizon obviously isn't cell-splitting to fix their LTE capacity problem.

 

Don't get me wrong. I have a VZW LTE iPad because it's still the best option in many areas for connectivity. However the number of those areas is shrinking, and many LTE customers on VZW will end up feeling like they're on last-gen tech with no future when Verizon doesn't cell-split on LTE 750, abandons 3G entirely and reserves all improvements other than VoLTE for AWS. From a coverage perspective this makes sense, but I'm glad Sprint won't be having this particular issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to admit, its not the best PR strategy to have Kansas lit up like a Christmas Tree while lower Manhattan is a big dead spot.

 

No need to elcture me on the why and how - Im just noting that from a marking perspective, its not the best optics.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to admit, its not the best PR strategy to have Kansas lit up like a Christmas Tree while lower Manhattan is a big dead spot.

 

No need to elcture me on the why and how - Im just noting that from a marking perspective, its not the best optics.

 

The Kansas market and NYC market started at the same time. Do you suggest they have people who could be working in Kansas sit on their ass and do nothing so it would be a better marketing story for the New York deployment? Obviously not. Sprint needs to do a better job explaining to its customers. That's the issue.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Kansas market and NYC market started at the same time. Do you suggest....

 

I suggested no such thing, and asked not to be lectured because I fully understand the situation.

 

That doesnt mean its fair to blame the customer for not understanding the reasoning. When they see "LTE live in tinyville Texas!" and theyre sitting at Newark Airport without LTE, it doesnt seem to make sense.

 

In most industries, you start out in the most populated places. Hollywood doesnt launch their big blockbusters in Kansas and wait 5 months to get to Philly.

 

WE know that theres very little similarity between the cell phone industry and, well, most everything else. That doesnt mean the average person does.

 

If Sprint it's to blame, its for as you said, not providing proper education for customers. Ive never seen a commercial explaining NV or their LTE strategy, or some of the many reasons behind delays in some markets (ie, permits).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I suggested no such thing, and asked not to be lectured because I fully understand the situation.

 

You certainly were not lectured by me. I hope you aren't suggesting that I cannot respond to posts on my own website. No one can make points on this site and then hide behind a shield. It's all open for discussion. That's the point of forums. Tsk, tsk.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You certainly were not lectured by me. I hope you aren't suggesting that I cannot respond to posts on my own website. No one can make points on this site and then hide behind a shield. It's all open for discussion. That's the point of forums. Tsk, tsk.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

Right, but I made sure to mention in my previous post that I understood the situation and was not talking about myself. All I said that its not good for market, and you agreed that marketing hasnt done their job in correcting the bad optics the deployment schedule handed to them.

 

They could for example have more video series that details how complex cell phone tower work can be in an urban market.

 

People hear that a small town has lte without realizing that....well, it was one tower. NYC for example has dozens of towers that have been upgraded, so yes more has been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint doesn't do a good job of explaining. Easy to agree. But does any carrier? I guess we can square it back to Verizon deploying at airports and (what seemed to some people) NFL Cities first. If that was the "right" thing to do, darn it, Sprint got it wrong. Sprint could have finished New York, Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Miami first and opened the network at 100% and that still wouldn't have carried them far once the media or the anti - Sprint chorus realized they had concentrated their manpower and money in those places and was "just beginning" everywhere else. Fact: Until we're at 100%, someone, somewhere is going to be complaining. And even when we get to 100%, someone else will still hate Sprint. Reminds me of comments I read somewhere the other day about Verizon not having service in some national park way out west ..... she (the commenting woman) said something like "I had to cancel my family vacation because Verizon doesn't seem to think its important enough to get coverage here... GET IT TOGETHER VERIZON!" Oh, the pain. Verizon doesn't have coverage some places still. Those pigs. But I digress... the most common thing I notice Verizon and ATT customers doing in the last few weeks during travels to Birmingham, Orlando and Atlanta is JUMPING ON WIFI AT EVERY POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY. They scope it out. They ask for it. If its not free, they complain. Some of my undergraduates (I am an advisor/mentor) in Orlando actually refused to facetime or watch youtube because there was no free wifi at their hotel. There was lots of LTE and HSPA+ to go around on those shiny little iphones.... and they didn't care.

 

Maybe Dan can jump on TV and show some big fuzzy maps and talk in fluffy terms to get the public excited.... But a lot of this comes down to care being able to adequately manage customer expectations. The "when will I get LTE" question should have always been answered with either "you have it now " or "we are working to deliver network improvements and LTE to the majority of our footprint by the middle of 2014". But, like digiblur said the other day... customers don't know why LTE is faster or how 4G matters... most of them just want facebook and youtube to 'load like it should". They're not mad because they're losing speed test whore-offs with uncle Ted who has verizon, they're mad because the damn phone is so slow.... And as we have all seen, 3G upgrades continue. Even for middle of nowhere bottom rung places like where I live. Most of the sites around me have gotten their 3G only ground mount upgrade and to my surprise, I've been pulling 2-2.5mb a second all over town since last week. Even at that speed test whore-off losing speed, I'm satisfied.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This guy should have consulted S4GRU b4 writing this article and then maybe he would know better than to write unresearched garbage...

 

http://www.androidpo...ly-phones-soon/

 

I just posted this DISQUS comment following that "article"...

 

Agreed. This "article" reads more like an advertisement or press release for VZW than it does a piece of real journalism. It sings the praises but fails to note several important shortcomings of the VZW LTE rollout.

 

One, VZW is not deploying LTE on every site, so that expedites its coverage expansion but compromises its capacity. Indeed, VZW LTE is already bogging down considerably in markets around the country.

 

Two, VZW's band 13 LTE 750 infrastructure is not using remote radios and is stuck at Release 8, while AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile are using Release 10 capable remote radios. So, that VZW head start on LTE does not look so attractive a few years later.

 

Three, no current VZW handsets support band 4 (AWS) LTE 2100+1700. Thus, millions of VZW subs who have recently upgraded to a Droid DNA or iPhone 5, for example, will be stuck on the increasingly slowing band 13 LTE 750 overlay until their next upgrade.

 

AJ

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to admit, its not the best PR strategy to have Kansas lit up like a Christmas Tree while lower Manhattan is a big dead spot.

 

Why? I guarantee you that more people live and work in the Kansas market than do in Lower Manhattan. Plus, the Atlanta, Houston, San Antonio, DFW, and Chicago markets were also "lit up" in the same timeframe, and those are not small markets. In the end, the problem lies largely with New Yorkers, who have an overinflated view of their self importance.

 

AJ

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just posted this DISQUS comment following that "article"...

 

 

 

AJ

 

The guy is probably thinking, "What's a remote radio?" Good work defending Sprint from the tools of the industry. For example this other guy:

 

"Mike Harris 15 hours ago

Unfortunately, this article is accurate. If I felt like I could get the same quality service from anyone else, I would happily leave the Evil Red Empire."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned on a sponsor only thread, Ericsson within the last 24 hours lit at least two more sites in my parents' small town (which I called home until 2007). Verizon is still 3G-only here. Granted, this doesn't help the argument that Sprint is focusing on not-NYC at the expense of NYC, but I'd rather have relatively inexpensive wireless providers that have non-overlapping LTE coverage than have everyone focus on one place, leaving cities like Fredericksburg, TX out in the cold. My iPad gets LTE in Austin but not here. My phone gets LTE here but not in parts of Austin. My Nexus gets HSPA+ in the middle of nowhere north of Dripping Springs, TX but is GPRS-only here. But switching between cell networks si as simple as switching WiFi access points if I'm tethering, and between the three carriers I have performance and coverage that's the envy of everyone, including Verizon!

 

More to the point, Chicago has more Sprint sites broadcasting LTE than Verizon, and I can say this without knowing directly how many sites Verizon has LTE-enabled in CHI. Thus, the "big cities don't get Sprint LTE" myth perpetuated by everyone in the media, including my semi-beloved DSLReports, is invalid.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to be honest, my intent was not to defend Sprint but to temper the VZW admiration with a strong dose of reality.

 

AJ

A close friend of mine complains every month about paying $130 bucks for unlimited everything for 1 phone on VZW. Despite surrendering his upgrade option because he refuses to give up his unlimited data, he then makes such a big deal about having LTE everywhere he goes. The one time he actually leaves the SF Bay we took a trip to LA, and in the hotel his VZW LTE was cutting in and out while my Sprint LTE was stable and strong. My Evo LTE made me so proud that weekend.

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


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Update just showed up for both of my phones. So far I don't notice any difference, LTE TA is still reporting as 0, I was hoping the new routine might fix that. I sent a diag report from both phones in case you need any of that info. I'll let you know in a day or so if its crashing as frequently or not. 
    • A new SignalCheck Pro beta release is rolling out now, and should become available on Google Play shortly! Some notable changes: New "swipe to refresh" -- flick down on the main screen, and the data will "refresh" -- I put this in quotes because it will *not* force the modem to be polled (that's unfortunately not possible), but it will 'wake up' the app and display the latest information if for some reason your screen did not automatically update. I am still working on improving this. New cell identification methods for Android 12+ devices -- new routines are available in Android 12 and this is my first attempt at implementing them. I have not seen any changes positive or negative on my Pixel 6, but hopefully someone sees improvements. I will continue exploring these methods and adding new features as I get them working. Location service auto-restart -- if your location has not changed in 10 minutes, the background location service should restart itself. This is a work in progress that I intend to optimize during beta testing. Missing/invalid TAC values included in web uploads -- this will need some testing, because I can't replicate it myself. The option to log cells with missing TAC must be enabled for this to have an impact. Feedback welcome as always!
    • Another converted keep site: Sprint eNB 9436 -> T-Mobile eNB 895067 (40.60777246698788,-74.16199692361377) Looks like they're using the FFVV-65A-R2-V1 here, as well!   Edit: Also, I know this technically isn't NYC, but here's a Jersey City conversion. Not 100% sure on either eNB. Sprint eNB 105863 -> T-Mobile eNB 876452 (40.72265196811989,-74.08804945021805)
    • More confirmations incoming! T-Mobile eNB 880561 (40.74176835140717, -73.88364207139453)   Sprint eNB 6191 / T-Mobile eNB 880065 (40.71339007010928, -73.85695387371624) Confirmed this site but was unable to get a photo because the antennas are set back from the edge of the building. I could see them from super far away but there wasn't a good area for me to pull over and snap a pic.   Sprint eNB 6189 / T-Mobile eNB 877995 (40.71183894845567, -73.83529788316665)   Sprint eNB 253741 / T-Mobile eNB 875537/875538 (40.70170960850086,-73.83302208208359)   Sprint eNB 79912 / T-Mobile eNB 875989 (40.86349197342981, -73.923456682535) — — — — — T-Mobile eNB 880536 in the Bronx isn't a Sprint conversion but rather, T-Mobile changed the eNB when they upgraded the site. The nearest Sprint site at 40.8150405321864, -73.93010756429787 still has all of its antennas up and is literally within spitting distance of two other T-Mobile sites in an area that's very industrial as opposed to residential or commercial so a keep site isn't particularly necessary. You can see on Cellmapper that the old eNB stopped broadcasting about two days after the new eNB went live.  — — — — — Also wanted to add that I spotted AT&T C-band antennas quite a bit in both Queens and the Bronx. I would expect a summer C-band launch announcement from them because they're moving FAST. At least in my area, it seem like they're upgrading at a faster pace than Verizon is. Some more pics: AT&T eNB 116408 / T-Mobile eNB 42887 in Woodhaven. This one is interesting because T-Mobile upgraded this site but in the process didn't put any Ericsson n41 antennas. There are just two of the RFS antennas that we normally get.   AT&T eNB 112047, bad pic but the arrows on the billboard are pointing right at the C-band antenna lol   — — — — — Last edit I promise: I noticed T-Mobile submit a permit to convert the keep site I found in Staten Island (Sprint eNB 75141). I 100% guessed it's location since I connected to it literally 4.5 miles across the water while inside a building. Glad to see I was right!
    • Support for the -1 TAC is good to go now, so I'm ready whenever you are!
  • Recently Browsing

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