I have the $100 for two lines Family Unlimited Data Plan with add-on lines at $40.
Would there be any "fine-print" drawbacks?
Like, loss of Unlimited for Life Guarantee?
Less off-network roaming data allotment from the usual 300+Mb of data?
Lower priority on the network? I know that bucket data plans have the highest post-paid priority.
What will I miss out on? Because I can NOT fathom that Sprint will be losing money by giving you 3GB of hotspot data AND lose more money than my current plan.
I'm sure everyone remembers the free night and weekend minutes we had years ago. This morning I was thinking what if a carrier took that same idea but instead made for it data. I think that if a carrier was able to implement this that it would be big and a game changer. What do you guys think?
With the introduction of the new plans Sprint has announced. I told one of my friends about the $60 unlimited plan and she was shocked yet happy about it. She currently has T-Mobile and there has been times where my Sprint service has out performed her service even in the city with puling up information and out of town...well... you already know how that went. She was talking about switching and stuff but then she sent me a typical article bashing Sprint and I got irritated by it and I had to explain to her that Sprint is not bad at all. These articles are based on past experiences from 3+ years ago. I told her I'm pulling 60+ mbps on LTE but she's worried about Sprint being slow ( because of what she read). Guys give me some advice on persuading her to give Sprint a chance.
I feel like articles that are being posted is what keeps away customers. It makes no sense that T-Mobiles 2g network is not spoken about when they are in the news for changes to plans and such. But good ol Sprint makes changes and articles that get posted rips Sprint apart for filth.
Okay, now that I said I hadn't seen any activity, I'm wondering if I saw something new this afternoon.
I copied one of the pictures and annotated it in red. Am I right?
I've been noticing lowband coverage loss in the greater Seattle area as T-Mobile has been swapping out 6-port 700/midband antennas for 8-port 600/700/midband antennas.
Judging from the antenna gain figures, this isn't surprising, but I was wondering if anyone else has been noticing the same? There are quite a few areas I frequent that have gone from reliable weak L700 to EDGE or no service after 600 antenna upgrades...
Antenna comparison for anyone interested:
Commscope SBNHH-1D65C (almost all 700 setups use these antennas)
2x2 700 (16.2)
4x4 1700 (17.7) & 1900 (17.9) & 2100 (18.5)
96.6 x 11.9 x 7.1
Commscope FFHH-65B-R3 (most new 600 setups use these antennas)
4x4 600 (14.1) & 700 (14.3)
4x4 1700 (17.6) & 1900 (18.4) & 2100 (19.0)
72 x 25.2 x 9.3
Commscope FFHH-65C-R3 (some 600 setups on large structures use these antennas)
4x4 600 (15.4) & 700 (15.8)
4x4 1700 (17.9) & 1900 (18.4) & 2100 (18.8)
95.9 x 25.2 x 9.3
Dish has ~8 million customers. I don't expect Dish to have the growth that TMobile has had. Lets say Dish is lucky to add an average of 1M customers a year for 5 years. That puts them only at 13M customers. Even if they were TMobile like in the ability to add at least 1M new customers a quarter, in 5 years that is 20M + 8M, so 28M.
Whatever network they build I think it'll focus very much just in the big cities where they have the most customers right now and plan to push sales the most. It doesn't make sense for them to build a nationwide network and use all their bands. It doesn't even really make sense to build a low-band network to hit their 70% pop coverage.
I could see Dish coming to an agreement with TMobile to broadcast their spectrum. Like why would they need to cover 70% pop if they have few customers. Also I could see if Dish continues forward in good faith and the deadlines are near that the FCC could be willing to come to some form of agreement with Dish to not penalize them if they are unable to get TMobile to host use their spectrum.