Network Speed

[packerrd]

It's also ok to understand that "better" is a subjective term and it will vary from person to person. What's better for you isn't necessarily better for me. If you're convinced that Sprint is so "inferior" then why are you bothering to grace us with your presence at a Sprint focused site? I'm sure there are AT&T and Verizon sites where you can go and gush over their alleged superiority.

ok

[S4GRU]

And Sprint speeds are also going decline, and they still be slower.

 

I just proved this fallacy false.  I was in a place where Sprint hasn't even upgraded its network and its 3G was faster than Verizon LTE and T-Mobile 4G.  So you cannot say that every place Sprint will always be slower, even when upgraded.  In Wichita Falls, Texas recently, Sprint LTE was faster than Verizon LTE and T-Mobile 4G in 80% of the places I went.  This is a place where Sprint has had LTE for almost a year.

 

It is extremely short sighted to make such sweeping claims.  Sprint has half the capacity of Verizon's LTE network, but also has half the customers.  Verizon can add one AWS LTE carrier nationwide, and some places two.  Sprint can add an LTE 800 carrier almost nationwide, can add several TD-LTE 2600 carriers nationwide and an additional PCS LTE carrier in most markets.  Sprint is in a much better spectrum position over time to keep their speeds up than any other American carrier.

 

Are we not supposed to say these things, just because you think AT&T and Verizon are better?  These are also facts.

 

Robert

[tommym65]

ok

Better yet, consider becoming a sponsor so that you can see the bigger picture: Where progress is (and isn't) being made, where the NV sites are, etc., etc.

[packerrd]

I just proved this fallacy false.  I was in a place where Sprint hasn't even upgraded its network and its 3G was faster than Verizon LTE and T-Mobile 4G.  So you cannot say that every place Sprint will always be slower, even when upgraded.  In Wichita Falls, Texas recently, Sprint LTE was faster than Verizon LTE and T-Mobile 4G in 80% of the places I went.  This is a place where Sprint has had LTE for almost a year. It is extremely short sighted to make such sweeping claims.  Sprint has half the capacity of Verizon's LTE network, but also has half the customers.  Verizon can add one AWS LTE carrier nationwide, and some places two.  Sprint can add an LTE 800 carrier almost nationwide, can add several TD-LTE 2600 carriers nationwide and an additional PCS LTE carrier in most markets.  Sprint is in a much better spectrum position over time to keep their speeds up than any other American carrier. Are we not supposed to say these things, just because you think AT&T and Verizon are better?  These are also facts. Robert

i said on average just like the articles points out, not everywhere.

[Mobilesolutions]

Another thing to mention, often the only speed a customer is able to detect is latency from input, to site, to server, and back to user. My Evdo ping times range from 90-150 ms on Sprint and 70-120ms on my VZW lte iPad. Throughput is more of a secondary function. A function in which Sprint is better equipped to maintain a high speed lte environment than the duopolies.

[S4GRU]

i said on average just like the articles points out, not everywhere.

 

You said Sprint's speeds will decline and will be slower than AT&T and VZW.  I just proved that is not true now, and the future looks better for Sprint than its competitors with available spectrum to serve its customers.  You cavalierly say that AT&T and VZW are better.  However, to millions of people your statement would not be true.  You claim we need to use facts in our forum posts, but you try to use blanket statements that cannot be proven to support your points.

 

If you agree to the premise that Sprint is better in many places and an acceptable carrier to millions of people, then your entire initial argument is out the window.  You have basically painted yourself into a corner to now say that AT&T and VZW are better for many people in many places, but not better to everyone, and not better for most Sprint customers.  Which is what we have always said, and what you did not say in the beginning.  So essentially, you now agree with us.  See, that wasn't so hard after all.  Welcome to S4GRU.

 

 

Robert

[dstar2002]

Oh ya? Oh ya? Oh ya? Well I say dish sucks most, because their phones are slow, and they don't even have phones, but they might, and they will suck, and vzw and att will have better phones everywhere, on average, some of the time, in some places, generally. Damn. How much do I have to donate to buy a ban on someone being ignorant?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

[themuffinman]

i was not directly complaining about Sprint, it would be useless here because it's not an official sprint site.

 

I was stating how most of you, even with evidence being shown, are in denial that Verizon and AT&T are better than Sprint. Like this site most of ya here were just assuming the test had flaw just because it showed that Sprint is slower.

and i don't see how discusting and understating why Sprint has slower data speeds is comlaning. it ok to understand the reason why Sprint is slower and accepting at the sametime that it's inferior as well

 

 

Yea not everywhere Sprint is worse than Verizon or AT&T because all carriers have different coveage in different location. But on average AT&T and Verizon got faster data and better data coverage. And Sprint speeds are also going decline, and they still be slower.

and im happy about Sprint expanding as well. I prefer their plans as compared to its conpetitors. but it doesnt mean i wont acknowledge their network currently perform worse than their competitors on Average.

sorry for bad grammar, im typing from a phone.

 

 

i said on average just like the articles points out, not everywhere.

Oh my god!!!! No one is in denial of anything, we are not a bunch of clueless ass hats here.  As far as overall AVERAGE speeds we know that sprint isn't the best, its simple math but whats important is how things will progress, what is important is looking forward and not living in the past and certainly not beating a dead horse.  If you are going to continue posting nonsense,further derailing an other wise decent discussion, then I would advise that you save yourself some time and move on because s4gru is not the place for you.

[Danielj1981]

At least Verizon's "can you hear me now" guy doesn't show up at my house anymore, once a month, punch me in the stomach, snatch my Wallet and take my $300 bucks. Then threaten to come back in a month lol.

 

To be honest it was a little bit of a shock to leave VZW on my i4 and join Sprint with my i5 in December, however what Sprint is lacking in Network speed AT THE MOMENT, they appear to be making up for in huge strides. I was with VZW thru their LTE rollout. I waited what seemed like YEARS for 4g Speeds with them. Sprints customer service is Stellar so far! Their physical stores are far more professional. And who cares about "on average" network speeds are slower. In the grand scheme of things, (in my opinion, take that with a grain if salt lol) like the guys in the know on this site have said in multiple threads, download speeds of 25 Mbps versus 15 down there's not much you really need that extra 10 Mbps for.

 

After reading what these guys here had to say, I started paying attention to Ping for the first time. And I must say, there have been times when I was in Charlotte and my i5 smoked my friend Kennan's razr Maxx. On 3 occasions I can remember for fact, his download speeds were higher than mine, but my pings were in the sub forty range and his were around 180. I was able to bounce around the web far faster than he, with his "faster average DL"

 

In short, we were in a VZW and Sprint LTE market for both he and I, and I was able to out surf him. I have been a victim of the big red machine lol and IMO Sprints NV rollout is better, their pricing is unmatched, their customer service is leaps and bounds ahead, and I watched the NV panels go up on my home tower over the weekend so I know I made the right Choice Just my opinion. Not trying to sell anyone on anything. Just my observations, having been with both carriers in this last year.

 

To me....Network speed averages are just that, average speeds. The experience with Sprint as a customer is and will continue to be far better. I see nothing coming to change that.

 

Daniel

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

[Mercurial1]

 

 

i was not directly complaining about Sprint, it would be useless here because it's not an official sprint site.

 

 

I was stating how most of you, even with evidence being shown, are in denial that Verizon and AT&T are better than Sprint. Like this site most of ya here were just assuming the test had flaw just because it showed that Sprint is slower.

 

and i don't see how discusting and understating why Sprint has slower data speeds is comlaning. it ok to understand the reason why Sprint is slower and accepting at the sametime that it's inferior as well

 

 

 

 

Yea not everywhere Sprint is worse than Verizon or AT&T because all carriers have different coveage in different location. But on average AT&T and Verizon got faster data and better data coverage. And Sprint speeds are also going decline, and they still be slower.

 

and im happy about Sprint expanding as well. I prefer their plans as compared to its conpetitors. but it doesnt mean i wont acknowledge their network currently perform worse than their competitors on Average.

 

sorry for bad grammar, im typing from a phone.

 

 

 

 

i said on average just like the articles points out, not everywhere.

 

 

Oh my god!!!! No one is in denial of anything, we are not a bunch of clueless ass hats here.

Hey speak for yourself. You may not be but I for one love it here in denial and I may have once or twice been called that other term...

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

[JeffDTD]

There are atleast two other boards about sprint soaked with miserable, uninformed belly achers who cling to each bad network experience as a panacea to declare sprint inferior. Also plenty of ringleaders who no longer have service. The beauty of this place is 1000x more is known and taught to even the tech dumb members than anywhere else. Stay awhile, donate a few bucks, and get informed.

 

Sent from my Note II. Its so big.

 

[Fraydog]

Sprint is more or less a budget choice from my perspective. It doesn't have to be as fast as Verizon or AT&T. That's OK. Every carrier should be serving a different market as it is anyway.

 

The real problem is that far too many people are subscribing to the premium services that don't need them, IMO. People on HoFo trash Sprint and T-Mobile, when they service a different target market than VZW or AT&T.

 

People just need to figure this out. That's all.

[Danielj1981]

Sprint is more or less a budget choice from my perspective. It doesn't have to be as fast as Verizon or AT&T. That's OK. Every carrier should be serving a different market as it is anyway.

 

The real problem is that far too many people are subscribing to the premium services that don't need them, IMO. People on HoFo trash Sprint and T-Mobile, when they service a different target market than VZW or AT&T.

 

People just need to figure this out. That's all.

Wife and four kids....don't buy a Corvette that chews up gas(data) and the family can't fit(data limits). You want speed, pay for the speed.

 

Buy the Lower priced Minivan, that can fill your needs and not cost you an arm and a leg. Yea it's a little slower speed wise, but far more practical to me! :-)

 

(Parent)

 

Your post makes too much sense Fray! ;-)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

[packerrd]

You said Sprint's speeds will decline and will be slower than AT&T and VZW.  I just proved that is not true now, and the future looks better for Sprint than its competitors with available spectrum to serve its customers.  You cavalierly say that AT&T and VZW are better.  However, to millions of people your statement would not be true.  You claim we need to use facts in our forum posts, but you try to use blanket statements that cannot be proven to support your points.

 

If you agree to the premise that Sprint is better in many places and an acceptable carrier to millions of people, then your entire initial argument is out the window.  You have basically painted yourself into a corner to now say that AT&T and VZW are better for many people in many places, but not better to everyone, and not better for most Sprint customers.  Which is what we have always said, and what you did not say in the beginning.  So essentially, you now agree with us.  See, that wasn't so hard after all.  Welcome to S4GRU.

 

 

Robert

i don't really see how i have become to agree with you. I initially stated that Sprint on average is worse than AT&T and Verizon when it comes to data. They're both faster and got better coverage. And if you search around on other sites or forums you'll see that sprint has the most complaints from its users regarding to speeds. even on their official forums there's a thread with 188 pages of complaints from users. http://community.sprint.com/baw/thread/78766?start=0&tstart=0

 

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/03/13/rootmetrics-4g-lte-us-survey/

 

and off course, sprint works for a portion of its subscribers but for many it does not, just like any other carrier. 

[Mobilesolutions]

i don't really see how i have become to agree with you. I initially stated that Sprint on average is worse than AT&T and Verizon when it comes to data. They're both faster and got better coverage. And if you search around on other sites or forums you'll see that sprint has the most complaints from its users regarding to speeds. even on their official forums there's a thread with 188 pages of complaints from users. http://community.sprint.com/baw/thread/78766?start=0&tstart=0

 

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/03/13/rootmetrics-4g-lte-us-survey/

 

and off course, sprint works for a portion of its subscribers but for many it does not, just like any other carrier. 

 

Yes, but you are making full judgement on a network that isn't even 1/2 completed. So now we question your intelligence. 

Obviously you don't try to race the corvette with missing tires. 

[Boosted20V]

Can this thread please die? Right now Sprint has a 5x5 carrier on a half built network.... No ish it doesn't match Verizon's 10x10.

[S4GRU]

i don't really see how i have become to agree with you. I initially stated that Sprint on average is worse than AT&T and Verizon when it comes to data. They're both faster and got better coverage. And if you search around on other sites or forums you'll see that sprint has the most complaints from its users regarding to speeds. even on their official forums there's a thread with 188 pages of complaints from users. http://community.sprint.com/baw/thread/78766?start=0&tstart=0

 

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/03/13/rootmetrics-4g-lte-us-survey/

 

and off course, sprint works for a portion of its subscribers but for many it does not, just like any other carrier. 

 

Because you've changed your mind again.  You agreed that Sprint was better to some people in some places, and that Verizon and AT&T are not always better.  Now you've flopped again trying to say that AT&T and Verizon are better.  They are not better to millions and millions of people.

 

Do you suggest that all the people on what you deem inferior networks, like Sprint and T-Mobile, go to Verizon and AT&T because you think they're better?  If Sprint and T-Mobile went out of business, you can forget about Verizon and AT&T being better.  Because being inundated with all those extra consumers would tax their resources, and with no competition, their prices would skyrocket.  You better be happy with all of who are delusionsal and choose Sprint or T-Mobile.

 

Additionally, AT&T and VZW coverage are only better in places we don't go.  I don't care that Sprint doesn't have excellent coverage in Great Falls, Montana or International Falls, Minnesota.  When I go off network, roaming coverage is most excellent for my needs.  People shop for coverage where they live and where they frequent.  For 90% of Americans, T-Mobile and Sprint are viable alternatives.

 

As far as network speed, Sprint Network Vision speeds meet the needs of 99% of their customers.  And for the 1% that don't, no one is forcing them to stay.  They are free to choose.  Yes, Sprint's legacy network stinks.  But no one can claim to have a perfect network.  AT&T still has A LOT of EDGE coverage. Those speeds absolutely stink and they have lost a lot of customers because of it.  Verizon LTE speeds are plummeting, in some places severely.  Those customers are extremely pissed off.

 

No one appreciates your narrow minded arguments and platitudes of AT&T and Verizon are best, and every one else sucks.  It's moronic.  The people at AT&T with poor EDGE speeds and VZW LTE slow downs wouldn't agree with you.  And most Tmo and Sprint customers would not agree with you.

 

Maybe, just maybe, people can decide for themselves their needs and what works best for them?  Naw.  Let's just declare AT&T and Verizon best and be done with it.

 

Robert

[packerrd]

Because you've changed your mind again.  You agreed that Sprint was better to some people in some places, and that Verizon and AT&T are not always better.  Now you've flopped again trying to say that AT&T and Verizon are better.  They are not better to millions and millions of people.

 

Do you suggest that all the people on what you deem inferior networks, like Sprint and T-Mobile, go to Verizon and AT&T because you think they're better?  If Sprint and T-Mobile went out of business, you can forget about Verizon and AT&T being better.  Because being inundated with all those extra consumers would tax their resources, and with no competition, their prices would skyrocket.  You better be happy with all of who are delusionsal and choose Sprint or T-Mobile.

 

Additionally, AT&T and VZW coverage are only better in places we don't go.  I don't care that Sprint doesn't have excellent coverage in Great Falls, Montana or International Falls, Minnesota.  When I go off network, roaming coverage is most excellent for my needs.  People shop for coverage where they live and where they frequent.  For 90% of Americans, T-Mobile and Sprint are viable alternatives.

 

As far as network speed, Sprint Network Vision speeds meet the needs of 99% of their customers.  And for the 1% that don't, no one is forcing them to stay.  They are free to choose.  Yes, Sprint's legacy network stinks.  But no one can claim to have a perfect network.  AT&T still has A LOT of EDGE coverage. Those speeds absolutely stink and they have lost a lot of customers because of it.  Verizon LTE speeds are plummeting, in some places severely.  Those customers are extremely pissed off.

 

No one appreciates your narrow minded arguments and platitudes of AT&T and Verizon are best, and every one else sucks.  It's moronic.  The people at AT&T with poor EDGE speeds and VZW LTE slow downs wouldn't agree with you.  And most Tmo and Sprint customers would not agree with you.

 

Maybe, just maybe, people can decide for themselves their needs and what works best for them?  Naw.  Let's just declare AT&T and Verizon best and be done with it.

 

Robert

ok ok calm down calm down

[Danielj1981]

Adam: iPhone 5

Carrier: AT&T

Service in the office: Nope

(With the little LTE indicator on screen)

 

Daniel: iPhone 5

Carrier: Sprint

Service in the office: Nope

(Network vision not even here yet)

 

The difference.....Adam pays twice as much a month!

 

True story!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

[nexgencpu]

Just compared a friends iphone 4S on the "awesome" ATT network in midtown manhattan, 4G indicator(kept switching from HSPA+ to HSPA to EDGE) and HTC ONE on 3G sprint (post NV) indoors, let me tell you..sprint killed it! pages would load twice as fast and with little hesitation, and verizon LTE blows in midtown. So no, Verizon and ATT is not best for every situation.  

[Danielj1981]

I really didn't pay attention to the loads on Verizon's LTE until Robert said something. The saturation on their network is really slowing them down. A buddy of mine has the Razr Maxx and he confirmed the same. He said it was really fast a year ago and now it has slowed down alot! He downloaded the speed test app(he didn't have it before) and he was running around 4 down and 2 up. We didn't have any speed or ping tests to compare it too from a year ago. But I remember 3 years ago when I got my first iPhone 4 on Verizon, I was getting close to 3 down and 1.5 up back then. So basically how I see it, their "enormous" subscriber base has drug their LTE network back down to just above their old 3G speeds. Which are still really decent. But to me just saying you have LTE and the other guy doesn't yet, holds little water to me. Especially when we are talking about a NV sprint LTE network that won't have the loads that Verizon and AT&T have.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

Especially when we are talking about a NV sprint LTE network that won't have the loads that Verizon and AT&T have.

 

That is true to a certain extent, but let us weigh the many variables:

• VZW and AT&T each have about 100 million subs to Sprint's 50 million subs.
• VZW currently has a single 10 MHz FDD LTE carrier.  AT&T, for the most part, does, too.  Sprint initially has a single 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier.
• VZW and AT&T have the advantages of Upper/Lower 700 MHz propagation.  Sprint initially is limited to PCS 1900 MHz propagation.
• VZW and AT&T started constructing their LTE networks before LTE hit the mainstream.  Sprint started constructing its LTE network not long before iPhone 5 -- like it or not -- brought LTE truly to the masses.
• VZW and AT&T do not offer unlimited data for new or subsidized upgrade subs, but Sprint still does.

So, here are a few takeaways.  VZW and AT&T have larger subscribers bases but they also have greater LTE bandwidth than Sprint does.  Thus, that contest is about even.  VZW and AT&T, with their below 1 GHz spectrum, tend to have signal strength advantages that can translate into higher data rates.  As a counter to that, though, Sprint may have greater site density.  Then, because they started their LTE network overlays well before iPhone 5, VZW and AT&T currently may also have lower LTE device penetration percentages than Sprint does.  And Sprint invites abusers with its unlimited data policy.

 

As a result, the situation is not clear cut.  Sprint may not have the upper hand and could be due for LTE congestion just as VZW and AT&T have experienced over the past year.

 

AJ

[Danielj1981]

 

 

Especially when we are talking about a NV sprint LTE network that won't have the loads that Verizon and AT&T have.

 

 

That is true to a certain extent, but let us weigh the many variables:

VZW and AT&T each have about 100 million subs to Sprint's 50 million subs.

VZW currently has a single 10 MHz FDD LTE carrier. AT&T, for the most part, does, too. Sprint initially has a single 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier.

VZW and AT&T have the advantages of Upper/Lower 700 MHz propagation. Sprint initially is limited to PCS 1900 MHz propagation.

VZW and AT&T started constructing their LTE networks before LTE hit the mainstream. Sprint started constructing its LTE network not long before iPhone 5 -- like it or not -- brought LTE truly to the masses.

VZW and AT&T do not offer unlimited data for new or subsidized upgrade subs, but Sprint still does.

So, here are a few takeaways. VZW and AT&T have larger subscribers bases but they also have greater LTE bandwidth than Sprint does. Thus, that contest is about even. VZW and AT&T, with their below 1 GHz spectrum, tend to have signal strength advantages that can translate into higher data rates. As a counter to that, though, Sprint may have greater site density. Then, because they started their LTE network overlays well before iPhone 5, VZW and AT&T currently may also have lower LTE device penetration percentages than Sprint does. And Sprint invites abusers with its unlimited data policy.

 

As a result, the situation is not clear cut. Sprint may not have the upper hand and could be due for LTE congestion just as VZW and AT&T have experienced over the past year.

 

AJ

Excellent info AJ! Thank you for that! I am finally learning what all those numbers and acronyms in your post really mean.

 

Regardless of the reasons and the truth you posted above....I still felt warm and fuzzy inside when my i5 smoked his razr when we were in Charlotte last month :-D (I hope it wasn't the radio waves making me warm and fuzzy haha).

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

[Mobilesolutions]

 

 

As a result, the situation is not clear cut.  Sprint may not have the upper hand and could be due for LTE congestion just as VZW and AT&T have experienced over the past year.

 

AJ

 

It seems to me the current solution would be for Sprint to deploy Lte on 800 as quickly as possible. Then you would have coverage & a slight bolster to capacity depending on how much spectrum you deploy.  Clearwire's spectrum will help with the outdoor capacity immensely if its put on every Sprint NV site. You take this network and go compete with Verizon as they transition to AWS which will add  significant capacity for outdoor coverage.  In many markets i could see Verizon struggling to provide AWS only devices with ubiquitous coverage; as their cell spacing is suited for a much lower frequency.  AT&T has their upper band to pull from, T-mobile is still early on in deployment & lacks low band frequency. 

[nexgencpu]

Hopefully Sprint having Tri-band under there belt will allow them to hold an advantage. Verizon is now deploying AWS (sorely needed in NYC for them) so that advantage might not last very long. One thing that surprises me, is no mention of any Tri-band smartphones on the sprint front! Just ran into this new Windows Mobile HTC device that looks to be coming to sprint. But still limited to  Band 25!   http://tinyurl.com/lvndt47