Jump to content

Site liks s4gru


jrccomputer
 Share

Recommended Posts

I would say no . But check Google or Bing if u wish

 

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Thank you. I could not find one thats why I ask to see if you guys might know.

 

Sent from my SPH-L300 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tmonews and the howard forums Tmobile section.

 

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk 2

 

Oh my, the t-mo section of HoFo...Well I won't go into it too much, but I will say that lilotimz and others must have incredible patience trying to have rational conversations with some of the fanbois in their pink capes over there. I also find it odd that a few of them seem to (incorrectly) discuss Sprint just as much, if not more, than T-Mobile. Very weird place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh my, the t-mo section of HoFo...Well I won't go into it too much, but I will say that lilotimz and others must have incredible patience trying to have rational conversations with some of the fanbois in their pink capes over there. I also find it odd that a few of them seem to (incorrectly) discuss Sprint just as much, if not more, than T-Mobile. Very weird place.

 

You kind of have to give up trying to argue with them when they dismiss *s4guru* as a fanboy site that lies and inflates numbers. Biggest offenders are usually Antenna and Morphling who both actually goes into the sprint area of HoFo and bash Sprint with information that's been thoroughly debunked by us. It usually begins a mass amount of "sprint sucks" messages... that kind of behavior is prevalent on many other websites as well on anything that mentions Sprint. Be it Theverge, Androidpolice, androidcentral, reddit, facebook, whatever. 

 

Just gotta laugh at their ignorance and focus on the relevant topics at hand. 

 

Note: I did have T-mobile service since 2006-7 until late 2011 so I can talk on equal terms to many of them

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh, Howard Forums tries my patience so much these days. I don't like visiting there, even though I do regularly because sometimes there's that wonderful little gem covered up by the boatload of scum...

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You kind of have to give up trying to argue with them when they dismiss *s4guru* as a fanboy site that lies and inflates numbers. Biggest offenders are usually Antenna and Morphling who both actually goes into the sprint area of HoFo and bash Sprint with information that's been thoroughly debunked by us. It usually begins a mass amount of "sprint sucks" messages... that kind of behavior is prevalent on many other websites as well on anything that mentions Sprint. Be it Theverge, Androidpolice, androidcentral, reddit, facebook, whatever. 

 

Just gotta laugh at their ignorance and focus on the relevant topics at hand. 

 

Note: I did have T-mobile service since 2006-7 until late 2011 so I can talk on equal terms to many of them

 

It would be nice to have sites for AT&T and T-Mobile similar to this one. This site can help people get great information on Sprint's progress, but it can be misleading without as much information on the other carriers. Sprint might have half the users as AT&T, but they probably have considerably more people mapping sensorly for them because of this site. The info in the sponsors section goes way beyond anything I've seen for any carrier. It's difficult to accurately assess which carrier is best for you when you have a lot of future information on one (e.g. Sprint towers in progress) and not even accurate present-day info on others (e.g. very few people actively mapping sensorly for AT&T).

 

I happen to be in Michigan and have a grandfathered plan with Sprint, so the decision is easy for me: Great coverage with Verizon for almost 2 and a half times the price, no nearby LTE with AT&T for twice the price, or no rural coverage with T-Mobile for about the same price. Needing rural coverage and with the explosion of Sprint LTE in my county I'll stay with them. But if I lived in New York or Washington state or Tennessee it'd be hard to choose without a TMO4GRU.com and ATTLTEtowersightings.com. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

You kind of have to give up trying to argue with them when they dismiss *s4guru* as a fanboy site that lies and inflates numbers. Biggest offenders are usually Antenna and Morphling who both actually goes into the sprint area of HoFo and bash Sprint with information that's been thoroughly debunked by us. It usually begins a mass amount of "sprint sucks" messages... that kind of behavior is prevalent on many other websites as well on anything that mentions Sprint. Be it Theverge, Androidpolice, androidcentral, reddit, facebook, whatever. 

 

 

Just gotta laugh at their ignorance and focus on the relevant topics at hand. 

 

 

Note: I did have T-mobile service since 2006-7 until late 2011 so I can talk on equal terms to many of them

 

 

It would be nice to have sites for AT&T and T-Mobile similar to this one. This site can help people get great information on Sprint's progress, but it can be misleading without as much information on the other carriers. Sprint might have half the users as AT&T, but they probably have considerably more people mapping sensorly for them because of this site. The info in the sponsors section goes way beyond anything I've seen for any carrier. It's difficult to accurately assess which carrier is best for you when you have a lot of future information on one (e.g. Sprint towers in progress) and not even accurate present-day info on others (e.g. very few people actively mapping sensorly for AT&T).

 

 

I happen to be in Michigan and have a grandfathered plan with Sprint, so the decision is easy for me: Great coverage with Verizon for almost 2 and a half times the price, no nearby LTE with AT&T for twice the price, or no rural coverage with T-Mobile for about the same price. Needing rural coverage and with the explosion of Sprint LTE in my county I'll stay with them. But if I lived in New York or Washington state or Tennessee it'd be hard to choose without a TMO4GRU.com and ATTLTEtowersightings.com. ;)

The only reason this site continues to exists because Sprint is not AT&T.

 

AT&T or VZW would sue to shut down a site like this one. The only carriers that arent opposed to sites like this are competitive carriers but even some of them might also sue a site like this.

 

The continued existence of this site, the policy towards demanding unlocked bootloaders from device oems, and their close integration of google products really are a testament to Sprint's proconsumer stance.

 

AT&T is the exact opposite. Rather than find new ways to innovate and give the consumer more, they are constantly finding new ways to charge customers more for less service and lock down their devices like fort knox.

 

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AT&T is the exact opposite. Rather than find new ways to innovate and give the consumer more, they are constantly finding new ways to charge customers more for less service and lock down their devices like fort knox.

 

AT&T should just rename itself DD&D.  Dividend Dividend & Dividend.  That is what matters most to Randall and company.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AT&T is just too envious of the closed system VZW has. It's a clear case of penis envy. The sad part is that they could be the ultimate anti-Verizon, open everything up as a 3GPP anti-hero, lower prices, and make more money. That is too contrary to AT&T's DNA from the Bell System.

 

In the end, we'd have a better industry if the FCC would just do their damn job.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With advent of LTE it is safe to say all major providers and probably a majority of the minor providers are doing some form of upgrades.

 

I'll even wager that coverage becomes non-issue in the next 5 to 10 years for all carriers. Imagine Sprint or Tmo or Vz Installing 5 to 10 picos or DAS in a rural area at a fraction of the cost of a full cell site.  It is not infeasible that carriers crowd-source coverage; installing a micro cell in one or two homes in a rural subdivision, every other farm along a lonely stretch of road.....

 

I believe Sprint has a younger user base than ATT, which may account for the Sensorly participation.

 

 

..... This site can help people get great information on Sprint's progress, but it can be misleading without as much information on the other carriers. Sprint might have half the users as AT&T, but they probably have considerably more people mapping sensorly for them because of this site. The info in the sponsors section goes way beyond anything I've seen for any carrier. It's difficult to accurately assess which carrier is best for you when you have a lot of future information on one (e.g. Sprint towers in progress) and not even accurate present-day info on others (e.g. very few people actively mapping sensorly for AT&T)......

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to throw this out there, based on maps I've seen, a site like TMo4GRU would be reasonably possible if somoene found a reliable source of info who didn't mind using internal tools significantly more than average.

 

Of course, the maps would be less colorful because refarmed 1900 and AWS LTE are being installed simultaneously with TMo...and LTE is being turned on in huge clusters rather than on a site by site basis like Sprint (so, similar to Sprint 3G). But the information would still be useful, particularly for folks who want to, for example, bring a Verizon phone to T-Mobile (which would have the same band implications as a pre April 12 iPhone 5).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll even wager that coverage becomes non-issue in the next 5 to 10 years for all carriers. Imagine Sprint or Tmo or Vz Installing 5 to 10 picos or DAS in a rural area at a fraction of the cost of a full cell site.

 

Not bloody likely.  Have you actually traveled this country?

 

Maybe that would work in North Carolina, but not from the Great Plains through the Rocky Mountains.  Small cells would not cut it for coverage across the wide open spaces.  And they would not be "a fraction of the cost."  The real cost would come from running fiber backhaul to those multiple small cells -- fiber that does not exist. If anything, those multiple fiber links could increase the cost.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not bloody likely.  Have you actually traveled this country?

 

Maybe that would work in North Carolina, but not from the Great Plains through the Rocky Mountains.  Small cells would not cut it for coverage across the wide open spaces.  And they would not be "a fraction of the cost."  The real cost would come from running fiber backhaul to those multiple small cells -- fiber that does not exist. If anything, those multiple fiber links could increase the cost.

 

AJ

 

I would have lost the wager.

 

Can't we expect an evolution in backhaul? Perhaps a cost effective point to point wireless backhaul other than mw? Perhaps use whitespace broadband.

 

Sadly power and backhaul are shortfalls of small cells. That being said the East coast, West coast, Upper mid-west and South east could benefit from improve coverage in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't we expect an evolution in backhaul? Perhaps a cost effective point to point wireless backhaul other than mw? Perhaps use whitespace broadband.

 

Once you go down the path of point to point wireless backhaul, you are likely no longer looking at a small cell.  You need radome(s) and a highly elevated structure -- all of which sounds more like a macrocell.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once you go down the path of point to point wireless backhaul, you are likely no longer looking at a small cell.  You need radome(s) and a highly elevated structure -- all of which sounds more like a macrocell.

 

AJ

 

Thanks for the insight!

 

I haven't opened an engineering book in almost 20 years so don't quote me on this..... I recall reading a paper on PoE as an alternative to T1..... Is it possible or even practical to use PoE as backhaul?

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

    • Just figured out this is a waste of time. US Mobile and Verizon lock the eSim to the emei while T-Mobile only uses it to see that you have a capable phone, like Red Pocket does with physical sims (although RP does keep track of what phone you are using it on with the emei.)  So @Trip was right in this case on liking physical sims.
    • Verizon has a reputation for being frugal with MVNOs. After looking around, I also decided US Mobile was my best option. People have gotten C band on it.  Hoping for esim for my S21 Ultra.  No luck so far.  Red Pocket does not claim Verizon 5g, although they say Soon!(TM).  I do see some 5g with it. Typically MVNOs are deprioritized, thus I am reluctant to claim truly getting top speeds with one.
    • Did some exploring yesterday/last night and didn't find a shred of C-Band, including with my brand new US Mobile SIM. Did find 4CA CBRS but the site seemed backhaul constrained; both that plus 15x15 B2 and band-locked 2/66 got me 190 Mbps or so.
    • Did some more exploring yesterday/last night and I think I spotted some LAA downtown but didn't get a chance to confirm before it went away in favor of mmW, which also went away pretty quickly. Also saw another n66 site, as well as an n2 site, making AT&T the second carrier to run n2 DSS within a few miles of me. I think at this point they won't be able to advertise anything flashy, but due to the sheer amount of CA they're throwing at customers here they can keep their network at 50+ Mbps until they can deploy both 3.45 and 3.7, and that's probably enough.
  • Recently Browsing

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