Jump to content

To so many consumers, why is Sprint's name "mud"? (was: Sprint vs Carriers A,B and C)


Recommended Posts

Sprint has a checkered past. Not news. Sprint has a smaller native network than ATT and Verizon. Not news. Open ended, vague threads like this are the equivalent to bashing our heads against pavement to make sure it still hurts and are easily guaranteed to bring the whine from anyone with a less than perfect experience in the last 15+ years. This isnt su.com. Sprint is a value carrier with many challenges and a brilliant and rich japanese man saddled to take the reigns. Despite what changing the name and color of the company would positively accomplish in the psyche of the short sighted average American consumer, Sprint chooses to hold on to its legacy. So get patient, get excited, respect the mods and godfathers of knowledge like AJ and Digiblur, or just get out.


Sent from my Note II. Its so big.


This is an excellent post to end this thread with. This thread is not providing the excellent discourse that S4GRU strives for and is ripe to become overrun by trolls. Thread closed.


Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta



  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither. Sprint was in a use it or lose it position concerning the 2500 mhz spectrum. Wimax was ready. LTE was not. The rest is history.


Besides the BRS 2600 MHz buildout requirements and LTE non availability, what many people fail to appreciate is that, had WiMAX really taken off, Sprint would have flung the doors wide open for connected devices.


See, LTE is standardized by 3GPP, which is basically under the thumb of wireless operators.  And those wireless operators have their own self interest at heart.  But WiMAX is standardized by IEEE, hence controlled by engineers, electronics manufacturers, and ultimately consumers.


WiMAX sweeping success would have meant electronics manufacturers routinely embedding WiMAX chipsets in handsets, tablets, laptops, etc., just as they do with Wi-Fi (another IEEE standard) chipsets today.  Consumers would have been able to buy countless off the shelf devices and just supply MAC addresses to attach them to WiMAX data plans.


So, those who fault Sprint for going down the WiMAX path may also be those who complain about wireless operator control over devices.  Well, they should realize that Sprint tried something that would have really shaken up the wireless industry.  And, even though it was unsuccessful, Sprint should be commended for that.



  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By DaQue
      I have Sprint and still on the framily plan if you can believe that. I am thinking about the new SE because its cheap mostly.
      For now should I get a Sprint phone or the T-Mobile version and just run it on Sprint? Current coverage here is spotty. If I go to my favorite Taco Bell I get 2 bars of strength but I can't even use the app to order until I drive a block north. I worried about included bands working now and some becoming obsolete in the future.
    • By danlodish345
      Even though Sprint doesn't have the best coverage in my area. I do have lots of memories and nostalgia with the company. I wonder who else here will miss Sprint besides me?
    • By vanko987
      I'm new to this forum, and I've seen people mention cell sites with specific ID's (for example, SF33XC664). Is there any significance to these ID's, and is there a way to decode them? Also, how do I figure out what the cell site ID's are for towers near me?
      Thanks! I'm excited to start talking on this site more 😀
    • By Paynefanbro
      I figured since Verizon's 5G-NR network officially launched it would make sense for there to be a thread for it.
  • Posts

    • At least a few sites in STL are now at 100 MHz.
    • 100 MHz n41 is live in Austin and...Bentonville, Arkansas. Guessing this went live on Tuesday or Wednesday in Austin; network was acting a bit wonky on Tuesday. Noticed it yesterday, as I'm still a little too far away at home to catch n41. Peak speed in Bentonville 1/3 mi from the site was 675-700 Mbps down, 80-90 Mbps up, with the upload speed only possible with a 20 MHz B66 anchor...which seems congested at times. They also have 5 MHz B2 here as an anchor, which predictably leads to slow uploads. n71 is 15x15 here. Sprint B25 is two 5x5 channels. Weirdly, seems like I'm being routed through Nashville, so latency is rather high, and tethering performance is somehow quite poor...maybe it's due to congestion on the PCC meaning that the difference between on-phone and tethered priority is the difference between a usable connection and...not. Also, VZW (with the old Alltel SID for CDMA) is what you end up using inside the Crystal Bridges museum, though the area has WiFi so not the end of the world.
    • The Sprint site at 520/202 was decommissioned a few weeks ago. Everything was pulled off the pole. 
    • It looks like N5 supports 5, 10, 15, and 20 MHz channel widths. I wonder how long they'll wait before they make a change to be able to use more of that spectrum for N5. Possible options I see: Use 15x15 as B26/N5 using DSS (If thats an option, or would it have to match and be N26?) 5x5 as B5 LTE for older phones and that still leaves 5x5 for HSPA.  A more aggressive option would be to use 20x20 for N5 exclusively and 5x5 for HSPA. This still leaves 10x10 B12 and 10x10 B14 for older phones for low band. Hopefully they enable SA if they go this route. Since I believe you can't aggregate low band LTE with low band NR in most cases, phones using the N5 carrier would not be touching the B12 and B14 carriers. If they enable SA on the 20x20 N5 carrier it would also help free up their limited midband spectrum for older non-NR phones. That would also prevent falling back to LTE only inside a building just because the mid-band anchor band was too weak. In Daytona AT&T was broadcasting 5x5 B2, 10x10 B66, and 10x10 B30 and that was it for midband. 
    • I've found 2 decommissioned Sprint sites in Louisville, both were sites with both T-Mobile and Sprint. In both cases all Sprint tower equipment including the rack were removed. I haven't had time to dig through our permit site to see if I can find anything, but I'll be surprised if I do. 
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...