Jump to content

The state of LTE in the U.S.: How the carriers’ 4G networks stack up


jamisonshaw125

Recommended Posts

 

 

The sad thing is Sprint has the spectrum resources to build the biggest, baddest LTE network in the country. It just refuses to do so. As of now, Sprint’s mobile broadband service is the slowest in the country, it has the least amount of capacity and it has the smallest coverage footprint. Maybe one day Sprint will truly live up to it’s 4G potential, but I doubt its customers will wait that long.

Gotta love the ignorance of these writers.  They don't realize Sprint's upgraded ~28,000 in the last 12 months, nor do they think they're even trying...They are right about the Spectrum holdings, though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta love the ignorance of these writers.  They don't realize Sprint's upgraded ~28,000 in the last 12 months, nor do they think they're even trying...They are right about the Spectrum holdings, though.

The problem is that even with all these upgrades, Sprint is perceived to be unable to keep up with the rest of the national operators. That, in itself, is a huge problem. Sprint's Spark isn't helping, it's making everything worse by raising people's expectations and having them crash and burn through real-world experiences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, Kevin Fitchard really blew it on his Sprint coverage in the article.  That is the worst piece I've ever read from him.  I'm really shocked.  His Band 26 info is wrong, there is even Band 26 live right this very second.  Also, no one is aggregating different bands yet.  Why would you hold that against Sprint?  

 

But worst of all, his Band 41 stuff is completely off the mark.  He know that Band 41 speeds can be kept way higher than 5-12Mbps because Sprint has so much capacity.  They can just keep deploying carrier after carrier to keep peak speeds up.  Sprint can keep average speeds way over 30Mbps on Band 41 if it wants to.  It mentions 5-12Mbps because of the signal strength many will encounter, especially deep in buildings.  Not because of network performance.

 

Since he is so familiar with carrier aggregation and holds it against Sprint for not doing it with other bands together, why doesn't he mention that Sprint is working on aggregating Band 41 carriers to bring really fast speeds surpassing even the other wireless providers?

 

I'm really disappointed in Kevin Fitchard.

 

Robert

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that even with all these upgrades, Sprint is perceived to be unable to keep up with the rest of the national operators. That, in itself, is a huge problem. Sprint's Spark isn't helping, it's making everything worse by raising people's expectations and having them crash and burn through real-world experiences.

 

That's your perception too.  Isn't that convenient?  Kevin supports your narrative.  Band 41 is helping, buddy.  Helping a lot.  You only look for evidence that supports your anti-Sprint, Magenta loving point of view.

 

Robert

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that even with all these upgrades, Sprint is perceived to be unable to keep up with the rest of the national operators. That, in itself, is a huge problem. Sprint's Spark isn't helping, it's making everything worse by raising people's expectations and having them crash and burn through real-world experiences.

 

He also makes it sound like T-Mobile has a 20MHz network everywhere.  No mention of lack of rural coverage.  No mention of the patchy LTE network.  No mention they only have 5MHz in some markets.  Only the good news.  And with Sprint, only the bad news.  And even the bad news was poorly portrayed.  It's a bad piece.

 

Robert

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that even with all these upgrades, Sprint is perceived to be unable to keep up with the rest of the national operators. That, in itself, is a huge problem. Sprint's Spark isn't helping, it's making everything worse by raising people's expectations and having them crash and burn through real-world experiences.

You don't think T-Mobile boasting their 120mbps speeds isn't setting customer's expectations high?  They've got it only in 1 city so far.  Sprint's only promising 5-12mbps, which is perfectly reasonable.  B41 will and does bring faster speeds than that but Sprint is under-promising and over-delivering.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also makes it sound like T-Mobile has a 20MHz network everywhere.  No mention of lack of rural coverage.  No mention of the patchy LTE network.  No mention they only have 5MHz in some markets.  Only the good news.  And with Sprint, only the bad news.  And even the bad news was poorly portrayed.  It's a bad piece.

 

Robert

Err, actually, he did mention that. T-Mobile does generally have a 20MHz network in most markets, when you realize he's talking about 10MHz FDD (10+10 MHz). He refers to Verizon's AWS network as a 40MHz network, so that's a good clue to note.

 

He did also mention the lack of mobile broadband coverage outside the metro areas, too.

 

You don't think T-Mobile boasting their 120mbps speeds isn't setting customer's expectations high?  They've got it only in 1 city so far.  Sprint's only promising 5-12mbps, which is perfectly reasonable.  B41 will and does bring faster speeds than that but Sprint is under-promising and over-delivering.

Sprint is mentioning 50-60 Mbps in its press releases. Those get repeated everywhere. It's only after you actually contact Sprint PR for details do they mention the 5-12Mbps number.

 

I don't specifically recall any mentions of 120Mbps outside of Dallas, where it exists today. They've been using Ookla data to show T-Mobile is the fastest, on average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He quotes every other providers peak speeds, but mentions Sprint's advertised speeds and holds it against them. Mentions other carriers aggregating bands which hasn't been done, and says Sprint won't do the same. Certainly had a bone to pick going into writing that article.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's your perception too. Isn't that convenient? Kevin supports your narrative. Band 41 is helping, buddy. Helping a lot. You only look for evidence that supports your anti-Sprint, Magenta loving point of view.

 

Robert

Is he a paid tmo salesman? Sure sounds like it.

 

Jim, Sent from my Photon 4G using Tapatalk 2

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, I have a bad feeling about this thread... <_<

 

I'm watching.  Trolls will be executed on sight.

 

Robert

  • Like 18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's your perception too.  Isn't that convenient?  Kevin supports your narrative.  Band 41 is helping, buddy.  Helping a lot.  You only look for evidence that supports your anti-Sprint, Magenta loving point of view.

 

Robert

Hardly. I refuse to make any judgement on Spark until I can witness it myself. The only judgement I can make is that I am not likely to be able to try it for at least a year or two, since it'll have to make its way down from Tier 1 cities to Tier 3 cities. I'm hopeful that I'll be able to travel to a Tier 1 city soon to try it.

 

I'm only saying what most of the people I talk to say.

 

While I was forced to cancel my Sprint service again and return my Moto X because of costs (I needed cash to pay for new glasses, since they broke on Christmas), I do plan to re-establish service soon. I do currently still own a Galaxy S4 mini, which is a tri-band device. I would have rather sold it to buy a Nexus 5, but it'll do.

 

And LTE multi-carrier will help, in places where Sprint actually has Band 41 deployed. The number of places it is accessible is growing almost every day, but it's still not going to be very large before the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hardly. I refuse to make any judgement on Spark until I can witness it myself. The only judgement I can make is that I am not likely to be able to try it for at least a year or two, since it'll have to make its way down from Tier 1 cities to Tier 3 cities. I'm hopeful that I'll be able to travel to a Tier 1 city soon to try it.

 

I'm only saying what most of the people I talk to say.

 

While I was forced to cancel my Sprint service again and return my Moto X because of costs (I needed cash to pay for new glasses, since they broke on Christmas), I do plan to re-establish service soon. I do currently still own a Galaxy S4 mini, which is a tri-band device. I would have rather sold it to buy a Nexus 5, but it'll do.

 

Don't you have to say that you have to wait to see Tmo 20MHz service yourself?  And see it spread to all areas of the country?  Say, Starkville??  Get off it, man.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Anthony

Anyone using Doctor Who references, gets bonus points!   :coolbeans: 

 

I need to get a Dalek emoticon!

 

Robert

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Article was disgusting and straight ignorance. S**t like that makes me want sprint and SoftBank come with a bang this year!

Hopefully they exceed their deployment goals for 800. & 2600. Also I hope they start to deploy 20+ 20 end of this year.

I kind of wish sprint waited to announce spark though. I personally think they should of started deploying it and then once they completed the 1900 lte rollout then announce spark.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you have to say that you have to wait to see Tmo 20MHz service yourself?  And see it spread to all areas of the country?  Say, Starkville??  Get off it, man.

 

Robert

I want both Sprint and T-Mobile LTE service in Starkville. Honestly, I don't care too much about LTE from T-Mobile, as the HSPA+ is plenty fast. But I do care about LTE from Sprint, because the EvDO is horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want both Sprint and T-Mobile LTE service in Starkville. Honestly, I don't care too much about LTE from T-Mobile, as the HSPA+ is plenty fast. But I do care about LTE from Sprint, because the EvDO is horrible.

 

If WCDMA is plenty fast for you, then you certainly are not in a position to complain about Spark/B41 high speeds.  So you must at least dispute Kevin's Band 41 conclusions, correct?  Also, Sprint has launched LTE service in Starkville, and all over the Golden Triangle.  I know you once claimed that you couldn't connect, but surely it is live now.  Sprint shows it on their coverage maps.  So this also must make you happy?  Correct?

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If WCDMA is plenty fast for you, then you certainly are not in a position to complain about Spark/B41 high speeds.  So you must at least dispute Kevin's Band 41 conclusions, correct?  Also, Sprint has launched LTE service in Starkville, and all over the Golden Triangle.  I know you once claimed that you couldn't connect, but surely it is live now.  Sprint shows it on their coverage maps.  So this also must make you happy?  Correct?

 

Robert

How can I dispute what I've never used? I've only managed to used Band 25 LTE in the last week before returning the Moto X. The low latency (~80ms) was impressive, but the throughput is depressingly low, averaging around 4Mbps, despite the low number of Sprint subscribers in the area. I also had some difficulty maintaining a connection, even in a strong area, but I'm not sure if that was a problem with the Moto X.

 

I am hopeful that if Band 41 service were to launch here, the speeds would be raised to >15Mbps (meeting or exceeding T-Mobile's HSPA+21 average speed).

 

And seriously, why the heck are you mad at me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
    • Yep, you can see the site was taken down between Aug 2022 and Apr 2023.
    • Verizon site at Woodbury Commons finally got C-band. I'm seeing upwards of 600Mbps there, a massive improvement over the <1Mbps I used to see. LTE is now at 10-20Mbps which is significantly better than before where speed tests would often fail. My only complaint is that C-band is super inconsistent. Not sure if it's a software issue but sometimes I'm connected to it and get the 600Mbps speeds previously mentioned and other times I connect and only see 15Mbps. Seems like whatever load balancing the network is trying to do is still shoving a ton of people to LTE, even in conditions where I have a strong C-band signal.  — — — — — You're absolutely right. The site on top of Bais Sarah Hall at 6101 16th Ave got decommissioned. Sad that they haven't installed a new site to fill in that coverage gap.  — — — — — In other news a carrier reached out to the board of my grandmother's building in Brooklyn about installing antennas on top of it so she called me today because she knows I map cell towers and she said a lot of people in her building, especially the folks on the upper floors, are worried about the health effects lol. I asked her if she knew what carrier it would be but she said she doesn't know. A quick glance at Cellmapper tells me it's either Dish or AT&T since Verizon and T-Mobile both have sites within a two block radius of her building but AT&T barely builds new sites so I'm leaning Dish. They're asking for a 25-year lease with an option to renegotiate the lease after 10-years. The board of her co-op said that if they do it, maintenance fees will go down since they'll be offset by the rent that the carrier would be paying them. She said she already voted in favor of it but she thinks that a lot of the older people in her building are against it.
    • Galaxy S7 FE most certainly doesn't have the same level of NR CA (if at all), it also looks like it doesn't have SA NR, so it's is inherently going to be much slower since most of the spectrum is now focused on NR rather than LTE. It's likely the same generation radio as the S21 (or maybe S20). Having trouble finding which it would be.
    • T-Mobile seems to be paying close attention to how much of B2 they refarm for NR, as on this trip down to South Padre Island I saw both 20x20 n25 and 20x20 B2 (but not both simultaneously) at various points on the trip. At South Padre itself, seems like someone else has 2.5 GHz licensed so the n41 setup here is 20+80 MHz. Speeds are still decent, but VZW has 100+60 MHz n77 live (and AT&T has some 80+40).
  • Recently Browsing

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