Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[lilotimz]

Thread cleaned somewhat due to recent off topic posts that does not relate to sprint. 

 

Remember to keep discussions of what the other carriers are doing elsewhere that is not relevant to Sprint be it in another thread or another site. 

[KD8JBF]

Thread cleaned somewhat due to recent off topic posts that does not relate to sprint. 

 

Remember to keep discussions of what the other carriers are doing elsewhere that is not relevant to Sprint be it in another thread or another site. 

[jamesinclair]

The market specific ads and websites just launched. There are about 30 cities that have "vanity" URLs. Kind of surprised that Indianapolis wasn't one of them.

 

Sent from my Tab 4

 

I think they made a mistake doing this for Fresno.

 

I saw an ad on Facebook about how Sprint has the most reliable calling in Fresno.

 

Every comment was negative.

 

Why? While the ad may be true in that calls are reliable, in Fresno, Sprint is dead last (20 points behind) everybody else in data speed.

 

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/fresno-ca?utm_content=buffer57162&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer#!

 

I dont think its smart advertising to tout your hown about one metric, when a second, possibly more important metric, is so bad. Just leaves a customer suffering from slow data with a bad taste in their mouth.

 

It reminds me of back when I had AT&T, they had "fewest dropped calls" ads running all the time. It would make me furious because I would drop a call every day. I switched to Sprint shortly after, in part because of the ads.

[S4GRU]

Every comment was negative?  Nothing new.  Even where Sprint is the best they will be perceived the worst for years.  Many people who complain are former customers who left, and they will continue to complain no matter how good Sprint gets.  Their minds are stuck in the performance that was occurring when they left.

 

If people are going to switch away from Sprint because of the ads, oh well.  Thousands of other sheeple (sheep+people) will come because of the ads.  And if they were Sprint customers in the past, they will undoubtedly see an improvement as Fresno is way better than it was, and will be better and better in the months and years ahead.

 

Sprint has got to move forward at some point.  And they are only touting real facts in Fresno.  Even if it's not as good as you think it needs to be to advertise.

[lou99/maximus1987]

I think they made a mistake doing this for Fresno.

 

I saw an ad on Facebook about how Sprint has the most reliable calling in Fresno.

 

Every comment was negative.

 

Why? While the ad may be true in that calls are reliable, in Fresno, Sprint is dead last (20 points behind) everybody else in data speed.

 

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/fresno-ca?utm_content=buffer57162&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer#!

 

I dont think its smart advertising to tout your hown about one metric, when a second, possibly more important metric, is so bad. Just leaves a customer suffering from slow data with a bad taste in their mouth.

 

It reminds me of back when I had AT&T, they had "fewest dropped calls" ads running all the time. It would make me furious because I would drop a call every day. I switched to Sprint shortly after, in part because of the ads.

 

 

Every comment was negative?  Nothing new.  Even where Sprint is the best they will be perceived the worst for years.  Many people who complain are former customers who left, and they will continue to complain no matter how good Sprint gets.  Their minds are stuck in the performance that was occurring when they left.

 

If people are going to switch away from Sprint because of the ads, oh well.  Thousands of other sheeple (sheep+people) will come because of the ads.  And if they were Sprint customers in the past, they will undoubtedly see an improvement as Fresno is way better than it was, and will be better and better in the months and years ahead.

 

Sprint has got to move forward at some point.  And they are only touting real facts in Fresno.  Even if it's not as good as you think it needs to be to advertise.

From 2H2014 to 1H2015, Fresno root down speeds jumped from 0.36mbps to 2.76mbps.

What's the MAIN reason for this? Is it addition of backhaul or addition of 2.5ghz?

[S4GRU]

From 2H2014 to 1H2015, Fresno root down speeds jumped from 0.36mbps to 2.76mbps.

What's the MAIN reason for this? Is it addition of backhaul or addition of 2.5ghz?

 

Moving from mostly 3G to mostly 4G on 1900.

[lou99/maximus1987]

I was curious how closely the root speeds line up with ookla so I looked at most recent Chicago rootscore (2H2014)

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/chicago-il/2014/2H

(tests performed 9/5/2014 - 9/11/2014)

 

And I compared to what ookla has for Oct 2014

 

1. Verizon Wireless 24.84
2. AT&T 10.32
3. T-Mobile USA 10.26
4. Sprintcom Inc 10.15

 

Legere is ALWAYs saying "rootmetrics is behind blah blah blah" but if you look at rootspeeds

1. Verizon Wireless 22.82
2. AT&T 15.18
3. T-Mobile USA 14.59
4. Sprintcom Inc 10.54

 

Rootspeeds way over estimated TMO's speeds (assuming Ookla is the gold standard).

[lou99/maximus1987]

http://www.rcrwireless.com/20150514/network-infrastructure/sprint-network-upgrade-expected-to-favor-small-cells-tag4

 

 

...Sources have heard that Sprint will add 20,000 small cells to its network...

...packing in as many as 150 per square kilometer in Japan’s biggest cities...

...Softbank has also installed thousands of small cells on post offices throughout rural Japan, using satellite backhaul ...

...“We believe that Sprint can cover the top 50 urban markets on 2.5 GHz with 25,000 sites (or 500 nodes per market) by the end of 2018,”...

... Moreland said that Crown Castle is currently working on a small cell trial with Sprint...

 

 

I'm most intrigued by the satellite backhaul.

[WiWavelength]

Rootspeeds way over estimated TMO's speeds (assuming Ookla is the gold standard).

 

Ookla is not the "gold standard."  A lot of Ookla speed tests tend to fall far outside the median at opposite ends of the spectrum.  As Ookla is a user initiated app, think about what prompts users to run speed tests.  Showing off amazing speeds for e-penis erection.  Confirming agonizingly slow speeds and venting frustration.  The large middle part of the bell curve gets neglected.  When in the middle, users do not care so much to run speed tests -- because their data just works.

 

AJ

[lou99/maximus1987]

Ookla is not the "gold standard."  A lot of Ookla speed tests tend to fall far outside the median at opposite ends of the spectrum.  As Ookla is a user initiated app, think about what prompts users to run speed tests.  Showing off amazing speeds for e-penis erection.  Confirming agonizingly slow speeds and venting frustration.  The large middle part of the bell curve gets neglected.  When in the middle, users do not care so much to run speed tests -- because their data just works.

 

AJ

 

I'd agree on the low-end but on the high end, you're just as likely to do the speedtest if you have ok speeds or really good speeds.

The user has no way of knowing he's about to receive a high test beforehand.

[WiWavelength]

I'd agree on the low-end but on the high end, you're just as likely to do the speedtest if you have ok speeds or really good speeds.

The user has no way of knowing he's about to receive a high test beforehand.

 

Nope, you are wrong on that one.  Users have ways of knowing, expecting, or at least hoping that they are on the high end, hence intriguing their speed test curiosity.  They may notice remarkably fast downloads, for example.  More likely, though, VZW, Sprint, or T-Mobile tells them that they now have XLTE, Spark, or "wideband," respectively.  That tends to bring out the e-penis measuring stick.

 

Either way, Legere is wrong, too.  Thanks for posting the Ookla results and RootMetrics results, as they are substantially similar.  And I put far more faith in RootMetrics methodology, which takes human bias out of the equation.

 

AJ

[lou99/maximus1987]

Canada 2.5GHz auction is done

 

70MHz FDD + 50MHz unpaired but part of the unpaired is restricted (didn't care enough to read exactly how).

Paired is split into blocks 10x10MHz

 

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/h_sf10939.html

 

Band plan

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10355.html

 

Winners

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf11030.html

 

Bell and Rogers do own unpaired in major areas like Windsor, Vancouver, etc but they'll probably continue deploying B7 (FDD).

[AppleFanBoy]

Ookla is not the "gold standard." A lot of Ookla speed tests tend to fall far outside the median at opposite ends of the spectrum. As Ookla is a user initiated app, think about what prompts users to run speed tests. Showing off amazing speeds for e-penis erection. Confirming agonizingly slow speeds and venting frustration. The large middle part of the bell curve gets neglected. When in the middle, users do not care so much to run speed tests -- because their data just works.

 

AJ

Ookla is also dependent on the server it picks. Unless you set your own default.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lou99/maximus1987]

Nope, you are wrong on that one.  Users have ways of knowing, expecting, or at least hoping that they are on the high end, hence intriguing their speed test curiosity.  They may notice remarkably fast downloads, for example.  More likely, though, VZW, Sprint, or T-Mobile tells them that they now have XLTE, Spark, or "wideband," respectively.  That tends to bring out the e-penis measuring stick.

 

Either way, Legere is wrong, too.  Thanks for posting the Ookla results and RootMetrics results, as they are substantially similar.  And I put far more faith in RootMetrics methodology, which takes human bias out of the equation.

 

AJ

 

How can you say they're substantially similar when root gave TMO a 40% higher result?

[lou99/maximus1987]

Ookla is also dependent on the server it picks. Unless you set your own default.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Unless you pick one in China - which I've done just for kicks and it's waaaaay slow even on wifi - I haven't noticed a difference and I've done A LOT of speed tests.

[S4GRU]

Ookla is also dependent on the server it picks. Unless you set your own default.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Exactly.  I just ran five Ookla speed tests from five different regional servers.  My range in download speed was 18Mbps to 33Mbps and ping varied from 70ms - 140ms.  So, the variation in a Speed Test result is atrocious.  The one auto selected for me was actually the worst for download speed, but one of the best for ping.

 

I don't know how many times someone has sniveled at a slowish speed test, then I explain for them to pick another server, and voila!  Their download speed was much higher than they realized.

[lou99/maximus1987]

I just ran five Ookla speed tests from different servers, my range in download speed was 18Mbps to 33Mbps and ping varied from 70ms - 140ms.  So, the variation in a Speed Test result is atrocious.  The one auto selected for me was actually the worst for download speed, but one of the best for ping.

 

I don't know how many times someone has sniveled at a slowish speed test, then I explain for them to pick another server, and voila!  Their download speed was much higher than they realized.

 

Maybe that's why TMO (and others?) have their own servers: they want to know their subs' true speeds and they configure themselves to only be visible to own customers.

[WiWavelength]

How can you say they're substantially similar when root gave TMO a 40% higher result?

 

Statistical uncertainty.  We do not know the sizes of both data sets.  We do not know how much their pseudo randomized locations overlapped.  But we do know that their time frames were offset by about a month.  All of that adds up to statistical uncertainty in comparing the two sets of results.  So, even if 4 Mbps amounts to a 40 percent difference, I do not consider that a statistically significant difference.

 

AJ

[lou99/maximus1987]

Statistical uncertainty.  We do not know the sizes of both data sets.  We do not know how much their pseudo randomized locations overlapped.  But we do know that their time frames were offset by about a month.  All of that adds up to statistical uncertainty in comparing the two sets of results.  So, even if 4 Mbps amounts to a 40 percent difference, I do not consider that a statistically significant difference.

 

AJ

 

It'd be cool for rootmetrics to perform speedtests on Ookla simultaneously with their own servers and publish those results too.

[sbolen]

Didn't see this anywhere else yet, but it looks like RootMetrics is testing venues - sports stadiums, amphitheaters, etc.

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/map/2015-1H?category=data&type=venue

 

Sprint's lone win was in Houston, which tied them with AT&T and T-Mobile. Verizon took the other 11 tests.

[Paynefanbro]

Didn't see this anywhere else yet, but it looks like RootMetrics is testing venues - sports stadiums, amphitheaters, etc.

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/map/2015-1H?category=data&type=venue

 

Sprint's lone win was in Houston, which tied them with AT&T and T-Mobile. Verizon took the other 11 tests.

 

I' really curious about NYC. They have to test Madison Square Garden, the Barclays Center, Citi Field, and Yankee Stadium. 

 

As far as I know, Sprint has LTE (I'm not sure what band) inside of MSG. By Yankee Stadium, Sprint has upgraded pretty much all of the sites around it but the DAS inside the stadium hasn't been upgraded yet. The Barclays Center has a DAS on all 4 carriers and is surrounded by two Sprint sites which are basically across the street from it, one of them is a Clear Band 41 site and the other site has 8T8R antennas. Citi Field, I'm not so sure about.

[sbolen]

Citi Field, I'm not so sure about.

Nobody likes the Mets.

[lilotimz]

Didn't see this anywhere else yet, but it looks like RootMetrics is testing venues - sports stadiums, amphitheaters, etc.

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/map/2015-1H?category=data&type=venue

 

Sprint's lone win was in Houston, which tied them with AT&T and T-Mobile. Verizon took the other 11 tests.

Sprint will basically lose almost every single test.

 

DAS systems are the absolute last priority and only very recently have sprint shifted focus to these setups and commercial vendors have started releasing equipment that supports band 41 in addition to 25/26 (I'd say they started popping up in the past year).

 

These systems are large and take a lot of time and money and red tape to finish from beginning to end.

 

Not going to be pretty.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

[lou99/maximus1987]

Sprint will basically lose almost every single test.

 

DAS systems are the absolute last priority and only very recently have sprint shifted focus to these setups and commercial vendors have started releasing equipment that supports band 41 in addition to 25/26 (I'd say they started popping up in the past year).

 

These systems are large and take a lot of time and money and red tape to finish from beginning to end.

 

Not going to be pretty.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

Why not do small cells instead of DAS?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sbolen]

Sprint will basically lose almost every single test.

 

DAS systems are the absolute last priority and only very recently have sprint shifted focus to these setups and commercial vendors have started releasing equipment that supports band 41 in addition to 25/26 (I'd say they started popping up in the past year).

 

These systems are large and take a lot of time and money and red tape to finish from beginning to end.

 

Not going to be pretty.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

The Busch Stadium DAS was supposed to be installed at some point before the season. They had a tower down nearby on opening day and I was dataless - absolutely brutal. I hope Sprint can spend, spend, spend to grease that DAS wheel... It makes a huge difference.