T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion V2

[EvanA]

Time Warner Cable is doing there here in NYC for us for free. If you have a Roku box, you can download the TWC TV channel and get access to all your channels streaming within your home.

Charter does the same thing for free. They have an app that you can use in home to watch all available broadcast TV stations. Outside of the home you have limited access to stations based on their agreements. Charter doesn't have data caps on their internet services, so that isn't an issue like it is with Comcast

[Deval]

Charter does the same thing for free. They have an app that you can use in home to watch all available broadcast TV stations. Outside of the home you have limited access to stations based on their agreements. Charter doesn't have data caps on their internet services, so that isn't an issue like it is with Comcast

 

Yep, that's why I was so happy when Time Warner did it. I get all 300 channels on the Roku

[Deval]

Got the offer by email, the twc stuff only benefit is you don't pay for a cable box box monthly fees. Still if you want the cable channels like CNN espn etc you need to drop 49.99 monthly for the first year.

 

Internet 64.99+49.99 115 dollars, and this is what cord cutters like myself want to avoid. It's like you are paying the same thing minus the cable boxes fees.

 

Yep which in my case I already have a cable box, so I don't have a problem with it.

 

I love having that second box without cabling.

[Sprke]

I was in a little rural Nebraska town of Laurel this afternoon and I noticed my T-Mobile phone had LTE on band 12. It stayed on LTE for maybe a minute or so and even connected to data then fell off and went to Viaero's HSPA network. I have attached a screen shot. Can somebody tell me what carrier I was on? Was I on US Cell? Signal check shows I was on T-Mobile but T-Mobile don't have any band 12 in Nebraska

 

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

 

Edit: Apparently T-Mobile does have coverage fairly close by in Yankton SD I'm probably connecting to that. Bummer...

[S4GRU]

I was in a little rural Nebraska town of Laurel this afternoon and I noticed my T-Mobile phone had LTE on band 12. It stayed on LTE for maybe a minute or so and even connected to data then fell off and went to Viaero's HSPA network. I have attached a screen shot. Can somebody tell me what carrier I was on? Was I on US Cell? Signal check shows I was on T-Mobile but T-Mobile don't have any band 12 in Nebraska

 

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

 

Edit: Apparently T-Mobile does have coverage fairly close by in Yankton SD I'm probably connecting to that. Bummer...

 

That GCI and Sector number is consistent with T-Mobile Band 12 sites in the Dakotas.  And T-Mobile has a site live between Belden and Laurel.  It is shown on my Dakotas Map in the T4GRU Sponsor section.  Or you can just view it on the Tmo Coverage Map:  http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage.html

[Sprke]

That GCI and Sector number is consistent with T-Mobile Band 12 sites in the Dakotas. And T-Mobile has a site live between Belden and Laurel. It is shown on my Dakotas Map in the T4GRU Sponsor section. Or you can just view it on the Tmo Coverage Map: http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage.html

I also had my cell booster on in my truck so that makes sense why I had it for a bit and I'm realizing it lost it when I shut my truck off.. Duh

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

The internet has had some form of portals for a long time. There's nothing inherently wrong with portals on the internet. YouTube is a free and open content portal with moentization features, is there something wrong with that? At its core, a web portal is just a site that aggregates content from numerous sources in to an easily accessible site.

 

The internet will continue to be free and open as it is today unless ISPs start mucking about. The FCC passing net neutrality rules is a key step in keeping the internet free and open and preventing this from happening. There is nothing inherently wrong with businesses using the internet to make money or curate content so long as the average Joe can continue to run his own website. The beauty of the internet is that everyone, from big corporations to individuals, is free to create their own websites and services.

 

I completely disagree with you.  But that's fine.  You can just enjoy Bread and Circuses with my son.  We will just enjoy what we are given by big business.  And later government.  I'm sure it's going to all work out for us.

[S4GRU]

Net Neutrality is a principle that ISP's (and the governments regulating them) should not be allowed to discriminate against content over the net, because they hold an effective monopoly over access.

 

Amazon's "pay developers for eyeballs" play is slimy, but is not a violation of Net Neutrality by definition.

 

Net Neutrality isn't a catch-all phrase for any company acting as a "gatekeeper", or using their influence to pick winners or losers -- Net Neutrality is a specific principle against a specific type of transgression. I worry that if people throw that label onto anything that happens to be "bad", it cheapens the meaning.

 

I'm applying it everywhere.  Terms evolve.  I'm doing my part to expand the knowledge of the sliminess in anyone who attempts to control content.  Especially through means of giving it away for free, when there really is a huge cost for it.  You can call it whatever you want.  The term doesn't matter.  Amazon will ultimately control content, and people are going to give them that control because it's "free."

 

The internet is great because anyone can become a sensation or entrepreneur.  Big business wants to take that away.  This is a huge threat.

[scubajwd]

Nope...Robert..not Amazon, Google,or Apple will ultimately control content..they will just be the

forbearers of control that ultimately be confiscated and then regulated by government; just as our

government has created a health care "portal" for health care services today..then, the internet as we

have known it for about 2 1/2 decades will be no more..

[maxsilver]

I'm applying it everywhere.  Terms evolve.  (snip).  You can call it whatever you want.  The term doesn't matter.

 

If someone steals property, they are a thief. That doesn't make them an arsonist. The term "arson" means something specific (setting fire to property) and stealing isn't that, even if the end result is similar.

 

If you try to warn people about a thief by saying "he's an arsonist", you'll be wrong and appear either uninformed or untrustworthy. It's sort of like crying wolf, it hurts the cause your trying to support.

 

I'm doing my part to expand the knowledge of the sliminess in anyone who attempts to control content.  Especially through means of giving it away for free, when there really is a huge cost for it.  

 

That cuts both ways though. You also run a service, on the internet, that controls content using a set of rules you defined (S4GRU Posting Guidelines). The content here is (mostly) free, even though there is a real-world cost for it.  

 

By your own "expanded definition" of Net Neutrality,  S4GRU.com is also "in violation of Net Neutrality".

 

---

 

Obviously that's not true, S4GRU.com does not actually violate Net Neutrality. But that's why these definitions are so important --  if "you can call (Net Neutrality) whatever you want" and "the term doesn't matter" then anyone can claim anything and be accurate.

[S4GRU]

If someone steals property, they are a thief. That doesn't make them an arsonist. The term "arson" means something specific (setting fire to property) and stealing isn't that, even if the end result is similar.

 

If you try to warn people about a thief by saying "he's an arsonist", you'll be wrong and appear either uninformed or untrustworthy. It's sort of like crying wolf, it hurts the cause your trying to support.

 

 

That cuts both ways though. You also run a service, on the internet, that controls content using a set of rules you defined (S4GRU Posting Guidelines). The content here is (mostly) free, even though there is a real-world cost for it.

 

By your own "expanded definition" of Net Neutrality, S4GRU.com is also "in violation of Net Neutrality".

 

---

 

Obviously that's not true, S4GRU.com does not actually violate Net Neutrality. But that's why these definitions are so important -- if "you can call (Net Neutrality) whatever you want" and "the term doesn't matter" then anyone can claim anything and be accurate.

I want the net to stay neutral. Neutral whether it's related to apps or ISP's. I'm not making the leap from thief to arsonist, what I'm discussing is directly related. I want the net to stay neutral.

 

Using Tapatalk on Note 8.0

[WiWavelength]

Nope...Robert..not Amazon, Google,or Apple will ultimately control content..they will just be the

forbearers of control that ultimately be confiscated and then regulated by government; just as our

government has created a health care "portal" for health care services today..then, the internet as we

have known it for about 2 1/2 decades will be no more..

 

I am the government.  You are the government.  We are the government.  But that does not seem to assure you.

 

So, you should move to Mogadishu.  Somalia is lovely year round -- a beautiful experiment in libertarianism/anarchism.  No government will confiscate nor regulate your tinfoil hat.  Only the warlords might take it from you.  But, with completely unfettered free enterprise, maybe you could become a warlord, too.

 

AJ

[WiWavelength]

I completely disagree with you.  But that's fine.  You can just enjoy Bread and Circuses with my son.

 

Or think of the situation like this.

 

Hey, kids, look!  Free candy!  Free puppies!  Come inside the van with no windows.  It is safe.  You can trust us.

 

 

AJ

[cortney]

Or think of the situation like this.

 

Hey, kids, look!  Free candy!  Free puppies!  Come inside the van with no windows.  It is safe.  You can trust us.

 

 

 

AJ

 

It just has to look more like this with different text: 

[anthony.spina97]

 

This new generation just does not get it.  They don't care that getting things "Free" has a cost.  And even free things need to pass a cost/benefit analysis. They will sell tomorrow to do something today.  Where did I go wrong as a parent???

 

I don't think it's because you failed as a parent, it's more along the lines of this generation (which, sadly, I'm a part of ) has a very big problem with seeing the big picture. Your son, like many others, doesn't care that these "free" things actually have a cost. No, all they care about is the fact that it benefits themselves at this particular point on time. It's very short-sighted, and it greatly worries me that someday I'm going to be living in a world ran by these people. My hope is that it is just a byproduct of not being mature enough to completely understand it.

 

-Anthony

[Arysyn]

I very much agree with Robert's assessments here. I've been watching how internet content and its distribution seems to be shifting towards a particular mode of big, large companies either grabbing up alot of the popular small and midsize content sources and branding them under their own labeling. As things appear to be going, the internet may very well end up like another form of cable television, with a number of popular sites owned by large companies that will use whatever means they can at grabbing away viewership to small independent content sources people create on their own, such as running a blog or a forum using a server host or their own hosting. The internet may become something of a pipe of big apps owned by these large companies, rather than a means of just typing away on a search engine for any content desirable. Instead, it'll all just become app based, and that certainly is not a good thing.

 

Actually, it seems to me these large companies that are doing this, are skirting net neutrality in any way they can to see this as their goal they intend to succeed in doing, no matter the "law". In some ways, it appears as they are getting away with violating net neutrality, at least based on what I'm understanding of it from reading posts here about it. Yet, the FCC is doing nothing about it Tom Wheeler even supports what T-Mobile is doing with Binge-On. As he is a former lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, I'm not surprised by it. I don't even really believe the FCC means to uphold Net Neutrality at this point, considering all of this. It seems to me what these leaders of this social system want, and they all are going to work together in their own ways. The public will just continue to accept it, is they always have done, because as log as these companies succeed at convincing them through various means, such as free service, etc., they will go along with it. This is a major reason why the world is as it is, and things likely will never improve this way.

 

Regarding your son, Robert, its not your fault for his views. Sadly, as I've said here, it is as it is in society where people just accept these things. The social system is such a powerful force that the ideals of true individuais and the life of the family unit just doesn't have the ability to withstand the constant development of the large, integrated, mainstreamed society nowadays, which entices people through such things as popular culture and the general attitude society has on the importance of acceptance and false inclusion.

[Sprke]

Looks like roaming on Viaero Wireless LTE is live. Currently in Norfolk,NE.

 

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[shaferz]

WHOA.

[Fraydog]

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/new-york-city-and-tri-state-area/2015/2H

 

Welp. T-Mobile didn't win the day in NYC after all. ????????????

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

Looks like roaming on Viaero Wireless LTE is live. Currently in Norfolk,NE.

 

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

I take it that was on a Tmo SIM and not a Sprint or AT&T SIM?

 

Sent from OnePlus 2 using Tapatalk

[Sprke]

I take it that was on a Tmo SIM and not a Sprint or AT&T SIM?

 

Sent from OnePlus 2 using Tapatalk

Yes Tmobile SIM. Phone is Moto X Pure

 

This wasn't on last week. I even had it in LTE only mode. Today it attached to LTE as soon as I got into Norfolk on the normal LTE/HSPA mode. Speeds are so so at 10-15 down.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Deval]

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/new-york-city-and-tri-state-area/2015/2H

 

Welp. T-Mobile didn't win the day in NYC after all.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

Better not tell the people who plastered Grand Central Terminal in Magenta. A walk up from the 7 train to the S (shuttle) and every usable inch of the hallway has T-Mo ads.

[Fraydog]

Better not tell the people who plastered Grand Central Terminal in Magenta. A walk up from the 7 train to the S (shuttle) and every usable inch of the hallway has T-Mo ads.

Biggest "what if" I have is "what if CA got enabled in time for RootMetrics testing?"

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

Yes Tmobile SIM. Phone is Moto X Pure

 

This wasn't on last week. I even had it in LTE only mode. Today it attached to LTE as soon as I got into Norfolk on the normal LTE/HSPA mode. Speeds are so so at 10-15 down.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It appears Native. Interesting.

 

Sent from OnePlus 2 using Tapatalk

[EvanA]

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/new-york-city-and-tri-state-area/2015/2H

 

Welp. T-Mobile didn't win the day in NYC after all.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

T-Mobile’s median download speed decreased from 21.7 Mbps to 16.5 Mbps since February.

 

Ouch, that hurts. Their most dense market with 20x20 and they still decreased in speed.