T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion V2

[Arysyn]

 

I do not have the absolute explanation, just a plausible explanation.  If you want to dig up the T-Mobile citation about BingeOn and reduced network resources, please do.  We can examine it to see how it is constructed, to see how it logically holds up.

 

For example, T-Mobile could make that claim with a straight face -- only because the video bit rate per subscriber has decreased with BingeOn.  For even further sophistry, T-Mobile could base it on a reduced video bit rate per sub per second.  Unless my calculus fails me, that would be a third derivative.

 

Now, maybe the amount of video data consumed per sub has decreased.  But has BingeOn enticed many more subs to consume mobile video?

 

These are questions to ask and be answered.

 

AJ

 

Absolutely agree here, AJ.

 

T-Mobile really ought to be more honest about BingeOn and what clearly is causing their network decline in reports, rather than having John Legere whine about how the reporting agencies are being "paid off" by the duopoly.

 

Perhaps if ever the FCC got its act together and looked seriously on the issues of BingeOn in relation to net neutrality or whatever other means it has to investigate, then maybe we'd get some honest answers about these issues.

[Arysyn]

Let's assume a pretty predictable trajectory for network load as subscribers increase.

 

Explosive subscriber growth has caused this runway to the end of the trajectory to become much closer than it was say 1+ years ago.

 

Every time they add more LTE capacity, be it by L700 deployment or UMTS->LTE refarming for wider LTE channel width, it extends that trajectory out further, extending the runway from that point, but not changing the fact that the massive increase in subscriber growth, takes you way further down the trajectory than anything else.

 

For reference, total subscribers after 13Q1 were 33.968M, and after 15Q4/EOY were 63.282M. That's 29.314M subscribers added to the network in 11 quarters/less than 3 years, 86% more subscribers on a network in that amount of time.

[All numbers pulled from T-Mobile earnings reports from their investor relations site]

 

Where we are now is the intersection of being "too successful too quick" and being able to put money back into the network with tangible results. Densification, sector adds/splits, all to mitigate the congestion of the massive subscriber growth. It's just not happening quick enough to make everyone happy.

 

Another thing to remember is that it stands to reason that it is likely that a large majority of adds are in urban areas, which were already susceptible to congestion because that's where the majority of the existing subscriber base came from.

 

All this to say, BingeOn likely extends that runway trajectory, but not further than the net adds drags it right back down.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

These are questions/issues I'd really like to hear being mentioned during the quarterly report live streams I often watch. They read off the growth count, brag about low churn, then move on to talking about how their network growth, but never give a clear answer to how they can manage to offer what they are at the rate of growth, or even if the rate of network growth is keeping up with that of subscriber count.

 

I definitely agree with those here on S4GRU mentioning subscriber growth possibly being too much on the network, that definitely is a part of this, though I'm not sure as to how much. We really don't get those answers from T-Mobile, as they make everything they do come up sounding rosy and great. Thank goodness though for reporting agencies like RootMetrics for showing important data that at least somewhat gives us a glimpse of truth, which of course gets immediately debunked by John Legere.

 

I know I was too quick at pointing out T-Mobile's successes at building their LTE network fast when comparing that to the broadcast incentive complaint letter to the FCC. I do try in all fairness to recognize the good among the bad with T-Mobile, which is something I've admitted being impressed with their past successes at getting the network built quickly. However, now it seems as that uncanny speed may not have been sufficient enough to build a quality network to handle this growth, or there is something else to it not known.

 

Whatever it is, we can see T-Mobile's network getting worse, more and more congestion while T-Mobile promotes BingeOn that causes various ill effects to the network, even as I still believe it is causing a backlash to those on unlimited plans who have disdain for BingeOn. As I just mentioned in response to AJ, we really need to see an investigation into T-Mobile to get more honest answers out of them, which both customers and investors especially need to be informed of.

[Fraydog]

Spending less on CapEx than other competitors has to play a part too, right? Unless TMUS surprises me and spends $6 billion in 2016.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

Spending less on CapEx than other competitors has to play a part too, right? Unless TMUS surprises me and spends $6 billion in 2016.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

I'm curious how the price hikes are affecting their overall income, in how much more money T-Mobile is making than they did before the price hikes and what they are spending this on, unless this somehow factors in with what they plan on spending in the 600mhz auction.

 

Now while I'm a big supporter of the wireless carriers getting as much of this spectrum as they can (I don't think the government  is offering enough spectrum to the wireless carriers as it is), I'm not fond of the idea that this new income is being used for it, if that is the case, I don't know. I believe all money for the auction should have been saved up from before, which much of it likely has, though I'm hoping that is all and not from the price hikes. The money T-Mobile is making from the price hikes ought to go towards infrastructure spending, not the 600mhz spectrum.

 

My thinking on this goes towards wanting a fairer system to wireless carriers as broadcasters have had for many years. Wireless carriers have to spend billions of dollars to get spectrum which really isn't enough long-term. The only carrier which has long-term spectrum is Sprint, and while I like Sprint and glad they have a strong chance to finally succeed with their spectrum, the other carriers who have less spectrum are not getting a fair chance long-term, spectrum-wise. This is where I do sympathize with T-Mobile, in hoping they can get more spectrum, though I believe it ought to be done through better deals with the FCC, rather than through such price hikes to customers.

[tyroned3222]

I'm curious how the price hikes are affecting their overall income, in how much more money T-Mobile is making than they did before the price hikes and what they are spending this on, unless this somehow factors in with what they plan on spending in the 600mhz auction.

 

Now while I'm a big supporter of the wireless carriers getting as much of this spectrum as they can (I don't think the government is offering enough spectrum to the wireless carriers as it is), I'm not fond of the idea that this new income is being used for it, if that is the case, I don't know. I believe all money for the auction should have been saved up from before, which much of it likely has, though I'm hoping that is all and not from the price hikes. The money T-Mobile is making from the price hikes ought to go towards infrastructure spending, not the 600mhz spectrum.

 

My thinking on this goes towards wanting a fairer system to wireless carriers as broadcasters have had for many years. Wireless carriers have to spend billions of dollars to get spectrum which really isn't enough long-term. The only carrier which has long-term spectrum is Sprint, and while I like Sprint and glad they have a strong chance to finally succeed with their spectrum, the other carriers who have less spectrum are not getting a fair chance long-term, spectrum-wise. This is where I do sympathize with T-Mobile, in hoping they can get more spectrum, though I believe it ought to be done through better deals with the FCC, rather than through such price hikes to customers.

What im really curious about and really haven't seen much in discussions. Is, t mobile really accurate with there coverage map? i know they said " we added 1 million square miles of new lte " ,but how does that translate into real world usage..has anyone had a better experince traveling with t mobile?? I will travel with tmobile in about a week thru texas and compare to sprint... im sure most of that is either covered with band 2 10×10 or b12 5×5.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

For reference, total subscribers after 13Q1 were 33.968M, and after 15Q4/EOY were 63.282M. That's 29.314M subscribers added to the network in 11 quarters/less than 3 years, 86% more subscribers on a network in that amount of time.

[All numbers pulled from T-Mobile earnings reports from their investor relations site]

 

Let us be clear that some of those adds came from the MetroPCS merger, some from tablets, and some from "organic" growth. But, certainly, not all came for "organic" growth.  And along for the ride with those adds from the MetroPCS merger came copious amounts of additional spectrum.  You can read my fall 2012 article:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-326-newco-needs-to-drop-some-of-the-pcs-from-metropcs/

 

Even with the subscriber adds, that additional spectrum extended the "runway" in many markets.  So, I feel little sympathy for T-Mobile.  Network congestion -- especially getting inverted on downlink versus uplink speeds -- has become a problem of its own creation.  Maybe T-Mobile should BingeOff both giving away free candy and adding new subs.

 

AJ

[richy]

Let us be clear that some of those adds came from the MetroPCS merger, some from tablets, and some from "organic" growth. But, certainly, not all came for "organic" growth.  And along for the ride with those adds from the MetroPCS merger came copious amounts of additional spectrum.  You can read my fall 2012 article:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-326-newco-needs-to-drop-some-of-the-pcs-from-metropcs/

 

Even with the subscriber adds, that additional spectrum extended the "runway" in many markets.  So, I feel little sympathy for T-Mobile.  Network congestion -- especially getting inverted on downlink versus uplink speeds -- has become a problem of its own creation.  Maybe T-Mobile should BingeOff both giving away free candy and adding new subs.

 

AJ

I don't feel sympathy for them but I am very glad they are here. If nothing else they have brought new ideas and some disruption to a fetid market. True they were desperate and had to get creative but they have had more hits then misses (although their misses have been pretty shocking). I don't love tmobile, but I have some respect for them coming out swinging hard and obviously having some success. Yes a lot has been fluff and I hate legere but he was given a job and delivered and frankly my service has been great for little outlay. The downside is locally the service is beginning to degrade, likely due to backhaul as they have plenty to refarm. My guess is they are holding off the opex to have fcf to spend on 600 MHz.

 

It would be very interesting to see their spectrum to subs ratio, they used to boast how much they had per sub compared to the duopoly.

[Arysyn]

What im really curious about and really haven't seen much in discussions. Is, t mobile really accurate with there coverage map? i know they said " we added 1 million square miles of new lte " ,but how does that translate into real world usage..has anyone had a better experince traveling with t mobile?? I will travel with tmobile in about a week thru texas and compare to sprint... im sure most of that is either covered with band 2 10×10 or b12 5×5.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

I'm not fond of any of the carriers' coverage maps, as they all have problems. However, T-Mobile use to have one of the best coverage maps until they changed it to be based off of supposedly user-generated technology, which I think is a bunch of crap, and so does many others I've read comments from about it. The new coverage map basically is T-Mobile's clone of Verizon's map, not anything that could be claimed as being accurate.

 

On a quick personal note, I had a long discussion with my mother yesterday about our T-Mobile service. I'm not getting answers from the contact we have there on the LG G5 arrangement we're suppose to have, though I've got information from them about the promotions ahead of time, which is kind of nice, but I'm not a journalist and I'm not asking for insider information. I simply want to make sure I can get the LG G5 A.S.A.P. and certainly not a week after seeing people posting their G5's on TmoNews. The other issue is what happens if LG decides to place a limit to these promotional items, and I miss out on them because of a late shipment.

 

Now another interesting bit, someone at the Executive Response center told my mother they are getting flooded with complaints from people angry about Samsung not shipping their S7 promotional items to them. According to this lady my mother spoke with there, Samsung decided to change the limit from 300,000 down to around 30,000 which is what she's telling customers calling in to complain about the issue. So, if promotional items are important to the buyer, it is crucial to get the product right away. This just reconfirms my concerns with what happened in my case with T-Mobile regarding the S7 Edge I bought, but cancelled due to T-Mobile's mishandling of the order.

[tyroned3222]

I'm not fond of any of the carriers' coverage maps, as they all have problems. However, T-Mobile use to have one of the best coverage maps until they changed it to be based off of supposedly user-generated technology, which I think is a bunch of crap, and so does many others I've read comments from about it. The new coverage map basically is T-Mobile's clone of Verizon's map, not anything that could be claimed as being accurate.

 

On a quick personal note, I had a long discussion with my mother yesterday about our T-Mobile service. I'm not getting answers from the contact we have there on the LG G5 arrangement we're suppose to have, though I've got information from them about the promotions ahead of time, which is kind of nice, but I'm not a journalist and I'm not asking for insider information. I simply want to make sure I can get the LG G5 A.S.A.P. and certainly not a week after seeing people posting their G5's on TmoNews. The other issue is what happens if LG decides to place a limit to these promotional items, and I miss out on them because of a late shipment.

 

Now another interesting bit, someone at the Executive Response center told my mother they are getting flooded with complaints from people angry about Samsung not shipping their S7 promotional items to them. According to this lady my mother spoke with there, Samsung decided to change the limit from 300,000 down to around 30,000 which is what she's telling customers calling in to complain about the issue. So, if promotional items are important to the buyer, it is crucial to get the product right away. This just reconfirms my concerns with what happened in my case with T-Mobile regarding the S7 Edge I bought, but cancelled due to T-Mobile's mishandling of the order.

I heard, the s7 edge is sold out for t mobile its in very high demand. Ya, i guess u won't really know the coverage until you actually travel around and find out for yourself.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

I heard, the s7 edge is sold out for t mobile its in very high demand. Ya, i guess u won't really know the coverage until you actually travel around and find out for yourself.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

The S7 is a great device and has sold well, so I wouldn't be surprised if the 300,000 promotional items were gone within the first few days. If it were lowered to 30,000 as the lady at the T-Mobile Executive Response center told my mother, then I can imagine why there are a lot of angry customers. Combined with those angry about the locked bootloader issue, if T-Mobile goes on blaming Samsung for both issues, I can imagine how it could affect Samsung's business in the future. I'm hoping LG doesn't make the same mistakes, though I'm not taking any chances with my order. If T-Mobile doesn't follow through with their promises this time, it'll be enough to get my mother to finally drop them for AT&T.

 

Otherwise, I'll have to take this issue up with her, as the line technically is mine now but on her account. Although, I should have a choice which provider I want. Its only been this way for a few months, before that it was her line we were sharing. So, hopefully we can get the line switched. I'm still trying to get a four-line unlimited plan situation worked out with her and her sister, and her sister's son on AT&T, to mitigate some of the extra cost.

 

Anyways, I posted in the smartphone forum section under Misc., regarding the Vivo Xplay 5 and Elite version, which if ever makes its way to the U.S., will be major competition for Samsung, LG, and HTC. Makes me realize just how poor competition in carrier-available smartphones there are in this country. Those three have dominant control on the four carriers here, so basically there are more carrier choices than there are smartphone brand choices (those available at stores), well besides Apple, but I'm thinking Android products that get more releases than Apple does, which I see Apple as being more of a specialty product. If only Sony were available in carrier stores here, that would help.

[tyroned3222]

The S7 is a great device and has sold well, so I wouldn't be surprised if the 300,000 promotional items were gone within the first few days. If it were lowered to 30,000 as the lady at the T-Mobile Executive Response center told my mother, then I can imagine why there are a lot of angry customers. Combined with those angry about the locked bootloader issue, if T-Mobile goes on blaming Samsung for both issues, I can imagine how it could affect Samsung's business in the future. I'm hoping LG doesn't make the same mistakes, though I'm not taking any chances with my order. If T-Mobile doesn't follow through with their promises this time, it'll be enough to get my mother to finally drop them for AT&T.

 

Otherwise, I'll have to take this issue up with her, as the line technically is mine now but on her account. Although, I should have a choice which provider I want. Its only been this way for a few months, before that it was her line we were sharing. So, hopefully we can get the line switched. I'm still trying to get a four-line unlimited plan situation worked out with her and her sister, and her sister's son on AT&T, to mitigate some of the extra cost.

 

Anyways, I posted in the smartphone forum section under Misc., regarding the Vivo Xplay 5 and Elite version, which if ever makes its way to the U.S., will be major competition for Samsung, LG, and HTC. Makes me realize just how poor competition in carrier-available smartphones there are in this country. Those three have dominant control on the four carriers here, so basically there are more carrier choices than there are smartphone brand choices (those available at stores), well besides Apple, but I'm thinking Android products that get more releases than Apple does, which I see Apple as being more of a specialty product. If only Sony were available in carrier stores here, that would help.

Is at&t much better in your area? If not i would stay with t mobile (way more benefits). Once i move for job relocation and t mobile's coverage (not network) is not up to par, i will probably look into at&t as well. At&t has much better spectrum portfolio then verizon.. i want to go with the s7 edge, but tmobilrle doesn't have any anywhere! Maybe, ill look into the LG G5

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

Is at&t much better in your area? If not i would stay with t mobile (way more benefits). Once i move for job relocation and t mobile's coverage (not network) is not up to par, i will probably look into at&t as well. At&t has much better spectrum portfolio then verizon.. i want to go with the s7 edge, but tmobilrle doesn't have any anywhere! Maybe, ill look into the LG G5

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

I'm in the Chicago market for T-Mobile and AT&T. While there are areas AT&T isn't great, Chicago is one of the better areas for AT&T, though not perfect. My cousin complained about speeds on his AT&T, but it could have been during a congested time period, and AT&T is upgrading to 15x15 on one of its bands (though I forget which one). The other AT&T bands are 10x10 and AT&T has low-band which does work extremely well. When I had Cricket for a brief time, I had over half bars of LTE signal in my basement, whereas T-Mobile goes completely out in the basement. At my aunt's, she has AT&T and it works well, whereas T-Mobile can barely pick up a signal, let alone LTE there. T-Mobile doesn't have low-band here in the Chicago market, and their LTE spectrum is limited to 15x15 AWS and 10x10 PCS, no more than that. I believe AT&T has three bands at 10x10 and a fourth becoming 15x15 from 10x10.

 

The other issue is cost. If my mother and I get the AT&T unlimited data plan, it'll cost us $140 monthly for two lines. Right now, my unlimited data plan T-Mobile Executive Response gave us a line last year for $45 monthly unlimited data and calling under a loyalty plan, since she's had prepaid service with T-Mobile since the mid-2000s spending over $9000 on the service since then. My mother recently got a prepaid line for herself to supplement the postpaid line she gave me. Her prepaid line is $25 monthly for unlimited calling, no data. So, that is $70 monthly for our two T-Mobile lines, despite she doesn't get data on her line, in contrast to $140 monthly for two unlimited data lines on AT&T. Big difference!

 

What we are hoping for, is my aunt and her son, who already have AT&T, to join with us on a four-line unlimited data plan, which is $180 monthly for the four lines. We have a Freelancers Union membership with a 22% discount, which if AT&T accepts it as they have for another S4GRU member who has it, then it'll bring that $180 monthly price down to just under $150 monthly. With taxes though, it'll bring it back up to $180 monthly, which we plan on splitting with my aunt and her son, $90 monthly for them, $90 monthly for us, so just $20 more per month than what we are paying currently for T-Mobile. That is a pretty good deal that'll be worth the slightly extra cost, but not so much without my aunt and cousin in with us on the plan.

[tyroned3222]

I'm in the Chicago market for T-Mobile and AT&T. While there are areas AT&T isn't great, Chicago is one of the better areas for AT&T, though not perfect. My cousin complained about speeds on his AT&T, but it could have been during a congested time period, and AT&T is upgrading to 15x15 on one of its bands (though I forget which one). The other AT&T bands are 10x10 and AT&T has low-band which does work extremely well. When I had Cricket for a brief time, I had over half bars of LTE signal in my basement, whereas T-Mobile goes completely out in the basement. At my aunt's, she has AT&T and it works well, whereas T-Mobile can barely pick up a signal, let alone LTE there. T-Mobile doesn't have low-band here in the Chicago market, and their LTE spectrum is limited to 15x15 AWS and 10x10 PCS, no more than that. I believe AT&T has three bands at 10x10 and a fourth becoming 15x15 from 10x10.

 

The other issue is cost. If my mother and I get the AT&T unlimited data plan, it'll cost us $140 monthly for two lines. Right now, my unlimited data plan T-Mobile Executive Response gave us a line last year for $45 monthly unlimited data and calling under a loyalty plan, since she's had prepaid service with T-Mobile since the mid-2000s spending over $9000 on the service since then. My mother recently got a prepaid line for herself to supplement the postpaid line she gave me. Her prepaid line is $25 monthly for unlimited calling, no data. So, that is $70 monthly for our two T-Mobile lines, despite she doesn't get data on her line, in contrast to $140 monthly for two unlimited data lines on AT&T. Big difference!

 

What we are hoping for, is my aunt and her son, who already have AT&T, to join with us on a four-line unlimited data plan, which is $180 monthly for the four lines. We have a Freelancers Union membership with a 22% discount, which if AT&T accepts it as they have for another S4GRU member who has it, then it'll bring that $180 monthly price down to just under $150 monthly. With taxes though, it'll bring it back up to $180 monthly, which we plan on splitting with my aunt and her son, $90 monthly for them, $90 monthly for us, so just $20 more per month than what we are paying currently for T-Mobile. That is a pretty good deal that'll be worth the slightly extra cost, but not so much without my aunt and cousin in with us on the plan.

Since ur in chicago you might wanna try sprint..it is there launch market and the have 100+ mhz of spectrum in that markets... service should be very competitive in your market

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

Since ur in chicago you might wanna try sprint..it is there launch market and the have 100+ mhz of spectrum in that markets... service should be very competitive in your market

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

I have tried Sprint last year, and it is something I'd consider again, but still only If I could get the same four line deal Sprint is offering similarly to AT&T and T-Mobile. Sprint definitely has an amazing spectrum situation here in Chicago, and with 3xca soon, it'll be amazing! I think it'll take some more positive reporting about Sprint in its progress though before I could convince my aunt and cousin to switch to Sprint, as I'd have to make it seem a great deal to them for a switchover to Sprint from AT&T. If I can find out more from my cousin as to what exactly his AT&T speed issue is my aunt recently mentioned about to my mother, then maybe I could try bringing up the Sprint option.

[tyroned3222]

I have tried Sprint last year, and it is something I'd consider again, but still only If I could get the same four line deal Sprint is offering similarly to AT&T and T-Mobile. Sprint definitely has an amazing spectrum situation here in Chicago, and with 3xca soon, it'll be amazing! I think it'll take some more positive reporting about Sprint in its progress though before I could convince my aunt and cousin to switch to Sprint, as I'd have to make it seem a great deal to them for a switchover to Sprint from AT&T. If I can find out more from my cousin as to what exactly his AT&T speed issue is my aunt recently mentioned about to my mother, then maybe I could try bringing up the Sprint option.

I think, it would have to be a test drive and compare. If you can test a sprint unti against t mobile in all those areas you guys most frequently travel to. That would be the best situation. that's what i did! Test indoor, outdoors, and venues

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

People, please do not quote long posts in their entirety just to respond with a few sentences.  That is bad forum etiquette.  It clutters up the thread.  Edit down your quotes, do not quote, or do not respond.

 

AJ

[Houston_Texas]

Service hasn't deteriorated for me. Ran a speed test after work yesterday.

 

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

Screenshot_2016-03-22-17-33-58.png Service hasn't deteriorated for me. Ran a speed test after work yesterday.

 

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Im actually moving to Housto soon! How is t mobiles network/coverage there along the I45/I10. The map shows strong coverage

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

Screenshot_2016-03-22-17-33-58.png Service hasn't deteriorated for me. Ran a speed test after work yesterday.

 

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

I will be about an hour outside of Houston. Huntsville texas

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

I think, it would have to be a test drive and compare. If you can test a sprint unti against t mobile in all those areas you guys most frequently travel to. That would be the best situation. that's what i did! Test indoor, outdoors, and venues

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

One thing I know for sure, is whichever carrier would utilize the Artemis Pcell technology is the one I'd be using, whenever that happens :

 

http://www.artemis.com/pcell

 

I haven't heard much of this lately, but it is something that would help T-Mobile around Chicago and other areas more spectrum-constrained. Although, it has been reported in the past that Pcell works best on TDD networks. So, if Sprint ever uses it, it'll be really amazing to see the results! Otherwise, I'm still hoping it could be used by T-Mobile to help out where needed.

 

In the meantime, it'll be interesting what happens at this spectrum auction this month.

[Fraydog]

http://www.rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/metro/st-louis-mo/2016/1H

 

STL's Root testing is out. Sprint tied T-Mobile for second. Verizon the winner but not by a large margin. T-Mobile's call reliability took a bit of a bump downward with VoLTE and no 700 MHz spectrum here. Sprint finished had the best call performance in STL, for what it is worth. T-Mobile beat Sprint in network speed (17 Mbps to 13 Mbps) but even the losing network, AT&T, had solid performance. Truth is, in large cities, we may be getting to the point where there isn't much bad performance. Yet when speed measurements are done compared to the rest of the world, the US lags behind.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

http://www.rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/metro/st-louis-mo/2016/1H

 

STL's Root testing is out. Sprint tied T-Mobile for second. Verizon the winner but not by a large margin. T-Mobile's call reliability took a bit of a bump downward with VoLTE and no 700 MHz spectrum here. Sprint finished had the best call performance in STL, for what it is worth. T-Mobile beat Sprint in network speed (17 Mbps to 13 Mbps) but even the losing network, AT&T, had solid performance. Truth is, in large cities, we may be getting to the point where there isn't much bad performance. Yet when speed measurements are done compared to the rest of the world, the US lags behind.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

Hmm... I must not be good with short form names for cities, or else its because I'm really tired waiting to speak with my mother today ab0out what we are going to do about the wireless situation we have. When I first saw your post here, Fraydog, the mention of STL I'm thinking Seattle, lol!

 

Actually, I am interested what the Seattle reports are, when they are released. I've considered moving there, though not to St. Louis, and I'm expecting T-Mobile to do well in Seattle. Good to hear about the improvements made by Sprint in St. Louis though.

[Houston_Texas]

Im actually moving to Housto soon! How is t mobiles network/coverage there along the I45/I10. The map shows strong coverage

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

No issues passing through Huntsville. Network is very strong; data hovering around 25mbs during my last visit. Made several calls using VoLTE, clear and zero drops.

 

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[tyroned3222]

No issues passing through Huntsville. Network is very strong; data hovering around 25mbs during my last visit. Made several calls using VoLTE, clear and zero drops.

 

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Nice glad to hear! Should be solid then along I-45/ im sure 1-10 from houston to san antonio is covered very well too.

 

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

[Fraydog]

Hmm... I must not be good with short form names for cities, or else its because I'm really tired waiting to speak with my mother today ab0out what we are going to do about the wireless situation we have. When I first saw your post here, Fraydog, the mention of STL I'm thinking Seattle, lol!

 

Actually, I am interested what the Seattle reports are, when they are released. I've considered moving there, though not to St. Louis, and I'm expecting T-Mobile to do well in Seattle. Good to hear about the improvements made by Sprint in St. Louis though.

STL is the airport designation. That is where the abbreviation comes from. Seattle is SEA.

 

But the Root scores for SEA are out too.

 

http://www.rootmetrics.com/en-US/rootscore/map/metro/seattle-wa/2016/1H

 

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk