cletus

I'm actually in the market for a new provider as my data usage has gone up (currently on Ting). The Framily plan changes are pretty intriguing to me because the requirement for 7 people has kinda been stopping me from going in on it. I also am not a huge fan of the whole not being able to leave a framily that loses members etc so having a lower starting point is compelling for someone like me. Still not sure what route I will go as my wife and I's Nexus 5 phones leaves me lots of options on AT&T and T-Mobile as well..

But doesn't this also mean that Sprint has the most under-utilized spectrum and therefor needs the upcoming auctioned spectrum the least? Or are they making the argument that lower frequency = cheaper coverage from less towers and so the duopoly shouldn't get to bid? I mean... having a ton of spectrum doesn't help much when you can't get reliable speeds due to delays/backhauls/weather/prime contractor being shitty/etc

So the last time I heard about this it was on the Evo line of phones where they had that horrible Telenav GPS app. If I recall the Sprint Navigation premium feature part of the app (normally $4.99) was free on the simply everything plans. I wonder if you changed your plan and now are seeing charges for something that was rolled into the service before? Edit: found a thread on the Sprint forums so I know I am not crazy https://community.sprint.com/baw/message/308182

In addition to the above comments all LTE coverage is most definitely not created equal. In Austin Sprint definitely has a wider spread LTE network than T-Mobile but where T-Mobile has LTE coverage it is certainly faster. The market here is slowly improving for Sprint but the T-Mobile market (my sister has T-Mobile and travels frequently around town) seems to be core downtown and along highways. So, T-Mobile has done an amazing job at getting LTE installed and running here but unfortunately from my experience they seemed to have picked the low hanging fruit where they upgraded the most used towers and towers along major highways and roads but stopped short where Sprint has slowly begun to infill the remaining area for customers to have a more complete LTE coverage.

Isn't the result the same? My point relating to T-Mobile is that they have essentially picked the winners here by whitelisting the most popular speedtest app that very likely has the best results for their service. Just like how the Spotify and others enjoy a competitive advantage over Google Music (until it gets "voted in" to the whitelist), Ookla and the unnamed services get an advantage as well. If you are on a limited data plan why would you ever use anyone but these services?

Yes but it doesn't say which are allowed. Is it only applications or is it whole websites? This type of treatment, like the treatment of music services, means that potential up and comers are not on the special no bandwidth counted lists and are thus at a competitive advantage. In my eyes raising some services above others is the same as throttling other services such as Netflix. So you don't think that because TWC has a business relationship with Ookla to provide speedtests that it could be a reason why TWC customers speedtest higher on Ookla? I understand peering can have an impact for these speedtest providers but when I test with other websites by selecting Dallas for example Ookla always is noticeably higher. TWC and T-Mobile both have incentives to provide the best connection they can to Ookla servers now. Oh, and my speedtests on TWC become normalized when I use a VPN for all speedtests through Dallas. I don't see how T-Mobile's approach is much better at all. Sure, it lets people post picture links to forums of their AMAZINGSPEEDS but it doesn't do much else for anyone except Ookla and the other unnamed speedtest providers.

I totally agree. This singles out Ookla's speedtest utility while not allowing others in on the freebie action which makes the path for a competitor harder. What if I want to use testmy.net (which is much more useful) to test my connection? Or DSLReports? Guess I have to use my data. The telecoms ALREADY game the system by giving preferential treatment to speedtest.net. Seriously, that site tests ~10% higher than ANY other website for me on TWC. Maybe it has to do with the fact that Ookla also runs the speedtest on TWC's actual website?

Still would have better rural coverage than T-Mobile.

Underarmor has finally found another niche to fit in.

GENIUS. By leaving it open ended Network Vision 1/2/3/4/15 will always be on schedule!

Ah well, maybe the next event where they announce acceptance of T-Mo/Sprint merger will be more exciting.

Yup, It is slated for 11 AM in Chicago which is CST.

I think if they did this I would instantly leave Ting and rejoin Sprint. T-Mobile speeds here in Austin are ridiculously high. It would be great to join a framily and have access to those speeds @$45/mo. Right now I just get a lot of time outs and slow connections with the Sprint network here so I figure I may as well pay less (overall) at Ting for metered bandwidth that I pretty much never use.

That ranking was for customer satisfaction. I am on Ting which is also an MVNO and I would probably rate my actual experience with them 9/10. However, these MVNOs score highly because the network isn't their fault and I think their customers realize it.

Sprint would still be the slowest. Anyways, this is a weird thread to be honest. We all know Sprint has the slowest network out of all 4 major carriers. I didn't think the subject was up for much debate. What I took away from the article is T-Mobile has had a meteoric rise in terms of speed and Sprint has marginally improved, I somewhat agree with WiWavelength in that the use cases for faster than 10Mbps mobile internet are pretty limited right now. My concern is that when this is the average that means there are way too many cases in which someone will have a connection slower than that which quickly gets into the realm of annoyingly slow. In Austin the results are pretty close to my experience in that the 3G network is abysmal at .8 Mbps and nearly half second latency with 4G quick for certain tasks but latency being an issue as well. For my personal use I find current speeds here to feel slower due to latency. I often have double the LTE latency of my coworkers T-Mobile phones and about 1/4 the speed. TL:DR this is unsurprising and Sprint has fallen behind the performance of all other carriers.

Yeah but if Softbank acquires T-Mobile and goes to a full no contract plans why would Sprint have a need for any MVNOs, really? As it is if I moved to a Framily plan with 7 or more people it is only $15/mo more with taxes higher than my Ting bill. I mean why even bother with Straight talk @ $45/mo when you can get unthrottled unlimited at Sprint for the same price?

I wonder what happens to my precious Ting under this plan for Softbank USA? I don't really have a problem with joining a Framily plan and my Nexus 5 should work great seeing as it supports T-Mobile and Sprint already. It is a bit sad if they go away though because the service has been great and the customer service is top notch. I kind of like the market we have now with many small MVNO players trying to carve out a niche but I see the logic in a combined T-Mobile/Sprint really taking on AT&T and Verizon.

Honestly? I will never be under contract again unless my employer pays for most or all of the cost. I've moved to an MVNO (Ting) and bought my own phones for about a year now. I find the idea of paying $700 for a phone or having an inflated bill to pay off a phone really weird in a world where the $300 Nexus 5, $300 Moto X, and $300 OnePlus One exist. I get how it works better for some people but I think it is the same experience I had cutting Cable TV. Now that I don't pay for it I wonder why I ever did. (if that makes sense).

I expect that Sprint will have to search 2, maybe 3, couch cushions to get the money for this.

I think in terms of actual deployment that T-Mobile has probably been the fastest in terms of completion time but that is mostly due to their comparably small coverage area. It is quite fast in terms of speed though.

On the one hand it is good that something will be put in place against people abusing the network such as people I have seen elsewhere that are pulling 100+GB/month of data. On the other hand, 5 GB is pretty low and if I didn't have superfast wifi at work and home (and for Time Warner customers in Austin there are a TON of WiFi hotspots) I could easily hit that amount. I get that they are trying to improve performance and cut down abuse but I also feel that maybe they just need to improve the damned network already. T-Mobile, while not having the coverage of Sprint, does not have this issue in Austin and started upgrading towers months after Sprint began and by far has the fastest network here. The next change may as well be tiered bandwidth plans and doing away with unlimited accounts slowly like Verizon has done.

Wow that is nice then. When I had Comcast in Chicago I definitely got the Powerboost runaround and usually only had 70% of my advertised speeds.

No, the complaint here is different.. Powerboost works for the first 30-60ish seconds of a download to boost the speeds and then drops down to normal. If you are on a "powerboost" or speed boost ISP you will notice that on longer speedtests your average speed will often dip below the advertised rates and you will also not hit your advertised rates on even the fastest servers when doing a sustained download (Microsoft.com?). Basically these powerboost programs are specifically there to make your slower internet briefly faster and non coincidentally make speedtests rate your speed as higher than the actual sustained speed. It is all a sham.

http://gigaom.com/2014/04/08/google-delays-austin-fiber-launch-plans-and-offers-a-look-at-future-service-areas/ Looks like Google is delaying the actual rollout in Austin until Fall 2014. I wonder if they are having to do more build out than anticipated?