Jump to content

Joeynach

S4GRU Premier Sponsor
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    839

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Joeynach

  1. Joeynach
    Yeah for sure, but I live/work in the city. This means I am a lot less concerned about the systematic NV problems that have been reported on this board when NV finally comes to the city proper. My phone is in 4G WiMax mode probably around 75% of the time so the NV upgrades shouldn't effect me and other WiMax users all that much.....thats awesome news.
  2. Joeynach
    Wait something just hit me. After the dozens and dozens of complaints about how poor people's 3G Sprint service is during the NV disruption and build out I am a bit confused. We all have 4G WiMax phones right and have been surviving on WiMax, owned by Clearwire, for some time now while we wait for LTE from NV. So if NV is the upgrade of Sprint's cell sites (3G EVDO only) with front end and backhaul, and we all have WiMax phones, which comes from ClearWire owned/operated cell sites, we shouldn't really see any disruption as long as we are on the WiMax service right?
  3. Joeynach
    What is eHRPD?
  4. Joeynach
    3G is unusable in the city proper. I live in Lincoln Park, work in the loop and spend most of my time in and around the usual Chicago neighborhoods and 3G can facilitate calls and texts and thats about it. Its been that way for almost 2 years now by my count. Most of my Apps, websites, and streaming media either won't load or time out when using 3G. It works OK out in the burbs near my family, but it has to as there is no 4G where I go in the South Burbs. If I cant get a reliable 4G WiMax signal where Im at in Chicago my phone essentially a data less tool. 4G LTE across the whole area can't get here soon enough.
  5. Joeynach
    Sure and it may work out great in many of their major markets, I wish Sprint well I really do. I am a Sprint customer and also have numerous friends employed by the company. Just seems to me their strategy is a little riskier in Chicago, especially with the increased instances of difficulties b/c of the presence of the Motorola legacy equipment in place. Another idea would be to "reward" their Chicago customers for their patience and diligence during NV and the LTE build out. Perhaps announce a special deal for 5% of any new smartphone for the first few weeks post LTE launch or offer a $10 credit to all Chicago based customer's Bills. In my experience these kind of non required gestures usually get eaten up by the public, not b/c $10 off on someone's bill is a huge deal, but b/c it shows the big corporation is aware of the little old customer's issues, is listening, and active in trying to appease their subscriber base. Traditionally Telco's 's get such bad reputations in these areas and have to fight the default stigma they dont give a crap and are there to screw the customer over......Sprint has an opportunity here in Chicago to inspire some confidence and loyalty. But hell, what do I know.
  6. Joeynach
    I also have a recent MBA in Strategy, Organization, and Environment so my views are quite skewed towards corporate macro level strategic decisions, such as market launch decisions.
  7. Joeynach
    Im not complaining. Complaining is whining without thought, logic, and understanding of the situation. I understand the situation fully, I just dont agree with Sprint's established launch or roll-out strategy (for Chicago). I think its done with undertones of misleading tactic, and haste, haste for competitive and marketing speak purposes. I also find comparing this to "its what Verizon did" is a poor comparison. Its difficult to make an apples to apple comparison here becuase Sprint is dealing with a myriad of network upgrade issues that Im not sure Verizon had to deal with. Was Verizon upgrading their 3G sites along with their LTE build out? Was their 3G network as antiquated and overloaded as Sprint's when they started the build out? Did they have issues with connectivity, dropped calls, slow speeds during their upgrades? Were they also using the legacy motorola equipment that seems to often times has been said to make things difficult to complete the upgrade? What backhaul were they using previously, were they even upgrading the backhaul during their LTE build out? Looking at Sprint and only Sprint, no other wireless providers, I feel that given what we know about the NV upgrades in the area, the best rollout strategy is what one of the admin's described earlier "What Sprint should do differently is not announce market "launches" until later. Customers are expecting better coverage at market launch. However, if they say they are opening up early when and where available, but the market will formally launch in a few more months, this would probably be much better from a customer service standpoint."
  8. Joeynach
    This I believe is better launch strategy, but I am not the Director of Strategic Operations at Sprint so its not my call.
  9. Joeynach
    Again I understand what Sprint is doing and that fact that its what Verizon did doesnt make right in my opinion either. I think its a poor strategy that's done more for competitive one ups-manship and carry's undertones of false advertising that the telcom's can essentially "get away with" by covering 30-40% of the market. Basically they are saying we are here Chicago come, join, buy, while knowing that a majority (at least initially) cant actually use the service. Not a big fan of that strategy, Verizon, Sprint, ATT, doesnt matter. As for price I agree Sprint offers tremendous value over the Big Two (VZW and ATT). They have to, how else could they retain users or entice people to switch without offering a similar product at a cheaper price (or by staying unlimited data when the Big Two quit). That doesnt change my stance on poor market launch strategy, especially after significant network upgrade problems in the Chicago-land area. I dont think Sprint can afford a smoke and mirrors launch that will leave some consumers saying hey I waited out all the NV upgrade pains and resisted the urge to jump ship, now your live in Chicago and advertising your new LTE network like crazy....so I even go out and upgrade my device and I still dont get LTE/post NV network coverage. Thats going to be awfully hard for a lot of folks to swallow and very risky on Sprint's part. Im worried about consumer backlash/social media uproar, etc.
  10. Joeynach
    No I get it I really do. I work for a company now that announces product upgrades and new capabilities often times before they are actually engrained, its part of the way business is done. I dont agree with it, but I get it. I am very partial towards any development thats sells itself or markets itself before the physical substance is actuated. There are probably 1000 sprint cell sites that cover the 10M metro Chicago population. If Sprint launches LTE in Chicago with 300-400 sites with completed NV (with or without backhaul) thats poor and misleading for both the consumer and Sprint IMO. Many consumers will follow the marketing and advertising, buy a new 4G LTE device, switch from their current carrier, re-up their Sprint contract, etc etc, and then quickly realize the service isn't quite up to par (yet), or not available in all parts of the city or metro area. This will lead to consumer complaints, poor word of mouth reputation, complaints with the BBB, increased customer service calls, and in general consumer backlash. Thats bad.
  11. Joeynach
    This I agree with, I dont see anyway Sprint can reliably offer LTE service to the Chicago market by Sept or Oct 1st. Im sure there marketing dept is already hard at work to campaign otherwise, but those who read this forum should understand the difference between a marketing announcement and the realization of reliable service. 30-40% of NV site completion with no back haul for a Chicago "launch" is 100% meaningless to me. Even if they do launch this half assed LTE product with a big marketing campaign and major announcement I wont buy until they deliver and cover the whole market with 4G LTE with new backhaul. A big market launch announcement with 30-40% market coverage and no backhaul completion is a misleading corporate move in my opinion. They must either be incredibly optimistic they can launch and sell LTE, and then catch up on NV sites and backhaul extremely fast (before the market realizes the service isn't all there), or they just don't care. Just my two cents.
  12. Joeynach
    So be it. I would say less than 1% of Sprint customers actually visit this site and stay informed, the rest just bit** and moan on FB, Twitter, and to their friends/family. My roommate recently took his rant on similar issues from Sprint NV to FB, dropped calls, timed out data, cant send texts, etc. Like 10 other ppl chimed in and started complaining about the same issues. I said two words, "network vision", and Google it. Suddenly the complaints stopped. My point is being as educated as possible is 80% of the battle (thats what this site is for), after that its patience. Think about the marginal benefit from switching now, vs. the opportunity cost of post NV Sprint network. Sure some ppl cant go through 2 more months of "pain" to reap the benefits of a post NV network for 2 years, but to each his own. But remember, to gain to marginal benefit of no NV pain for 2 months, you lose the benefit of a clean and fast 4G LTE network, unlimited data, a bill that is 20-25% less than a comparable plan at ATT/Verizon, and probably what will be the least user saturated 4G network in the country.....and all for at least 2 years (contract terms).
  13. Joeynach
    Does anyone know what the theoretical expectation is for speeds once NV is complete, both the front end and back haul. With 4G WiMax now I get 6-10Mbps download speeds. Wonder what a completed post NV 4G LTE speed would be?
  14. Joeynach
    A friend of mine who has the Samsung Galaxy S3, obviously LTE, sent me the following speedtest screenshot. He lives in the city proper, but I know his folks live out in Saint John, IN, which according to the latest NV progress map shows NW Indiana has a bunch of completed NV sites. He told me this is the first time hes been to St. John since getting the Galaxy S3 and boom the 4G LTE symbol lite up on his phone so he did the following speedtest. No clue why the Upload speed is around 8MB (blazing fast) and the Download speed is around 3MB, fast, but not mind blowing.
  15. Joeynach
    Ever heard of student loans?
  16. Joeynach
    TMobile will also be offering Unlimited Data very soon. The two giants ATT and Verizon can't offer unlimited data b/c there networks suck and they ran out of spectrum. They sold so many iPhones and Android Phones over the last few years there networks are completely saturated by data usage. They both have double if not triple the amount of subscribers than Sprint or TMobile in most markets, thus no spectrum left. Only Sprint and TMobile, with less saturated networks (spectrum owned/users), can even offer unlimited data from a technical point of view. I was at a focus group for TMobile, they will be offering unlimited data as selling point to try and gain subscribers now that they will not be exiting the US Market after the failed merger with ATT. Its just that TMobile's network sucks cuz its not 4G LTE, its not really 4G, its HSPA+, which by technical standard is like 3.5G, they just market it as 4G b/c its faster than native 3G, but it doesn't compare to the speeds u can get with a real 4G LTE network, its just a PR stunt. That being said we are back at square one. If you are a consumer and you want the newest, most advanced, least saturated, 4G LTE network, and you want unlimited data on your plan...you have one option, waiting for and choosing Sprint (post NV that is).
  17. Joeynach
    Where are you getting these Tower ID's and Maps, I would like to see as well.
  18. Joeynach
    My sentiments 100%. The 3G is so bad its almost inoperable for anything except calls/text. The only thing keeping me afloat is the 4G WiMax which is well satisfactory, my speeds are 500K-1.5M, but service is spotty outside of the city proper and even in the city the phone prolly loses 4G and goes 3G on me 30x a day. BAD!
  19. Joeynach
    No I agree with most of what you say. Though this reminds me of the broadband dilemma of the 1999-2002 period. I remember these similar quandaries; should I stick with my DSL from Telocity, switch to Covad, wait for cable modem, but wait if I do that I have to sign a contract, and cable modem is faster than DSL and said to be coming soon, but I dont want to go back to dialup to wait for cable, but wait maybe I should wait for DSL from my actual telco ATT, they are working on bringing ADSL right, better than what I got now...blah blah blah.
  20. Joeynach
    Thanks for all the info. Def presents a problem, albeit temporary, for those in the market for a new phone right now like me. I cant stand this garbage Evo Shift anymore with its awful battery life and endless low phone storage, but the only 4G phones available (as it should be) are LTE, not like anyone should be buyign a WiMax phone anyway. Which means if you buy one, ur stuck on the struggling 3G until full NV is complete and/or LTE goes live. Could be several months, who knows. Not that I am a sprint store rep, but I couldn't recommend anyone to go buy a Galaxy S3 or Evo LTE 4G right now knowing they may be stuck in current 3G conditions for possibly 6 months. Just stick with ur 4G WiMax if you have one, sux b/c 4G WiMax phones are all outdated at this point, like mine. The only real alternative is to switch to Verizon, who by all accounts has a good local and national 4G LTE network, but then ur stuck both paying more for service and being placed on some asinine tired data plan. I guess the right way to put it, if your sprint, is to ask the customer would you rather be on an already saturated 4G LTE network in Verizon or ATT, or wait a few months and be on the fastest, newest, least saturated LTE network there is?
  21. Joeynach
    Oh yes I am well aware its clearwire 4G WiMax network. I have just noticed as you described progressively worse service and speed in the last 18 months. As you presume, the lack of 3G spectrum has no doubt put excess strain on the 4G WiMax network. The 3G outage I experienced while riding the Red Line was strange, it lasted about 2 weeks, any thoughts on if that was network vision related? You're the expert, im just the end user (albeit highly educated I must say)!
  22. Joeynach
    I noticed some strange things with speeds and coverage in my typical Chicago areas. I live in Lincoln Park and work in the Loop. First of all in the 1.5 years I have been living and commuting in this routine the 3G speed and connectivity has gotten considerably worse. I actually believe around the time Sprint started offering the iPhone4S (which is only 3G) things starting getting much worse on the 3G side of things. At this point 3G is almost un-usable anywhere I go in the city for anything other than calls/text as the speed is 100K or less and its riddled with disconnects and timeouts. As for the 4G I will say its useable at best, I get speeds between 500K-1Meg, but again its riddled with disconnects and dropouts. In fact the last few months I have noticed a lot less solid 4G connections where the phone is constantly dropping out of 4G and back to 3G in spots where 4G has always been rock solid. Suggests to me either complete saturation or NV is in effect. More recently I noticed something strange. I take the Red Line to work M-F during normal commute times. Up until about two weeks ago I got coverage 4G above ground, 3G when it runs underground everyday without hesitation and could use my phone during the commute. Around mid June I noticed I was getting no service on the below ground run on the Red Line and poor 3G above ground, with extended no service runs after coming out of the underground (would take phone 10 min to find signal again). I assumed, without discovering this forum yet, that Sprint must be either having outages or doing work on their towers. I cant tell if this was the case, but last week things were back to normal in terms of the no service areas along my commute. 3G is back and working on the Red Line underground and 4G is back above. Im not sure what happened but now reading this forum it seems wise to assume that NV may have been underway here in the Loop, River North, Old Town, Lincoln Park, Wrigleyville area....could be, could be? P.S. As a side note I was at Arlington Park on the 4th, service was awful. 3G was un-useable ( I go down to 3G when my battery gets low) and I could harldey make a call, kept getting network busy, no data would come through on 3G at all. 4G worked fine on the data side of things, but again couldn't make a call. Not sure if that was NV or a crowded day at the Track, but either way...super crappy!
  23. Joeynach
    I do not consider Joliet and Elgin to be suburbs of Chicago. They are large enough and far away that they have their own economies, laws, and cultural identity.
  24. Joeynach
    Haha this is hilarious, this is more or less a direct correlation to US city population. The only revelation here is that Spring seems to garnish about 20% market share per metro area on average, other than that the amount of data usage in each city just seems to correspond to the city's population. We all know NY, LA, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Philly, Atlanta, Detroit, Wash DC, Boston, Miami, SF....are the county's most populated areas since we were in 5th grade.
  25. Joeynach
    I never meant to make it sound like it was a "slight against the city" I was just curious as to why the maps of the other cities from the beginning of this thread that city and burb coverage and Chicago had only burb coverage. If it makes the transition to the city smoother than Im all for it. The sooner LTE is really here the better.
×
×
  • Create New...