Frizzlefry

No one is at least mildly excited at the potential to have a revised Note 3 that could possibly have tri-band for Sprint if it came to the states?

Looks as though Lenovo is going to be bringing a smart phone to the US. The Vibe Z has pretty solid spec's (rumor) and also a 5.5" screen. If it comes to Sprint and it's tri-band, this could be a very suitable replacement to the Note 3 enthusiasts who were disappointed in the LTE support. http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/lenovo-vibe-z-and-vibe-x-announced/

You guys keep saying this a lot. You act like the uni-band is equivalent or worse than 3g signal. Granted, I really find that I'm wanting to understand what makes this so absolutely dire, but at the same time my emotions seem beyond reason as I think I'm so in love with the phone it would seem I'm prepared to ignore any good argument, lol. Seriously though, assuming I can keep an open mind to the response, why all the complete hatred for the 1900 Mhz LTE signal. What am I missing that makes this signal alone so absolutely lame? Because it seems like while tri-band is supposed to be much more prevalent in all future devices, if you look backwards and just bought a device a few months ago, anyone who was maybe uni-band was not so overwhelmingly demolished for being such. Maybe I find that I care less about it because in my area the 3g is so weak I can't even get that kind of signal, so even just the upgraded 3g from NV and possible sporadic 4g even out of a uni-band device still seem like massive upgrades to what I'm getting out of my HTC EVO LTE. But you guys make me feel insane for thinking so.

Yeah, that's tough going. Aside from the fact that the people I know with Note 2's either aren't local or aren't close enough to let me walk off with their phone, the LTE is really not out enough in my area to properly test. I think in the Metro area we have maybe 5-7 towers active... maybe.

So, I was hoping some of you might explain your position to a more novice reader to the Sponsor forums. I get that tri-band is supposed to boost signal for the LTE, and that I believe 800 has better range and building penetration and that 2600 is faster LTE. Are you saying, though, that being uni-band on 1900 means I'm just straight not likely to get LTE in a building? Or will it just be a diminished signal? On top of that, is some of your concern that the 1900 band is going to be overloaded with use and therefor slower than the 800? I guess my main reasons for why you guys feel this is such a dramatic issue is that I too am upgrading from an HTC Evo LTE (Worse phone decision I ever made) and I really was quite in love with the notion of a phablet. I played with a few peoples Note 2 and deliberately waited for the Note 3 to use my upgrade for one of my lines. I was quite excited about how powerful the phone was and love all the spec's with exception to this Tri-band issue. I don't really feel like I have it in me to wait for another phone, so do you really think I'll regret this purchase for the same reasons I regret my Evo LTE (terrible reception)? Keep in mind that in my area (Omaha, NE) that 4g is just starting to trickle out. But my main use for my data plan would be inside my work building...

A big reason why Verizon has such a large footprint in Nebraska versus Sprint is that they've actually been investing in their equipment here and so in the rural areas there tends to be better reception and less bandwidth issues. Especially when you compare that to Sprints TERRIBLE 3G speeds here. Couple that with the fact that Cox bundles "their" wireless service which they run through Verizon with cable/internet and they pull down even more customers. But everyone I know that has Verizon is getting tired of them. Apparently they charge quite a bit more than Sprint and their customer service has been slowly going downhill.