richy

Just noticed a jump in off peak download speeds, I got nearly 50mbps down.

In the UK they are trialling 1.5Gbps down 150mbps up over docsis 3. Docsis 3.1 should allow for even more (assuming this isn't actually 3.1 and they just aren't referencing 3.1 differently from 3.0) so at least that coax has some life in it still! Are some cable providers switching over from coax to fiber for higher speeds rather than upgrading the headends etc? I think we have twx maxx headed here in the next year or two which should give us up to 300mbps down which honestly is plenty for now.

You might benefit from an amplifier at that kind of range (just on the edges of reception)? The cradle types from wilson can be had for 100-150 depending on how much amazon thinks you want one. You might get more use from a whole house setup and an antenna on the roof though. Do be careful to check what bands the amplifier supports!

Whilst I don't think you are wrong, I think they are also waiting and keeping it ready to deploy as the next 'feature' to drive sales. Right now they are harping on about 'xlte', as soon as that loses impact and they need something else to spur sales they will roll out CA after giving it a name concocted by the marketing dept on a rafting expedition and bonding weekend on the LA river.

Thats pretty much where I am at also, although a different profession. One good thing I noticed which would negate others worries is that I believe both sprint and tmo prioritize metered data over unmetered on the network which seems fair. So nobody watching youtube on an unlimited connection would slow down anybody on a metered connection. Seems like a fair compromise! Edit: I went to double check on the prioritization and it seems that they 'may' do this so my comment may be in error, apologies if it is. I will wait for someone with better knowledge to chip in. Tmo does have a policy of deprioritizing those in the top 3% although they again state it's a 'may', but its explicitly mentioned in the t&c. Sprint mentions top 5%. I could have sworn they also explicitly prioritized metered data in congested cells. Maybe I'm just getting old!

Makes me feel a little less guilty! I think as well the previous average included all phone users including feature phones and dumb phones which likely drove down the average. Looking solely at smart phones or even just as the smart phone penetration grows quickly that average will jump up a lot. Plus for two of the carriers it is tough to look at how their pricing suppressed usage. Only being able to afford 2GB a month and not wanting to pay overages probably held back a lot of people from fully using their phones when off wifi. A certain two providers probably wanted to keep the average low as well as it allowed them to infer that people wanting to use their smartphones more should pay exponentially more, allowing them to rake in more profits. To illustrate the point, go on verizon.com (after sprinkling yourself with holy water) and try the build a plan. They label 1GB as average use and 2GB as heavy use. Seriously? Yet they offer plans all the way to 100GB. It's just marketing spin to position the products to gain the maximum revenue. They get you in thinking it will only be X per month for 1GB then when you find yourself using 6 GB they can make out you are just using more than should be expected but will happily sell you the extra for <insert silly number> so what you thought was cheap is in reality a lot more expensive. Personally I would think 1GB per line is low, 3-4 is medium, somewhere around 5-10 is average and you'd have to be in the 15-20GB for actual heavy usage. And yes, I'm sure theres people out there who only use 1.44MB a month who will chime in that the rest of us are data hogs that are causing global warming etc.

Same here, I use a Verizon Lte tablet as a hot spot for the places I can't get a tmo signal. Works nearly everywhere but even the LTE is fairly slow in many places. Could just be the tablet though.

Yes it is that simple here as well, assuming fiber is already lit there (which it is) and theres no capacity issues. That was pretty much my concern, if its so easy and they obviously are having peak issues, why not pull the trigger? Too many legacy non lte devices that they don't want to cramp into less refarmed spectrum? Just saving money? Honolulu probably is fast, they have 6 times our population so they tend to get more lovin when it comes to any kind of infrastructure. They're even getting their own disney style monorail thing The tmo thing just confused me honestly, its not like the boonies were slow where it only affects few folks, theyre actually upgrading the whip aerial edge only deployments in the boonies to lte. Its 'town' that was suffering which by our standards is a lot of people. If it was so easy to do (which it should be) why not just do it? Overall tmo is in a fairly decent situation right now, theres a good chance they can continue to grow and invest, however my worry was that the big two would try and drive the price of acquiring the low band spectrum they need through the roof. Theres a chance we may see a new sherrif in town in 2016 and if the auction date gets moved again we could see a change in rules to a more 'business friendly' (read bought and sold officials) situation where its a free for all over all the spectrum, in which case tmo doesn't really have the financial might of the big two. Sprint has spends, it's sugar daddy has deep pockets, would DT leverage itself even more to do the same for tmo. As I've said before, I am happy tmo is the right place for me, in my market, right now, but I have doubts about their future. The recent 'uncarrier' moves have largely been fluff, they have enough mid band right now but I have a feeling the low band is going to cost them dearly. AWS3 is approaching 40bn. If google or amazon decide to play in the 600MHz, alongside Dish, then it could get really messy. Either way I am happy we have choices in who we can use! In some respects I am glad that the tmo sprint merger didn't happen as at least I have a choice besides the bad two!

Yeah, we are on 5x5 here. They perhaps aren't throwing the switch on a wider channel until they can get the backhaul in. Given they can deploy the backhaul here quickly (one of the few things that does happen reasonably quickly, especially since they have fiber drops anyway so it's just a provisioning boost) I'm curious as to why the wait, perhaps keeping their opex low, boosting FCF prior to the Aws3 auction. It's going to be interesting to see what they end up with from that, given the pricing they may not have many big wins. The NY 10x10 was around .3 cents per MHz per cockroach, 2.5bn is nearly tmo entire budget for the auction so I doubt they got it, unless they are trying to make a statement. Maybe they grabbed some 5x5 in important markets? I think Sprint was smart to sit out. My concern over tmo isn't so much that is terrible currently, I can just see where it is starting to slip. Now if they keep adding subs at their current rate and can't keep up with the required investment they are going to fall hard. They need to buy and build, Sprint just needs to build right now.

Low single digits lte, 1-3 mbps in Wailuku Town. If I'm wrong wrong I'm happy but it seems either air side or backhaul is hurting them. Plenty of other places it's between 6 and 30mbps. Then there's North and East Maui where you get no signal but that's another story.

To your first point. I guess it depends on what you want to get from the results. Personally I want to evaluate potential new providers so I want to see an apples to apples comparison. Is rather have it represent capacity and congestion rather than be influenced by capped plans which is a situation I don't intend to find myself in. Re the network, perhaps but it's my impression that Sprint is in a far better position. It already has all the spectrum assets it needs, it just needs time to build them out. Tmo has a network which is already suffering in some areas (at least that's my experience here) and whilst it has plans it needs to find a hell of a lot more cash to get where it needs to go. Buying more 700 lower A, the aws3, 600MHz, building out it's 4x2 mimo network across all those bands and upgrading is edge network plus expanding its footprint, all on 1/3rd the network spend of at &t or Verizon and managing to do it all before it piles in so many subs its network can't cope. The comments legere made about Sprint subs leaving and not coming back applies just as much to tmo subs, tmo has some great areas and some areas collapsing due to load. The whole reason I'm on this forum is that my bet is Sprint will be the better provider just as soon as NV gets fully rolled out here. I could be wrong but I hope not! Plus after the aws3 had raked in as much as it has so far what's the bets cavalier et al start wanting a lot more for that 700 MHz?

That is the speed you would have been getting before you hit the cap so your comment makes no sense? A person with a larger wallet gets the same speed, just for longer. A speed test serves more than one purpose. It's entirely correct to believe it should show the speed a person is getting at a given point in time even if they are capped, I get that. However, the tests are also used to measure network performance and in that respect the uncapped rate is a more realistic measure. Ideally both should be given or the capped results should be discarded when considering relative network strengths. I understand why tmo did what they did, I agree it isn't right for people who are capped to be shown a faster rate but I also agree with why tmo allowed the tests to run unthrottled. You don't obviously, I'm sure we will survive

I think we just have different expectations of what the tests should show and how we want the to work. I want them to show how fast it will be assuming I buy enough data, i.e. the underlying network performance. You think it should show an average of what everyone experiences and I do understand that, I just think it's less useful to me as I don't get throttled. We disagree, such is life it's hardly important.

Lol ok my bad

That is most definitely not the same. Using QOS to unfairly show the flat out rate of the network disregarding congestion is not the same as not taking into account a billing related restriction. The speed test would still be an accurate representation of the speed the user, or any other user could get rather than an absolute maximum. The speed tests are supposed to give an idea of the strength of the network, not a person's wallet. Which is more indicative of what another person could expect to achieve, the throttled rate or the unrestricted rate which still takes into account signal strength etc? If you are throttled to 64k or 128k that isn't indicative of the network, the limiting factor isn't the network, it's your payment. I could easily turn your argument around and say if I get suspended for non payment and run a speed test and get 0 is that representative of the network?

That's not entirely unfair. Both are legitimate arguments, people shouldn't think they are getting faster than they are but also it wouldn't be a realistic measure of the networks actual speed if it took into account throttled speeds which are only there due to the plan they are on. I think the fairest solution is to give both answers. Tmo needs all the help it can get with network speeds On a semi related note, does Verizon throttle prepay lte? Just trying to figure out why it's so freaking slow lol

Probably not far off! I can see it being crazy. I can also see the owners of the 700a that havent sold to tmo yet tipexing out the decimal points in their valuations. We could spend it on education (public and private), or we could have one hell of a luau! Or a Mars mission or a moon base. It probably all just goes in 'the pot' to disappear forever.

Thats correct. Maybe I'm just cynical but I can see a fight over whats left. It isnt just tmo and sprint after the spectrum reserved from the big 2, Dish, Google and Amazon could all easily make a play for it which could drive up the price for Sprint and tmo. Plus you then have the risk of speculators like Cavalier mixing it up. I could be wrong, I hope I am wrong, but I don't see even with FCC help that they are guaranteed a low priced big piece of the low band pie, it could get messy. Also with the auction pushed back, will we see a change of guard in the whitehouse affecting things? Just my opinion

Because tmo needs capacity ASAP in select markets and if it can pick up any additional spectrum for a fair price on other markets it will help with future needs if they continue to grow. Sprint only needs low band spectrum so it makes sense for them to miss this one, continue NV and save cash for 600, tmo needs low band AND any other spectrum it can get so they need to bid on anything and everything, especially in some markets. Plus more AWS means they can possibly get away with needing less 600 which is likely to be a bloodbath of an auction.

You are way behind the times, tmo is now UnUnCarrier. They went so far uncarrier they looped back round. Their latest offer of a 'free' tablet (so old it's screen uses beeswax instead of lcd) that you have to pay for if you don't keep the line rental for 2 years. Smells a lot like a subsidized tablet, not very uncarrier! The auction looks amusing, maybe tmo and dish will push up pricing to try and hurt the big two enough to slow them in the 600MHz auction? It will be interesting to see who ends up with what!

#3 sounds about right lol Maui County 'only' has about 180 K people across 3 Islands (and 2 more uninhabited ones) so we don't rate the same as Oahu. We do have what feels like 2 million tourists at any given time which seasonally kills certain cellular networks. Sprint hasn't shown much love here either, I don't blame them given the permitting system but it's basically a 12-14 month wait for most of the permits they need so I find it odd that tmo and Sprint don't have more permits filed given both networks have a list of upgrades to do. I can see tmo not wanting to spend anything it doesn't absolutely have to until at least the aws3 auction is done if not that and 600MHz.

Thanks! Yes backhaul certainly could be an issue here although it would be one I thought they could easily fix. Permits are an odd one here, changing channel widths wouldn't need one add you say, same for most back haul additions but would they need additional panels for the 700MHz? The permitting system is rather strict here, even changing a hand rail outside a restaurant required a change of elevation permit Anything close to the ocean needs to be at least evaluated for a Special Management Area permit and most cell sites locally are on hotel roofs within SMA zones. Any guesses what could be holding them up on wider lte channels if it's not permits or backhaul? Just not wanting to spend extra on backhaul? Too many legacy HSPA only devices? Or just too much to do and not wanting to rush stuff?

I've only paid for a sim once for Verizon ($6 on fleabay) for an lte tablet (as an aside I was shocked how poor the Verizon experience was). Sprint waived the 'activation fee' as did tmobile when I joined. Years ago I got a tmo sim when I visited the us (back when edge was as fast as it got) and the cost of the sim was applied as credit. Not sure what you actually have to do to pay for a sim. Perhaps it's like paying the sticker price for a car, someone does but most don't? Latest on tmobile s network here is basically a slow decline in speeds. No network upgrades in the near future (based on permits). Lte in a few locations gets down to 1-2 mbps. Tolerable even for video but doesn't bode well for the future. Traditionally fast areas are still 20mbps+ offpeak but now frequently 8 mbps at peak. It will be interesting to see how it continues if tmo keep adding subs at their current rate without adding more capacity. Still no word on a 700MHz purchase from cavalier. I see their list of upgrades to do growing longer all the time. They need to get their ass in gear pronto and at least get the 15 X 15 running here to deliver capacity in congested places then the 700 for building penetration and some additional rural coverage along the coasts at the edge of towns. Once Sprint gets everything rolled out here there should be an exodus back from tmo if this decline continues.

Reading those comments made me laugh. Tmo (and any other company) wants your business, they aren't going to turn away money unless the odds are strongly in favor of it going south for them. We are taking about fairly small amounts of money, not car loan or credit card type balances, and they are targeting just two particularly poor credit groups. It's also worth bearing in mind this is for luxury items (smart phones, tablets and watches etc) that could easily be replaced by a $50 smart phone. Nobodies kid is going to starve over this, you just got to take care of your credit if you want to use it. Nobody should be shocked that a poor credit rating would affect their ability to borrow. They even allow tenure to count which seems fair. Peeps just gotta have their iPhones Signed a jaded ex debt collector.

I've stuck with them although with the same issues (building penetration and rural coverage) but I use an old verizon tablet on pay as you go as a hotspot for the gaps. Sprint sadly isn't much better on either count here but they do have plans to change it whereas tmobile haven't announced the purchase of the 700 lower A here yet. Probably still talking to cavalier? about it. Rural coverage is tough, either company would need at least 2 more towers which wouldn't be cheap. At least with Sprint I could roam on Vzw. Can't wait to dump that tablet, sending money their way makes me feel dirty As soon as Sprint get 800 etc rolled out island wide it should make them the obvious choice. For people who never leave town they probably already are.