Arysyn

Oh, one more thing quickly. I understand not wanting to stifle debate, which I take it that means people are allowed to criticize each other for both content and writing style. Yet, when there was a debate about this in the poll thread, as I was defending myself to someone, we both were asked to stop, which I'm fine with as long as it isn't discriminatory against me and my defense. Though I'm unclear now as to how that wasn't stifling, unless of course its only done when matters go off topic. Yet criticizing someone's writing style is off topic all over this site, other than on a thread specifically about writing style, which actually could be very bad allowing such to exist where people could freely attack on this.

Robert, I'm fine with people disagreeing with the content of my posts and even writing responses critical of that content, of course along with any helpful information for me regarding the content itself, but not the style of my writing. I'd rather people not respond to me if they feel an uge to attack that style. Otherwise like I said, disagreements and differences of opinion regarding the content is fine. My disability has nothing to do with the content, but it is partly a reason for my style of writing, depending on what exactly about that style is being criticized. Then I do need to defend myself with it, or at least inform about it to those with more fair, polite questions pertaining to that style, or even mistakes, such as accidently pressing the add reply button too soon. As noted, I'm going to defend myself whenever I get responses to my style of writing. In the matter of Lou, and in fairness to his latest response to me, he was using the same wording used by AJ, which that wording and even the response to my style of writing by him, was uncalled for. The additional problem to this, is I've been very understanding of Lou and haven't been harsh to him at all. I don't have a negative opinion of him and I even told him I believe his motives for being here. So, I wanted to point that out to him, which I did and then moved on from.

Same with me, though I'm not supportive of some of the speed figures I've heard for reduced speeds caps, such as anything in the range less than 1mbps, and even a number that may come as a surprise to people here, 9mbps. I use to talk a lot about how I supported a 9mbps speed cap, though my opinion of that changed when I saw a Netflix article stating that the base streaming nitrate of their 4k video streams is 15mbps. While I'm not saying people should be streaming lots of 4k video on LTE when they could do it on WiFi, a few 4k videos here and there using LTE when they cannot access WiFi, is certainly normal use, which people ought to have speeds to accommodate that with limited to no buffering. So now, I'm supportive of a typical range of 15mbps to 18mbps with the latter being a maximum typically. Although going back to a post I made a while ago about congestion aided speed caps, someone gave me a great idea to have a special speed cap exclusion for during times with very little congestion, as to take advantage of an otherwise unused network. With that in mind, along with the reasonable rate idea I've been discussing with some people here, 30mbps as a maximum to that is reasonable, though going back down to 18mbps when the network gets a bit busier, yet stabilizes at 15mbps. I'll leave it at that for now, as there are issues I realize will bring the number lower than 15mbps, which then gets into the issue of network improvements needed to prevent further decreases in speed during congestion. Simply said though, I do support the Artemis pcell idea.

That sounds fair and is something I thought about, until I realized one particular problem with it. That is spectrum would need to be allocated specifically for that, something I use to think could hold both technologies together using the same spectrum, until I heard that is not the case. Surely some spectrum could be put aside for that use, though carriers seem to be on the path to getting all their spectrum using 4g LTE. Speed caps could be used though.

Thanks for the helpful response. I'm baffled by how spectrum has been handled by the FCC which is so different from what I not only believe, but also know to be a much more efficient way of dealing with this, that I often suggest ideas that don't always work well with how things have happened and are implemented in such a way that would be difficult to change, or just not worth it at this point. Still, if spectrum reorganization were possible and feasible, then perhaps something more streamlined could happen.

By the way, anyone who is going to attack the nature of my posts, just stop. I don't even care if I get banned for saying this, because I know I'm in the right here. I don't insult others here and their posts, which I'm asking not to do so of mine. If you have a difference of opinion of the content, or want to inform me of something I'm mistaken on, then fine. However, I'm going to defend my right to post as long as the staff allows me to be here. If you want to petition them to ban me, then fine. I'll leave here knowing I remained respectful and did not violate rules, but was removed from posting supposedly grandoise and novel-like posts while being defensive and taking things too personally or whatever.

Here I thought you had more class than to insult me too on my posts, which are not grandiose. I don't understand why some people here have to insult the nature of posts, rather than just focusing on a posts content. You yourself Lou get a lot of complaints here, while I've been fair to you.

That is very odd. I can understand why they wouldn't offer points for third party orders and fulfillment orders, but restricting based on department, is strange.

Sorry about that. My disability is getting worse in my hands where I have to use a stylus to type. Yet I've been pressing the add reply button too soon on accident before I've finished, which means I have to go back and edit the post. I've been using the device here much more often lately than my computer, which while more convenient in some ways, does have its drawbacks.

Such a shame if they don't, because this is a very good thing. Now while I know such an idea has little chance of happening and people may find this unnecessary, etc., I think Softbank/Sprint ought to work a deal with T-Mobile to give T-Mobile its 800mhz entirely, so T-Mobile could have both 700mhz and 800mhz on its network serving various areas where T-Mobile cannot get and deploy 700mhz, or to have additional spectrum to accompany their 700mhz. In exchange for this, T-Mobile works with Softbank/Sprint on getting all (hopefully) of that reserved 30mhz spectrum, or the equivalent nationwide. Then Sprint could do a 15x15 nationwide 600mhz network. Softbank/Sprint could then give T-Mobile additional PCS spectrum and extra cash to accommodate such a deal. Softbank has plenty of cash to see this happen and should do so, even in keepng Dish away from this amount. In the least, Sprint should get enough for a 10x10, though 15x15 is better for this level of spectrum.

How is the engineering screen accessed in order to make carrier aggregation work?

I completely agree. People who use a lot of data but don't break the T.O.S. are not intentionally harming the network. There seems to be a feeling of deep resentment by some here towards those who use a lot of data. It really isn't a problem, other than those who violate the terms of service. If heavy data usage is a problem for the network, the carrier has a responsibilty to modify their plan offerings to reduce the stress on their network, not punish the user for using a lot of data, unless of course they are violating the T.O.S. Getting angry about it doesn't help either. Insulting people who use a lot of data by insinuating their data usage must be violating the T.O.S. isn't fair. Their are a lot of legitimate data usage that can add up really fast for even basic stuff. Moderate usage like watching four movies per month and listening to eight hours of CD quality music each week adds up to a bit over 20gb in a month, yet is completely reasonable usage, as I mentioned in the poll thread. dedub is absolutely correct here that carriers should price plans reasonably and accordingly, which is a much more fair way of looking at the issue than it is saying heavy users should "pay through the nose". Although not everyone can afford such things like NFL season tickets or to have data on multiple carriers. Just the same, not everyone who is using a lot of data is a network abuser. Besides, I don't even like using the word "abuse" when it comes to describing heavier usage of data and I realize I need to make an effort to refrain from using the word myself in writing about this. There are much more serious issues where the word is more appropriate to be used.

Is Overstock or any of the online streaming services listed?

That's disappointing. I like the 800 service and the 2.5, though the PCS spectrum is where Sprint was slower for me. Although I'm hoping this device will work better than the Nexus 6 did for me, at least until I can get the Samsung Note 5.

I agree. Just is a nice thought both on a competitive level and seeing Verizon being more customer friendly would be nice, although that is unlikely considering what Verizon's history is, etc.

I'll inquire about this at the store today.

T-Mobile will meet its limitations eventually in more places than just the Midwest and a few other areas. When that happens eventually, that would be a good time for Verizon to get very competitive. If they do, T-Mobile sure will be in a lot of trouble.

Considering what is being said about pcell, it sounds as if unlimited data with unlimited tethering might be possible without severely affecting the network using pcell, though it awaits to be seen how this will work in real conditions/situations.

The rate plan ideas being discussed are serious, which many people are doing, in coming up with alternatives for unlimited data. Several people are doing just that on one of TmoNews' best articles written in quite some time. Cam actually wrote it very well with no bias and no Sprint bashing, even though he mentioned Sprint and did so fairly. Most of the people in the comments section are being fair about it too, while discussing positive solutions with very little hostility.

You also could choose to either not respond to me, or just respond with the few paragraphs where you were fair in your disagreement with me, though without your last paragraph attacking my opinions by claiming they've been "disproven" when only false facts can be, not opinions.

BTW, rather than having a hostile rebuttal to my above post by staff, with respect I'm not criticizing the site, but merely saying what I'm noticing here by certain people, though I understand how that may not be welcomed on a publicly viewable post. If you are going to remove it, etc. please also delete me from the site, as this matter is already causing me enough stress.

I'm not arguing with anyone here, nor am I even being hostile, though I do sense hostility towards me by some, even those who say my opinions don't matter here. Seriously, there is a lot of really bad, very negative hostility by many people here, despite there also being many kind people here as well. Although, a lot of the hostility seems to be allowed to go on, despite the problems it can cause. It goes beyond people just giving their opinions and while normal discussion generates debate of those opinions, it is very rude for anyone to say those opinions don't,t matter or that those opinions are false, which is insulting.People can give false ideas on facts, not on opinions. I'm very tired of the hostility shown to me by some on here, along with seeing others receiving this same hostility while nothing gets done about it. Granted, I'm use to administrating forums about much more personal, life-sensitive issues than wireless, yet even for this topic things go too far at times, especially when a few of the staff here are the source of some of the hostility. From accusing people or even insinuating people on breaking legally binding contracts, to smaller yet still hurtful comments, is very inappropriate and is shocking to see on any professional type site. FYI to everyone reading this, I didn't just get involved being interested in wireless as a hobby, nor just as a means of finding the right wireless carrier for myself, but also as a way to keep my mind away from a topic that was a major part of my life for eight years that still remains a daily thought in my mind. I even was on the front cover of the Chicago Tribune about it back on St. Patrick's Day 2009. Getting involved in wireless interests has helped ease my mind about my serious health situation, which I was hoping to share those interests and opinions on a community site I felt was best, and where I can learn from others who wouldn't be so judgmental. I thought this was that site, and in some ways, it still is. So for those who will be more fair in their discussion with me, great, but those who are going to be hostile, please stop responding to me, unless you can be fair and not be so judgemental.

One thing is for certain, they are far from taking over the Midwest, as they have so little amount of spectrum here. Another issue is that I'm so sick of them claiming T-Mobile did well, or well enough in the AWS3 auction, which they did not do either. They did poorly, at best, which shows they either don't care or have very little money, perhaps both. If it were the money, they should have forgone this area specific 700mhz spectrum purchase, and either saved it for the AWS3 auction or the 600mhz auction, which the latter I believe they'll do poorly in at best also, However, the magenta minions will still be bragging on about how great their beloved company is while T-Mobile gets desperate for a merger. DT must have its good reasons for wanting to dump T-Mobile, which I certainly understand. I'm already excited to be dumping them for the excellent Sprint plan arrangement I'll be getting tomorrow.

Note : This post is going to be a bit long, I apologize, but I need to allow space to do calculations I believe are important in showing my outlook on data usage. When I look at the example I frequently use for data size comparison, which is the 3gb HD movie I downloaded from Xfinity ToGo awhile back while I had MetroPCS, I consider how many of those movies could a person watch on their streaming device if they live a "normal" life with a job and all. Admittedly, I'm one of those people often referred to online as "a person who lives in their mother's basement", though I have a valid reason for my life being this way as I'm terminally I'll and suffer from a severe neuropathic condition. Yet, I try to look at data usage not from my own situation which allows me plenty of free time to use a lot of data. In doing so, it doesn't seem far fetched that a person with a job could watch one HD movie each week using wireless data, which considering that 3gb amount per movie, would bring that total to 12gb in a month. I definitely would never consider watching four HD movies in a month using wireless data, as network abuse. However, once 4k becomes the normal viewing preference, that 3gb each HD movie will become at least around 9gb or more per movie, depending on compression. Four 4k movies watched in a month becomes a 36gb data usage, at least, which isn't considering other things that can be done in a month using wireless data. For example, a dozen speed tests use around 1gb of data, which at one test per day is around 2.5 GB of Data for a month. Listening to a few hours on Tidal, say around the amount of time it takes for many people to travel between work and home, along with an outing during lunch breaks when they decide not to watch streaming video, so around half a GB of Data. So on a five day work week, four days they listen to Tidal, the other they watch streaming video in HD and/or 4k. those days listening to Tidal add up to around 2gb per week, while the HD video around 3gb per week which adds up to my 12gb Monthly usage example. The Tidal Monthly usage in this example is 8gb Monthly. Between the 12gb Monthly video streaming usage and adding in the Tidal usage, brings the number up to 20gb Monthly for six hours of Monthly HD video streaming and 32 hours of Monthly Tidal music streaming. By the way, I'm referencing Tidal rather than others, as I believe Lossless to become a standard for music listening eventually. Oh, adding in the 2.5gb Monthly for once per day speed testing, totals that Monthly usage at 22.5gb, this not counting any 4k streaming, internet browsing, etc. Besides, I'm not looking at this in a way to judge how people decide to use their data. People shouldn't have to watch/listen to low quality, when there is high quality. Surely there should be a difference in price based on usage, though not at the currently high per GB data rates. Again, sorry for the length of this post. I did shorten it quite a bit from what I had originally, using more examples.

Is there a timeframe when it will be enabled?