chris2420

Excuse me if I don't find jokes about my education funny. But I believe that you are too blinded by hatred by the Twin Bells/Big Cable. At the end of the day they are all businesses even Sprint. And business don't provide goods & services out of the goodness of their hearts they do it for the profit. While I can see that Twin Bells/ Big Cable would want to act like your mobster example the FCC specifically said that actions like that would be unacceptable.  

"Despite criticism from fellow commissioners, Wheeler defended the proposal, saying the FCC would find many of the possible broadband provider practices feared by net neutrality advocates unreasonable. If a broadband provider charges a service like Netflix a fee to access the Internet connection for which a customer has already paid, that would be an unreasonable practice prohibited by the FCC, he said.

Wheeler’s proposal, he said, would consider the slowing of broadband connections by providers to be unreasonable and prohibited. “When a consumer buys specified capacity from a network provider, he or she is buying open capacity, not capacity where the network provider can prioritize for their own profit purposes,” he said. “Simply put, when a consumer buys a specified bandwidth, it is commercially unreasonable, and thus a violation of this proposal, to deny them the full connectivity and the full benefits that connection enables.”

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2155720/fcc-moves-forward-with-controversial-net-neutrality-proposal.html

I don't think y'all are reading the decision correctly. It does not allow a provider to purposely degrade the speed of certain content. In fact they said that any such action would be met by FCC action. I think this is a great thing if the FCC enforces the before mentioned part. Services like Netflix( Which I have spent countless hours avoiding studying on) account for about 30% of peak internet traffic. Fiber is costly to lay out and most providers have all but slowed to a stop when it comes to laying new fiber because they have to meet with increase demand on their existing lines and they cannot recoup the cost on new lines. Hopefully if a few big time users like Netflix, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube pay some for the amount of traffic they use the expansion of new fiber will pick up again, and the millions of americans without high-speed internet can get access. I know y'all most likely won't agree, but from and economic perspective this is a good step

It is great to see the details posted for each market. Are there also details regarding how many sites are in each market? Also, apologize if already noted, are all sites that are being upgraded also being installed with new dual band antennas for NV or are they reusing existing antennas at these sites?

Thanks!

There are maps that show every site by market, but they are only only available in the Sponsor section. If you are able to donate and become a sponsor I would suggest it there is lots of cool information in the Sponsor section. When you donate you get access for 6 months I am a broke college student and only able to donate $5 every 6 months, but every little bit helps and it gets you access. For you 2nd question someone correct me if I am wrong that all NV site will be 1900/800mhz LTE ready when they are installed. The only thing that will be lacking are the antennas for 2600mhz which sprint will have to install later 

While 30% is good that also means that 70% has unrestricted bidding for AT&T and Verizon. Which basically means that 70% of the 600 band will go to them because nobody (unless dish decides to jump in) has enough money to go against them. That's a lot of low band spectrum. I would rather see a more even 50/50 split maybe even more to make sure no one group controls too much of the 600 band

One word. Competition. As long as date rates stay artificially inflated, unlimited will remain an attractive option.

Unlimited is still not attractive for the people who use less data if you use 2gb you still pay the same as somebody that uses 10gb. The wireless company will price their unlimited plans more toward the 10gb people than 2gb therefor they pay more 

I don't see why y'all seem to think Unlimited data is a good thing. I basically forces everyone that doesn't use a lot of data to subsidize the people that do. The problem in the US is the big 2 charge a ton for very little data. If you look at our European counterparts they offer data at a much more reasonable rate. EE in the UK offer unlimited talk/text plus 10gb for 53 pounds a month. or 20gb for 58. you couldn't even get 1gb for that amount on verizon or att 

People keep saying the 5s has a CSIM, but has anyone tried pulling on out and putting it in another 5s or 5c to see if it works?

The battery life on my 5s is amazing I can use it all day and when I get home around 8pm it's on like 65-70%. And I mean as a college student I use it heavily

Most of it is going towards base stations. There must be some expansion with that many base stations being added. Plus that money buys more now that before because of bulk discounts 

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/softbank-set-to-invest-16-billion-at-sprint-20130707-00017

Y'all also forgetting about apps like GroupMe I got the app and I went from over 2k texts a month to 150 this month.... all of my organizations in college use it for communications and so do my friends

All I know is that I've both roamed internationally and activated my phone on an international network but have not been able to activate it on a domestic GSM carrier - all while using my iPhone 4S that was purchased on the original release date. If you or anybody else is ale to unlock your iPhone for domestic use I will be thoroughly interested.

I dont really think it will but i would kick myself if i didnt try to at least try

The GSM network you're roaming on (Orange - France in this example) uses whatever sim is in the phone to determine roaming eligibility, so even if the phone did in fact ship unlocked that would have no bearing on whether the phone would roam or not. Perhaps your Sprint sim was invalid for some reason but I'm not going to theorize on why you couldn't roam as there could be many other factors at play.

I dont think that was what he was saying I think he meant that sprint apparently did something really weird with the unlock and relock thing that its causing the system to reject the authorization to roam using the sprint sim card already in the phone.

But that has nothing to do with unlocking. You probably did not have international roaming enabled on your account. An unlocked handset could use a local carrier SIM.

 

AJ

"Unlocking" your phone allows you to be able to activate it on another carrier (not simply roam), be it domestic or international carrier. The fact that you still had the Sprint sim in your phone while traveling abroad just means you would have been roaming, not actually activating your phone on another carrier. Sprint has roaming agreements with carriers in France (Orange if I recall correctly), however your issue of not being able to connect while in Paris probably had more to do with changing your settings to allow international roaming which are accessed by going to settings - general - cellular - roaming. Additionally I believe that you also need to call Sprint to allow your account to roam internationally. FWIW you should be thankful that you didn't allow roaming as you would have forked over a huge amount of cash if you used your phone at all, especially for data.

I did have all the settings set for international use and called sprint before I left and they said everything was good to go, but still no go. When i got back i went back to my local sprint store the guy in the store noticed that I had bought it when it first came out and said it didn't work because how sprint did the whole unlocking thing when it first came out it couldn't use the internal sim card to connect and roam on a network. If i wanted it to do that he would have to lock it and unlock it for international use. IDK if he knew what he was talking about or was just BS'ing to make me happy but I didn't let him relock it and defiantly plan on borrowing my brothers sim card (t-mobile) and trying it on my phone when i see him next weekend.

Im not so sure I got my 4s on the day it came out and I could not get it to connect to a network when I was in Paris over spring break and I had the Sprint sim card still in the sim slot

One of the major problem i see with this is that other carriers would adopt this but still keep the same monthly pricing. Also why would you want to pay full price for a phone if its still gonna be locked to that carrier.

But it would be pointless for Sprint to go to rev B. Already next year Sprint is going to start working to roll out LTE-A so why should they worry about a 3G technology plus i think there goal is to get as many people switched to LTE devices as possible so they can start shutting down 2-3G technology so they can add more capacity for LTE. I would rather that happen then for them to waste time and money upgrading to rev B

So my friend and i were studying in evan's library on the TAMU campus today then his SGIII connects to an LTE signal in which we proceed to walk around campus and find our that the whole campus is decently covered with LTE.

Sweetness, thanks Robert hopefully it will be an earlier Christmas gift from Sprint.

There seems to be a fairly good blanket of coverage over Austin especially if you look at the sensorly maps do Y'all think they are getting pretty close to officially launching?