Cingular FamilyTalk 850, Family Messaging Unlimited, 2GB/mo data
Feedback Score
0
Originally Posted by larryt510
That is simply not the case here in So. Cal or any other major market I have been in. I've done plenty of traveling and am an actual Sprint user (unlike you) so I know you assertion is false.
We're in a major megaregion, and we have really bad cell site density on Sprint. Some markets may be fine, but we're less than 100 miles from NYC, and Sprint is a distant fourth behind T-Mobile in 3rd. There shouldn't be areas with crappy cell site density. Figure out where you want to cover, and do it, and do it right.
As an example, they put up a new tower in my area, which T-Mobile spearheaded. T-Mobile got on it, and shortly thereafter, AT&T did. After a few months of bringing countless tons of apocalypse-proof equipment, Verizon got on the tower. There is a 4th spot for Sprint, with the mounts for the deck, the door for the RF cabling and everything, but Sprint never showed to put their gear up. Sprint is nowhere to be found on a lot of other towers. They only seem to get on a tower when there is nothing else for miles, so that they can make their map look better.
Originally Posted by larryt510
Very silly question. The answer is they provide coverage in those areas in the populated markets where they can make money. They don't need to cover every cow country no man's land in the Nevada desert.
They can never be a viable player in the Idaho market, when they have a tiny, skeletal network out there. They should just call it quits, and let Verizon take it.
I usually support government regulation, but It is unfortunate that the government over-regulated and killed the AT&T/ T-Mobile Merger The best explanation of the pricing nutiness in the industry. Why Sprint and T-Mo will always suck.
The only way to end the pricing insanity is to eliminate contracts and subsidies.
I want Wifi calling on AT&T. If you text while driving, you're an idiot. End of story.
I'm sorry, but if Sprint can't cover a little state that has part of the largest metro market in the US, than that's pathetic. It doesn't set a good start for coverage anywhere else.
Originally Posted by larryt510
Sorry but that's some flawed logic right there.
Don't you just love the people who know all the answers about a network they have never used?
I'm in CT a lot and doubt the OP even drives but coverage is fine where there are actually people.
Don't you just love the people who know all the answers about a network they have never used?
Yeah. Honestly it's some of the biggest nonsense I have ever seen posted in this forum (and I've been around a long time!). But sometimes it's entertaining.
Yeah they don't cover the boonies in Idaho well enough so they should just call it quits and fold as a carrier. Send all their customers over to Verizon.
If Sprint is really that bad in CT then why stick with them for 7 years? If they are the worst in CT like you claim wouldn't it be wiser to switch carriers and get on something better? I know I would.
A) They used to be the best, so I was with them then
B) I am poor and they are the cheapest with my discount from work
C) They gave me an airave for my house, and various other offers every time I try to leave
D) I am on a good tower most of the time
You always jump down the throat of anyone who says anything bad about Sprint. The world does not revolve around southern California. You act like because Sprint is good there it must be good everywhere which is just as bad as the people who say Sprint must be bad everywhere because it is bad in their area. Sprint has good spots and bad spots but lately you have to admit they seem to have a LOT more bad spots.
Also if Sprint coverage is so great, please tell me why on earth you have an Airave? I'm not trying to attack you but it doesn't seem to make any sense that you would have one.
I have always been one of the first people to stick up for Sprint in regards to coverage in the Pacific Northwest... Not only did they integrate the Nextel network, but they integrated the old Qwest/USWest Wireless network before that, which really has made the network solid. There are numerous areas that I know of that that have a full signal on Sprint vs. 1-2 bars on Verizon because Sprint happened to take on one of Qwest's old small but densely placed monopoles in that area.
That said, I have never noticed a slip in their services until the last 12 months (and it happened quite suddenly). I have had Sprint as my primary phone for for now over 10 years, and have always seen steady progress every year in regards to coverage improvements and data speed. In fact, for YEARS I could get 1-2 megs pretty much every time of the day on 3G. Now I'm lucky if it's 2-300k. I can't even stream an MP3 from the Android Music Store or listen to a Podcast while it's buffering live. It's a shame--and Network Vision has NOT fully hit Seattle yet (I don't care what the web site says--even their "upgraded" towers are pulling 6-700k... not the 1-2 megs I used to see regularly)
What's really weird is that overall signal strength has seemed to go down. I've never seen this happen before--and it's happening on both my Epic and BlackBerry. I don't know if they are retuning or what--or if the error correction has changed or something. But it seems like individual site coverage has dropped 10-15%, and I am finding areas that I used to have a 1-2 bars and able to have a clear conversation in reliably have 1 bar/searching/garbled conversation---on the same phones!
I've also noticed some particular areas that now will "hang" onto a particular tower until the call garbles and drops--then shoots right back up to full signal. Or, even weirder, I will place a call in an area with full signal, the display will drop to 0 bars, I will hardly be able to hear the person I have called, but they say they hear me great. This has started in the last 2 months, and I've called them about it--it happens on both my phones, and I NEVER had problems before. They say everything is fine.
I'm hoping these are just Network Vision pains, and will get cleared up in the near future. It really is annoying--I'm quite forgiving when it comes to Sprint, but even I am noticing them start to slip.
You always jump down the throat of anyone who says anything bad about Sprint.
Nope. I will sometimes challenge posters who make silly generalized claims or make under informed comments about Sprint. That's all. In your case all I did was ask why you stuck around with Sprint for many years if you aren't happy with the service. Fair question I think and you answered it.
Originally Posted by Ace41690
The world does not revolve around southern California.
No but it certainly doesn't revolve around CT either. California has the largest wireless market and it's also the market where Sprint has the most customers.
Originally Posted by Ace41690
Also if Sprint coverage is so great, please tell me why on earth you have an Airave? I'm not trying to attack you but it doesn't seem to make any sense that you would have one.
That's a good question and a long story that goes back to 2008. This is hard to explain but I happen to be on an NID (network ID) border. Right in between two cell sites on different switches (which is a pretty rare situation). Back around 2008 this NID bouncing would sometimes cause incoming calls not to ring even though I had a full signal. What happens is the calls were getting lost in the paging channel when the phone kept flipping back and forth on the two different switches. So when the Airave came out in 2008 I decided to pick one up to eliminate that problem and it worked like a charm. So I use the Airave for 1x and then I can pull in a great EVDO signal from the regular tower for data.
Nope. I will sometimes challenge posters who make silly generalized claims or make under informed comments about Sprint. That's all. In your case all I did was ask why you stuck around with Sprint for many years if you aren't happy with the service. Fair question I think and you answered it.
You call your rebuttals challenging.. lol.. No offense but stating that someone is wrong, in under a sentence or two, does not equate to having challenged anything. Probably okay in GOP debates, but not for the rest of the world with a clue about a topic. Whereas, those of us with actual legitimate concerns about Sprint are using actual quantifiable points.
No way allow BYOD on Virgin Mobile so all the cheapskates can use a Photon @ 25.00 a month.
Never mind the risk of losing postpaid customers to your prepaid division. Take a look at Verizons Impulse, they do prepaid right.
Never, no voice roaming at all. Maybe have an option to purchase an allotment but that's it.
Why "no way", considering everyone but Sprint allows it? Including PP that you use yourself. I guess since Sprint is doing so well fiscally, then have the luxury of being choosers.
Actually, it's $35 a month for 300 minutes, unlimited text and capped/proxied data. Now compare this to $45 unlimited everything on ST, using cutting-edge HSPA+ networks of AT&T and T-mobile. That is, rather than some early 00's Voice only EVDO, with T-mobile's 42MB/s HSPA+ network actually faster than 4G Wimax on Sprint.
The other three carriers seem to mitigate the risk well. Just look at the PP rates versus Verizon. I don't use postpaid, as it's a waste of money, and it does not allow me to purchase a brand new handset every 6 months like prepaid does.
The other two major carriers do not need voice roaming because they have large network footprints, while T-mobile prepaid does include roaming.
That is simply not the case here in So. Cal or any other major market I have been in. I've done plenty of traveling and am an actual Sprint user (unlike you) so I know your assertion is false. It's also a mistake to make that big of a generalization about Sprint's coverage.
Generalization? Take out roaming and Sprint's actual voice network is puny. Heck, there are numerous spots were 100 feet off a highway you receive no coverage with Sprint. Compare VM's coverage maps which illustrates Sprint's actual network to PagePlus. Verizon's network is more than 3 to 4 times larger.
This is an example of Verizon's network. Looks like PP also offers roaming as illustrated in yellow.
It took a while to source sprint's actual network maps, as they often include roaming or are (conveniently) the size of a 2001 cell phone screen.
Amazing how Sprint's apparently awesome in CA, considering less than half the state is actually covered. You must mean using other carriers networks (roaming).. lol
Very silly question. The answer is they provide coverage in those areas in the populated markets where they can make money. They don't need to cover every cow country or no man's land in the Nevada desert. The average user who visits Nevada is either going to be in Vegas or Reno where coverage is excellent. In Nevada they cover some outside areas like Pahrump, Beatty, Amargosa Valley and Tonopah.
Sprint's making money, when did this happen? As the last few reports over x years seem to suggest otherwise - losses.
No but it certainly doesn't revolve around CT either. California has the largest wireless market and it's also the market where Sprint has the most customers.
We are part of the New York Metro Area. The world revolves more around us than it does Los Angeles-No offense. haha
Originally Posted by larryt510
That's a good question and a long story that goes back to 2008. This is hard to explain but I happen to be on an NID (network ID) border. Right in between two cell sites on different switches (which is a pretty rare situation). Back around 2008 this NID bouncing would sometimes cause incoming calls not to ring even though I had a full signal. What happens is the calls were getting lost in the paging channel when the phone kept flipping back and forth on the two different switches. So when the Airave came out in 2008 I decided to pick one up to eliminate that problem and it worked like a charm. So I use the Airave for 1x and then I can pull in a great EVDO signal from the regular tower for data.
So what you are saying is Sprint does not provide adequate coverage to your home to reliably receive voice calls?
So what you are saying is Sprint does not provide adequate coverage to your home to reliably receive voice calls?
It's not a coverage thing. Coverage is excellent. I can pull in a -65 to -80 dbs anywhere in the house with the Airave off. It's a CDMA technology glitch that sometimes affects incoming calls when close to two different NID's. In 2009 Sprint changed the azimuth pattern on my local cell site (after many complaints from me) which pretty much drowned out the other NID beam I was receiving. Incoming calls seem to work fine now but I still like my Airave and it's free to use.
Once again you nailed it. It's no coincidence (aka common sense) that the carriers with enough money to buy sprint tomorrow (AT&T and Verizon) started their rollout in these mega-regions. Heck, if T-mobile (Deutche Telecom) was not keen on leaving the US market, they could buy sprint out too, as even they are profitable.
Originally Posted by larryt510
But sometimes it's entertaining.
Bookmarks