Page 17 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 414

Thread: LG V30; Officially the first 600Mhz phone

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,767
    Device(s)
    SGS 7
    Carrier(s)
    MSV 10GB plus 10GB free, 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    Not according to the Verizon website. If you dispute that take it up with Verizon. But I'm sure Verizon has a lot more info about their competition than you would have. So I'll take their word for it.

    Per Verizon, T-mobile is only 400,000 square miles behind them and that means AT&T is further back.
    Again, read the posts. We don't have any reason to doubt Verizon, but they are looking specifically only at coverage that is using an LTE air interface, not all 4G coverage, which includes HSPA+. If you want to have the HSPA+ is not 4G debate, fine, have it, but then you've got to specify that LTE has to be deployed with at least a total of 10x10 or maybe even 20x20 to count, so bye-bye massive chunks of T-Mobile's LTE land area coverage, especially in places like Michigan. A lot of the B12 sites that T-Mobile built in the last year or two have significantly less capacity than the AT&T sites that they upgraded 5+ years ago and dropped fiber to, making them Faux G.

    That's great. That shows there's even less reason for T-Mobile to build robust coverage in these areas. Why spend more money when a tissue-thin network will color in your coverage map just as magenta.
    They could have just opened the floodgates on AT&T roaming, but apparently it costs them a pretty penny to do so.

    So they use Verizon. Despite not having these areas covered, T-mobile has been gaining customers quarter after quarter. These uncovered areas show no sign of impacting T-Mobile's subscriber growth.
    And Verizon has the highest ARPU and the best quality customers. Building lousy coverage isn't going to get those high-value customers.

    It shows the tissue-thin dust bowl network is not what matters to T-Mobile customers.
    We'll see.
    Happy AT&T customer and addicted Speedtester in CT
    AT&T Galaxy S7
    If you text while driving, you're an idiot. End of story.

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    13,504
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    I really don't see any sense in a certain person arguing that bad coverage is a strength.

    The good thing is that the TMobile company finds that idea to be ridiculous as well.
    If they found it ridiculous then they wouldn't have the bad coverage that people would call it tissue-thin. If you think it's top-notch good quality coverage, then argue with people who are presenting data to the contrary.

    The company has given a huge priority for covering Americans wherever they go,
    How, by providing tissue-thin coverage in those areas? Doesn't sound like a huge priority to me. The huge priority has been given to making their LTE network the fastest in the land.

    Verizon and AT&T are huge and successful and profitable and have so many customers precisely because they cover America better than the other networks.
    Actually their huge and successful because they had such a head start on T-mobile and they were able to make acquisitions to keep their customer base at double what T-Mobile has. So they had much more revenue to start with and thus they can afford the losses that coverage in rural areas provide. T-mobile has fewer resources and they have to do their rural coverage on the cheap---which is exactly what they're doing.

    T-Mobile's only path to set success is to cover America as well as the others.
    That's not what they believe. They're successful now without covering these backlands as well.

    I just hope things don't end up being as bad as you say they will be due to this coverage being very thin.
    If you don't like how bad it is, just take your business elsewhere.

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,767
    Device(s)
    SGS 7
    Carrier(s)
    MSV 10GB plus 10GB free, 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm playing with the LTE map on T-Mobile's site, and it still shows USCC roaming, which the maps in the 600mhz PC Mag article clearly don't (look at Maine!), so the Verizon number may account for roaming agreements on both carriers, which puts Verizon even farther ahead, and might bring T-Mobile ahead of AT&T. I also have a feeling that if you turn off AT&T's HSPA+ network, their LTE network would get significantly larger because of all of the "border area" between a strong HSPA+ site and a weak LTE site. I don't doubt Verizon's metrics for measuring the size of the LTE network, but I don't think it means much of anything, I'd rather see comparisons of 4G networks, but that might not turn out so nicely for Verizon, so I understand why they want to go purely by LTE, as it puts T-Mobile ahead of AT&T, but more importantly, it puts Verizon way ahead of either of them.

    It's a much smaller, more niche use of the whole "4G vs LTE" coverage war we had around 2010-2011 when Verizon's LTE network was far smaller than AT&T's HSPA+ network, but launched well ahead of, and stayed ahead of AT&T's LTE network to this day.

  4. #244
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,764
    Feedback Score
    0
    The areas being discussed aren't backlands.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    13,504
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GSMinCT View Post
    What concerns me is not that they haven't covered 100% of the area that AT&T or Verizon has covered overnight, as they have built out very fast, and no one has ever built a network like this before (Verizon and AT&T having put humpty-dumpty together by buying other carriers, and Verizon's massive LTE buildout happening on existing CDMA/EVDO sites) but the low quality of some of their buildouts. If they really intend to get more customers in rural areas, or who travel even semi-frequently, their network is going to fall apart in B12-only areas.
    I think it's great that they're not wasting the money on high quality build-outs in these areas.

    The problem is, they are doing it cheaply and poorly, and the experience on that network will suffer as a result. All the carriers lie about their coverage maps. I personally have seen AT&T lie about theirs, but it sounds like T-Mobile is lying just as much if not more than AT&T and Verizon lie in trying to crayon in the map. They have built the only tissue-paper-thin LTE network without a backup.
    With record-low churn it shows that their customers don't really care about how cheaply and poorly the tissue-thin network is. It's smart business on their part to keep doing the same cheap build-outs in the future.

    We don't have any reason to doubt Verizon, but they are looking specifically only at coverage that is using an LTE air interface
    Yes, I know what they're looking at. It was very clear from their website.

    They could have just opened the floodgates on AT&T roaming, but apparently it costs them a pretty penny to do so.
    Right, and why pay your competitor for your customers to use their network. That's dumb. It's good business for them to prevent most AT&T roaming.

    And Verizon has the highest ARPU and the best quality customers. Building lousy coverage isn't going to get those high-value customers.
    T-Mobile is getting its fair share of Verizon customers. Why do you think Verizon brought back unlimited data plans? Because they were losing too many customer to T-Mobile.

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,767
    Device(s)
    SGS 7
    Carrier(s)
    MSV 10GB plus 10GB free, 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    If they found it ridiculous then they wouldn't have the bad coverage that people would call it tissue-thin. If you think it's top-notch good quality coverage, then argue with people who are presenting data to the contrary.
    That is a nonsense argument. It is clear that they see the value in filling the map out, but are doing a cheap and fast job of it.

    Actually their huge and successful because they had such a head start on T-mobile and they were able to make acquisitions to keep their customer base at double what T-Mobile has. So they had much more revenue to start with and thus they can afford the losses that coverage in rural areas provide. T-mobile has fewer resources and they have to do their rural coverage on the cheap---which is exactly what they're doing.
    Actually, it had almost entirely to do with the big two each buying one of the two CLR carriers in most markets, enabling them to build out coverage in the CLR band long before 700 was available. T-Mobile and Sprint didn't have a chance with PCS. Sprint got a chance with SMR, and completely blew it. T-Mobile is just now getting a chance with 600 and 700.

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,767
    Device(s)
    SGS 7
    Carrier(s)
    MSV 10GB plus 10GB free, 4 lines
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    I think it's great that they're not wasting the money on high quality build-outs in these areas.
    Providing good coverage is literally the reason cell phone carriers exist. It's not a waste when people are on vacation and their T-Mobile phone has no service or is slow as molasses while the person next to them is Instagramming and Snapchatting and Google Mapping on AT&T or Verizon.

    With record-low churn it shows that their customers don't really care about how cheaply and poorly the tissue-thin network is. It's smart business on their part to keep doing the same cheap build-outs in the future.
    It makes no sense to cut corners on a small amount of marginal cost to build out every band with 2 panels per sector on a site that they've already paid to lease and bring fiber to. I could see the argument for stretching the sites thin spacing wise, especially since they are getting the B71 license, but there is simply no excuse for going cheap on the sites themselves. Maybe part of the grand plan is to come back in a couple of years and rebuild those areas as B2/4/12/71 with CA and everything else, but in the meantime, they are going to suffer. They can't stand still, as AT&T is already B2/4/5 or B2/4/17 in most of those areas, and as needed, they are ready to go to B2/4/5/14/17/29/30, while Verizon is on B4/13 or B2/4/13, and is heading for B2/4/5/13/66.

    Yes, I know what they're looking at. It was very clear from their website.
    Then don't argue to the contrary, as you literally argued with my post that said "AT&T is Verizon's nearest competitor for 4G coverage,", which says NOTHING about LTE, only about all 4G technologies.

    Right, and why pay your competitor for your customers to use their network. That's dumb. It's good business for them to prevent most AT&T roaming.
    To provide coverage. Sprint built their network to rely heavily on Verizon for roaming. That worked with voice, but it fell apart for data, and now their network is a mess. Paying for Verizon LTE data roaming would be even more astronomical than their CDMA/1x roaming agreement is now.

    T-Mobile is getting its fair share of Verizon customers. Why do you think Verizon brought back unlimited data plans? Because they were losing too many customer to T-Mobile.
    And Verizon still has a higher ARPU and higher quality customers.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    13,504
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GSMinCT View Post
    It is clear that they see the value in filling the map out, but are doing a cheap and fast job of it.
    I agree that they see the value in filling in the map cheaply and quickly. Nothing to dispute there. The cheaper the better as far as I'm concerned.

    Actually, it had almost entirely to do with the big two each buying one of the two CLR carriers in most markets, enabling them to build out coverage in the CLR band long before 700 was available. T-Mobile and Sprint didn't have a chance with PCS. Sprint got a chance with SMR, and completely blew it. T-Mobile is just now getting a chance with 600 and 700.
    Yes, that is true. It's easier to cover more areas with CLR.

    It's not a waste when people are on vacation and their T-Mobile phone has no service or is slow as molasses while the person next to them is Instagramming and Snapchatting and Google Mapping on AT&T or Verizon.
    If people think it's too slow they'll switch. But obviously people don't mind because their churn is going down, not up. So clearly T-Mobile knows what kind of backcountry coverage their customers will be fine with.

    It makes no sense to cut corners on a small amount of marginal cost to build out every band with 2 panels per sector on a site that they've already paid to lease and bring fiber to.
    T-Mobile execs think that what they're doing is just fine.

    Then don't argue to the contrary, as you literally argued with my post that said "AT&T is Verizon's nearest competitor for 4G coverage,", which says NOTHING about LTE, only about all 4G technologies.
    I didn't know you still considered HSPA+ a 4G technology. But I guess if AT&T is stuck with using so much of that old technology, they'll hang onto that line a bit longer.

    And Verizon still has a higher ARPU and higher quality customers.
    Well there's no rule that you can only be profitable with the higest ARPU customers.

  9. #249
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,764
    Feedback Score
    0
    "T-Mobile execs think that what they're doing is just fine. " - Jet

    Especially when it comes to the path they've taken since 2014.

  10. #250
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,764
    Feedback Score
    0
    LG V30 pre-orders start at T-Mobile in 2 days!

    http://www.tmonews.com/2017/09/lg-v3...r-october-5th/

  11. #251
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Greater Los Angeles
    Posts
    8,361
    Device(s)
    Galaxy S8+ and Gear S3 Frontier
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile USA
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    LG V30 pre-orders start at T-Mobile in 2 days!

    http://www.tmonews.com/2017/09/lg-v3...r-october-5th/
    Are you getting one?
    “The Internet wasn’t meant to be metered in bits and bytes, so it’s insane that wireless companies are still making you buy it this way. The rate plan is dead — it’s a fossil from a time when wireless was metered by every call or text.” John Legere 1/5/2017

  12. #252
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,764
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by @TheRealDanny View Post
    Are you getting one?
    Good question... I'm not seeing any flaws with it so far, but am keenly interested in reports of LG's past reputation. I haven't had an LG phone as a daily driver since the Optimus Prime.. er Slider years ago.

    Honestly, I am hoping for something like a "two for one" deal, which who knows might happen for Black Friday, or sometime next year months after these phones are out. Again, I am not familiar enough with T-Mobile phone marketing to know how likely this is with LG flagships and other high end phones....

    I'd like a "2 year phone" or better. One that will be ahead of the curve for a long long time, and toward the end of its projected 2 year life it will get all spry with the 600 mhz band having been rolled out.

    /me steps down from my soap box, embarrassed at interrupting all the erudite Lincoln Douglas-debate level comments with something as crass as to be on-topic.

    Name:  400px-Lincoln_Douglas.jpg
Views: 110
Size:  21.4 KB

  13. #253
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Greater Los Angeles
    Posts
    8,361
    Device(s)
    Galaxy S8+ and Gear S3 Frontier
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile USA
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    Good question... I'm not seeing any flaws with it so far, but am keenly interested in reports of LG's past reputation. I haven't had an LG phone as a daily driver since the Optimus Prime.. er Slider years ago.

    Honestly, I am hoping for something like a "two for one" deal, which who knows might happen for Black Friday, or sometime next year months after these phones are out. Again, I am not familiar enough with T-Mobile phone marketing to know how likely this is with LG flagships and other high end phones....

    I'd like a "2 year phone" or better. One that will be ahead of the curve for a long long time, and toward the end of its projected 2 year life it will get all spry with the 600 mhz band having been rolled out.

    /me steps down from my soap box, embarrassed at interrupting all the erudite Lincoln Douglas-debate level comments with something as crass as to be on-topic.
    ...........................
    Name:  19557940.jpg
Views: 114
Size:  120.0 KB

  14. #254
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    286
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    Good question... I'm not seeing any flaws with it so far, but am keenly interested in reports of LG's past reputation.
    Had an LG G4 on one of my lines that bootlooped. LG wouldn't fix it. I had the LG V10 and it also bootlooped. T-Mobile replaced it at the time and then I got rid of it - I read that the fixes don't fix the design problem and those repaired models are no less likely to bootloop again.

    That being said, I already bought a case for the V30 along with a wireless charger. I may wait a month or two though before ordering one.

    I did read that there is a display issue. Looks like an LCD light bleeding issue but since it's OLED, it isn't actually lightbleed. Possibly due to LG using panels designed for OLED TV's and cutting them into little pieces to be used in a phone.

  15. #255
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,764
    Feedback Score
    0
    Hokie, apparently you don't fear the bootloop for the V30?

Page 17 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-28-2014, 12:43 PM
  2. Motorola to launch the first 'world' phone
    By Bratan in forum Motorola
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-31-2004, 06:04 AM
  3. The first wireless phones in Canada with GPS capability.
    By Helmsley in forum TELUS Mobility
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-17-2003, 10:30 AM
  4. What's going to be the first camera phone to come to verizon ?
    By WeneedJapPhones in forum Verizon Wireless
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-27-2003, 11:34 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks