Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 30 of 30

Thread: Sprint LTE speeds collapsing in E Michigan. What about your market?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    173
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AndroAsc View Post
    I live in E. Michigan and the LTE speeds in urban areas are terrible. Just got 300kbps off speed test...!!! My phone is not Spark compatible btw...
    You really need to try out a Spark device -- your missing like 60% of the data network without one.

    Speeds aren't great in Detroit, even with a Spark device. But the B41 service is faster than 300k.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    3
    Feedback Score
    0

    Spark greatly improved speed

    Quote Originally Posted by whathuhwhat View Post
    I've been getting like 2 Mbps from band 41 at my work since the N5 became spark enabled. Today those speeds were upgraded to 30 Mbps. Caught me completely by surprise.
    Same here is chicago, LTE Speed was extremely slow till Spark
    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 368
Size:  51.0 KB

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,310
    Device(s)
    Pixel XL, OnePlus 2
    Carrier(s)
    Project Fi
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gafram View Post
    Same here is chicago, LTE Speed was extremely slow till Spark
    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 368
Size:  51.0 KB
    Thanks for sharing that. I had heard that speeds in Chicago were so so, so seeing this is good news.

    I have a Sharp Aquos and I average 2-3 MBPS everywhere I go. Even when I visited the Metroplex recently, I got the same speed in the area, but only got .1 MBPS in DFW. Hopefully Spark will soon be lit in more places and there will be some further expansion of the native coverage area.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    172
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maxsilver View Post
    You really need to try out a Spark device -- your missing like 60% of the data network without one.

    Speeds aren't great in Detroit, even with a Spark device. But the B41 service is faster than 300k.
    I shouldn't need to get another phone just to get proper 4G LTE speeds. I just purchased my Samsung Victory 4G LTE.

    I'm constantly getting 100-500kbps during normal hours. It's not a hardware issue because when I test the speed at 5am in the morning, it goes to 10mpbs.... This is sickening...

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    711
    Device(s)
    Pixel, S9+, S9, S8, S7, G6
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint, T-mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AndroAsc View Post
    I shouldn't need to get another phone just to get proper 4G LTE speeds. I just purchased my Samsung Victory 4G LTE.

    I'm constantly getting 100-500kbps during normal hours. It's not a hardware issue because when I test the speed at 5am in the morning, it goes to 10mpbs.... This is sickening...
    Verizon users with band 13 only devices needed to get new phones with band 4 support to get usable lte speeds.

    Tmobile users will need to get new band 2 phone to use rural lte.

    Att users need to get new phones to support carrier aggregation for higher speeds.

    Sprint users to get triband phones to get higher speeds.


    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    3,543
    Device(s)
    Nexus5/Nexus6
    Carrier(s)
    Cricket
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by lilotimz View Post
    Verizon users with band 13 only devices needed to get new phones with band 4 support to get usable lte speeds.

    Tmobile users will need to get new band 2 phone to use rural lte.

    Att users need to get new phones to support carrier aggregation for higher speeds.

    Sprint users to get triband phones to get higher speeds.


    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    That doesn't stand true with AT&T they have been including all their bands for a while now. Most customers can care less about CA so your point is moot. Unfortunately with Sprint it's been the buy a new phone for Wimax, customers didn't get it, but wait buy a new phone for LTE, got it but didn't work well so buy a new phone for triband LTE. It has pushed a lot of customers away.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    711
    Device(s)
    Pixel, S9+, S9, S8, S7, G6
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint, T-mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by digiblur View Post
    That doesn't stand true with AT&T they have been including all their bands for a while now. Most customers can care less about CA so your point is moot. Unfortunately with Sprint it's been the buy a new phone for Wimax, customers didn't get it, but wait buy a new phone for LTE, got it but didn't work well so buy a new phone for triband LTE. It has pushed a lot of customers away.
    Hence why I said higher speeds and not usable speed.

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by martin_j001; 11-17-2014 at 11:25 AM.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,505
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s+ 64GB
    Carrier(s)
    ·T···Mobile· USA
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maxsilver View Post
    People will say "but Sprint has 800mhz spectrum" -- but that doesn't help any, Nextel also used that same 800mhz spectrum and still needed the higher density to offer good service. Sprint does too.
    No, Nextel needed the density due to how inefficient iDen was at handling phone calls. Everyone forgets that iDen was a IP/PTT network first and phone network second (phone capability was a total afterthought) and the max calls Nextel could squeeze out of any given channel was 6 calls when they used that garbage half rate codec that made everyone sound drunk and caused many a "Please hold while the Nextel subscriber your trying to reach is located..." Messages even with full signal

    What your experiencing is Sprint just improperly aiming antennas and leaving the base station power too weak to be properly effective
    Left: Verizon Unlimited LTE, Right: WideOpenWest 500/50

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Patriots Nation & St Petersburg FL
    Posts
    9,553
    Device(s)
    LG G8, LG K20 Plus
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AndroAsc View Post
    I shouldn't need to get another phone just to get proper 4G LTE speeds. I just purchased my Samsung Victory 4G LTE.

    I'm constantly getting 100-500kbps during normal hours. It's not a hardware issue because when I test the speed at 5am in the morning, it goes to 10mpbs.... This is sickening...
    You bought a basic, entry level phone with only a single band (1900Mhz) LTE channel.

    My wife uses my old Optimus G which is a good phone but suffers from the single band syndrome as well. My iPhone 6 runs circles around it due to having pretty good Spark coverage around my place in St Petersburg FL.

    Are you on postpaid, prepaid, Boost or Virgin?



    Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    173
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    No, Nextel needed the density due to how inefficient iDen was at handling phone calls.
    Your right about Nextel having "please hold" issues. But that doesn't in any way mean that the towers were redundant or unnecessary, because data is easily as inefficient as voice used to be, and Sprint's measurably last place in data performance, on average, in most cities.

    Sprint needs all of those sites, even if they theoretically could cover an area without them (they can't, but for the sake of argument, we'll pretend) because their sectors would be too large to offer even 3G-levels of data service over LTE.

    Sprint trying to do that anyway, is the main cause of their last-place data rankings over the majority of this year, including a dead-last ranking in Detroit from two months ago at http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/detroit-mi

    This thread is supposed to be about East Michigan. Have you ever been to Michigan? Because site spacing here is terrible, even by Sprint's already-low standards. Even the S4GRU guys typically take pity on us, and will admit we're one of the bottom 5 worst markets in the nation for Sprint site spacing. (Again, examples - http://imgur.com/a/rXDUd )

    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    What your experiencing is Sprint just improperly aiming antennas and leaving the base station power too weak to be properly effective
    Your right, how could I have missed it. Removing 60% of a markets cell sites changes nothing. Sprint's network would be perfect, even without sites, if they could just find someone to properly aim their sectors!



    This is a really weird argument to me. I'm complaining that they're really cheap on cell sites, which can be easily validated, and isn't a knock on Sprint's employees so much as management. (I'm guessing there's a bunch of engineers who know this is ****, but aren't allowed to make it better, because of cost)

    But your taking that much further by saying that Sprint (or the contractors they manage) are so incompetent that they can't install a sector properly (even, presumably, during NV1.0 / NV2.0). That's a bold claim, that I've not seen much evidence of.

    Network Vision 2.0 ("Spark") works fairly well here on the sites, if your close enough to a tower to get it, and have a phone that supports it. It's just that 50% to 80% of the population here isn't close enough to a Sprint site to experience any of that good service.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,505
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s+ 64GB
    Carrier(s)
    ·T···Mobile· USA
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maxsilver View Post
    Your right about Nextel having "please hold" issues. But that doesn't in any way mean that the towers were redundant or unnecessary, because data is easily as inefficient as voice used to be, and Sprint's measurably last place in data performance, on average, in most cities.

    Sprint needs all of those sites, even if they theoretically could cover an area without them (they can't, but for the sake of argument, we'll pretend) because their sectors would be too large to offer even 3G-levels of data service over LTE.

    Sprint trying to do that anyway, is the main cause of their last-place data rankings over the majority of this year, including a dead-last ranking in Detroit from two months ago at http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/detroit-mi

    This thread is supposed to be about East Michigan. Have you ever been to Michigan? Because site spacing here is terrible, even by Sprint's already-low standards. Even the S4GRU guys typically take pity on us, and will admit we're one of the bottom 5 worst markets in the nation for Sprint site spacing. (Again, examples - http://imgur.com/a/rXDUd )



    Your right, how could I have missed it. Removing 60% of a markets cell sites changes nothing. Sprint's network would be perfect, even without sites, if they could just find someone to properly aim their sectors!



    This is a really weird argument to me. I'm complaining that they're really cheap on cell sites, which can be easily validated, and isn't a knock on Sprint's employees so much as management. (I'm guessing there's a bunch of engineers who know this is ****, but aren't allowed to make it better, because of cost)

    But your taking that much further by saying that Sprint (or the contractors they manage) are so incompetent that they can't install a sector properly (even, presumably, during NV1.0 / NV2.0). That's a bold claim, that I've not seen much evidence of.

    Network Vision 2.0 ("Spark") works fairly well here on the sites, if your close enough to a tower to get it, and have a phone that supports it. It's just that 50% to 80% of the population here isn't close enough to a Sprint site to experience any of that good service.
    Well as a former tech that used to work for Sprint, you'd be surprised at the directions given to the techs by management on how to place sites (at least out west). Most of the time the techs are just doing "what they're told to do" and moving on.

    I've seen first hand how they poorly plan the network, and what would generally happen was one would be put in a "test" mode (aka not tuned properly - underpowered and not pointed properly) then the techs were given 50 other sites to work on, so there are a ton of sites that are still not properly tuned.

    I can see this all around Phoenix still anytime i use Sprint as they still have not properly tuned about 50% of the LTE network causing poor 800MHz propagation and speeds.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    6,322
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy S8
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    No, Nextel needed the density due to how inefficient iDen was at handling phone calls.
    Yeah they had to do extremely dense cell site spacing to make the service work properly. In many markets they had to have more sites than the PCS 1900 carriers had.

    Quote Originally Posted by maxsilver View Post
    What your experiencing is Sprint just improperly aiming antennas and leaving the base station power too weak to be properly effective
    I've seen a few instances of this in the LA area back in the day. I also heard some similar stories from a friend who used to be a field tech. One particular problematic site that I had reported for that very reason ended up getting fixed a few years later.
    Sprint user since 1997

  13. #28
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    6,322
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy S8
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maxsilver View Post
    The worst part of it is that Clearwire also has a dense network with nice cell spacing, at least in Grand Rapids proper. The jury's still out on it, but it looks like that's *also* getting mostly killed.
    What makes you say these Clearwire sites are getting mostly killed? Give me some locations that you think they are getting killed in.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    492
    Feedback Score
    0
    First Spark tower is up in Ann Arbor (Westgate) 37/10, band 41.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Minneapolis/St.Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    925
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon Wireless
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    Well as a former tech that used to work for Sprint, you'd be surprised at the directions given to the techs by management on how to place sites (at least out west). Most of the time the techs are just doing "what they're told to do" and moving on.

    I've seen first hand how they poorly plan the network, and what would generally happen was one would be put in a "test" mode (aka not tuned properly - underpowered and not pointed properly) then the techs were given 50 other sites to work on, so there are a ton of sites that are still not properly tuned.

    I can see this all around Phoenix still anytime i use Sprint as they still have not properly tuned about 50% of the LTE network causing poor 800MHz propagation and speeds.
    Sad how poor decisions from the top and a string of "yes men" in middle management can virtually collapse the entire company a few years later because the network, well, doesn't work, and they ain't pulling an AT&T by fixing their trouble spots ASAP.

    Imagine if the right person just had the stones to say "leave all sites in test mode? NO, we won't be leaving any of these multi-million dollar sites running at 50%, we'll be pulling as much overtime as my crews can handle for eight, maybe ten months, K THX BYE!" [Hangs up his Nextel and mumbles under breath, "F--ken' idiot."]

    Just imagine. Why, they'd be like T-Mobile, only with a better network!

    Because honestly, Sprint is better on paper, but as far as I can tell, T-Mobile crews WORK to make their network work at 100%, thus providing the better customer experience. It shouldn't take a genius to figure out that if you let your network and customer experience fall to 4th place, you're going to end up in 4th place.
    Last edited by thegonagle; 11-17-2014 at 01:46 AM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. T-Mobile is doing 3G infill in my city, what about yours?
    By ChristopherMcG in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-30-2010, 02:03 PM
  2. 3G speed issue in SE Michigan?
    By spartanrob in forum AT&T
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-12-2009, 07:53 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-17-2007, 05:50 PM
  4. Speed Issues in SE Michigan
    By spartanrob in forum AT&T
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-05-2007, 12:28 PM
  5. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-23-2005, 11:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks