Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
5s all but worthless on sprint
- Thread starter Joybulb
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I LIKE YOU!!!! You basically stole the words right from under my mouth.
It's shocking that people choose Sprint as an option in 2013. There non-existent LTE network maxes out at around 5mbps. For the record, AT&T's 3G has been doing that for years. Sprint seems to "work" for about a dozen or so people. The rest just have to use wifi the rest of the time.
I will NEVER understand why someone wouldn't want to pay more for a much better network experience? Sprint will not be around much longer anyway. Getting the iPhone only helped cripple their already pathetic network.
props and you did it all by your self without having to be spoon fed. Now you can think about me every time you pay your bill and save $40 per month...mwahahhahahhaahh
props and you did it all by your self without having to be spoon fed. Now you can think about me every time you pay your bill and save $40 per month...mwahahhahahhaahh
fair enough
Matt! Post #52 in this thread about Sprint! Took you long enough to find it and post "Sprint sucks!" Were you using Apple Maps on Sprint 3G to get here?
I understand what your getting at. However I've been a Sprint customer since 2004. They are liars ... MAJOR, but my LTE is way faster than 5 Mbps. I'm averaging about 30 Mbps down and 10 up. Now I realize I'm one of the few, but just saying
How is Sprint better than its competitors in call quality ? I never had a drop call on Verizon or AT&T.
I never said Sprint was better than AT&T or Verizon at anything. I just said Sprint does not suck for me.
Matt! Post #52 in this thread about Sprint! Took you long enough to find it and post "Sprint sucks!" Were you using Apple Maps on Sprint 3G to get here?
You crack me up!!!
No way you're averaging 30+Mbps down on Sprint. Their 2x5 slice of spectrum allows for 37 Mbps max (theoretical.)
I think the 5s has a weaker antenna than most phones. I have a galaxy s4 and it picks up LTE very well on sprint. My 5S can be sitting right next to it and only get 3G. People say I'm crazy for choosing sprint. I say people are crazy for choosing Att and Verizon. Verizon does have great coverage, and AT&T should be ashamed to be the nations leading GSM carrier with its shady coverage. Sprint doesn't have the best network, but where it does work it works great. It's going to only get better once the 800mhz LTE network goes live. I refuse to pay the ridiculous prices verizon and Att charge, and on top of that they have the nerve to cap your data.
Ok I'm not. I have no reason to lie about it! What am I averaging then? People kill me telling me what I do or don't do...
Here's a Speed test it's 25 down. Ok I'm probably averaging 25 down not quite 30 but I have hit 30 and 32 Mbps. My highest has been 32 down.
You can't tell me what I do and don't do.
There's no way this and no way that. I know there's a way I've seen it with my own eyes...
Attachments
You can't tell me what my phone does and don't do ... I know what it does and how fast it is. No matter what you "believe."
30 down isn't what I've averaged, but I have gotten 30 and 32 ... I'm averaging a good 25 no problem
Last edited by a moderator:
I live in the south bay area(Los angeles) and i love sprint. switched over from verizon because it was WAY cheaper and offers unlimited everything for half the price basically.
From switching about 2 years ago, i haven't noticed a big difference in service and quality in terms of call reception. Im getting 3 bars of LTE in my house and avg. 15 down 5 up which is perfect.
guess the people who hate sprint are those that don't have a good service or those that live in nowhere nebraska lol
From switching about 2 years ago, i haven't noticed a big difference in service and quality in terms of call reception. Im getting 3 bars of LTE in my house and avg. 15 down 5 up which is perfect.
guess the people who hate sprint are those that don't have a good service or those that live in nowhere nebraska lol
Sprint is a joke. Where i live the saying is if you want LTE get VZW, good voice get AT&T, and if you want no service get Sprint. Sprint only offer 3G, but most people cant even get 1Mbs speeds. Really poor for a metro area of 240,000 people. Of course T-Slomo is even worse with only 2G speeds. Cant wait for AT&T to upgrade from 4G to LTE. At least then there will be some competition for VZW. No upgrades in sight for Sprint. Swiftel owns all the towers that Sprint uses.
Well done!
One fast speed test doesn't mean that you average that much over a period of time. You conveniently left out that your "fast" speeds probably last about a block and drop down to sub-1 mbps EVDO, as Sprint usually does.
----------
That "shady coverage" network has over 437+ (as of 10/21) markets of LTE live.
Sprint? Haven't even broken 200 markets yet and are STILL working on their round-1 markets. TMobile is ahead and have only been deploying since early 2013.
VZW and AT&T have LTE deployed in sub-1ghz frequencies (700mhz) at twice the capacity as Sprint (2x10 versus 2x5) and are very close to deploying LTE on their AWS (VZW)/ PCS (AT&T) spectrums.
They have "the nerve" to cap data because the typical Sprint/TMo customer abuses their "unlimited" data plan and thinks they can get away with torrenting on it, etc.
So why again should AT&T be ashamed by some cut-rate carrier who can't even deploy LTE properly?
Last edited by a moderator:
If anything, I wish the hammer would fall on Alcatel-Lucent. As I stated in the Sprint is Pathetic thread A-L is a ******* company that hasn't turned a profit since 2006 and just replaced it's CEO. The new guy is already cutting. Even s4gru.com has finally started to recognize the gross incompetence and negligence of this company. There's a thread about it over there and the fact that it's still open says that A-L is pretty bad. IDK, maybe s4gru is finally looking to start blaming someone.
They even mentioned that A-L is behind the curve technologically. They are arguing over there on whether the equipment is quality or not but the point of being behind has been agreed upon.
A-L's done a great job of reinforcing Sprint's poor reputation of network performance. But Sprint isn't clean either as they actually gave a contract to the damn company and handed 50 percent of the buildout to them!
Because I couldn't deal with having to walk outside or drive up to the nearest freeway to my house just to make a phone call. That's why T-Mobile isn't an option.
You bring up a very valid point. I was reading some thread a few days ago over there about how the ALU hardware is quite behind Samsung/Ericsson, etc. and how Samsung is quite new to the US market, but has become among the leaders for tower hardware/deployment.
I have no problem placing (some) blame on ALU for hurting Sprint's already-poor reputation, but it's not just Sprint using ALU. AT&T and VZW have both contracted ALU for some of their deployment. If they can meet deadlines for the big two, why not for Sprint? Did Sprint negotiate a cut-rate price for their deployment, so ALU doesn't care?
I just wish that (for Sprint's sake), they get their stuff together and deploy LTE out there. They desperately need it fast. None of the round 1 markets are done yet. That's ridiculous. AT&T and VZW are already going back and adding more sites (and deploying new spectrum) to their top markets.
And I don't mean stringing along a few towers and announcing the market launched. (Sprint PR fail here). It's not fair for the loyal users to be lied to, especially for supporting them through all of this turmoil.
Last edited:
