eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
CrimsonKnight is getting about what I get at home in PHX. Same thing, PHX isn't launched yet, 16% of towers done.
Except CrimsonKnight's upload speed is about 2.5 times mine. I'm lucky to crack 1mbps upload.
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.
Carrier Sprint is pathetic
- Thread starter Squilly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except CrimsonKnight's upload speed is about 2.5 times mine. I'm lucky to crack 1mbps upload.
Not really. VZW already has 2x20 AWS LTE deployed in major areas. They will easily outshine Sprint in the long run. This is VZW were talking about. They never sit around and do nothing (like Sprint/TMo)
Sprint is quoting peak speeds of 50-60mbps. People with VZW AWS capable devices are already getting over 100mbps down in NYC, etc.
Last edited:
CrimsonKnight
macrumors 6502
Yea no, you are wrong. Verizon does have 2x20, but Sprint will have 20X20 with LTE band 41, which is being launched throughout Denver as they are converting the WiMax 2500/2600 over to LTE 2500/2600 TD_LTE Band 41. Higher capacity. This shows as well, with Verizon getting bogged down in the major cities like Manhattan. Customers are getting kicked off of LTE to 3G because the network is over capcity.
One TD-LTE 20MHz carrier has 1.5 times the capacity of one 750MHz LTE 10MHz carrier. comparing one VZW LTE carrier with maximum coverage, one Sprint TD-LTE carrier on 12 sites would have 18 times the capacity.
Even if you add the second AWS carrier on Verizon, Sprint still has more for half the customers when you add three TD-LTE Sprint carriers, plus add LTE 800 & 1900. Sprint's capacity would be more than five fold greater than Verizon for half the customers. The numbers look really good compared to AT&T too.
Sprint is launching a Tri-Band TD-LTE network.
What Sprint is doing, is building a future proof network. 2013 was a painful year for Sprint, however 2014 is when most of the NV phase 1 will be complete. Than we will start to see more and more Sprint Spark cities come live, and if executed correctly, will have a advantage over the competition. Patience is key here, and I understand why a lot of Sprint customers have jumped ship, understandably.
Good things are on there way if you are a sprint customer, hold on to your butts!
^ yea no.
I'm well aware of the technical aspects of NV and all the BS being spewed on the internet by the S4GRU boys. Until Sprint can actually deliver on NV, it's all hypothetical. They've proven to us that they can't hold up their end of the bargain so far...
NV was supposed to be done by year end 2013. We all know how that ended up...
I'm well aware of the technical aspects of NV and all the BS being spewed on the internet by the S4GRU boys. Until Sprint can actually deliver on NV, it's all hypothetical. They've proven to us that they can't hold up their end of the bargain so far...
NV was supposed to be done by year end 2013. We all know how that ended up...
CrimsonKnight
macrumors 6502
Again, Sprint expected to have phase 1 on NV completed by the end of 2013, or early 2014. That was pushed back to mid 2014. Not a huge setback, considering the massive upgrade the network is going through.
Keep in mind, this is a different company than say 5 years ago. Softbank is pumping 7 Billion dollars into Sprint per year. So I would not rush to the judgement of " They've proven to us that they can't hold up their end of the bargain so far..." just yet.
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
AU39 isn't denying Sprint's position. He's just referring to Sprint's execution.
Historically, that's been a problem. And while you are correct that this is a "new" Sprint, Network Vision was paid for at the end of 2011 when Sprint signed contracts with Alcatel-Lucent, Ericsson and Samsung. All the checks have already been written and long since cashed. Any money Softbank has to toss at NV won't have any effect at all on NV 1.0. NV 2.0, rolling out 2500 and so forth yes, but not NV 1.0.
Yes, Softbank has made a big difference, but it's result aren't going to affect what's already been started. Sprint chose to start NV on the cheap. Alcatel-Lucent, which has ties to AT&T and Verizon (Sprint's competitors) gives preferential treatment to those vendors and assigns it's least experienced crews to the Sprint jobs.
Ericsson is not involved at all in NV 2.0. Who knows about Samsung. There's ways around that. You pay the company you hire a bonus for each day a job is completed early. That gets the best crews assigned. Obviously, Sprint chose not to do that.
Then you get the local backhaul vendors involved. Sprint can't control that true, but they could have influenced the hiring processes of the vendors (ALU, Samsung, Ericsson) who do hire them. Quite a bit of New Mexico had to be redone because Sprint refused to sign off on bad installs.
As to the delay, you say it's only about 6 months. Which, if you look at the whole is true. But if you look at the individual process is just a big grind.
Taking Phoenix, AZ for example. Work started in December 2012. We would have been finished by December 2013, but only 16% of LTE sites are signed off on because the backhaul vendors can't get their crap together and deliver backhaul. Permits that were pulled well over a year ago for sites still have not been acted on. I'm not expecting PHX to be finished by mid 2014 because of this. No matter what s4gru.com says. We are a third round market and we are BEHIND several 4th ROUND MARKETS!!!
Someone has to be the last. And maybe that's Phoenix. But I wouldn't be surprised at all to discover that Phoenix is that .1% that won't budge and keeps the completion status bar fixed at 99.99%.
If it is finished by mid-2014, then this will be the first time Sprint has surprised me in a good way and I'll be happy about it. But Sprint has a problem of focusing on something new and not finishing the old. WiMax, is a bye, because they weren't in control of Clearwire rolling things out. But Dan Hesse was the one in charge as to when Nextel would be cut off. He chose to leave it running for a few years instead of just shutting it all down and taking the hit once. Instead of the several hits every month over the years.
I am just hoping that for once Dan Hesse is right and 2014 IS a rebuilding year. It would be nice for once to be on a carrier that no one is laughing at you for using. 😉
Once NV is done though Sprint will be in a very good position. But getting Sprint there is the hard part because Sprint has the bad habit of impeding it's own progress.
----------
Wow! Is it January 1, 2016 already? I'm getting 8-11mbps down right now so it must be! 😉
CrimsonKnight
macrumors 6502
Right, I never disagreed on the execution part. In fact, I agreed with that in a my previous post. And you are correct, Sprint must execute this correctly, otherwise.. they will be in the same boat they are in now.
I do believe Dan Hesse, that 2014 will be the year, that Sprint will show the hard work is paying off. I feel your pain, I have been with Sprint since 2004. Work great until 2010 when the android smartphones came on the network, and being the network was never meant to handle that amount of data, the slowdown has been awful.
I have seen between 2 Mbps and 20 Mpbs on a few towers lit up north of Denver. I am hoping they execute NV correctly, and Spark. That way, me and you ... won't be on the carrier that everyone laughs at! 😛
Good post, thanks for the comment!
----------
Better check that again. 😛
Much of Denver is already converted for Spark. It's just a matter of weeks or a few months before the first 5 Cities like Denver are lit up.
Again, it's all hypothetical situations. We can go on and on and dream about how great tri-band LTE is supposed to be, but execution is a another issue.
We've been hearing the exact same line from Sprint for a long time now. "Just wait, it will get better..." And it HASN'T gotten better yet.
Sprint launched (3G) EVDO Rev A (2006) before VZW (2007). XOHM 4G was launched and WiMax went online. They were the first to 3G and 4G. Both times, they were called the VZW-killer. Now with NV, Sprint users are calling the network revolutionary. Yet people are completely ignoring the fact that AT&T is at 500+ LTE markets. Even their HSPA is performing better than Sprint LTE in some areas. VZW is at 99% coverage of LTE over their EVDO network footprint.
VZW/AT&T (even T-Mobile) will have LTE-A up before NV is even remotely complete. What will Sprint do then? They've been telling us things forever, but never follow through. Even NV phase 1 has been delayed multiple times and we've been getting BS excuses, such as winter weather, birds on towers, etc. Issues that the competitors don't seem to be having. All round 1 LTE markets are STILL not done.
Why should customers have to "wait a few months" to see if Sprint will get around to upgrading all these sites. The competition is already delivering in a big way. AT&T and VZW have been delivering quoted Sprint Spark peak speeds for over 2 years now. Even when these networks "bog down," users have more reliable connections than the Sprint NV network. This has been shown on root metrics reports from ATL and Chicago.
Last edited:
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
I think we are all in agreement. Execution is the thing Sprint needs. They have everything else at this point.
I've been with Sprint since 1999. Execution and consistency have always been Sprint problems. They are only consistent in failing to execute and be consistent.
I believe though that NV 2.0 is the rollout of LTE-A. So, we'll see. Supposedly that's a simple software upgrade to the current equipment and therefore won't take anywhere near as long. But in order to do that, the equipment has to be there to begin with!
Let's see what 2014 brings! CES keynotes from all the carriers will be interesting! I'm curious about AT&T/VZW's next steps, as LTE deployment is almost done.
My IT head told me the other day that they might switch us back to Sprint MiFis around summer time to cut some costs. We've been using a combo of AT&T/VZW ones since the end of 2012. We had Sprint ones before. I really don't want to give up my VZW one, but they pay for it, so... 🙁
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
Would that mean that the MiFis will have built-in direct connect capabilities? no thanks then 😛
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
Tthomas612
macrumors 65816
I'm highly doubting it. LTE has been live in my area since September. At one time I was averaging 30 down and 10-15 up, but right now it's settled around 20 down and 6-8 up. It's not awful, it's usable, but not like AT&T or Verizon.
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
No idea, but I doubt it. Sprint would have crowed about it already. The fact that we've heard zilch from Sprint on that is a pretty good indicator that they blew it on that one.
Hmm...
Another statement they made was that a few thousand 800 LTE sites were going to go up. Nothing on that either.
Maybe they're waiting until CES to make a big deal about it? 😕
I could be wrong, but I think they're waiting to launch them altogether, instead of 1 by 1 like they're doing with LTE 1900. I know they're doing that with LTE 2600 in some areas.
They need to hurry up though.
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
Tthomas612
macrumors 65816
Yeah that's a bit ridiculous. I've been with the for 10 years. Almost switched then LTE went live, but the rollout has been super slow that's for sure it's definitely ridiculous and I do NOT understand at all why
I think the standard explanation is that it's a total network overhaul. I'm not sure that's a fair excuse at all because AT&T/T-Mo/VZW have also overhauled their cell sites. The towers lacked the backhaul necessary for LTE. VZW did it in record time and their network was slow EVDO everywhere.
Sprint's goal was 200 million on LTE by year end 2013. T-Mobile blew through that goal in 10 months (1/13 - 10/13) and are a little over that on LTE.
eyoungren
macrumors Nehalem
Yeah, and Sprint will argue that the others simply overlayed their equipment while Sprint ripped everything out and replaced it. And that the others didn't announce anything before completion. That's one of Sprint's big faults right there - telling everyone about what they were doing before they had anything done.
I'd be inclined to give Sprint that one, especially since a lot of the actual replacement work has been accepted. However, as you and I both know, backhaul has been one of the big issues. Something Sprint never accounted for and planned on and of course the fault is with the vendor and not Sprint - if you believe Sprint.
But even accounting for late backhaul, a 16% completion rate after a years worth of work, when permits were all lined up…no, I don't buy it. Sprint's really messed this up.
I'm from California. A state where Caltrans can do major freeway work (to code!!!) in a night and construction workers can put up a building in a few weeks. Arizona's way of getting things done (looking at you AZDOT!) involving weeks and months and sometimes years was a rude shock. But even Arizonans have to admit that this is damn slow!
Black Magic
macrumors 68030
I'm in a Texas city that is a first round market for Sprint LTE that is apparently 95% done. Major gaps in coverage all around the city that leaves a lot to be desired. S4GRU says it 95% but sure as hell doesn't feel like 95% coverage.
The kicker is if you go to the NBA game in this city and you bring your Sprint phone, you will have no data service period. I find that crap unacceptable. I will say that the arena has AT&T in the name, so I'm curious if there is some cock blocking going on there?
AT&T runs a DAS system at AT&T Center. It's up to the carriers (ROI, etc) to also sign up.
TD Gardens (where the Celtics play) got an AT&T DAS back in 2012. VZW signed up a few months later. During Celtics/Bruins game days, only the two have working data. Pretty ironic because Sprint is a huge NBA sponsor.
http://pocketnow.com/2012/05/21/this-is-how-att-covers-19000-people-under-one-roof
-It's a very similar situation in our MBTA (subway) tunnels/stations. T-Mobile/AT&T share a DAS underground. A few months later, VZW came on board. Sprint refused. The work-around is to roam on VZW underground with your Sprint device.
-Similar situation at Fenway, where the Red Sox play. AT&T/VZW share a DAS. Sprint barely works in that area. No LTE at all, even though the maps say so. T-Mobile gets HSPA sometimes. Mostly EDGE if there's too many people.
-I don't think the name has to do anything with it. At VZ Center (Wizards play there), AT&T has a indoor DAS.
-Barclay's Center (BKN Nets) has a DAS that is shared between VZW/MetroPCS/Sprint/AT&T.
side note,
(Tim Duncan is one of my favorite players. Go SAS!) 😀
Last edited: