It is and it isn't. Cricket only gives 8mbps on their network and it's plenty fast for most other folks.
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
It is and it isn't. Cricket only gives 8mbps on their network and it's plenty fast for most other folks.
So, you want to be able to do speed tests all the time, so you can say to yourself, that the network can keep up with what you perceive to be a certain static demand above a certain LTE speed? That doesn't make sense to me.
If one is getting good call quality and is able to traverse the internet freely, without having to wait and wait for websites to load etc, what exactly is the need to get 20 MBPS LTE versus 10 MBPS, outside of being able to brag on the forum or to one's friends? What part of the puzzle am I missing?
----------
I think the company has made positive steps forward with the new CEO.
Sprint isn't going to work for everyone, as far as coverage and usability goes. But, for me, the coverage is good and the price is right, especially for unlimited data. I don't get 10 - 20 MBPs LTE speed everywhere I go. On occasion, I only have 3G coverage, where I may have to wait an extra 1 - 2 seconds for a website to load. I am also not hung up on doing speed tests all the time. In my opinion, getting rid of my unlimited data plan to go with Verizon or ATT&T, just so I can brag about the speeds at a capped plan and higher rate isn't worth it. If something major changes with Sprint or my locales, then I will reassess my options in relation to my needs.
He does have a point in this case. Like say someone is getting 10mbps down during low usage hours or regular network traffic. What happens during a concert or some type of special event? Or what happens around peak afternoon hours when everyone is on the network?
A network that's only capable of 10Mbps down on LTE right now in a major city could easily be overloaded to frustrating speeds in 6-12 months just from the natural increase of more people using the network. Granted, Sprint has been more accustomed to less people using the network with all the customers fleeing, but at some point they'll start growing again and all of those already overloaded 5+5 markets that provide 10Mbps today will be near unusable except during off-peak hours. Keep in mind that people are also using increasingly more data with time. Data usage per customer will only increase from here on out.
Whereas a person who can pull 25+Mbps down today will likely be fine several years from now as the number of people using the network as well as data usage per customer increases. A 50+Mbps connection will likely hold up well during major events and peak hours too.
----------
Cricket is different in that it's being artificially capped at 8Mbps rather than that being all that the network is capable of. If AT&T is actually capable of 40+ speeds in a market, then Cricket users are fine. Now if AT&T proper were only capable of 8 Mbps in a market then the experience would be much more frustrating for Cricket customers in that same market.
that was not my question.
----------
Perfect!
This is how I feel exactly
The topic title is very correct. "Sprint is pathetic". Was just in Atlanta the past weekend were they supposedly have Spark enabled and watched my one poor friend who refuses to leave Sprint attempt to load a Youtube video. Watched it buffer as if it were on dialup. Sprint seems to drop down to '3G' quite a bit. This was in Midtown, Buckhead, and Sandy Springs. While my Verizon iPhone had nothing but flawless LTE even inside all the buildings.
And yet I still get faster speeds from Sprint than I did on AT&T, with Unlimited at 50$ a month at that.
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story...rk-new-boingo-deal-small-cell-push/2015-04-30
Seems Sprint is just a follower. None of this does anything to push the bar and actually improve their network. Sprint is notoriously weak in airports across the US. Instead of improving their networks in airports, they're just throwing a band-aid over it.
AT&T subscribers have had free access to their huge WiFi network for years now. And the in-home WiFi router? Direct copy from TMobile.
Seems Sprint is just a follower. None of this does anything to push the bar and actually improve their network. Sprint is notoriously weak in airports across the US. Instead of improving their networks in airports, they're just throwing a band-aid over it.
AT&T subscribers have had free access to their huge WiFi network for years now. And the in-home WiFi router? Direct copy from TMobile.
Have you thought that maybe they're using this while they improve their network? Or would you rather have crap airport performance now and forever on Sprint?
Airports should have been 1st priority on the list of sites to be upgraded nationwide, especially with the amount of travelers at these major American airports.
When VZW and AT&T launched LTE in the US years ago, sites in (and around) airports were some of the first to get upgraded to LTE. Here in Boston, the first LTE sightings on AT&T were at Boston Logan Airport.
Fast forward to 3-4 years later, Sprint still has sketchy service at Logan and part of Boston STILL don't have LTE up and running. The excuses are running out. The network should have been done years ago.
All I'm getting from this is poor network planning and management. Why aren't airports and high-traffic areas of major cities the first places for network upgrades? Every other carrier seems to understand this.
No, airports aren't a place where people are a majority of the time. Getting their service up and about around the country where people are a majority of the time should be their first priority. Getting Sprint Spark working should be second priority. Airports are minor.
Perhaps. But it's only for the top 5% of heavy data users and ONLY when they are connected to a congested cell tower. If they connect to a NON-congested cell tower they are not throttled. If you are not in that top 5% you are not throttled period.
Lastly, Sprint, in the wake of last week's implementation of the new net neutrality laws has abandoned even this practice.
So, speed is down to congestion, lack of backhaul and lack of network densification (i.e, too few cell towers).
I had this problem i am on 4g some year and previously i tested my speeds and had crappy 4Mbps..and oddly upload 18-20 it was clear throttle ..
I complained to them, started shouting at them , started giving them bad feedbacks on every site , spreading ,telling ppl on forums how they ar crap other ppl been saying same experience and now they realized that takin piss from its customers is not good idea and now, all sudden my speeds are now as they should be on 4G 50Mbps and 20Mbps
Perhaps they just finally upgraded your area?I had this problem i am on 4g some year and previously i tested my speeds and had crappy 4Mbps..and oddly upload 18-20 it was clear throttle ..
I complained to them, started shouting at them , started giving them bad feedbacks on every site , spreading ,telling ppl on forums how they ar crap other ppl been saying same experience and now they realized that takin piss from its customers is not good idea and now, all sudden my speeds are now as they should be on 4G 50Mbps and 20Mbps
My speeds at work were less then 1mbps from late 2012 to early 2015. No complaints (to Sprint anyway). But they upgraded the second tower near work and added a third and now my speeds are in the 6-10mbps zone.
I did however complain a lot online. But Sprint is usually pretty tone deaf to customer complaints.
Obviously they DID BECAUSE I told them TO ! been remaindering them like 10 times a week until they done it !
you know they are lazy to check area and replace Masks ..(stronger booster /higher bandwidth)
And the last domino has fallen!
Joe Euteneuer is gone!
http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-strengthens-senior-leadership-team.htm?view_id=12582
Very, very interesting! Considering that financials are being reported tomorrow I see this as a precursor to some very bad numbers on Sprint's part.
Joe Euteneuer is gone!
http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-releases/sprint-strengthens-senior-leadership-team.htm?view_id=12582
Very, very interesting! Considering that financials are being reported tomorrow I see this as a precursor to some very bad numbers on Sprint's part.
Agree with you, just picked up a friend at Logan, he was with a Sprint phone. Couldn't reach him at all. His phone didn't ring at all. Have to drive to central parking and walk around. We lost time and money because of Sprint. The guy switched to Att at my advice after that. He told me you have what you pay for. Sprint is the last one in Boston.
At least sprint partnered with boingo to give free wifi at airports now. Plus with WiFi calling that should fix poor areas.
I can understand the partnership with Boingo. That's cool.
But I am not or ever have been a fan of WiFi calling as a substitute for proper coverage. A stopgap measure until things are fixed, fine. But I'm not paying Sprint to use the WiFi I already pay Cox Communications for. Nor should Sprint get a free ride to use someone else's WiFi as their cellular backhaul.
According to rootametrics sprint has improved at airports every quarter. Its a good stop gap until service is better.
I live in NYC and service is fine inside the main airports, its the data speed that can vary.
I'm not arguing that service has improved. It has. Unfortunately, I'm in one of the markets where they are still struggling (Phoenix, AZ).
Sprint is currently in a lawsuit with Arizona Public Service, which has refused to vacate 800mhz, asking for more time well past the deadline.
Consequently, Band 25 is overloaded, Band 41 is patchy and Band 26 is minimal. The result is a market that has lots of holes and congested 3G.
It's better than it was in 2012 (no LTE) but not anywhere near what I expected when I bought my first LTE capable iPhone.
Again, I've got no issues with WiFi calling as a temporary measure. It's when it's being issued as a permanent solution to coverage issues that aren't being solved that I've got a problem. That seems to be more and more what is happening lately too - with all the carriers, not just Sprint. Fix the network/coverage issues and WiFi calling won't have to be an option.
Forget to tell my friend that Sprint had no coverage and connect to the Internet
May be Sprint has partners, bowifi, but it doesn't work for me.This sums up my irritation with Sprint. I'm in the Detroit market/area, and while I don't know the specifics of what's going on with Sprint's LTE here, I do know it's something bad.
I first noticed LTE here in January of 2013, and it officially launched that summer, I believe. 2 years later and I STILL have yet to see "LTE worthy" speeds. It's slow almost everywhere (1-2mbps) and extremely spotty. I don't need to reiterate how abysmal Sprint's 3G is. Literally unusable 90% of the time here.
I defended Sprint for years, telling my family to stay with them because they're improving. And while they technically have "improved", it isn't saying much. I held out for WiMAX (which never came here), I held out for LTE, and I held out for Spark (which by the way is nonexistent despite Sprint's maps claiming it completely covers my area).
No more. After a decade of hoping for things to improve, I'm long overdue to switch carriers. Perhaps other areas are not as bad, but for a major metropolitan area, Sprint's service has been inexcusable.