Sprint: The Now Network?

• krambman

  

  Sprint calls themselves the "Now Network" but they also mention in every ad that they are bringing the world the first ever 4G network, which is not out right now. Does anyone else find it ironic that they advertise as the "Now Network" yet their biggest advertising point is something that they don't have now?
• gorocks99

  

  They do have a 4G network, it's just in a few select cities (Baltimore, Atlanta, Austin, Boise, Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas) and nowhere near nationwide yet.
  
  Honestly, their coverage is bad once you get outside the city ... but I spend 99% of my time in the city, and if I'm not there, I'm on a highway or fairly close to one. IF I get out into the country, I don't get a signal, but that's not always a bad thing. Their plans are way cheaper than others, which is why I go for them.
• Con_Alma

  How can one 3G network be faster than another? Is it because of the difference in overhead bit usage for network management?
• derek bomar

  

  I have Sprint...not really thrilled with the signal strength but hey, I don't pay for the phone, so I can't complain.
• ZeroCool

  now with sprint. love the service. better coverage than att and i dont live near a big city. better signal inside of buildings.
• Con_Alma

  Con_Alma wrote: How can one 3G network be faster than another? Is it because of the difference in overhead bit usage for network management?

  Can anyone answer this???
• coyotes22

  

  Thats funny, the ad for this thread is,,,,,,,, Sprint
• sherm03

  

  Con_Alma wrote:

  Con_Alma wrote: How can one 3G network be faster than another? Is it because of the difference in overhead bit usage for network management?

  Can anyone answer this???

  It's all determined by the number of users, the amount of data transferred among towers, and strength of the network.
  
  For example, AT&T's network was extremely fast before the iPhone (hence the "fastest 3g network" claim). Once the iPhone was released, and users were draining network resources at a much higher rate than ever before, AT&T's data speeds became sluggishly slow. While it is still a 3g network, the amount of users cramming the network with all the data being transferred slows that speed down.
  
  Verizon's network is able to handle the increased data transmissions because it covers a lot more area. The more towers, the less strain on the network from all the data being transmitted (hence the "most reliable 3g network" claim). Verizon's network is built to handle a lot of data...which is why the massive amount of users buying the Droid have not affected speed one bit.
  
  Sprint on the other hand is in an interesting spot. Their 3g network is probably the fastest. The reason for it is due to the mass exodus of subscribers over the past few years. Because of all the room created by people leaving for other companies, Sprint's network is able to handle a great amount of data without problems (hence the "most dependable 3g network" claim).
  
  This is also why there is a push for the LTE and WiMax networks. Carriers are in a tough spot...as they increase their subscriber base (which is the goal of every carrier) they put a higher strain on their 3g network and muck it up more. Eventually they'll be able to loosen things up with 4g, and be able to add more subscribers without fear of slowing their network down to a crawl.
• Society

  sherm03 wrote:

  Con_Alma wrote:

  Con_Alma wrote: How can one 3G network be faster than another? Is it because of the difference in overhead bit usage for network management?

  Can anyone answer this???

  It's all determined by the number of users, the amount of data transferred among towers, and strength of the network.
  
  For example, AT&T's network was extremely fast before the iPhone (hence the "fastest 3g network" claim). Once the iPhone was released, and users were draining network resources at a much higher rate than ever before, AT&T's data speeds became sluggishly slow. While it is still a 3g network, the amount of users cramming the network with all the data being transferred slows that speed down.
  
  Verizon's network is able to handle the increased data transmissions because it covers a lot more area. The more towers, the less strain on the network from all the data being transmitted (hence the "most reliable 3g network" claim). Verizon's network is built to handle a lot of data...which is why the massive amount of users buying the Droid have not affected speed one bit.
  
  Sprint on the other hand is in an interesting spot. Their 3g network is probably the fastest. The reason for it is due to the mass exodus of subscribers over the past few years. Because of all the room created by people leaving for other companies, Sprint's network is able to handle a great amount of data without problems (hence the "most dependable 3g network" claim).
  
  This is also why there is a push for the LTE and WiMax networks. Carriers are in a tough spot...as they increase their subscriber base (which is the goal of every carrier) they put a higher strain on their 3g network and muck it up more. Eventually they'll be able to loosen things up with 4g, and be able to add more subscribers without fear of slowing their network down to a crawl.

  Dependable and reliable are the same thing.
• sherm03

  

  Society wrote: Dependable and reliable are the same thing.

  For the first time ever, I would agree with you.
  
  But apparently the courts feel that they are different enough because Sprint was not forced to drop the tag line after they were sued over it.
• pmoney25

  

  Hey Sherm you seem to know a bit about the Wireless Industry. Did you see the rumors floating around that Deutsche Telekom is possibly considering putting up T-Mobile USA as an IPO or possibly selling them? IPO would be a nice influx of cash possibly to help build out their network and I think could be a good thing.
  
  As for selling, I know some of the Cable Companies(Cox, Comcast) and even rumors of Google are floating around out there.
  
  T-Mobile has great pricing and getting better phones, they just need to kick it up on the network.
• sherm03

  

  I did see those rumors. However, Deutsche seems to have rumors regarding TMO USA every year. Last year, the talks were that TMO was going to buy out Sprint (which would be a HUGE mistake). I am just going to wait it out and see what else comes out of those rumors.
  
  I think best case for Deutsche would be to sell off TMO...but they would need to increase the subscriber numbers to get a really good price for it.
  
  I could absolutely see Google being interested. There was a deal in place between Google and TMO when the Nexus One was released, so they would be the logical choice if Deutsche does sell off the TMO network.
  
  But like I said, the rumors are always flying with Deutsche...so I wouldn't put a ton of stock in it just yet.
• hoops23

  

  I have Sprint and have never had bad reception. I'm not always in/near a city either.
• O-Trap

  

  sherm03 wrote: It's all determined by the number of users, the amount of data transferred among towers, and strength of the network.
  
  For example, AT&T's network was extremely fast before the iPhone (hence the "fastest 3g network" claim). Once the iPhone was released, and users were draining network resources at a much higher rate than ever before, AT&T's data speeds became sluggishly slow. While it is still a 3g network, the amount of users cramming the network with all the data being transferred slows that speed down.
  
  Verizon's network is able to handle the increased data transmissions because it covers a lot more area. The more towers, the less strain on the network from all the data being transmitted (hence the "most reliable 3g network" claim). Verizon's network is built to handle a lot of data...which is why the massive amount of users buying the Droid have not affected speed one bit.
  
  Sprint on the other hand is in an interesting spot. Their 3g network is probably the fastest. The reason for it is due to the mass exodus of subscribers over the past few years. Because of all the room created by people leaving for other companies, Sprint's network is able to handle a great amount of data without problems (hence the "most dependable 3g network" claim).
  
  This is also why there is a push for the LTE and WiMax networks. Carriers are in a tough spot...as they increase their subscriber base (which is the goal of every carrier) they put a higher strain on their 3g network and muck it up more. Eventually they'll be able to loosen things up with 4g, and be able to add more subscribers without fear of slowing their network down to a crawl.

  I could be mistaken, but wasn't it Sprint that basically kicked a significant chunk of its customers to the curb a few years ago?
  

  LTrain23 wrote: I have Sprint and have never had bad reception. I'm not always in/near a city either.

  You're going to get mixed results, no matter what. Any company able to stay in business is going to have at least SOME customers satisfied. I hated Sprint when I had them.
• Ytowngirlinfla

  

  I love sprint and I wouldn't change. I have excellent coverage and the data speeds rock cause I use mine on my computer. My roommates both have ATT Iphones and they don't get signal at all in our room. I get full bars.
• sherm03

  

  O-Trap wrote: I could be mistaken, but wasn't it Sprint that basically kicked a significant chunk of its customers to the curb a few years ago?

  I wouldn't say a "significant chunk." They dumped about 1000 customers because the customers called in to customer care an average of 15-25 times a day. That's a LOT of calls to care...and enough to cause significant delays in hold times. Clearly, if a customer needed to call into customer care that much, they were with the wrong cell phone provider. Sprint credited the affected customers' accounts to bring them to $0, and waived all their termination fees. It was actually Dan Hesse's first step in fixing Sprint's customer service...which has gotten exponentially better over the past year or so.
  
  The mass exodus of customers I was referring to was when Sprint and Nextel merged. There were tons of system and billing issues, and tons of customers fled for other providers. Sprint really hasn't recovered completely from that merger.
• O-Trap

  

  sherm03 wrote: I wouldn't say a "significant chunk." They dumped about 1000 customers because the customers called in to customer care an average of 15-25 times a day. That's a LOT of calls to care...and enough to cause significant delays in hold times. Clearly, if a customer needed to call into customer care that much, they were with the wrong cell phone provider. Sprint credited the affected customers' accounts to bring them to $0, and waived all their termination fees. It was actually Dan Hesse's first step in fixing Sprint's customer service...which has gotten exponentially better over the past year or so.
  
  The mass exodus of customers I was referring to was when Sprint and Nextel merged. There were tons of system and billing issues, and tons of customers fled for other providers. Sprint really hasn't recovered completely from that merger.

  Gotcha.
  
  I do remember thinking it was something like that. Just thought it was a bigger number for some reason. I had heard that it was a section that was accounting for a disproportionately high percentage of the customer service issues.
  
  Either way, upon hearing that, I actually thought it was a good idea. I wanted to do that a few times as a CSR for VZW. Just terminate someone's contract so I didn't have to deal with them anymore.
• sherm03

  

  O-Trap wrote: Gotcha.
  
  I do remember thinking it was something like that. Just thought it was a bigger number for some reason. I had heard that it was a section that was accounting for a disproportionately high percentage of the customer service issues.
  
  Either way, upon hearing that, I actually thought it was a good idea. I wanted to do that a few times as a CSR for VZW. Just terminate someone's contract so I didn't have to deal with them anymore.

  When I worked as a rep for Sprint...I did do that to one guy. He came in the store every week and complained that his phone was turned off for being over the spending limit. He would constantly fight me, and end up throwing $20 on his bill to restore service. Finally, after one shouting match with him I had had enough. I told him to go to a different company and port his number over and that I would waive the termination fee because I was tired of his shit. He never did it (probably because a $250 deposit at Sprint meant that he was going to have a $500 deposit at just about every other carrier)...but he did threaten to rob our store and we never saw him again.
  
  Good times working at Sprint! LOL.
• O-Trap

  

  Oh yeah. I have some stories. Woman pissed on my computer chair while at VZW (she had asked if we had a place she could sit while she waited ... I said yes ... she sat down, pissed through her clothes, and then left).
  
  The last straw there was a guy pitching his phone at my head, and me watching it shatter on the wall not a foot from its intended target. I calmly walked into the manager's office, and I told him that he was going to have to talk to my customer, because if I continued to do so, I was going to get myself fired.
  
  Ugh ... The cellular business wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the general public.
• sherm03

  

  LOL! I had a lady throw her phone at me, too. I told her that her phone was water damaged. She didn't believe me. I took the back off the phone, and took out the battery, and showed her the water that was STILL INSIDE THE PHONE! She said I was lying. So I laughed and slid the phone back to her. Apparently I shouldn't have laughed, because she got pissed and whipped the phone right at my head. Thank God she missed...and I laughed again. She walked out without her phone.
  
  Nothing is going to top someone pissing themselves though. That story is a keeper my friend!
  
  I agree...if it wasn't for the customers...the wireless business wouldn't be bad at all. Which is exactly why I was so excited to get this position with Motorola. I get all the advantages of working in wireless...and don't have to talk to customers anymore!
• O-Trap

  

  sherm03 wrote: LOL! I had a lady throw her phone at me, too. I told her that her phone was water damaged. She didn't believe me. I took the back off the phone, and took out the battery, and showed her the water that was STILL INSIDE THE PHONE! She said I was lying. So I laughed and slid the phone back to her. Apparently I shouldn't have laughed, because she got pissed and whipped the phone right at my head. Thank God she missed...and I laughed again. She walked out without her phone.
  
  Nothing is going to top someone pissing themselves though. That story is a keeper my friend!
  
  I agree...if it wasn't for the customers...the wireless business wouldn't be bad at all. Which is exactly why I was so excited to get this position with Motorola. I get all the advantages of working in wireless...and don't have to talk to customers anymore!

  Nice. I took a job as an affiliate manager just to get out. Once I started the new gig, I fell in love with Email marketing, and even Internet marketing in general.
• LJ

  

  FWIW T-Mobile has the highest speed data
  
  http://jkontherun.com/2010/01/05/who-has-the-fastest-u-s-3g-right-now-t-mobile/
  
  Sprint's "4G" is about 5 mb/s and the T-Mobile HSPA is 7 mb/s
• hoops23

  

  All I know is, I get unlimited data/text/any mobile to mobile (meaning I can call any cell phone on any network w/o using my minutes) and nights starting at 7pm for 69.99. Not to mention my 1 year upgrade as a 2 year price (love that!)
  
  I get great coverage where I live, so until another company can match that, I'm sticking with Sprint.
  
  I had problems last month one day connecting to the internet on my Blackberry. After contacting Sprint, they resolved the issue in no time.. I went to pay my bill for the month and saw a $25 credit for "inconvenience".. Nice!
• Con_Alma

  sherm03 wrote: It's all determined by the number of users, the amount of data transferred among towers, and strength of the network.
  
  For example, AT&T's network was extremely fast before the iPhone (hence the "fastest 3g network" claim). Once the iPhone was released, and users were draining network resources at a much higher rate than ever before, AT&T's data speeds became sluggishly slow. While it is still a 3g network, the amount of users cramming the network with all the data being transferred slows that speed down.
  
  Verizon's network is able to handle the increased data transmissions because it covers a lot more area. The more towers, the less strain on the network from all the data being transmitted (hence the "most reliable 3g network" claim). Verizon's network is built to handle a lot of data...which is why the massive amount of users buying the Droid have not affected speed one bit.
  
  Sprint on the other hand is in an interesting spot. Their 3g network is probably the fastest. The reason for it is due to the mass exodus of subscribers over the past few years. Because of all the room created by people leaving for other companies, Sprint's network is able to handle a great amount of data without problems (hence the "most dependable 3g network" claim).
  
  This is also why there is a push for the LTE and WiMax networks. Carriers are in a tough spot...as they increase their subscriber base (which is the goal of every carrier) they put a higher strain on their 3g network and muck it up more. Eventually they'll be able to loosen things up with 4g, and be able to add more subscribers without fear of slowing their network down to a crawl.

  You're saying the true speed of the network at any give time based on the number of active users along with the number of towers available? I'm not disagreeing with you yet but I'm not sure I understand. Pipe sizes or bandwidth spectrums will run full most all of the time. As traffic increases the network still functions at the same rate. If 10 people or 100 million people are communicating over the network it's capacity is still the same.
  
  You may not be receiving data at that rate but the network speed and capacity doesn't change based on the number of active users. That's ridiculous.
  
  I think my problem is with the actual verbiage of the advertisement.
• sherm03

  

  It's no different than if you have a wireless network set up at your home. If you have one laptop connected to the wirless router, things function normally. As you connect a second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, etc. laptop and everyone is online at the same time and transmitting data, watching Youtube, and checking email...the speed that you experienced at first is dramatically changed and slowed down.
  
  The same theory is true with cellular networks and data speeds.
  
  You don't have to agree with me. But I'm not just making this stuff up. Back in December, iPhone users were complaining about the sluggish network and slow data speeds. AT&T released a statement telling their customers to not use their phone as much. They said that the sheer number of users getting online and utilizing the data on their phone was draining the networks resources and actually asked their customers to cut back on usage to help the network speeds improve.