Tmobile is not faster! 🤣

Where did you get that info? 🤨

DiamondPro said:
Where did you get that info? 🤨

Every speed test ever done by anyone in a market that has both WiMax and HSPA+.

Do I need to show you several test proving that Sprint's 4g is faster then tmobile's or will you take phonescoop's word for it?

Amarantamin said:
Every speed test ever done by anyone in a market that has both WiMax and HSPA+.

Including this one?

https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=7145 »

I thought phonescoop would have saved me the trouble of having to do this with the article they just posted. But I guess thats not enouch for u. You may need to do more research. If not I have tons more proof that Wimax is way faster then hspa+ by a longshot, but they just released this article and its pretty good one to I think you should check it out 😉

If after you read that article and you stil...
(continues)

That Article You Posted said:
In 80% of my network tests, Clear's WiMAX network beat AT&T and T-Mobile in terms of download speeds. Also, in terms of raw performance, the fastest speeds I saw on any network after Verizon were on Clear. In the historic Fort Worth stockyard district, a popular tourist spot, Clear often registered download speeds in excess of 11 Mbps. Though T-Mobile's HSPA+ network often came close, I never saw HSPA+ break the 10 Mbps mark.

That said, Clear's WiMAX service could be unreliable. Sprint's WiMAX network was far reaching, and I never found a spot that lacked a 4G signal. But even on the so-called 4G network, I often saw data slow to a crawl that was less than 1 Mbps. Or, I might have three c

...
(continues)

So, DiamondPro, I appreciate the effort you're doing for our company, and I agree, Sprint's not a bad option at all.

But we're mostly wireless employees one way or another here, and there's no reason not to be honest. I like PS because I can find facts here without going through my employer's propaganda of "WE ARE THE BEST!!!1!1!" and you have to understand that not everything that they say is exactly accurate.

Go to U.S. Cellular. Now in 26 states! Including New Hampshire!

dj89 said:
So, DiamondPro, I appreciate the effort you're doing for our company, and I agree, Sprint's not a bad option at all.

But we're mostly wireless employees one way or another here, and there's no reason not to be honest. I like PS because I can find facts here without going through my employer's propaganda of "WE ARE THE BEST!!!1!1!" and you have to understand that not everything that they say is exactly accurate.

I don't work for Sprint. And I definitely don't read there internal propaganda on how there number one. 🤣

I make a lot more money then Sprint can afford to pay me.

But by all means if something I stated has been false please correct me I am here to learn just like everyone els...
(continues)

First rule of the internet: Claiming to be weathly in an argument ALWAYS makes you out to be some nerd who lives in their mom's basement.

It doesn't matter how much you make. No one cares and there is NO way you can prove that what you say is true. So by mentioning it you only make people assume you're lying about it.

If you made more money than sprint could afford to pay you, you would know this. (wealthy people tend to know the value of not flaunting it without evidence)

I do know that I make more money then Sprint could afford to pay me. Otherwise I would be an employee. I may do it in my spare time just for the fun of it and go work at a store. I already do whenever a friend or someone who brags about there carrier and disses Sprint I pretty much shut them down real quick and they end up admitting Sprint is better and many of them switch and thank me for saving them money when they do. 😎

and again, you're making claims that you have no way of backing up and add nothing to the discussion.

And if you're that effective at your job, you could make a lot as a retail rep.. a lot more than anyone outside of the industry would most likely guess.

But that doesn't change the fact that saying "I make more than x could pay me" or something along those lines ALWAYS makes people assume that you're lying, even if you're not, and even if they assume you're not lying, it doesn't aide your position in any way.

It would be like me arguing about coffee knowledge when discussing android programming.

🤣

And Sprint is consistently faster!

Wow I guess you skimmed over that article

Especially parts like this

Sprint's WiMAX network was leaps and bounds ahead of both T-Mobile and AT&T

Overall, across all of my download tests on Clear's WiMAX network, I recorded an average speed of 3.8 Mbps.

In 80% of my network tests, Clear's WiMAX network beat AT&T and T-Mobile in terms of download speeds. Also, in terms of raw performance, the fastest speeds I saw on any network after Verizon were on Clear

Amarantamin said:


I guess you were going for 'highest possible speed'. Personally, I consider 'consistantly faster' to be mor

...
(continues)

And his test, while informative was in a SINGLE market.

Which, when you're talking NATIONAL Consistancy tech, is kinda moot

Wow menno you are extremely biased and know very little about 4g. Do you need me to post nationwide test results that show sprint 4g faster then tmobile and att hspa+ and verizons 3g? 🙄

btw pop quiz...

What carrier covers the most pops in the US?

What carrier? That's easy. Technically Att covers the most pops with coverage in the USA. That's for voice/edge connectivity. A close second would be Verizon.

But you're going off of 4g, in which case the answer is T-mobile (200million) with HSPA+.

But you want me to say wimax right? with 120 (projected.. you still haven't posted anything to prove this, and all i've found is press releases saying they INTEND to cover that many, not that all those markets are live) which is more than the 100 million LTE covers. Which again, I already answered this. yes, I got the numbers off by a bit at first. But numbers aren't the end all here. The fact remains that in ~6months, verizon went from 2 test markets (trials) to 100 million pops....
(continues)

Wow you actually got a question right. Bravo!

Att covers the most pops in the US then Verizon, tmobile, and Sprint. The catch is Verizon and Sprint have the most 3g coverage by a very large margin. Att n tmobile are working hard to cover this gap but still have not done so at the moment.

The reason why I brought that up is because you were braggin about how many pops verizon covers when in fact att covers more pops than verizon. Yet verizon puts up comercials dissing att about coverage. So I think att works in more places then verizon does. Point is most people think verizon has the most voice coverage, even there own employees luckily your not one of them but you still drink there kool-aid daily in other ways. So for the record att ...
(continues)

If you're notice the verizon commercials are talking about 3g coverage, NOT voice. So the commercials are accurate.

And if you talk to a verizon rep, when they talk coverage they talk Data coverage. Voice coverage is only brought up if the customer mentions dropped calls (offering coverage and offering consistant coverage, especially from location to location is different than claiming pops, especially in rural areas)

People think verizon has the most voice coverage because of creative marketing and because tests consistantly rate them as having the best voice coverage.


As for 4g pops. Check the numbers again in 6 months.

I never said the commercial were not correct. You do like to put words in that were never said by me. I was pointing out the fact that att could have fired back with there more coverage period maps! And poor verizon would loose that battle

So as of right now Sprint covers more pops and verizon needs 6mths to ketchup. 🤣

Im sorry but we are talking about right now! Not sometime in the future... Sprint is the NowNetwork verizon is the maybe someday. 🤣

What about the test ranking Sprint constantly more reliable than Verizon 3g network? That doesn't stop verizon from making the claim.

So exactly how many pops does Sprint 4G cover today, December 17, 2010?

260million unless something has change 😉

Link showing this?

I have a link but before I show it to u its my turn to ask a question especially since you should already know if my answers is correct. 😎

What are the pops for all 4 major carriers?

Verizon
Att
Sprint
Tmobile

No, not going to play that game. I asked you "how many pops does Sprint 4G cover today" and you came up with 260 million, which is more than double what Sprint says they "intend" to have by the end of this year (which is all of 14 days away).

I can only assume you misunderstood or didn't see the "how many pops does Sprint 4G cover today" part of my question, but seeing as how it was a fairly straightforward question, I'm not sure.

So I asked you for a link stating that Sprint 4G covered 260 million pops, and you pull one of your hat tricks out instead.

Sorry, it doesn't work like that. This isn't tit for tat or quid pro quo. You made a point, substantiated with "evidence," and I asked for a verifiable (i.e. not someone's...
(continues)

oh yes I thought you were referring to network coverage not 4g. Sprint 4g covers 120million pops but there is no hard evidence other then the the ones that say by the end of the year 120million which I'm sure by now it does. 😎

Thank you for acknowledging the error.

I can only assume that Sprint has met the goal, too, but until they state actual numbers, it's going to be difficult for anyone - on either side of the argument - to make any tangible points.

Well here is a piece of information that you still have to take into consideration. Sprint has 4g in several markets unofficially long before they ever announce them so I'm pretty sure the 68+ markets plus the unofficial ones will put them over the top. 😉

So more unofficial numbers?

You demand that everyone else fact checks their posts, but when anyone asks you to do the same, you either ignore the question, link to marketing material (see first post of this thread) or link to an article you clearly didn't read, or at least understand.

They very well MIGHT have 120 million pops. But they haven't said they have. Let me repeat that CLear, the company, hasn't stated that they had more than 120 million pops.

Most likely they do, but we have NO way of verifying that, so in reality we have no idea HOW many people they cover.

AT&T did fire back with the Luke Wilson commercials where he slings the post cards after asserting that AT&T covers 97% of Americans.

He has really nice hair.

It took you 15 minutes to find the answer for yourself, didn't it?

Do u really believe that? 🤣

Well, in general, you seem to post and respond rather quickly, but your response to Menno in this sub-thread took you all of fifteen minutes to write. Just curious.

I was posting to another response and watching netflix at the same time so sue me. I'm not the type of person who ask a question and doesn't know the answer to them. I asked your bathroom buddy 2 question in another forum and he got both wrong. But the one i asked about pops in this one was the answer I was looking for but it would mean menno would have to admit Verizons coverage is inferior to att. 🤣 I just wanted to see if menno could do that especially since all the raving done about lte pops and menno was wrong about verizon having more coverage then Sprint 4g wise. 😎

Bathroom buddy? You can't have an argument without personal insults?

I can but its only fair since other have referred to cameltowing as (insert joke here) it only right to make the same claim as its more fitting for u to. 😛

I can't speak for anyone else, even Menno, but the name calling goes back and forth so much that it's difficult to say who did it first.

I've always tried to take the higher road on here, and hope that others do as well, but CamelTowing can cause anyone to lose control of their sensibility.

Bathroom buddy, though? Seems like a cheap jab, to me.

Agreed I will from now on take the higher road in regard to discussion between you and me personally as long as u do the same.

I also will stand by my guard and fight fire with fire should menno or cosmicspiderman or any other name calling trash talker arise. I believe sometimes to combat evil you have to fight it with an even greater evil otherwise the good end up suffering at the hand of the bad and everyone loses. 😈

Take your own advice Diamond and set that good and evil nonsense aside. 😕

Fighting nearly everyone on phone scoop with a "greater evil" has left most everyone annoyed with you.

These are forums where people come to learn and discuss. You can learn far more and maybe even contribute with the knowledge gained from here if you would just take your own advice 😎

Take the high road Diamond 😎

I understand you love WiMax, and it's a great service, but it starts to feel like you're spreading propaganda when this is the one site where we can compare services without that in the way.

So I appreciate you, in the end, taking the high road. And I hope the 4g coverage in it doesn't have an outage, like in so many places at any given time.

Taking the high road is the less efficient way to get to Scotland!

I've taken the high road with u many times and gotten nowhere actual as I tried to be more professional in my responses to u yours became more childish and imature. Your are one of the main reasons why I respond the way I do. When I first came to phonescoop u trolled every post I wrote. You dnt even contribute to the discussion which is why I don't even bother responding to u.

When you first came to phonescoop you were a troll, the only thing that's changed is that you're trying to convince people you have teeth now.

In real-world terms this meant videos might stutter and stall. Downloads might stop unexpectedly, or Web pages might require a refresh to finish loading a page properly.

THIS SEEMS FAIRLY IMPORTANT!!!!! BUT WHO AM I TO SAY?!?!?!

That particular article only tested dallas metro area. There are many articles that have found HSPA+ to be faster. Tests like this don't prove which standard is faster. Sprint could have better backhaul in dallas. T-mobile could have more customers than sprint in the dallas area.

Here's one phonescoop did in philadelphia a few months back.

https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=37 ... »

Most speed tests i've seen have HSPA+ on top. The one you posted is actually the first one i've seen where wimax was faster.

Ive seen a lot more and if you did the research you would to. I will post an article soon Wimax vs Hspa+ to give you the break down but in the meantime I have a few questions for you. Do you have hspa+? Do you have wimax? Have you done a comparison? Whats your personal max on tmobile? please post a screenshot of your fastest test and quote your avg speed.

These are the most important questions that you should already know the answers to because like you say markets vary so the speeds in you area are most important to you. Not Dallas or New York! In my market area and from all the research I have done Sprint wipes the floor with tmobile and it not even close. 😎

I don't have HSPA+ or Wimax. I just work in customer service and like to do a lot of reading about the wireless industry.

I can tell you after reading this reply I went and looked for articles saying Wimax is faster and I found exactly what I found before, most of them say HSPA+ is faster in the speed tests. The only one i found where wimax won is the new one from dallas/fort worth and a whole bunch of articles using it as their source.

Really these are recently deployed technologies though, we have to wait for one of the big national studies. Like PC magazines annual fastest network study. But again, none of this proves a better standard, it only proves a better deployment.

Tmobile really SHOULD redo their software to let a customer know if they are connected to HSPA+ though.. that would make these tests a lot easier to see what was going on.

I agree with DiamondPro, coz when they tried tmob "4G" connection, there weren't a lot of users trying to connect on their network, that's why traffic is fast. 😁

Wimax and HSPA+ were actually deployed within a few months of eachother.

As for less users being on HSPA+, the standard is fully backward compatable with with the UMTS that T-mobile was using before.

So when T-mobile upgrades their sites to HSPA+ all UMTS users are using HSPA+ they just can't connect at full speed.

Wimax uses a seperate base station from EV-DO so having less users would skew sprint's speeds more than t-mobile's.

Not really take a look a tmobile speed now that they actualy have users. Its gone down and u can see the difference yourself if you have access tol the network

They had users from day one, every 3G enabled phone on t-mobile is using HSPA+ where it's deployed.

HSPA+ a just a revision of UMTS. Revisions sometimes require only minor hardware updates, sometimes none at all. Going UMTS to HSPA 7.2 only required a firmware update to deploy.

Backward compatable means that they don't have to maitain the origional technology for legacy users. All UMTS, HSAP 7.2 and HSPA+ users connect to HSPA+ when it is deployed.

Wimax is not that way. 3G users using Sprint's EV-DO are using a seperate band and base station, they only share backhaul. So only users that buy compatable equipment connect to sprints 4G.

I low score in 1 city does not equate to your network slowing down. We have to wait for a ...
(continues)

I dont think u understand how inferior hspa+ is to wimax... Wimax is about 3-5mbs faster then hspa+ in the real world

Your replies are pretty half hearted.

In every one of my replies to you I point out inaccuracies in your posts. They are full of them.

It seemed that the theme of your post that I replied to prior to this was that the reason that HSPA+ beat wimax in early tests is because no one was on HSPA+. I explained to you why the opposite of what you posted is actually true. No one was on wimax except people who purchased wimax devices. Everyone with any 3G device on T-mobile connects to HSPA+.

Rather than taking ownership of the factual error that you posted, it seems your strategy is misdirection. Your reply is that I don't understand the inferiority of HSPA+ to wimax.

I'm calling BS on that one. You're the one who doesn't seems to ...
(continues)

And where are actual tests that show this? not clear press releases, not your "real world examples" but tests that have their testing method clearly laid out.

And as deepskyblue said, since HSPA+ is built out over HSPA, EVERY tmobile phone who is 3g is technically straining the network, even if they don't get those faster speeds.

Sprint posts that average expected download speeds with wimax are 3-6mbs. HSPA+ is a lot faster than 1mbps

But on average they get about 2mbs on hspa+ 5mbs max I get 7-8mbs average 10+mbs max. Plus they cannot tell when they are connected to hspa+. Its hit or miss... Or should I say hit and guess on tmobile fake 4g. 😎

4G = IMT-Advanced

Wimax < IMT-Advanded

HSPA+ < IMT-Advanced

Wimax 2 > IMT-Advanced

LTE-Advanced > IMT-Advanced

Wimax /=/ IMT-Advanced

Wimax = Fake 4G

Diamondpro = Uninformed

This is coming from someone who's emoticon is a cat. Your clearly a Sprint hater who doesn't know much about Wimax or Lte. Do yourself a favor and do some more research. 🙄

let me fix that for u

Wimax 2 = IMT-advanced
Lte advanced= IMT-advanced
Wimax = 4g
lte = 4g
hspa+ = 3g that tmobile lies and calls 4g
deepbluesky = misinformed cat emoticon

Wow. Really? Your argument starts and ends with his avatar?

I don't feel obligated to explain my math to you, but it's correct. I crunched the numbers twice.

As for my emoticon...

This is an emoticon = 😲

Sebastian, my cat, is my avatar.

Yet another factual inaccuracy.

Your avatar almost looks like this emoticon: 👿

🤣 🤣 🤣

I like to play with photoshop.

He's actually a very nice cat, not at all evil.

He's only hissed once in his lifetime. For the longest time we thought he didn't know how.

Can I have some of what you're having?

Its called 4g and the Speeds are awesome! 😉

Where the heck are you and your trolling when PS needs you? I'm tired of trying to talk some sense into a fellow employee. Customers are bad enough.

I think I saw him in the t-mobile forum?

if diamondpro DOESN'T work for sprint, they should pay him just to stop posting.

And for someone who doesn't work for Sprint because he makes a lot of money elsewhere, he sure spends a lot of time online trying to justify his service provider. I'm not exactly sure when he has the time to work for all that cash he makes.

I have a great job. You would have a lot more free time and money if you had a good career like me but from you post you don't and obviously cant relate enough to know what financial freedom feel like. So keep hating, my line of business has been recession proof. I'm not posting about Sprint for the money like u are with verizon. I post about them because they are my fav carrier out of the top 4 and I would hate to see them go and I cant explain how big of a loss it would be to America if Sprint collapsed. It already happen to Wamu in the banking industry we lost a major player one that actually was about customers they truly cared about and now we have society to thank here for the banking industries current situation. I'm not about to let ...
(continues)

Wow, it's hard to read your responses sometimes.

You had me through most of this, until you called me a Sprint hater. That seems to be your only consistent argument, but like the rest or your points, are based on nothing substantial. I might rib someone in the side about Sprint once in a while, but I'm just as apt to do that about my own employer and the other two carriers. If anything, I'm more likely to poke fun at Verizon than I am Sprint, AT&T, and T-Mobile, because I deal with corporate lunacy every day.

But fine, keep calling me that.

Oh, and my business has been mostly recession-proof, too. And you might be surprised what I make. Do I make less than when I started in this business, certainly, but not because of the reces...
(continues)

Your the one that ruined phonescoop not me. I have to constantly combat the lies people continue to spread about Sprint that are not True. I use facts more than any other poster on phonescoop including u. I haven't read one post from u putting down verizon as u so claim. If you know the inside story about verizon you certainly don't talk about it. Keep putting out that bs I saw you blog and to say its biased would be and understatement. Its clearly over saturated with verizon propaganda and I'm not impressed at all.

I dont talk about my career every 3 post you are indeed misinformed as usual this does not surprise me. At least 3 times people assumed I worked for Sprint until it became insulting. So I let him know I am not employed by Spr...
(continues)

I'm grateful for the list of products in your house. As if I cared, really.

No, I'd have to say once again that you and those like you have ruined PhoneScoop. I'm still here for the occasional consumer in need. What are YOU here for?

I don't spread lies about Sprint. I don't spread lies about any company. If anyone here is spreading lies about Sprint, it's more likely to be you with your unmoving devotion to Sprint. Do you think Sprint cares about you as much as you care about it?

Seeing as how it's rare of me to put down any company, you'd be hard pressed to find examples of me putting down Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile OR Verizon. But still, you'd have to look, and since you're too busy trying to find links that justify your devot...
(continues)

Not really only facts that tend to piss people on other carriers off. 🤣

I have research your recent post you have not posted anything that slanders Sprint directly as other have but your missing the point. Right now consumer wise Sprint is the best overall at the end of the day if you look at network quality, what u get, and how much u can do, Sprint pushes that past any of the other 3. If you disagree Id be more that happy to hear why. 😎

There's a thin line between "facts" and "propaganda."

I'm missing the point?

YOU said:
it because Sprint haters like U and menno spreading false information about them and swaying potential customers away

https://www.phonescoop.com/carriers/forum.php?fm=m&f ... »

The point is, you refer to me specifically as a Sprint hater, and then admit that you can't find me expressly slandering them? Do you see why people are constantly disagreeing with you? You're inconsistent, your points and supporting material are flawed, you pride yourself on your employment, and then you come back with "yeah, but" style remarks. And on top of all that, your sentence structure and grammar are difficult to read ...
(continues)

And yet when anyone (including epik) asks you to give facts, you consistantly refuse to.

You mention sprint beating everyone else on reliability... where's the link?

You mention Wimax is faster than HSPA+, where's the link?

If I were to claim that Verizon covers more pops you'd DEMAND a link.. and yet you give yourself a pass?

The only reason I haven't posted my links yet is because I'm commenting from my Epic 4g I've posted a ton of links already how many have u posted? 🤨

Have you really not seen the test that shows sprint to have the most reliable 3g network?

I've seen a test where that was the case, I've also seen tests where it wasn't.

I will soon be posting a video on youtube and including a link to show just how fast TMO is. I have a G2 and get consistent 4-5+ MBPS down and .9-1 mbps up. So show me where you get those speeds on sprint. Real-world applications are what count i could careless what a controlled test says

I agree and I can post the same info. funny after all this trash talk you are the first one who asked for actually speedtest. 😎

NAIL ON THE HEAD. Well said, thank you.

All sprint's specturm holdings seem to cause a strange intoxication in their employees.

Verizon has the best spectrum holdings of any company for their 4G deployment.

https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=18 ... »

They've got the entire country plus double or triple the megahertz of a normal liscense in a lot of urban areas.

And it's in a band that's nearly 3 times more efficient that sprints 2500 mhz band.

deepskyblue said:
All sprint's specturm holdings seem to cause a strange intoxication in their employees.

Verizon has the best spectrum holdings of any company for their 4G deployment.

https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=18 ... »

They've got the entire country plus double or triple the megahertz of a normal liscense in a lot of urban areas.

And it's in a band that's nearly 3 times more efficient that sprints 2500 mhz band.

I don't work for Sprint!

No verizon spectrum is not the best. That statement is an opinion an extremely open one at that. Lets try to see if we can narrow down that opinion. Best can be one of many things. In regard to Spectrum for example Speed or range.

...
(continues)

It will take Clear a TON of money more than it will take Verizon to roll out a nationwide "4g" network. FACT. (that pesky range thing)

If you're going off of what Deepskyblue said about 700mhz range because you don't know yourself, you really haven't read into it.. at all.


I've seen cellstudent give you a ton of reading material about why lower frequencies are better for data. Sources that are a heck of a lot more reliable than you hand out in return.

So obviously you're not reading the material.

What is says about sprint's spectrum is that you're comparing Cannonballs (700mhz) to Buckshot (2500mhz)

Yeah considering Verizon spent 9.6billion on spectrum alone.

I don't go by what cellstudent or you say because you dont back them up with facts or articles like I do. Most of the time you just rant on about how verizon is better then everyone else or belittle other carriers who try to improve.

Please show me some of these sources you claim cellstudent dished out to me... btw please discredit the information in the source I gave u. That was the first thing I found 1min after reading you post. I cant tell you how many times you have been ask for proof to back up your statements and did not find any. 🤣

I already replied to that.. you posted an article that was PRO VERIZON, mentioned that the limitation was PROFITABILITY and never mentioned bandwidth and didn't even mention wimax.

Maybe you should READ an article before posting it, hmm?



And if someone is making a rational request, they get links.

Even if I posted links, you wouldn't read them (you don't read your OWN links, why should you read others?) and a lot of the stuff YOU PERSONALLY have asked for information on is readily available and was news posted on THIS SITE or others like it.

I'm not skirting the truth by telling you to google it, I'm telling you it's common knowledge so the fact that you DON'T know where to find what I'm talking about is troubling.

I'm wa...
(continues)

https://www.phonescoop.com/carriers/forum.php?fm=m&f ... »

That is my response.

Also consider: The site you linked is a wordpressblog running a stock theme (so thrown together) and is posting without giving ANY idea who the authors are.

And again, you posted a PRO-VERIZON link to back up your claims.

You may need to read the article again. Thats all Im saying. Smh. 🤨

No, you need to read the article again.

Some idiot bitching about a data cap in a comment doesn't support your claim. Period. That's about as useful as someone saying the SAME thing here. For all we know, that comment COULD be yours.

Secondly, the article does not mention ANYTHING about spectrum limits, clear, sprint, wimax, or how anything about LTE is negative. At all.

The ONLY thing they said is that it will allow speeds that it might not be profitable (at first) to offer high cap or unlimited plans since Verizon's first responsibility as a business is to make money (which is true of all businesses).

YOU need to read the article period.

I'll give you a head start:

1: It's written by an anonymous contributor with n...
(continues)

that phonescoop articles are good enough to back up your claims, but if someone else uses them, they are merely "opinion"... 🤣 🙄

? It's not opinion. Typically phonescoop articles are some of the best, especially when it comes to phone reviews (IMO) but if you're talking about Nationwide speedtests or something of the like, you can't go off of just that article, since it clearly stated that it was in one area.

Now, the other post he linked to (a broadband networks blog) IS opinion.

No he calles the link that Deep posted as someones's opinion.

They may not be if you look in the discussion section I clearly told phonescoop what would be need to be irrefutable proof backing there claims I have more proof then just what phonescoop has posted. If your going to troll my post please troll them more closely.

Which band a company broadcasts in has never been the bottle neck for network speed, and it won't be for a long time.

The bottle neck so far has always been the standard they are using and the backhaul.

Look at how the market values the different bands. Clear has market average of about 150 Mhz of spectrum that they paid about 3.5 billion for. The FCC has not even auctioned the full 100 mhz of the 700 band has sold nearly 40 billion dollars in licenses.

Clears spectrum has traditionally been used for shortwave radio broadcasting, it works for cell phones but it doesn't penetrate buildings and you need 2 to 3 times as many towers to cover a market.

If the 700 band became a limiting factor you would have to deploy more towers so t...
(continues)

Verizon isn't a full owner of Verizon wireless. Never have been. Verizon wireless is a joint venture between Verizon communications and Vodaphone.

It's true verizon's been improving Fiber backhaul in their towers for a couple of years now, but if sprint wasn't doing that there was something wrong. heck, Att should be doing it now too, even though they are a year out from deployment.

But they didn't have LTE networks up and running all over the place and just kept them from the public. they had two test markets, and the rest of the sites started lighting up maybe a few months back for larger user trials.

This is very different from launching the network in 2008. They didn't even start test markets until late last year.

So yes...
(continues)

This is the first thing I found and I'm pretty sure there a lot more big red doesn't want u to know about its 4g lte network.

http://www.highspeedexperts.com/vz-4g-too-fast/ »

btw you got both of those easy question I asked you about lte and wimax wrong! So your knowledge on about 4g could use some work. 😎

Considering both questions you asked were stupid, It doesn't really matter.

And unless you can LINK to a direct source (not marketing) you saying I got the questions wrong is about as useful as tits on a boar

Yes, you posted to a blog.

A basic wordpress blog using a stock theme that doesn't list WHO the authors are or why we should care about them..

Do you know ANYTHING about research? Linking to that is like linking to a xanga page

You do realize that the point of that article was basically this:

"Verizon's network is SO good, and their service SO popular that unlimited bandwidth will not be profitable at launch."

You know it was basically defending verizon's move to going to tiered data as the ONLY rational option, right? And that it NEVER mentioned wimax, bandwidth caps (profit cap is not the same as bandwidth cap)

In fact, that article mentions NOTHING about the spectrum crunch whatsoever.

So in essence, you just posted an article entirely unrelated to the topic at hand, that doesn't support your point AT ALL and is in fact very PRO-VERIZON.

So what did you do? See the title, giddily copy/paste the link and post here without actually reading it?

You may need to read the article again.

I can use a article meant to make verizon look good also look very bad and Smart customers will pick up on this very quickly as you did not that tells me you need to read it again. The comment at the bottom of the page maybe an easier start for you and point u in the right direction. As it clearly points out one of the 3 major flaws with verizon lte network. The article points out the other 2 if you cant see them Ill copy and paste them for u later. Im done debating with u for now! 😉

The Verdict:
There are so many variables to consider, but a few things are clear. Firstly, Verizon’s 4G looks like it will be incredibly fast, and that is a very good thing. Second, Verizon’s existing bandwidth caps are very generous, and are hard to reach with most mobile devices unless one is using a broadband modem and a laptop 24/7. Lastly, Verizon is likely to deploy 4G services in stages, with major markets receiving the upgrades first and secondary markets receiving the eventual 4G roll-out over time. This should give Verizon plenty of time to fine-tune their offerings to meet the needs of consumers, and that is ultimately the goal of any company.


You're taking an article and then making OPTINIONS about it and claiming...
(continues)

menno i wouldnt bothering fighting with diamondpro over this. No matter what you say he is going to find a way to say sprint is the most amazing carrier and there is no other carrier, that anyone should have

This is coming from someone that thinks the g2 is a good phone. 🤣

Newflash: you cannot send pics larger than 300kb on tmobile's junk network

That equals a 3sec video recorded on a nexus one 🤣

The g2 is not a 4g phone but it is now all of a sudden that the my touch 4 got released... smh

I could go over the list of flaws with that brick u call the g2 but Im sure u already know that since u have one. 🤣

It obvious tmobile will lie right to your face but u still remain a customer. Why? 🙄

you really dont know wat ur talking about do you...let me see i have gotten videos sent to me well over 300kb.

The reason I am kinda necroposting this, is because I do hope that some Verizon AND non Verizon customer's get a chance to look at this link. It's is very good at explaining that Verizon is an excellent choice for the future of 4G! Please refer to the original link posted by DiamondPro. Thanks, DP, for sharing this link with us!

🤣


The funny part is, DP posted the link because he thought it was anti-Verizon. I'll never get over that one.

Yeah, I love that. 😁

You said:
Sprint has been in the game since 2008 not last year.

Sorry. My bad. I should have said this:
Didn't Sprint "just get into the game" a year and a half ago?

You said:
Tmobiles has even stated there competitors do not have enough spectrum to properly deploy 4g.

First, what sense does it make to have T-Mobile as your source for information about the other carriers. T-Mobile has little idea what's going on any the other big three carriers, and can only speculate as to anything their competition is doing. Sure, they have the logic of how much spectrum THEY need to deploy 4G, but they have little clue as to what's going on with anyone else.

...
(continues)

LTE-advanced is certified as "Real" 4g by the ITU:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/LTE-Advanced-certifie ... »

On top of that, so was your beloved Wimax2

and a demo station at a tech show is not Real world speeds.

Don't tell people to do their research when you don't even know what you're talking about with your OWN pet technologies.

And if LTE-advanced isn't standardized yet as you claim, the speeds wimax2 get's in comparison to it are MEANINGLESS since LTE-Advanced definition is constantly changing.

And deepbluesky doesn't use verizon. They don't even particularly LIKE verizon as far as those things go. They just are calling a spade a spade, or in this case, pointless basless advertising... pointles...
(continues)

Was that demo station not in the real world?

So I guess the demo booth verizon has on there website isn't real either. 🤣

You definitely don't know what your talking about as recall you were the one corrected by wiwavelink not me. 🤣 isn't he one of those tower techs u said correct me all the time?

Obviously I did know what I was talking about deepbluesky is the one who said Lte advanced was the only 4g standard. When in fact Wimax 2 is 4g and was at one point the only 4g standard and ratified first so thank u for further proving my point. My question is why didn't you bother correcting him when he posted that response? 🤨

I know why because u only troll my post and happen to become educated in the process by me and eve...
(continues)

I didn't correct him because YOU had already responded by the time I read the thread.


YOU said this:

Wimax 2 and lte-advanced both meet and exceed the requirements by the ITU for 4g speedwise and are both candidates but have not passed the ITU trials yet neither has Lte advanced.

Which is what I was responding to. YOU Were the one who claimed that NEITHER tech was certified, just that they met the requirements. FREAKING READ YOUR OWN POSTS. I didn't prove your point, I pointed out that you didn't even know that Wimax2 was officially listed as 4g.

A demo station is a white box proof of concept. It's a demonstration in a tighly controlled environment without minimal chance of interruption. It was a...
(continues)

This is another one I had to do a little reading on. I don't catch every ITU press release.

So yes it looks like wimax 2 got approved as well.

In any case, none of these technolgies will be deployed by any mobile network operater any time soon.

You can champion the benifits of wimax all you want, it's niche move at best by sprint. They may never release wimax 2, they may opt for LTE instead. I'm not saying Wimax is useless, it may be handy for isps not having to run wires to people homes or it may fade away into oblivion.

Who is backing LTE? The GSM association, that means virtually all of Europe. About 80% - 90% or Asia, Africa and South America use the GSM association standards because they are considered the "global sta...
(continues)

Wimax 2 was approved first I think u may have missed that part. Wimax also has more support worldwide then lte does. Wimax is also much father along then Lte. Wimax is the world standard not lte. You may need to do more research. Only 2 of the US carrier have plans to use Lte tmobile is going with lthspae which is a spin on hspa+

They were approved during the same session when they reviewed 6 different standards for IMT-advanced certification.

You're absolutely crazy if you think wimax is the global standard.

Here's a little reading for you to do. You should really read before you post somthing that is completely wrong, not after.

http://www.gsacom.com/gsm_3g/market_update.php4 »

Quote:

"The GSM family of systems (which embraces GPRS/EDGE, WCDMA-HSPA, HSPA+ and LTE) increased its global subscriptions market share to 89.7% by 31.12.09."

Nearly a 90% market share as of december 2009, and that's increasing because, most worldwide CDMA operators are going with LTE. CDMA was a niche standard but it's peak market share blows away anything Wimax could ever...
(continues)

In my research, some of the worldwide WiMAX numbers include municipal and company ISP connections, not just wireless phone data. Occasionally, it's hard to tell if a WiMAX figure is just for mobile phones, or if it's just for home Internet service. I believe that this is because WiMAX is a generational build off of WiFi. It's just a convenience that the same standard works for two mostly different industries.

That's were I see the future of wimax after it fades away as a phone standard.

It will be used by some ISPs as an alternative to having to run internet lines to homes.

THANK YOU!!!

We're still Sprint fans in spite of him.

All the limitations he listed were an issue with fiber and backhaul, getting it out fast enough to meet demand. It has NOTHING. to do with anything you've been talking about

Also, it is the same issue clears havingright now and will have. The issue of keeping money to expand.

You read it again.

awww poor baby. Sounds to me u need to do your homework. It has everything to do with it but you failed as u always do to see verizons network will face some serious issue and may have a very slow adoption rate because of pricing. But if pricing is not a factor there network load will be. Plan and simple Sprint has a much bigger pipe then verizon and can handle millions more user on their 4g wimax network 😎

No they do NOT have a bigger pipe. There is NOT information out there to prove that. Pipe =! spectrum

🤣 🤣 😎

They don't have a bigger pipe. In fact, they more than likely have a much SMALLER pipe than Verizon does.

Unless you're going to tell me that Clear's fiber network is better than Verizon's FiOS and Nationwide backhaul network.

Consider this, they have 120million pops (assuming that number is accurate)

Last quarter's statement pegged them at having 3 million subscribers. Let's double that to work in Sprint users. So 6 million.

so basically they currently serve 5% of their pop market, and that % is hopefully growing. Now even at that 5%, they're still throttling speeds, and some cities have capacity issues. This isn't knocking their network. more than likely, that 5% includes a lot of "heavy users" aka, people who consume dat...
(continues)

Oh and another thing u had a problem with was this comment

Jack said:5 GiG is ridiculous to begin with. This year i was fortunate to get rid of Starband which has caps of 5 gig per month as well. 5 Gigs is not enough to do anything but open News articles. You can;t even consider d/ling a movie or Music. You can’t play games which is one reason to have a faster speed. My Fiber is 75 gig a month which allows me plenty of room to surf, but more important i do NOT have to keep a constant watch on my limits.Paying some $50 or so a month is not cheap and people deserve better than 5 gigs for that.

Menno said:
No, you need to read the article again.

Some idiot bitching about a data cap

...
(continues)

his post doesn't matter because it's a COMMENT. I asked you for proof, not comments.

What you don't seem to understand is that the "problems" that article is listing are entirely backhaul/financial related. They have NOTHING to do with network availability or Spectrum.

In fact, the article is quick to point out that the issue ISN'T Spectrum, but that Verizon sacrificed that heavy bandwidth capability initially so that they can build out a NATIONWIDE network faster.

This initial launch is targeted almost exclusively at businesses. And no, 5gb isn't a drop in the bucket when it comes to home usage which is why verizon isn't ADVERTISING this as a home replacement package, at least initially.

You're comparing two networks that are...
(continues)

I said that for all we know it "could" be yours. I did this to point out the absurdity of trying to quote it.

It would be like me quoting someone from another site's comment section to back up my claim. there is no reason you should believe what they say, and they're not talking from a position of authority.

If every blog and subsequent comment were to be taken as a quotable source, there'd be a lot more absurdity on this site. Especially with the mythical Verizon iPhone threads.