×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sprint May Have Unlimited Data Plans, But Not Unlimited Customers

timothy posted about 9 months ago | from the get-busy-living-or-get-busy-dying dept.

Communications 207

mitcheli writes "Sprint announced a Q2 loss of $1.6B as 2 million subscribers left their service. While Sprint remains one of very few carriers to continue to allow unlimited data on their networks, the failure to reconcile two competing network technologies (iDEN Nextel and CDMA Sprint) combined with the lack of upgrades to their network and degrading service prompted a mass exodus of subscribers from their network. Of course the fact that during the iPhone 5 release, Sprint openly advertised that their iPhone would not be carrier locked, only to turn around and push out an OTA two months later that locked them probably didn't help much either."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

207 comments

Why I left (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44423953)

When I joined, the Evo 3D was $299. The Evo 4G was $199 (and already a year or so old at that point). I didn't want to pay the extra $100 for the 3D, so I got the 4G. However, the updates pushed to it made it extremely low on space before my two-year contract was up. My wife's phone was also acting up. But to get a new phone, we would have to pay full price. We could've done some early upgrade thing that also cost money, but it cost more than the ETF fee! That's right. We could pay more to stay with Sprint, or we could pay the cheaper ETF and go to T-Mobile with a cheaper monthly fee.

Re:Why I left (2)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about 9 months ago | (#44424791)

I'm on my way out. 2 yr contract is up and unlimited data is nicely 'limited' by crappy data service. I live in VA right outside DC. Absolutely NO LTE service but if you look at the map, Baltimore has it, Fredricksburg (south) and the I-81 corridor have LTE, but not DC and it's suburbs. It's an amazing hole in coverage for what is supposed to be the best service.

It's absolutely ridiculous that they are upgrading multiple markets around the country and the nations capital is still getting a pittance. Even plain 4G service is quite spotty.

And all this at equivalent Verizon pricing. simply amazing

Re:Why I left (1)

lightknight (213164) | about 9 months ago | (#44425229)

Hmm. Currently on Virgin Mobile, which is one of Sprint's brands, and while I enjoy the 'all you can eat' approach to data, I can't make use of it, since I have such poor signal out where I am.

It gets worse...I've repeatedly asked Virgin Mobile to offer me, sell me, anything, a micro-cell / femto-cell, so I can use their service inside my own home, using my own damn broadband connection...and they repeatedly act like they don't care. Their PR crew seems to be more focused on MyFi than addressing a serious problem which, if they just spent 5 minutes with a Sprint engineer ("Hey guys, can we offer our customers Air Raves? Thanks...."), would be fixed / go away; how am I supposed to share a cellular signal with '5 of my friends' via 802.11x if I have to go outside to place a phone call?

And it's not like there has been a lot, and I mean a lot, of noise on the boards about VM lacking a femto-cell, going back for years...I can only conclude that Sprint is a masochist, that enjoys self-sabotage.

As for the phones being offered...not bad, but they do need to work on things a little. The Samsung Galaxy 4, or what have you, is the current lead from Samsung...but VM just got the 3; and it's not like Samsung doesn't want to sell this thing, if the latest figures from El Reg are true. And it's not like VM is subsidizing these phones...because you pay for the phone in its entirety.

Re:Why I left (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 9 months ago | (#44425637)

I got the Evo 4G right when it came out, I think even the day of (June 2010, I think). I switched to Sprint to get it. The salesman I talked to said that Phoenix would be getting 4G service "soon". By the time I dropped Sprint a few months ago to go to T-Mobile and get the HTC One, there still was no 4G service in Phoenix. I'm not talking about LTE either, I'm talking about whatever Sprint thinks is 4G. I would see network speeds around 20-40kbps frequently on the Evo 4G in Phoenix. I just ran a speed test on my HTC One on T-Mobile and it shows 20MB down, 10MB up. That's actually by far the fastest speed I've seen on it, the other 2 tests I have saved are 3MB and 4.6MB down, and under 2MB up (still 2 orders of magnitude better than Sprint's network). Maybe the network got an upgrade. Unfortunately for Sprint, I was done waiting around for them to get their shit together.

t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44423955)

i'm on AT&T but looking to go to T-mo next year because the prices are actually cheaper. sure you get less LTE data, but i don't care. i have wifi at home and work. and LTE is more hype than anything else. i have two LTE phones i use daily and the real speeds are a lot slower because most of the content is virtualized and clouded to the point where the source is a lot slower than LTE
Sprint costs just as much as AT&T and Verizon and their data speed is too slow for what you pay

the unlimited data fiends who stream netflix/youtube/pandora 24x7 are a niche market and a small minority of the total smart phone user population

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424319)

Someone doesn't know about republic wireless.

$20 a month for unlimitted data,text&talk. There's of course, only one phone available, and they strongly encourage you to use wifi instead of cell service when possible. But if you can get over those hicups as I have you laugh at the ridiculous rates other people pay. (Also, leaving is free)

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424423)

nope, need to have an iphone and want a full GSM network so i can buy any GSM unlocked phone in the future

i have an iphone 5 i'm looking to keep for 3-4 years and every phone after that i'll pay full price and keep 3-4 years. no reason to upgrade every 1-2 years anymore

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424561)

I predict you won't be keeping that iPhone 5 past 2013 (you'll have to have the new one when it comes out.) Just watch...

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424597)

i can do the same on t-mobile for about the same price and pay less every month

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (2)

bberens (965711) | about 9 months ago | (#44425127)

Try Straight talk. It's Wal-Mart's rebranded service provided by either T-Mobile or ATT (you choose which type of SIM you want). The tricky point is you don't get roaming like you would have included with T-Mobile or ATT proper. Based on where I live, work, and mostly travel the T-Mobile SIM works great for me. $45/mo unlimited talk, text, and web on HSPA+. They did call me and fuss at me for data usage once, but it was pretty egregious.. I think I downloaded like 20-30GB one month :-/

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 9 months ago | (#44424579)

There's of course, only one phone available

I'm willing to pay $199 for the phone, but is it my phone on Republic? Can I load CM10 on it and still use their WiFi routing app? Do they roam over to Verizon when the Sprint CDMA network is unavailable?

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (2)

Charles Duffy (2856687) | about 9 months ago | (#44425045)

Unlimited data (5GB at 4G speeds) on T-Mobile is $30/month, it's compatible with Nexus phone hardware, and I don't have to worry about getting kicked off for using too much. I know about Republic Wireless -- and very intentionally choose not to use them.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

fermion (181285) | about 9 months ago | (#44424377)

I have looked at T-mobile, and for what I have it does not seem that much better. For one thing they say unlimited night and weekends, but it does not say it voice minutes are unlimited. I am on legacy rollover, so some months I use more, others I use less, and it tends to balance out. Coverage is an issue. I have devices for ATT, Verizon and Sprint. Where I am, ATT and Verizon are now the same, but I do travel to places where the ATT coverage is worse. Sprint coverage for 4G/LTE is spotty at best. I have tried them twice in past, and still have a situation where I can use it if I pay a monthly fee, but pretty much I don't since coverage is basically non existence.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424543)

the new plans are unlimited minutes and texts. 500mb of LTE data going up to 2GB and unlimited if you pay more. data is unlimited but you are throttled after the first 500MB or 2GB which is a no biggie since i use less than 1GB most months

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (4, Informative)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | about 9 months ago | (#44424817)

Caveat: As always, YMMV. I went over on my T-Mobile data a few months ago while at a conference. To my surprise even at 5GB I wasn't throttled. When I got back to my hometown I walked into one of their stores while my wife was shopping and asked them about it. The answer I got was that they reserve the right to throttle if you go over and that it's not an automatic thing. I have no idea if this is correct since in my experience salespeople are about as ill-informed as viewers of Fox News, but it is something to think about.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about 9 months ago | (#44425079)

No, that's about right. I only ever got throttled once or twice on my old "unlimited" plan, and I consistently use about 1-3GB (hooray streaming music).

Something people here haven't been mentioning: if you pay an extra $20/month, you get "true" unlimited data - no throttling at all.

Also, your high-speed data cap also counts as a tethered data cap. So normally you get up to 500MB tethering/month included. If you spend the extra $10 per 2GB extra high-speed data, you also get an extra 2GB of tethered data (per $10). The $20 for unlimited high-speed is a flat-rate deal that doesn't apply to the tethering cap, though.

It's still an excellent deal, and they are not, generally, complete dicks about things.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 9 months ago | (#44424397)

Sprint costs just as much as AT&T and Verizon and their data speed is too slow for what you pay

This - it applies to coverage too. Here Verizon has good coverage, AT&T unreliable, and Sprint only has a few towers. I can't think of any good reason to go with Sprint. If they had made WiMax work, then perhaps it could have happened, but they need to do more than offer 'unlimited' data to win customers. 'Unlimited data' would get me over to them _if_ the other problems were solved.

Unlimited data only because they have to (1)

sjbe (173966) | about 9 months ago | (#44425115)

'Unlimited data' would get me over to them _if_ the other problems were solved.

Of course if the other problems were solved, they would have no need to offer "unlimited" data. Sprint isn't offering that because they are nice guys. They are offering it because they are getting their asses handed to them by Verizon and AT&T and it is a way to draw in customers that would otherwise go elsewhere.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 9 months ago | (#44424729)

i have two LTE phones i use daily and the real speeds are a lot slower because most of the content is virtualized and clouded to the point where the source is a lot slower than LTE

This is the part a lot of people don't get. Once we got to 3G and 4G, the limiting factor often wasn't the mobile network anymore - it was the server at the other end.

But people love posting those screenshots from their speed test app that show 70Mbps...

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

healyp (1260440) | about 9 months ago | (#44424823)

I would check the local coverage maps before you make that decision. I have T-Mobile and their coverage is still awful outside of the big cities.

They are by far the cheapest big name provider. I have a $30 unlimited data/text + 100 voice minute pre-paid plan. At .10/min after that you could go over by another 150 minutes and still come in cheaper than the next cheapest option, or supplement with Hangouts/Skype/etc. and not go over at all.

None of the other providers comes close to the price, I have a Nexus 4 so I only have GSM to choose from AT&T's offering is not unlimited, it only includes 2GB of (if you don't add any more with a data package) and that's $60/mo, A comparable Simple Mobile plan(unlimited, first 4GB at 4G) it's $60 Straight Talk has an "unlimited web access" plan for $45, still more expensive than the $30 with T-Mo.

But again, my phone becomes almost completely unusable anywhere outside of the NYC Metro or inside a big building since the T-Mo frequencies don't penetrate buildings well.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

Andrio (2580551) | about 9 months ago | (#44424927)

I'm on T-Mobile and I'm pretty happy. The lack of LTE is meaningless when you have HSPA+.

My very first day on T-Mobile, I did a speedtest in my home. 12Mbps on cellular data. My jaw dropped, especially after having been with Sprint for nearly two years.

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about 9 months ago | (#44424989)

Unless you need to use it.

I switched back from T-Mobile to Sprint after finding my phone would only work in cities. Anywhere on the highway between places nothing.

Vote with your wallet (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44425061)

I'm on Sprint. It sucks. To say their service is spotty is a huge understatement. I wouldn't even call them a national carrier. I spent a week up in the White Mountains of New Hampshire recently, and I didn't get a single moment of cellular service for the entire duration of my trip. Now, I know the White Mountains are somewhat remote, but my girlfriend's AT&T phone seemed to have service more often than not.

I'm out of contract with Sprint. I could leave for an affordable T-Mobile. I could leave for a Verizon's awesome coverage. I could go with AT&T so I can talk and surf (2G/3G) at the same time. But I'm staying with Sprint instead. Why? Because I put my money where my mouth is.

All you assholes complaining about capped data plans, what the fuck are you doing to support Sprint's efforts? Everyone that complains that telecommunications companies have no incentive to increase network capacity due to laughable data transfer caps, are you financially supporting Sprint to make a statement? Why the hell not?

I don't even use much cellular data, mostly because Sprint's network is so god damn slow and spotty. But you know what? I'm doing my fucking part. If everyone started lining up to switch to Sprint to get their unlimited plan, it would not only finance Sprint's build out of increased capacity, but also send a clear message to other [more capable] carriers that consumers are tired of being gouged by laughable limits on their phone usage. So here I am, with my shitty cell service, taking one for the team, with the hope that other like-minded individuals will join me, and things will change. But all you other like-minded individuals seem to lack any sense of principle. Next time you find yourself fretting about potentially exceeding your data cap, remember this post. Remember me saying in no unclear terms: "Fuck you."

Re:t-mobile is the best low cost carrier (2)

Hydian (904114) | about 9 months ago | (#44425157)

I saved a lot of money by switching back to Sprint from Verizon and Verizon cost me a lot more when I initially switched away from Sprint even with a corporate discount.

Coverage...it all depends upon where you are. My personal phone is Sprint and my Blackberry is Verizon. I travel a lot and in my purely anecdotal experience the Sprint phone has had slightly better coverage with fewer dropped call issues. I can't say which is better for data because I don't use my Blackberry for many data tasks and frankly, 3G is fast enough for most tasks that you perform on a phone anyway.

Where they fail (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44423967)

Its a great service as long as don't plan on using it like a phone and receive calls

Re:Where they fail (1)

AvitarX (172628) | about 9 months ago | (#44424017)

Who does that anymore?

My last month had 23 minutes, and I use my phone as a work and personal phone.

Re:Where they fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424115)

23 minutes because the sprint phone never let you take a call?

Re:Where they fail (1)

bonehead (6382) | about 9 months ago | (#44424451)

Sounds about right...

Where I live, in order to make a phone call I have to go outside and walk a few hundred yards. From that location (hope it's not raining) I have a clear line of sight to a sprint tower less than a mile away. It's still hit or miss whether my call will go through.

As for unlimited data, it's easy to see how they can offer that. I could tether to my laptop and download as fast as possible 24/7 for an entire month, and a quick, back-of-envelope calculation tells me I would still come nowhere close to where other carriers are capped at.

For the first time since I've been a cellular customer, I am actually *happy* when I see the roaming icon pop up on my phone, because that's the only time it works worth a shit.

Switching carriers on Friday, and they can shove their ETF up their ass.

Re:Where they fail (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 9 months ago | (#44424415)

I'm on Virgin Mobile, owned by Sprint. On an average month, I use less than 10 minutes for phone calls. I use it considerably more for email and texting, and fairly often for web and remote desktop. If Verizon or ATT offered anything remotely similar to Virgin's $45 unlimited data, I'd jump in a heartbeat just for the better coverage. But until they do, cost is king and I'll stick with Virgin.

Re:Where they fail (4, Interesting)

chmod a+x mojo (965286) | about 9 months ago | (#44425305)

Verizon shot themselves in the ass. They had unlimited data, then got rid of it. Eventually if you had unlimited data you got to keep it while new customers didn't have the option. Then they even got rid of that, to keep your unlimited data you had to buy a phone outright ( and this is even after they got rid of the "new every 2" ~$50 bonus when upgrading)... after buying one phone outright on my old contract I contacted customer support to inquire about keeping my unlimited data. Basically was told to fuck off, and pay more for a lot LESS data even though the absolute highest I ever used was 5.5GB one month. Told CS to shove it up their ass since I was a loyal - pretty much perfect, since my bill was paid on time every time- customer for ~10-12 years .

Ported to another carrier in less than two hours, got enough data with equivalent minutes for ~$20/Month cheaper to not worry, and haven't looked back. If they had worked with me as a loyal customer I would still be with them, and it's stupid... it's much much MUCH more cost effective to keep a good customer than it is to try and get a new one.

Re:Where they fail (1)

Insightfill (554828) | about 9 months ago | (#44425719)

Ported to another carrier in less than two hours, got enough data with equivalent minutes for ~$20/Month cheaper to not worry, and haven't looked back. If they had worked with me as a loyal customer I would still be with them, and it's stupid... it's much much MUCH more cost effective to keep a good customer than it is to try and get a new one.

So: who did you go to?

Re:Where they fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44425609)

Even that is questionable. I bump into significant coverage holes in Las Vegas. The coverage is just poor enough to keep the phone 'locked' to the Sprint signal rather than roaming to (presumably) Verizon. When I do roam in those areas, I get nice consistent calling.

Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (4, Insightful)

adisakp (705706) | about 9 months ago | (#44423983)

While slashdot users may like to complain about carrier locking, your average US consumer doesn't really care. Why?

Because they typically get a discounted or free phone that locks them into a 2 year contract anyhow. And by the time 2 years are up, they want a new phone anyhow.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

adisakp (705706) | about 9 months ago | (#44424045)

It's like the whole thing where slashdot complained about "open" MP3's vs iTunes DRM. But consumers will pick whatever is better and easier.

For cell phones, if the the data rate is slow or service sucks they will leave as soon as their 2 year contract is up. If service and data are awesome, they will stay.

It has very little to do with iPhones being locked. How many people want to use a 3 year old iPhone when you're at least 2 models behind and a 3rd is about to be released?

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424193)

How many people want to use a 3 year old iPhone when you're at least 2 models behind and a 3rd is about to be released?

Me. Honestly I'm tired of my "Smart Phone". I never use apps anymore and only occasionally use it for surfing (I hate mobile sites...seriously the only reason I bought an iPhone in the first place was so I could surf "real" websites). I pretty much use it for making and (gasp) receiving calls. I never bought into Siri and all my friends that rushed out to buy a new phone just for Siri used it for a few weeks and now never use it. They're phones, stop trying to make them into tiny computers that only consume mindless data.
 

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

jdunn14 (455930) | about 9 months ago | (#44424471)

stop trying to make them into tiny computers that only consume mindless data.

Yeah, that's what an iPad is for!

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | about 9 months ago | (#44425081)

I agree that Siri is a joke, but for those of us that leave the house and travel the rest is invaluable. GPS + maps + websites will find you stuff in a local area, get you directions through an unfamiliar place, etc with a minimum of fuss. Plus texting/IM is a much more efficient way of communicating for small messages and/or things you'd need to write down like addresses. And occasionally there is a work emergency to respond to, so having access to email rather than needing to find a computer makes a whole bunch of difference.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (0)

Belial6 (794905) | about 9 months ago | (#44425247)

Well, there is your problem... Of course you are unhappy with your phone... You got an iPhone. (I kid... I kid...)

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424085)

Actually that's untrue -- US consumers are rapidly adopting pre-paid plans.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

tech.kyle (2800087) | about 9 months ago | (#44424155)

While slashdot users may like to complain about carrier locking, your average US consumer doesn't really care. Why? Because they typically get a discounted or free phone that locks them into a 2 year contract anyhow. And by the time 2 years are up, they want a new phone anyhow.

I've found it's not uncommon for people to upgrade at full price (or used price), their "old" phone now up for sale. Alternatively, some people use their phone for more than two years (my account has a few extra lines with basic flip phones) and it's not uncommon to extend the contract, purchase a heavily discounted phone and immediately sell it for near full price to help offset the cost of the line (if not for profit).

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | about 9 months ago | (#44424175)

I agree with you that most people won't care. However, if that were my iPhone 5, I would have sued Sprint immediately had they refused to unlock it.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424249)

most of us don't have ADHD or other mental issues where the simplest thing annoys us and causes us to switch a carrier

i remember having a cell phone before number portability. it was predicted that lots of people would switch carriers, the opposite happened. a few crazy people switched carriers. a few others who live in a bad service area for that carrier did as well. most stayed since there was no point in switching.

same with 2 year contracts. if i had to pay $500 for a cell phone and the service i would just keep my home phone and not get a cell phone. but a cheapo cell and slightly more expensive service makes it worth it to dump my home phone

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

sjames (1099) | about 9 months ago | (#44424613)

So the 2 year loan with hidden interest and fees on $500 is the deal maker for you?

If people typically had to pay for the phone up front (or put it on the credit card), it would probably be down to $400 or less by now.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424745)

with the prepaid carriers being $45 or so a month per line on average going 2 year contract was a good deal since the prepaid savings were tiny

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

bberens (965711) | about 9 months ago | (#44425223)

I dunno what time frame you're talking about but for me pre-paid has been $40-50/mo for unlimited stuff (similar to your quote) but a comparable plan with contract was 90/mo. So even with a free iPhone or comparable device I still saved quite a bit by switching to pre-paid.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424779)

for a while AT&T was at 18-20 months to upgrade so that was a nice discount compared to prepaid. now that everyone is at 24 months and the innovation in smartphones is gone, there is no reason

i've used every version of ios and android for the last few years and the changes are minor on both camps

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about 9 months ago | (#44424995)

Most people didn't know about pre-paid yet either. There are lots of other options now and when you can look at it costing half as much, it really starts to make you question why?

Doesn't happen overnight, but believe me, it happens.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (1)

sjames (1099) | about 9 months ago | (#44424497)

That explains the commercials where the lady checks in to her cell contract jail cell. It';s obviously targeted at /. readers. I had no idea we were a big enough demographic to warrant a national ad campaign in prime time.

Perhaps others don't put 2+2 together and realize that if their phone was network portable they would have a better bargaining position to avoid the 2 year lock-ins, but that doesn't mean the issue is unimportant to them.

Re:Carrier Lock Not That Big An Issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424583)

While slashdot users may like to complain about carrier locking, your average US consumer doesn't really care. Why?

Plus most of the Carriers are incompatible at a technology level or frequency level anyway.

Pretty much the only two you can switch between with the same phone are T-mobile and ATT (of major carriers anyway)

Many people also travel (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 9 months ago | (#44425649)

your average US consumer doesn't really care. Why?

Because they typically get a discounted or free phone that locks them into a 2 year contract anyhow.

I don't care because of the contract. I was going to be with a carrier that long anyway.

I care because I travel and I like to use other sims when traveling. That's why it may in fact matter even to the average US consumer. Especially true as the population grows older, more people retire - and travel.

the view from across the street shows... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424015)

... it is raining on the sprint campus today.

Lack of upgrades? (3, Informative)

afidel (530433) | about 9 months ago | (#44424031)

Sprint's in the middle of a complete network overhaul (called network vision) that will bring LTE to almost every cell site by the end of 2014 while significantly upgrading both the antenna's and backhaul at most locations bringing better coverage and better speeds. It hasn't gone nearly as quickly as Sprint's original timetable laid out, but they're less than 6 months behind that fairly aggressive timetable. I know I come off sounding like fanboi but it really annoys me when people can't get their facts straight and use that lack of knowledge to tear down one of the last hopes we have for real competition in the cellphone market in the US. Not only does Sprint compete against the big boys but by being friendly to MVNO's they foster new concepts that help to drive down costs (see Virgin Mobile (now part of Sprint) and Republic Wireless for examples).

Re:Lack of upgrades? (1)

tech.kyle (2800087) | about 9 months ago | (#44424275)

I do appreciate posts like this and I don't mean to sound rude when I say this, but source? I am, as many others are, unhappy with Verizon's practices (the network is rather good, especially compared to others in the slightly rural area where I live, but that's the extent of my like of Verizon) and would appreciate any insight as to the future of Verizon's competitors.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44425469)

I do appreciate posts like this and I don't mean to sound rude when I say this, but source?

For whatever it's worth, I have noticed that nobody outside Sprint knows what "Network Vision" is.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44425619)

I do appreciate posts like this and I don't mean to sound rude when I say this, but source? I am, as many others are, unhappy with Verizon's practices (the network is rather good, especially compared to others in the slightly rural area where I live, but that's the extent of my like of Verizon) and would appreciate any insight as to the future of Verizon's competitors.

The way I see it goes like this:

I switched back to T-Mobile after two miserable years with Verizon when there was a threat that T-Mobile could have been bought by AT&T. During that time I experienced terrible service indoors just about everywhere. Their 4G was no faster than T-Mobile's HSPA+ and Verizon's 3G was a joke, like max speeds of less than 1 mbps down 256kbps up.

I've noticed that anywhere I go now that I am a T-Mobile subscriber I have a better signal in those locations than I ever remember having, the LTE is much faster but if you go to HSPA+ even with a weak signal it is still much faster than Verizon's 3G.

So onto voice services which seems to be what everyone tries to use as their justification on why they have to put up with Verizon's BS. I'll start off by saying right now I don't care about voice service, I don't like talking to anyone on the phone, I don't care if I can talk on the phone. To me dropping down to Verizon 3G/1X or T-Mobile EDGE/GPRS is the same because at that point I have no usable data so to me that means I do not have cell service.

Last time I traveled anywhere I went outside of the city where I had a T-Mobile EDGE signal, that would have meant I had a Verizon 3G. So even further out of civilization if I found myself without T-Mobile's signal or that of AT&T due to the failed buyout, I would have only a Verizon 1X signal which is even worse.

I also don't buy the BS Verizon spews out on why their data costs so much. It has nothing to do with congestion and only to do with profit so again I'd much rather support the business model of T-Mobile. People can justify Verizon however they want but I think their network sucks ass, their anti-consumer stances on just about everything is terrible and the collusion in pricing with AT&T just makes it worse.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (3, Informative)

dietdew7 (1171613) | about 9 months ago | (#44424361)

They haven't done a good job of informing their customers of the upgrades. I've used Sprint for over 4 years and paid for unlimited data and 4G access. Unfortunately they don't have 4G anywhere near me so I've paid for something I can't use. It also seems that 3G service has declined in the last six months, slower spotty coverage. Unless I'm on WiFi my phone is frustratingly useless.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424513)

Since all the rain here in NC, Sprint's network has gotten even worse. Ive dropped every call Ive made for the past 3 weeks. 4G seems to have vanished. I was told by a reliable source that Sprint is having issues with their equipment not being water tight and all this rain has caused them lots of problems.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (1)

bonehead (6382) | about 9 months ago | (#44424619)

that will bring LTE to almost every cell site by the end of 2014

I would not recommend holding your breath on that.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (1)

alen (225700) | about 9 months ago | (#44424705)

nice, except that everyone else in the USA is already on LTE or HSPA+. been like this for years. why do we need sprint?

Re:Lack of upgrades? (1)

TerminaMorte (729622) | about 9 months ago | (#44425287)

I'm sitting between Chicago and Milwaukee (South East Wisconsin).

Not only did Sprint not have Wisconsin listed on their 4G website, but service around here has gotten MUCH worse in the last few months.

I got sick of throwing away money for shit service and went to US Cellular. Awesome service/speed.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (4, Informative)

wjcofkc (964165) | about 9 months ago | (#44425303)

Until recently, I supported smartphones at Sprint. As a consequence, I had a front row seat to the Network Vision rollout from both the strictly corporate perspective as well as from the perspective of access to a wealth of robust network analysis tools. I can tell you that it is happening as quickly as is possible. One problem for LTE rollouts regarding all carriers is the simple fact that no one predicted that all of a sudden 200+ countries would suddenly start ordering massive amounts of LTE equipment from the very few companies that sell it... so there is a run LTE equipment which has been a speed bump. However, the Network Vision rollout has a lot more going on than just the LTE rollout but I don't have time get into that. Personally, I just got Sprint LTE in my area and regularly get 30+ down and 8 - 10 up. Not bad. One thing that has been confusing for customers is the difference between Sprint's 4G WiMax and LTE. A lot of customers currently getting great WiMax coverage are buying LTE phones in areas that don't have LTE yet, not realizing there is a difference (stores should explain this better), consequently they go from 8 - 10 down and 2 - 4 up to 3g, when they call up and find out what has happened from me (formerly), it's usually too late to take the phone back at which point they get understandably upset, pay their ETF, and go to another carrier. There are other complexities as well. Also, I have a good friend who works at T-Mobile and the way they are selling phones and service now really is a sweat deal to the point I might make the switch. However, it also needs to be said that Sprint has adopted a very similar model that is taking place as a pilot program in limited areas and through stores only. I think a lot of the reason they are shedding customers is due to their aggressive marketing for 4G LTE and unlimited data. A whole lot of the country has yet to have their 4G LTE switched on, and no one cares about unlimited data over 3g, so it is kind of misleading. Another part of the problem is the way they advertise the number of cities that now have LTE, the thing there is that they are concentrating their rollouts primarily in very small towns which is an artificial way of inflating their numbers - which is also confusing for customers. Basically their rollout is on schedule but their dubious ahead-of-time marketing is killing them.

Re:Lack of upgrades? (1)

wjcofkc (964165) | about 9 months ago | (#44425391)

Sorry to respond to myself I would also like to point out that push to talk has been ported over to CDMA from IDEN and it works well. I at one time thought that the Nextel purchase was a dumb move, and perhaps at the time it was. The reason they are decommissioning IDEN is to free up the 850 mhz spectrum it uses... they have interesting plans for it.

I am by no means a Sprint fanboy, just telling it like it is.

Failure starting at the very top (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424035)

All Sprint has to do is figure out what the hell it's doing. Is it a business carrier? Then stop marketing to consumers and switch your Sprint network over to Nextel's "beep" two way phones. Is it a traditional cellular carrier? Then stop coddling Nextel's ancient tech and figure out a way to make it work on your own network, then kill off the other standard.

Step 2: Capital investment in major markets, fuck the burbs. 4G with unlimited data my friend, you will be making money hand over fist.

Step 3: Pay Google to use you as the 4G carrier for their tablets.

Re:Failure starting at the very top (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424307)

They just need to stop the CDMA nonsense and things will start going better.

Virgin Mobile (1)

intermodal (534361) | about 9 months ago | (#44424053)

I'm on Virgin Mobile, which is essentially Sprint's prepaid service with no roam whatsoever. For the limited use I actually give my phone, it's mostly a safety net in case I have an emergency. At home, I use Google Voice via GrooveIP, and at work I just use the phone on my desk.

That said, their coverage, at least out here in the country, is awful. I'm not that far from Dallas/Fort Worth, perhaps an hour on a fairly main artery. To use mobile data at the office, I have to go outside, and to use mobile data at home, I have to both go outside and be very lucky. Voice works ok in most cases, if I can get reception. Which I sometimes cannot get at all at home or the office, but on my commute is just fine.

Spotty networks cost customers. I occasionally consider changing, but there's no particular hurry as low as my usage and need is. For $35 a month, it's about the cheapest I'm likely to find.

Hey submitter, try reading your own submission. (1)

xigxag (167441) | about 9 months ago | (#44424079)

From TFA: "Its [defection of] customers largely came from the Nextel side, where it lost 1.3 million customers. But Sprint's own prepaid and wholesale businesses also suffered losses. Only Sprint's core service remained in the red, adding a net 194,000 customers in the period. "

IOW lack of upgrades and degraded service may have been problems, but they weren't the problems that led to the mass customer loss. It was Sprint shutting down PTT and former Nextel customers having no reason to stick around.

Re:Hey submitter, try reading your own submission. (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 9 months ago | (#44424129)

From TFA: "Its [defection of] customers largely came from the Nextel side, where it lost 1.3 million customers. But Sprint's own prepaid and wholesale businesses also suffered losses. Only Sprint's core service remained in the red, adding a net 194,000 customers in the period. "

Wait, what? Doesn't "in the red" mean "negative?"

Re:Hey submitter, try reading your own submission. (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 9 months ago | (#44424491)

Yes... yes it does. Apparently in Soviet Sprint, gaining customers causes a loss.

Re:Hey submitter, try reading your own submission. (1)

xigxag (167441) | about 9 months ago | (#44424985)

Hmmm, true. :) But the word "red" means "net" in Spanish so maybe we can charitably assume that the author of the CNET piece made a mental transposition error, "remained in the red (net), adding a net ," in translating between his native Spanish and English.

The author, Roger Cheng.

not liking sprint (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424093)

Sprint was fine when i first got my phone, now it sucks. plain and simple...

Adios, Sprint (2)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | about 9 months ago | (#44424139)

I used Sprint for over 10 years, always with "unlimited" data and texting. That same service over doubled in cost during that 10 year timeframe. They never once updated coverage in my area. One time last year I was stranded in the center of downtown Dayton, Ohio and couldn't even get a signal to make a call!

Shitty reception, shitty prices, shitty customer service, shitty marketing, Sprint is just shitty all the way around.

Capitalism at its finest (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424179)

Dear USA,

See how your precious capitalism is working for you fucktarded USians? They lock you into shit to legally extort money from you. The solution to legal extortion is simple, communism. That's right boys and girls, communism. Capitalism is all about those with lots of money exploiting those without money but you fucktarded USians want your precious "individual liberties" so much that you are brainwashed into believing that the free market will cure everything. Eventually every nation on Earth will turn the free market against you by refusing to sell the materials required to make your precious little toys. Then you will come whining about unfair the free market is only to find out it is too late as you will eventually self destruct by becoming a third world nation while the other nations will flourish.

Sincerely,

Signed : The rest of the world

Re:Capitalism at its finest (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 9 months ago | (#44424531)

but you fucktarded USians want your precious "individual liberties" so much that you are brainwashed into believing that the free market will cure everything

You're not terribly far off, but still significantly. The people here are indoctrinated to believe that they are granted freedoms, and that they must support a fascist [econlib.org] system to maintain those freedoms.

Very few Americans actually understand about liberty and free markets because those choices are told to be dangerous to them. The government and its schools work against liberty and free markets at most opportunities.

The price isn't that great anymore (2)

jjhall (555562) | about 9 months ago | (#44424241)

When I switched to Sprint from AT&T, it was nearly half the price for 2 "smart" phones with data and one "feature" phone. Sure Sprint's coverage was nowhere near as good, but for the price difference it was worth it since it worked OK in most of the places I was at anyway. Over time their signal quality has not improved, actually I'd say it's degraded quite a bit, and their pricing has gone up. If I were to renew my contract on the plans they offer today, I'd be within $10 per month of Verizon's plans with the amount of data we actually use. Add to this the fact that Sprint doesn't have LTE in my area, yet they only offer new phones with LTE data, not the older WiMax 4G. I'd have to downgrade my data speed to "early upgrade" our phones, and they aren't offering any kind of discount until LTE is in place. They won't even give an estimate of when LTE will be available. I talked to a Sprint rep a couple of weeks ago and was told they have tower techs working in this area, but they were working on a 3G capacity expansion, not an LTE upgrade.

I've been with Sprint now for about 10 years, but unless something changes (in a big way) in the next 5 months before my contract runs out, I'm highly likely to be joining the mass exodus.

Re:The price isn't that great anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424535)

In march my wife and I switched from Sprint (was with Spring since 2006) to Virgin mobile. The phones are crap on virgin BUT they do not have carrier IQ and our bill for 2 Android phones went from $180.00 a month (Sprint) down to about $80.00 (virgin mobile).
Plus we were told that Virgin uses the Sprint network but I do not see how as we had on avg 5 dropped calls a week on Sprint to Zero dropped calls on Virgin mobile.
So far so good with Virgin Mobile using Samsung Reverb phones (rooted on day one ... poot is a wonderful thing :)

Softbank (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424247)

Wasn't Sprint acquired by the Japanese company, SoftBank? I hear they are one of the decent providers in Japan, although they don't let you unlock phones. I know this because my GF is Japanese and she came to NYC with a Softbank Iphone5 and there was nothing we could do to get it Sim Unlocked so that she may use it here in the USA.

I actually use Sprint for my cell service. Its mediocre at best and not that cheap. For 3 lines, 2 of them with the Internet Upgrade for LTE/4G and an additional 15$ a month for Unlimited calling/texting to Thailand I pay around 200$ a month. The cell service drops all the time and a lot of times I have to try 3 or 4 times before I can make a call. The internet is so horrible. Right now I'm just waiting for the 3rd line on my service to be at no contract status so I can cancel all 3 lines and move to something else.

 

another ex-Sprinter here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424277)

the final straw was 3 years ago when they forced me to start paying a 4G fee (when I upgraded to a 4G-capable phone) despite the fact that 4G isn't available in my area.

as of several months ago, it still wasn't... that would have been several hundred dollars in fees over the years all for a service they're not providing me.

Re:another ex-Sprinter here (1)

Pauldow (1860502) | about 9 months ago | (#44424749)

I had the TouchPro2 on a $30 SERO plan. Windows API services were shut down well before by 2 year contract expired. I changed the phone to Android, but it would often lock up just trying to answer a call. Even though I have Sprint towers 4 miles to my north and south, I could very rarely complete a call. Forget about data. I was provided with an Airrave for the $4.50/month fee. I could upgrade to a LTE phone, but that would have locked me into another 2 years, raise my rate from $30 to $50/month, and my calls and data would still be going through my Airrave on the internet line I pay for anyway.
I bought a Verizon Droid 4 off of Craigslist for $80. Replaced the glass on it, got the software changed to Cyanogenmod, and got it running on PagePlus. There for $30/month I get 1200 min, 300 texts, 500 MB data and it runs on the Verizon network.
The triple bad news for Sprint is two of my neighbors now can't make Sprint calls since they were hitting my Airrave.

Screw Sprint (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 9 months ago | (#44424295)

I live in KC where they're headquartered and had them 10 years ago or so. The service was atrocious, which I can't wrap my head around considering this is their turf and their employees *must've* heard complaints every single time they told someone where they work.

They apparently got better for some time, but if they're stupid enough to fall back into that same hole they deserve to get bought out.

Re:Screw Sprint (1)

Andrio (2580551) | about 9 months ago | (#44425307)

I used to have Sprint, in South FL. I had no complaints about the phone service, but the data service was abysmal. It was so bad, I actually developed a type of twisted, perverted fascination with the speed of Sprint's data. I had a speed test app, that I would often use when I felt especially frustrated. I guess it was a way of indulging my fascination. After dozens of tests, at different times throughout the day, and over a geographic area consisting of south florida (both coasts), and central Florida, over the span of nearly 2 years, these were my findings:

By far, the most common speed I saw was around 90-120kbps. No, that's no joke and no exaggeration. That was the speed of my 3G (not 1x, but 3G! 1x probalby didn't even count as internet), roughly 90% of the time.

On especially bad times, it would be as low as 40-70 kpbs.

Every once in a blue moon, and this was mainly in an unpopulated area of the west coast, I saw speeds of 200-600 kbps. These were always like mini-surprises. "I can stream video now! Woah!"

Some notes:
-No, it wasn't my phone's fault. Not only had I tried different ROMs, plus these speeds are consistent with what I see from some of my poor, sucker co-workers stuck on Sprint. It takes them like 20 seconds to load a mobile page
-WiMaxx 4G was one of the most useless telecom technologies I've ever seen. Basically, if there was a wall between you and the cell tower, you had no 4G connectivity. If you were driving, your 4G would stay connected for maybe a dozen seconds.
-I went to St Augustine (which is at the very north part of Florida), and to my amazement, Sprint's 3G exceeded 1Mbps while there. It's almost like it was a different provider there.

Whats new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424403)

Sprint hasn't made a profit in more that 5 years.

Unlimited means nothing if the network sucks (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424435)

That's why I had to leave Sprint after many years of being a customer: degrading network, and a poorly handled network upgrade in my city.
Having an unlimited plan means nothing if you can't do a simple google search.
The final straw for me was one day when I was running errands all over the city, and kept trying to look up something online but couldn't get connected no matter where I was; at that point I had to ask myself what I was paying for anymore.

Ting (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424473)

I recently switched to Ting. They are an MVNO on the Sprint network. They are pay only for what you use, no contract, no limits. I dropped my monthly bill from $90 a month, I had a 25% employer discount, to $30 a month. They have great customer service and you never have to wait on hold. You can buy one of their phones or you can bring your own Sprint device.

Here is a code to get your $25 credit on your account if you setup a new account with them.
https://zob29f136i3.ting.com

Re:Ting (1)

serbanp (139486) | about 9 months ago | (#44424753)

I too have been a Sprint customer for 12 years, then switched to Ting this spring and am very happy with the price and customer service. Brought my phones from Sprint without a hiccup.

Regarding some retarded comments regarding CDMA: if you use a cell phone for voice services too, the audio quality on CDMA is still much higher than the GSM networks (ATT etc).

Re:Ting (1)

JTinMSP (136923) | about 9 months ago | (#44425547)

No, that's AT&T running the half-rate audio codec to save their precious spectrum. T-Mobile is running the full-rate codec (badged as HD Voice) and if you have two people using HD Voice phones on T-Mobile, it sounds like they are in the same room.

This is the difference between knowledge & mar (5, Interesting)

rabtech (223758) | about 9 months ago | (#44424533)

Sprint has been weighed down by the horrible acquisition of Nextel. They were paying for two networks but only one network's worth of customers.

The loss of these subscribers was intentional and predicted well in advance as Sprint finally shutdown the Nextel platform. They already recaptured the more valuable customers onto the Sprint platform and made a strategic decision to let some go because the equipment fees and/or discounts made it unprofitable to keep them.

Part of the financial write downs was paying lease termination fees on backhaul and sites to shut down redundant Nextel locations. They won't ever post a quarter like this again; the Nextel bleeding has finally been stopped and their cost structure will only improve going forward. If you check the Sprint platform, they are still adding subscribers and revenue is up.

They have also closed the Clearwire deal, allowing them to move forward deploying 2.5Ghz spectrum but that won't really bear fruit until next year when handsets start shipping with support for those frequencies. Now that iDEN SMR 850Mhz is shut down, they can deploy the 3x3 LTE channel in that space which should make a huge diffence for indoor coverage. They have been planning this during Network Vision (their modernization effort that is running fiber to every tower along with LTE) to deploy the Nextel spectrum. All the newer handsets already support it, including the iPhone 5. At the newest upgraded towers they don't even have to roll a truck, the equipment is already installed and can even have the downtilt remotely adjusted.

They aren't stupid... Network Vision is running fiber to almost every tower with microwave bounces for the few that can't get it. The backhaul is all minimum 1Gbps, software upgradable, so they can just turn on more backhaul with a keystroke... The old network was all T1s, requiring a 4-6 week wait on the phone company. The new antennas are more sensitive, can be remotely tilted, and support more frequencies. The LTE gear is all software-upgradable to LTE-Advanced.

They had two major problems. LTE equipment wasn't ready prior to their must-build deadlines for the 2.5Ghz spectrum and they were severely hampered in capital spending due to the Nextel boat anchor. They foisted off the 2.5Ghz spectrum on some investors to help offset the cost and protect the spectrum, probably knowing WiMax was a dead end. Boost was a way to help offset the cost of iDEN with prepaid customers they could jettison later.

Now that SoftBank has solved the capital problem, they own the 2.5Ghz spectrum again, and they are rolling out fiber/LTE, they should be able to challenge the dualopoly on equal footing relatively soon. My city is one of the LTE launch markets and the difference between the old and new networks is night and day.

Once you understand these things, you realize that Sprint is a good play, albeit somewhat risky. The market just goes off headlines (often completely bogus ones, see every Apple story ever) and freaks out. Those are excellent buying opportunities if you understand what is really going on with a company.

Prepaid... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424663)

I am perfectly happy with my non smart prepaid Samsung phone with AT&T. Its a dumb phone, but serves all my needs. Only costs me $25 every three months, so its like $8.33\month.

You all are stupid to pay so much for smart phones.

Just switched to sprint (1)

r6_jason (893331) | about 9 months ago | (#44424701)

I've just switched from Verizon to Sprint, mainly because of Verizon's changes to data plans which they are forcing current users into. There is little point in sticking around and paying $240+ a month for 3 smart phones and 8 to 10GB of data w/ Verizon. Sprint is $180 a month for 3 smart phones w/ unlimited data. Verizon may be faster but w/ caps so low that's pointless. I can't help but fell that the caps are that low to force you into overages. Sprint is slated to roll out 4G in my area by Q3 2013, i'm guessing when that happens Sprint will be the better deal by far.

Re:Just switched to sprint (1)

aquabats (1985346) | about 9 months ago | (#44425025)

The cake is a lie. I joined sprint in 2009. I was promised 3g would improve by end of the year. Using the 1 year upgrade (which they canceled for everyone) I upgraded to a new phone thinking it was the phones fault. Still bad service but they promised 4g Wimax by the end of the year in my city...3 years later I still dont have 3g or 4g. Ive been in a couple emergency situations and had no service around Philly, Princeton Nj, and even outside of Baltimore. They push back the roll outs or just silently cancel them. Calling Sprint does no good as the reps always do the same thing. 1. Check for outages 2. Check your PRL/Software 3. Make you reboot your phone 4. Claim its you phone and you can pay $50-$100 for us to look at it and tell you its not broken. 5. (repeat) Store rep tells you he cant do anything on his end and I would have to call customer service to resolve said issues. Save your money and dont drink the kool-aid

Carrier locks suck, but who buys unlocked (2)

Colin Castro (2881349) | about 9 months ago | (#44424715)

Why pay more for an unlocked phone? So you aren't in a contract, they don't give you a discount on services. It makes no sense that they make a person with a locked or unlocked or out of contract phone pay the same amount. Make it worth my while and I'll bring my own phone to the game.

Re:Carrier locks suck, but who buys unlocked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44425463)

Well, personally I'm on Ting (spring network) and paying $15/mo for my limited needs (I stay on WiFi most of the time).
I did pay full price for one of their refurb phones ($75), but I think I'll buy a fancier one next time. The amount I'm saving per month over my AT&T plan (where I didn't even have data and was still being charged $60/mo) would cover the cost of a nice phone in 6 months or so.
And, since it is month-to-month, I could walk away, switch to Verizon or whatever, at any time.

No complaints about the Sprint network here. I eye the signal on my commute and wandering about the area, but haven't ever hit a dead area.

I guess I could include the link they give for discounting my service and that of any person who joined, but that would make this seem a bit too much like an advertisement instead of honest evaluation of service to me, so I won't :)

I left Sprint (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44424919)

I bought an EVO 4G when they first game out. The sprint network is so slow in San Diego I couldn't stream Youtube on low quality. When my contract expired I immediately switched to T-Mobile pre-paid and got a Galaxy Nexus. The T-Mobile network is better.

Do these numbers reflect Boost & Virgin Mobile (2)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 9 months ago | (#44424939)

I haven't looked at the report so I don't know but since Sprint is the sole owner of both Boost and Virgin Mobile I'd be curious to know if their sales numbers are added in to Sprints total bottom line or if they are kept separate.

Sprint is terrible (1)

zeroryoko1974 (2634611) | about 9 months ago | (#44425125)

Such an inept company. Their wimax was a failure, their customer service is a failure, their coverage is a failure, the acquisition of Nextel was a failure. I am surprised they have any customers left.

Surprised? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44425159)

Not in the slightest. I used to work for Sprint. Their upper management act like a bunch of high schoolers competing to see who is most popular and steal all the credit from underlings that they can to play politics with. They also encourage management by fear and good employees are often run off because of that. No one does their best job when the threat of unemployment is constantly dangled over their heads. The NOC was run, when I was there 10ish years ago, by a bunch of really competent guys and gals who were usually hamstrung by the office politics in upper management and prevented from making the service all it could be. To be perfectly honest, you're lucky a Sprint phone work at all. They've even tried to hire me back before and at a time I needed a job. I kind of like working in telecom (still do for a competitor), but I'd flip burgers before going back into that cesspool of corporate inadequacy and petty office politics. Whenever family or friends ask who they should get for their cell service, I tell them anyone but Sprint (and T-Moble).

Sprint to T-Mobile per replacement phone pricing. (1)

cojsl (694820) | about 9 months ago | (#44425255)

My recent Sprint to T-Mobile switch was per the need to replace a failing phone, and Sprint's inability to offer a price comparable to what I'd pay T-Mobile on a new activation. I spoke to two different agents, telling them specifically that I'd leave if they didn't offer me a better deal. In all fairness, I'd previously switched from T-Mobile to Sprint for the same reason. There must be some accounting reason why both carriers would sooner lose a ($99/mth, auto-paid on time every month) customer rather than offer replacement phones at lower cost to retain them. They both got me to switch by discounting the phones anyway.

T-mobile is gaining ground. (3, Informative)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 9 months ago | (#44425657)

Their no-contract plans are good. Despite a strong smear job by some Attorney General, (probably paid under the table by the big carriers), their phones are not locked once they are paid for. Unlimited talk, text and data, throttle down to 120 kbps after 500 MB, (10 Mbps before). 2GB more for 10$/month/line. 10 more for unlimited. When I got my nexus 4 from Google directly they gave me a micro simcard for free in their kiosk. Another nexus4 I saw from the store did not have as much junk pre loaded. No surprises so far.

My brother was saying that T-mobile benefited immensely in the failed take over big by AT&T. Apparently they had fine print, saying AT&T should give T-Mobile some 3 billion dollars and access to its network, if the deal was stopped by the Feds. So suddenly T-Mobile's coverage area increased tremendously and got some money too. But other are saying that still, T-mobile's coverage is its weak spot.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...