Who plans to go HD2? - Page 35

**p-slim** · #**341** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaltyDawg

So wait, Cricket has just as good of a network as Verizon then because both are CDMA? Is that what you are telling me? LOL! Man, you are in over your head here. Trust me, Sprint's network is NOT anywhere even close to Verizon's. Yes, both are CDMA. That has very little to do with anything. Why don't you do some reading. After you research this a bit, you'll understand that technologically speaking, GSM is better than CDMA. CDMA may have better coverage in your area, but that doesn't mean the technology is better. And, again, I can link you to the T-Mobile forum on Howard Forums right now and show you literally thousands of people all tellin gyou how much better their T-Mobile service is than Sprint. So don't think the 5 people in this thread claiming Sprint is better means anything. It's all about the coverage in your own particular area. Sounds like Sprint has good coverage in your area. Good for you. But you are out of your mind if you think they have good coverage everywhere. Heck, I could link you to the Sprint forums on Howard Forums and you'll see plenty of current Sprint customers complaining about their coverage. I don't know where you got the idea that Sprint is known for good coverage, but you are sorely mistaken. They have always been only 1 step above T-Mobile in that regard (and T-Mobile has better voice coverage, Sprint was just better on 3G coverage). But with the improvements T-Mobile has made (and continues to make) they are certainly a lot closer to Sprint in data coverage, and will almost certainly pass them in the near future. People in this thread (yourself included) seem to be stuck in the past. Heck, 2 years ago T-Mobile didn't have any 3G coverage at all, anywhere. Now they have every major city covered and are working on the rural areas. Another thing about T-Mobile- they don't list something as covered on their map until it has been totally tested and confirmed. For example, T-Mobile just barely listed my area as having 3G on their map like 2 months ago, but I have a friend at work that has had 3G on his G1 since the day it launched.

Uh, the Sprint plan I am on right now is cheaper than anything on T-Mobile. And this is after T-Mobile just cut their prices a month or so ago. Sprint has been the cheapest for quite a while now. And don't even get me started on stories about bad service. For every stopry about T-Mobile's bad service, I can probably dig up 20 about Sprint's bad service. I understand that this forum is full of a bunch of Sprint customers so their opinion is biased. But go over to XDA, where it is mostly GSM people and ask if people would rather have T-Mobile or Sprint- you'll get a totally different answer than here. Go over to XDA and ask if CDMA is better than GSM, you'll probably get laughed at.

your partner in crime rotrymeadows already agreed sprint has better voice coverage, I don't need to ask the people over at xda anything. Especially when the majority of the people on xda are not even from the states, and cdma is in only 1 or 2 other countries besides US and canada, so their opinions will be bias to what they have. YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE SAYING TMOBILE IS BETTER THEN SPRINT.

rorytmeadows · #**342** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaltyDawg

Another thing about T-Mobile- they don't list something as covered on their map until it has been totally tested and confirmed. For example, T-Mobile just barely listed my area as having 3G on their map like 2 months ago, but I have a friend at work that has had 3G on his G1 since the day it launched.

Exactly. They have not updated their maps with the 3G yet and I'm not sure why. I have 3G where I sit right now and the map doesn't reflect that.

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx

zip code: 14559

SporkLover · #**343** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rorytmeadows

So basically Sprint just admitting to wasting company money investing in WiMax. If they need to make statements like that saying they can just upgrade the software (we'll see), then maybe they should have just invested in LTE in the first place. Especially since it's theoretically faster technology.

That's not Sprint. Thats Clearwire. When Clearwire began building it's Wimax network, LTE was a unicorn. It was a non-approved standard that wasn't commercially viable. WiMax was. WiMax had other actual deployments too.

The fact that Clearwire can switch, and has network flexibility, means they have positioned themselves well.

Sprint's investment in WiMax actually has less to do with a desire to roll out a 4g network than a desire to not lose valuable Spectrum. Sprint had a bunch of unused Spectrum that the FCC said they would take away from Sprint if they didn't use it. Sprint decided to utilize it with the deployment of a commercially ready 4G technology.

**austin420** · #**344** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:26 PM

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx

i dont think id call that 3g coverage in every major metro area.

rorytmeadows · #**345** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by p-slim

your partner in crime rotrymeadows already agreed sprint has better voice coverage,

Yeah I made that up. Sounded pretty good, right?

rdcrds · #**346** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rorytmeadows

it really isn't. The hd2 will be out for t-mobile first. So people started asking if it was worth it to go to t-mobile to get it. Then someone said t-mobile sucks, then it morphed into a cdma vs. Gsm discussion, which morphed into wimax vs. Lte... Etc etc...

It's still all relevant.

how is all of this relevant with the tp2 it has gone 10 different ways and still has nothing to do with the touch pro 2

**brownhornet** · #**347** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaltyDawg

So wait, Cricket has just as good of a network as Verizon then because both are CDMA? Is that what you are telling me? LOL! Man, you are in over your head here. Trust me, Sprint's network is NOT anywhere even close to Verizon's. Yes, both are CDMA. That has very little to do with anything. Why don't you do some reading. After you research this a bit, you'll understand that technologically speaking, GSM is better than CDMA. CDMA may have better coverage in your area, but that doesn't mean the technology is better. And, again, I can link you to the T-Mobile forum on Howard Forums right now and show you literally thousands of people all tellin gyou how much better their T-Mobile service is than Sprint. So don't think the 5 people in this thread claiming Sprint is better means anything. It's all about the coverage in your own particular area. Sounds like Sprint has good coverage in your area. Good for you. But you are out of your mind if you think they have good coverage everywhere. Heck, I could link you to the Sprint forums on Howard Forums and you'll see plenty of current Sprint customers complaining about their coverage. I don't know where you got the idea that Sprint is known for good coverage, but you are sorely mistaken. They have always been only 1 step above T-Mobile in that regard (and T-Mobile has better voice coverage, Sprint was just better on 3G coverage). But with the improvements T-Mobile has made (and continues to make) they are certainly a lot closer to Sprint in data coverage, and will almost certainly pass them in the near future. People in this thread (yourself included) seem to be stuck in the past. Heck, 2 years ago T-Mobile didn't have any 3G coverage at all, anywhere. Now they have every major city covered and are working on the rural areas. Another thing about T-Mobile- they don't list something as covered on their map until it has been totally tested and confirmed. For example, T-Mobile just barely listed my area as having 3G on their map like 2 months ago, but I have a friend at work that has had 3G on his G1 since the day it launched.

Uh, the Sprint plan I am on right now is cheaper than anything on T-Mobile. And this is after T-Mobile just cut their prices a month or so ago. Sprint has been the cheapest for quite a while now. And don't even get me started on stories about bad service. For every stopry about T-Mobile's bad service, I can probably dig up 20 about Sprint's bad service. I understand that this forum is full of a bunch of Sprint customers so their opinion is biased. But go over to XDA, where it is mostly GSM people and ask if people would rather have T-Mobile or Sprint- you'll get a totally different answer than here. Go over to XDA and ask if CDMA is better than GSM, you'll probably get laughed at.

That's obviously because a LARGE number of them DONT live in the states... thats pretty obvious.

rorytmeadows · #**348** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdcrds

how is all of this relevant with the tp2 it has gone 10 different ways and still has nothing to do with the touch pro 2

Honestly, I only want to visit the TP2 forum. This site is so inefficient when it comes to forums, I'd rather just talk about it here. Don't raise any flags, goddamnit!

**p-slim** · #**349** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SporkLover

That's not Sprint. Thats Clearwire. When Clearwire began building it's Wimax network, LTE was a unicorn. It was a non-approved standard that wasn't commercially viable. WiMax was. WiMax had other actual deployments too.

The fact that Clearwire can switch, and has network flexibility, means they have positioned themselves well.

Sprint's investment in WiMax actually has less to do with a desire to roll out a 4g network than a desire to not lose valuable Spectrum. Sprint had a bunch of unused Spectrum that the FCC said they would take away from Sprint if they didn't use it. Sprint decided to utilize it with the deployment of a commercially ready 4G technology.

i think you guys are losing the technology battle with sporklover. his statements are factual and honestly starting wimax now and keeping up with tmobiles supposed switch to 10mg download hypothetically and then switching to lte without that much hassel (will probably just require purchasing new devices) does seem like a good way to go, I definitely won't mind the speed increase while they take another year or 2 to roll out lte.

SporkLover · #**350** (**permalink**) 12-31-2009, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaltyDawg

So wait, Cricket has just as good of a network as Verizon then because both are CDMA? Is that what you are telling me? LOL! Man, you are in over your head here. Trust me, Sprint's network is NOT anywhere even close to Verizon's. Yes, both are CDMA. That has very little to do with anything. Why don't you do some reading.

P-Slims point wasn't that Sprint's network is as good as Verizon's BECAUSE it's CDMA, it was that because due to being CDMA carriers, they have roaming agreements. With Sprint roaming is free. So wherever the Verizon network is, you can get Sprint service, and vice versa. That was the underlying logic.

While the logic is sound, in execution it's not so rosy. Data roaming limits you to 1x, even when evdo is available, and sprint forces their customers on the sprint network, even when the coverage from verizon is ten times better, and sprints coverage is unreliable.