??Sprint Myths??and also a bit of GSM thrown in

This is one of the best posts I've ever read on this forum. Someone who can really contribute some good tips instead of another "my carrier is the best and Sprint sucks" type of mentality.

 

My carrier is the best....lol.......J/K. I think Sprint is 14 day return policy.............Larry??

Very good post

 

yes. sprint does have a 14 day return. i tried them 2 weeks ago. i wasnt even thinking about trying them out; but they had a samsung a400 on display (i couldnt leave without this phone) i took the phone back and forth to work and all my usual travel routes and i'll tell you what a difference compared to 2 years ago when i first tried them.coverage was excellant everywhere except but at my home. verizon,att and voicestream also have no coverage in my house .nextel is the only one that works .i ended up returning the samsung and i bought a i90c. but sprint has definitely improved in my area . tompug

 

Yes Sprint has improved big time in the past two years just about everywhere. Glad to hear you were open minded enough to give them another try out. Some people on this forum think that because they were bad two or three years ago that they haven't improved at all.

 

Sprint, who's Sprint?? Never seem 'em,

 

Larry, you really love Sprint, you probaly be the president of Sprint ,huh. Just kidding, Sprint is very nice in the Dallas area, I had Sprint service for about a year now, I also have Cingular service (By the way I'm a employee of Cingular) and their service is okay to. The only thing that I don't like about Sprint is they don't have promotions for their existing customer, like rebates,etc. Cingular have upgrade plan for existing customer to sign another year or two for another phone at the advertise price.

 

I also have your favorite model phone the Kyocera 2255. which I brought when I lost my Samsung 8500.

 

Hey dukedog,

Welcome to the forum! We need more Sprint users here. That's right I should be president of Sprint PCS!!

 

Sorry! about that, what do you mean promotion plan, if you think that Sprint plans are better now than the past plan, you must be Stevie Wonder, these plan are weaker now than last year before they change the nights hour to 9:00 pm. All sprint did was give more Nights&Weekend mins it still the same daytime minutes that they offered when Night time was 8:00. So I wouldn't call that a promotion plan.

 

Good post, but I have a question:

First, let me say I currently have 6 sprint phones/plans, 2 verizon phone/plans and 1 cingular phone. (All my family members use my name to get their phones/plans due to credit reasons).

Since when does sprint allow you to change your plan without renewing your contract (1 or 2 year)? (is this in writing some where?) I've had sprint for almost 3 years now and have changed my plans about a dozen times total (combined on all 6 phones) and each time I've had to renew my 1 year contract in order to get the promotion (whatever the promotion may be). Note however only once did the sprint PCS rep tell me about the required contract renewal. All of the other reps did not mention it and twice the reps didn't even know about it when I asked. They said they didn't think it was necessary to renew the contract, but when they checked with their supervisors, they were told that a contract renewal was required in order to get a new promotional rate.

Coverage: I find converage for all 3 carriers to be roughly equal (this is in the Boston area, and I travel to NY, CT, NJ). Verizon has better coverage indoors, probably due to the use of a lower frequency CDMA (800mhz, vs 1900mhz for sprint). There are certain spots where one carrier's phone will work and anothers won't. But it's about equal among the 3.

All 3 give a large # of weekend/night minutes, but have changed their night to after 9pm. Which in my case really is useless.

But I agree with IdiOTeQnoLogY, check the coverage map BEFORE you sign the contract. Make sure you will get coverage before you buy the phone. Don't wait until after you buy the phone to complain. Do your homework!

 

IdiOTeQnoLogY,

While your original post is mainly true, you've also missed out on a major point...those who feel that they are not getting adequate service within the supposed coverage area on the map. Let me give you an example, Sprint PCS has supposedly indicated that they have vastly improved their service in the Chicago area...but yet their coverage map remains the same from 2 years ago. Yes there are those who don't evaluate the coverage map as closely as they should, but consider the huge number of complaints coming from service and reception problems within the printed coverage area. There was an article about this very problem and I posted it here in this wireless forum...not about the general coverage maps that carriers provide -- but on the reception quality and ACTUAL coverage within the defined coverage areas that carriers provide to the public. What the carriers don't provide is where all the troublespots (deadzones) are -- this is a good bulk of the problem.

I can give you another example...Buffalo, NY is covered on Sprint PCS's map...yet I couldn't get any signal around the Buffalo airport (indoors and outdoors) 2-3 years ago. Now you may say "Oh well I can get coverage there now" ... that's great but isn't there something wrong here? First you publish a map showing coverage and then work on building coverage years to follow? You see, that's where the problem arises in that it pisses off customers big time. BUT yes Sprint PCS at this point in time has done a good job in trying to aggressively improve their service -- not necessarily in expanding their coverage but in improving their service and coverage WITHIN the coverage area as stated on their maps printed from 4 years ago. For Sprint PCS and it's customers it was a growing pain process in building their own CDMA network "from the ground up" -- this is not a _____ about Sprint PCS, just reality of how building a network works.

I don't quite understand your assessment of GSM? You're basically saying that if a person never travels outside the US then they would not require GSM service? This is nothing new to "chew on" as its something that's quite obvious to most people. Let me jump to another point here ... you mention that you'll be cruisin' with 2.5G and 3G on your CDMA network much sooner than the GSM carriers? Can you please back up this statement with a timeline on CDMA versus GSM carriers? Your statement is not entirely true because the issue is not so black & white due to the upgrades that are being done in phases. For example, by mid-summer CDMA carriers may have launched a faster network than the GSM/GPRS carriers. But by year end, the GSM/GPRS carriers may be launching their targeted EDGE implementation and therefore leaping ahead of CDMA carriers ... and the game of leapfrog continues so on and so on ...

Again, I'm not praising GSM/GPRS/EDGE superiority nor the sole fact that it offers European roaming -- because frankly only a small percentage of the US population would need or even use their cellphone overseas. But you have to look at what AT&T Wireless and Cingular currently have (which is a TDMA system) and where their "vision" lies ahead. Their "vision" lies not in the individual users that think "oh i don't need them because I don't need international roaming" but in a bigger and grander vision of upgrading their network as best as possible right here in the US, utilizing the world's most popular standards. AT&T Wireless and Cingular hope to move forward benefiting from the economies of scale in joining the largest user base in the world, as well as the technological advances, services and application standards in-tune with the rest of the world as oppose to being several steps behind everyone. These are some of their goals and they will do it whether or not you need global roaming.

 

Kenny,

I'll have to disagree with you on the Chicago area maps being the same as they were two years ago. They have changed considerably from two years ago. I have the maps dating back from 1999 right here in front of me and can prove it. But of course we all know Chicago has always been the trouble spot for Sprint anyway. It's too bad you have to judge them by how they are there. But another thing I should mention is that when 3G is implemented by Sprint this July, Chicago stands to gain the most from this. The 3G voice capable phones will take up much less space on the network and therefore help solve the capacity problems in Chicago. As more and more people switch to the new 3G phones the network will vastly improve.

 

Larry,

People judge wireless carriers based on where they use the service the most. That makes obvious sense. How can you agree with the original poster's comment that everyone should review the local maps and do a test run of the service...which is what Sprint PCS users in Chicago have done and yet say "oh well it's unfortunate that Sprint PCS' opinion as a whole are based on Chicago's sore spot?"

If your solar car works great in California but not for those in Chicago...does it make the product a shitty one? Not necessarily, but those in Chicago are entitled to their review of what they experience at home, not in sunny california. Again as I stated before, this is not a Sprint bashing but an understanding that the Chicago network is not up to par with the rest of the network and something that is understandable in trying to build a network from the ground up.

As far as the map goes, ok granted that Sprint PCS has "expanded" coverage over the past couple of years. Let's not focus on how expansive the coverage is...let's focus on how good the coverage is in the stated coverage area. Two years ago, the map showed the entire city of Chicago and adjacent suburbs yet Sprint PCS themselves acknowledged the capacity and coverage problems in Chicago. Again, in my previous post I've already given Sprint PCS a pat on the back for their buildout in the rest of the country. The problem with Chicago is not about the bitching from people who say they can't get coverage 150 miles outside the city but from those within the city and neighboring near suburbs (all covered by the map). A call will get dropped when capacity of the cell tower/sites are max'd out and thus the 2.5G/3G implementation will help out things out vastly by increasing capacity.

 

Ok well it seems to me that all carriers will put out maps which are not completely accurate. I remember a few years back when Pac Bell in California claimed to cover the entire state but of course there were many dead zones that were too small to be seen on the map. Verizons maps will show coverage just about everywhere even though there's areas of no coverage among them. I think Sprint's maps are pretty accurate for the most part. The maps can't predict which cell sites will become overloaded and drop calls. The maps themselves even state that there's no gurantee of coverage in all areas shown as covered. But at least they try to show current areas as well as planned future areas.

As for Chicago, the network HAS improved and many new sites have been added this year and last. Sprint is working as fast as they can to solve additional problems. There was even a new PRL released to help with capacity problems in Chicago. (10014) Not everyone has this PRL and are not yet benefiting by it but they should.

 

This is the greatest thread I have ever read, I too agree with IdiOTeQnoLogY that customers should just do their home work. Just as people talk about Voicestream's coverage, just look at the map. Voicestream even has an individual Nationwide roaming listing, you just put in your state, and it shows the cities with which it covers. If the city isn't in the listing, then you won't get service their. Don't take your phone there, and when you get their and don't have service, come here and make them out to be the worst company on earth. Do your homework.
I do disagree with your assessment of 2.5G/3G IdiOTeQnoLogY. Kenny is right about the leap-frog idea. I beleive GSM is close, if not at 2.5 G. Well, I'm not going to say GSM, I'm going to say Voicestream, because I don't really know what Cingular is doing. I want to be first-hand here, Voicestream is running their GPRS at up to 56k on their phones, and up to 100k on their PC Card. This is current, as of right now. I see in print the steps that Sprint PCS is taking towards 2.5G etc., but all I see of Verizon, is what they are about to do, getting ready to do. DO IT, and quit talking about it, because everyone else is doing what we call "Walking the Walk," and not just "Talking the Talk," as Verizon is doing.

I'm not going to talk about Sprint in the Chicago market, because it would be misjudgement (I don't live there).
As for changing you rate plan without renewing your contract, I have once had to renew my contract with Voicestream, and once not. I guess it just depends on who you talk to, and what it takes to make-the-sale.
I have to go back to the point of how much looking at the map helps, everywhere that I intend to travel with my Voicestream phone, I just look at the website. All except for once have they not had coverage where I was going. I took my phone anyways just to see, guess what, they were right. I had no signal, but I knew this before I left, so I didn't come on here and make a forum, and call them all kinds of names.
DO YOUR HOMEWORK
We will just have to wait and see who does the best with the 2.5G/3G stuff. Right now, Voicestream customers are enjoying the 56k data capabilities. I'm not however, because I don't have a GPRS phone yet. I'm waiting for some other GPRS phones to come out, other than what they offer right now. I have my eyes on this beauty:
Sony Ericsson T68i

Oh yeah, can anyone explain the EDGE thing to me?

 

EDGE (Enhanced Data for Global Evolution) is a 3G technology solution for GSM networks. It will theoretically enable transfer rates at around 384 kbs. US GSM companies are going to EDGE as their 3G solution. It works within much of the existing spectrum, so it "should" be a pretty "smooth" transition once the time comes.


Also, aiwapro, you're a little off base on your assessment of Verizon. Verizon has already officially deployed parts of it's 1X network, where as Sprint has not. Not trying to open a can of worms here (regarding the deployement schedules and availability of Sprint's and Verizon's 1X networks), that's already been done, however since Verizon DOES have 1X networks already available, it seems to me they are "walking the walk."

 

Does Verizon even offer any 3G phones yet besides the 2235? Sprint already has 4 or 5 3G voice capable phones on the market so when they launch their full 3G nationwide system in July there will be immediate capacity improvements in their more crowded markets like Chicago.

 

Thanks.

I haven't seen Sprint's steps that they are taking in action, but I have seen a really good explanation on their website a few weeks ago. That's is good enough for now.
Where does Verizon have this technology at? Voicestream has their ISTREAM everywhere that they have their Digital GSM service.

 

I believe they only have the Kyocera 2235 at the moment. They also sell the Sierra Wireless Aircard. In the San Diego area, they have the QCP 3035e and Sharp Z800 which are BREW enabled phones.

Here are maps of where the 1X networks are officially available.

 

It just seems to me like they are slow in releasing the new phones. What's the point of rushing to be the first to bring 3G when you don't even have the phones to support it yet?

 

I have to agree with that, larry.

I'm surprised myself at how slow Verizon has been in releasing 1X phones (yes, I know I just opened the door for your Verizon bashing rhetoric, awiapro, so come on in . Before switching to Verizon a few months ago, my plan was to wait for the 1X phones. I was thinking they would release them ahead of the network availability to drum up interest and to have consumers ready to roll once the network was ready. After waiting awhile it became clear that they weren't releasing 1X phones on non-1X networks, so I went ahead and got a phone, figuring I'll upgrade in a year or so.

I don't know what they're reluctance is or what they're waiting for. I imagine once they start releasing them, they'll come out pretty quick with several options. I know that Verizon has a reputation for being very stringent in their testing of phones (probably too stringent sometimes, because I think it slows things down sometimes), maybe that's part of it....

 

It's probably good that they are stringent in testing phones before release so they can avoid situations such as what Sprint went thru with the Nokias.

Sprint took a different approach to the 3G thing by releasing some capable phones way ahead of time. I'm guessing that the reason for this is to try to get as many customers as possible using the new phones so that when the time comes to put 3G on the air, capacity problems in certain markets will greatly improve. I've been hearing that a 3G voice capable phone will only take up half as much bandwith space on a tower than the old phones do. It's pretty good strategy I think.

 

Not that isn't perfect IdiOTeQnoLogY, itdiot, or whatever; EDGE will provide a smooth transition from GPRS to it. It will not require a new spectrum. Of course Voicestream isn't in the top four (4) carriers, they are kinda new. They haven't been around quite as long, as other carriers, and their Nationwide service doesn't consist of a lot of roaming agreements, like some providers. How can Voicestream be in the top four carriers, if they're service isn't fully across the US. They are missing service in 11 states. I'm not talking about analog, I'm talking about Digital service. That is why Verizon can say that they are a Nationwide company, because of analog. In my view, that doens't count. I mean it counts because you can use your phone, but you can't use the features & technology that provider has been working towards for all these years.

Yeah Malial, that's quite a big 1x area that Verizon has themselves (ha ha). I'm sure that they will build out, but WHEN is the question, sometime or another I guess.
Actually Malial, I'm not gonna bash on them not releasing their 1x phones, I'm just gonna keep bashing on their 1x network altogether. WHEN Malial I say, WHEN?

 

A few comments on stuff in the thread....

EDGE is the first 3G implementation for the GSM carriers. VS has said that they will be rolling out EDGE starting late this year and continuing into 2003. Will they turn it on this year? I dunno I would guess not until their whole network is ready as they did with GRPS/iStream link

The next implementation of 3G is wCDMA, also known as UMTS. That will give the GSM carriers the Mbps+ speeds (not sure of numbers) Yes it is based on CDMA. I don't know its exact timeframe. 2004 in USA I would guess.

Then we move into 4G

As for GSM/CDMA phones, well, *not exactly*. There will be GSM/TDMA phones (Nokia 6340 and Siemens S45 (model no. might be wrong) are two come to mind. QCOM has announced a chipset that will use GSM and be able to use cdma200 1xrtt for data. As I understand it, it's a stop-gap proposal since QCOM says you can still hop to wCDMA if you want.