Sprint to place its LTE signal in 28 more markets

4. ojdidit84 posted on 16 Jan 2013, 23:57 8 3

Right? Like, a bumf**k town like Pittsfield, MA shouldn't be getting LTE before major cities like say San Diego or Phoenix/Tucson. Their priorities are all screwed with their 4G just as it was with the fauxG WiMax rollout.

12. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:32 2 5

I can asure you that there is major progress going on as we speak. From So Cal all the way up to Central CA especially along the coast. Theres a small blank spot between Central up to Modesto, but don't expect that to be out of progress for long. Areas near San Francisco have major progress too.

26. xXMAKESHIFTXx posted on 17 Jan 2013, 02:37 1 4

Well again I will reply with it isn't that Sprint doesn't want to do major cities but they are hitting some areas that get major traffic. Also a lot of it has to do with the fact that there are less politics involved and these cities welcome Sprint.

40. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 18:36 1 1

That is not the reason. They are simply flipping the switches to whatever is complete and stable to run on. There are different contractors working different areas. So, there are too many reasons why some areas might get LTE before others. It could be storms, nesting, or government approval.

9. KFear posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:09 4 0

Hopefully it hits Denver soon, though Verizon's stat's say that a number of their customer's are not using the LTE when they have capable devices. My friends that have LTE say they only use it to show it off! We'd also compare my Sprint 700k speeds to their 14mb a second LTE Verizon speeds. The websites loaded about 4 or 5 seconds faster on LTE. Not a crazy big deal in my book. I can wait.
I'd actually be happy with 2mb a second ALL the time. Mobile doesn't need 30mb a second

27. cwilliams706 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 06:49 4 0

I know for a fact that both of these companies did this to alleviate some of the issues with capacity in our area. The people I know who use the 3G networks of Sprint and VZW always complain about slow data speeds on their cellphones.

41. apocalypsebc posted on 17 Jan 2013, 18:55 0 0

Albany GA., Columbus GA., and Waycross GA. I'm waiting for Sprint to get it here in Macon GA. in the Middle GA. area. You would think that it would have been here by now since Atlanta GA. has it!!!

8. KFear posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:03 2 4

The Ten extra dollars is not a charge for faster data speeds. They add it onto phones to compensate for a lower overall price plan with the expenses of running a nationwide network. Sprint is a business and they have to make many decisions. Wendy's just raised their prices too, but the sandwich hasn't charged. Of course, I understand why they had to do this.

21. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 01:43 4 4

Sprint is getting major work done on the South East Part of Florida.
There are a lot of issues with Sprints network and that is why they are upgrading and going above and beyond replacing their towers instead of patching.

28. Fallout09 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 08:51 6 4

Finally someone who understands that Sprint is doing a complete overhaul of the network and it takes time.

50. paynekiller posted on 22 Jan 2013, 07:20 0 0

its getting me annoyed being on 2G on the road as well, but I have experienced LTE at least here in ft lauderdale. I've picked it up by the airport and theres also a hot spot on Sunrise blvd by the turnpike. Got a download speed of 31MBPS while there! I cant wait til they have it up and running everywhere

11. threeline posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:28 4 5

KFear, I have a feeling you don't know sh*t either but want us to think you do.

42. KFear posted on 17 Jan 2013, 20:11 0 3

I work for sprint. I know that a lot of factors are thrown into play. Believe it or not. My other posts will say the same. The researchable material is also on the web.

14. threeline posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:35 1 6

My friend just switched to TMO from sprint and he couldn't be more impressed with the difference in data speeds and he is not even into phones like that. He has the Note 2 as well and that thing flies on TMO's network. I cant wait to leave Sprint myself!

22. big.e927 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 02:11 3 4

T-Mobile? You mean the sorry ass carrier who had to whine and complain that hspa+ speeds qualify as 4G because it didn't officially unveil that? In addition, I personally know a family who hates T-Mobile for sending them a phone bill belonging to a dead relative. That's some shady ass s**t, plus my ex had to go to court to throw that out because T-Mobile was threatening to take legal action by acquiring their property even after they sent a copy of the death certificate. T-Mobile's response? A half-assed apology and claiming that the death certificate was sent to the wrong facility. Bottom line, if you're somewhere that received mail and it's property owned by the carrier, wouldn't it be the rational thing to do if you sent it to the right place? Naw man, screw T-Mobile even a prepaid carrier like metro pcs has LTE. T-Mobile is what's really sorry here, at least Sprint has a LTE footprint.

23. big.e927 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 02:12 2 4

P.s T-Mobile has billed families with their dead relatives bills like a bunch of punk ass corporate bullies.

13. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:34 4 1

No. They are releasing whatever is complete. There are a lot of factors that go into releasing LTE and their contractors. They want to finish as fast as they can. They are flipping switches to whatever is OK to do so.

15. threeline posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:38 4 5

Probably because their LTE signal is weak anyway. Knowing Sprint like I do it will suck!

16. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:44 4 4

It's not. Actually the signal should be better than Verizon. The reason why Verizon was so fast to upgrade to 4g was because they are using the "Cheap" way by upgrading their current 3g towers and they won't hold as much traffic as Sprints towers once there are too many users using 4g.

Sprint is using the latest technology and replacing everything on site.
Guess you don't know Sprint too well bro.

17. Sniggly posted on 17 Jan 2013, 00:49 3 2

Yeah, great way to spit out the internal propaganda. Sprint has a long way to go to prove their signal is worthwhile, especially with their coverage being as haphazard as it is right now.

• This comment is posted in response to #16 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #16 Hide

20. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 01:39 1 4

Signal will be better. Idk if coverage will remain the same. Two different topics, but LTE will rollout to all of its current 3g network.

• This comment is posted in response to #17 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #17 Hide

37. lsutigers posted on 17 Jan 2013, 16:56 0 4

Their coverage is great right now, speeds is what they are improving but coverage too will get much better with the deployment of 3G / LTE on Nextel's 800mhz spectrum.

• This comment is posted in response to #17 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #17 Hide

31. christony1120 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 14:14 3 1

Ever thought that VZW is a more larger company than Sprint, meaning more money, meaning can afford more towers FASTER.... so take your little Sprint is using the latest tech. bulls**t out of here. Besides the only reason Sprints LTE is faster is because their LTE footprint isn't as big as VZW and they're skipping all the major cities and covering up little cities meaning less people are using it

• This comment is posted in response to #16 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #16 Hide

39. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 18:32 0 4

Oh please. Do you think money is everything right now? Companies care about the environment too. There are cites that need to get done on Sprint and they don't finish due to birds nesting or something like that. Also, Sprint needs permission from the government to build their towers, etc... You make it sound so easy.

I was using VZW LTE very early in the game. I never said Verizons LTE was slower, so get your facts straight. Sprints LTE will be able to allow more users at once without slowing down.

• This comment is posted in response to #31 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #31 Hide

45. christony1120 posted on 18 Jan 2013, 07:42 2 1

Okay now you sound like a dumbass making excuses just shut up and accept that Sprint WILL NEVER better than VZW...... Their probably shining now because like I said not a lot of people are using LTE or even have it.... and have you watched youtube vids on LTE speeds (ATT came first in download and VZW comes in first at upload)

• This comment is posted in response to #39 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #39 Hide

47. cripton805 posted on 18 Jan 2013, 11:35 0 0

How did you learn to see the future? Id like to do that.

Anyhow, if you base your supposed ideas on download and upload speeds that is extremely stupid.

Why do you think Sprints 3g is so bad? Theyre not bad in all areas, but in the parts where they are. Well if you cant figure that out, it could be the same reason why that could be Verizon in some years.

Like I said before Verizon is using the cheapest way to upgrade their towers by upgrading their 3g towers. Do some more research and relize that Im not talking BS

• This comment is posted in response to #45 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #45 Hide

32. hanseljohnson1234 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 14:27 3 1

You're an idiot we all know the only reason Sprint is a LITTLE faster now is because they have a smaller LTE footprint than VZW...... In the end VZW will always be better and ahead of crappy ass Sprint

• This comment is posted in response to #16 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #16 Hide

38. cripton805 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 18:26 0 4

Keep telling yourself that and you will soon find that you were the idiot all along. I've seen speeds as fast as 44 on VZW and it was glitchy. There are numerous threads about this issue about cut outs, so please refrain yourself from making yourself look like a moron.

I've personally used Sprints LTE and Verizons LTE in the same areas. Sprints LTE wasn't as fast, but it was a hell of a lot more stable.

• This comment is posted in response to #32 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #32 Hide

44. hanseljohnson1234 posted on 18 Jan 2013, 07:33 2 0

Shut the hell up with your bulls**t and accept the fact that VZW is better and more reliable than stupid ass Sprint

• This comment is posted in response to #38 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #38 Hide

46. cripton805 posted on 18 Jan 2013, 11:30 0 0

Ahh. You really are dumb. When did I say they were more reliable? Do you even know the difference between signal strength and coverage?

Sprint is doing a great job upgrading and they are doing it very quickly for the amount of work they are doing to every cell cite.

You really need to do more research on technologies and see what both carriers are switching to. Obviously Sprint is not done yet. You probably havent even used Sprint LTE. Ive used both. So, just shut up. If Sprint gets a lot better, the cost of Verizons price plans will go down and LTE traffic will be less congested.

Youre freaking stupid if you dont think Verizon needs some competition.

• This comment is posted in response to #44 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #44 Hide

52. user312 posted on 30 Jan 2013, 15:36 0 0

You are the most f****** ignorant person I've seen on this site. Lets switch the roles here. LTE is almost here and Verizon makes a multi billion dollar deal to get something late that everyone else had (the iphone).How would your special Verizon bounce back to that? Now they've lost money and cant develop LTE as fast. Thats the only reason sprint doesn't at the very least have as much LTE as AT&T. You need to open your eyes a little bit.

• This comment is posted in response to #32 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #32 Hide

34. kicksetc posted on 17 Jan 2013, 15:20 3 0

My last trip to Phoenix I stayed downtown and could barely get a signal. No big deal it is just the 5th largest US city.

48. cripton805 posted on 18 Jan 2013, 16:44 0 0

I find that strange since you could technically be roaming off of VZW towers.

35. nbannis posted on 17 Jan 2013, 16:10 0 2

haha youre sounding like a pretty ignorant "jethro right now" . Do you have something against southeners or something. Im pretty sure they are happy to have lte over there just like you"ll be when coverage gets to you.

29. Fallout09 posted on 17 Jan 2013, 10:02 4 0

Agree. Charlotte was to launch by Oct of last year.... Jan now and still no offical launch.

30. Jyakotu posted on 17 Jan 2013, 12:02 4 0

Charlotte still doesn't have 4G LTE, but other cities like Raleigh and Chapell Hill and the smaller towns around The Triangle metropolitan area will get it before us. SMH

53. user312 posted on 30 Jan 2013, 15:40 0 0

Sprint LTE for long island is going to be coming in March, as well as NYC

43. xDrizzyXx posted on 18 Jan 2013, 01:31 1 0

-__- ... larger population wise. Not literally larger in most cases.