3G singal repeater - Touch Pro2 CDMA

I was considering buying one of these ebay signal boosters, and was wondering if anyone has had any experience with them and the TP2 on Sprint. I am getting 2 bars, and on a good day I can download at ~80k/s at home. I want to be able to squeeze any more data speed from my phone that I can as it is my only internet source (D*mn you Comcast for putting your pole 1000' from my house).

That repeater appears to be for GSM only.
The only repeater I've heard of for Sprint/CDMA is kind of a hack. It basically uses your existing broadband connection to 'boost' your signal - see Airave.
Edit - the more I read that ebay ad, the more confused I am. CDMA 2000 is CDMA, but it says it boosts at the 2100mhz range, while Sprint's service is 1900mhz...
Edit 2 - moar info

The ebay link I posted shows Frequency range: Uplink 1930~ 1990MHz Downlink 2110 ~ 2180MHz boosted. That should cover the correct range.
It looks like sprint 3g is running from 1932.4 to 1987.6 from what I am seeing on the web.

wizardknight said:
The ebay link I posted shows Frequency range: Uplink 1930~ 1990MHz Downlink 2110 ~ 2180MHz boosted. That should cover the correct range.
It looks like sprint 3g is running from 1932.4 to 1987.6 from what I am seeing on the web.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So does that mean the repeater will only work in one direction...
I'm not trying to discourage you from finding a solution, I just don't want you to waste $90 on something that might be useless for you.
Edit - what about wi-ex? Those seem to be the most "dependable" products... although much pricier. I just can't find much outside of the Airave for Sprint... and in theory it should work - but it would only improve your signal to what you get outdoors it seems. I'm not convinced any of it will boost your signal as if you had a new Sprint tower outside your window...
http://www.wi-ex.com/homeOffice.aspx

arrrghhh said:
So does that mean the repeater will only work in one direction...
I'm not trying to discourage you from finding a solution, I just don't want you to waste $90 on something that might be useless for you.
Edit - what about wi-ex? Those seem to be the most "dependable" products... although much pricier. I just can't find much outside of the Airave for Sprint... and in theory it should work - but it would only improve your signal to what you get outdoors it seems. I'm not convinced any of it will boost your signal as if you had a new Sprint tower outside your window...
http://www.wi-ex.com/homeOffice.aspx
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the airave work by using a broad band internet connection? As noted in the first post I am using my cell as my internet connection so that doesn't seem like a viable option.

wizardknight said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the airave work by using a broad band internet connection? As noted in the first post I am using my cell as my internet connection so that doesn't seem like a viable option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh? Wi-EX is not an Airave. Sorry I mentioned it my post, I was just stating the only cell booster technology I've seen for Sprint or even CDMA specifically is the Airave - which as you noted works on an existing broadband connection.
However, that Wi-EX site seems to support both GSM and CDMA technologies - perhaps as does that one you found on ebay. If you don't have good service outside I don't see those devices improving anything for you...
Good luck, let us know if you do end up with something - I've always wondered about doing this for my parents house - they live in the boonies and no service... but over a ridge not 1/2 mile by the way the crow files, full bars. Very frustrating for them, and it was maddening when I lived up there... I just am skeptical these types of devices will make that big of a difference. They seem to really be for large buildings where you have difficulty getting service inside the building - but service is fine outside of the building. Not quite the case for my parents, not sure if it's the case for you or not...

Do those things transmit with higher power than your phone? If so then they could improve your signal strength quite a bit since the limiting factor in your phones ability to communicate with the network is its puny transmitter, not the towers.

Related

Crowd Sourced Coverage Maps

I've created an Android (for now - maybe other platforms in the future) application called Coverage Mapper (http://www.coveragemapper.com), available in the Market. It logs signal strength data while you're moving around, uploads it to my server, and generates maps.
It started in the WIND Mobile on hofo, because WIND is a new cell carrier, so their coverage isn't as broad or consistent as carriers that have been around for decades.
Take a look at the website and the maps, and if you want to try it out, download the app and turn it on the next time you go driving around.
Also, it only works for GSM-based phones for now.
Keep in mind, it's still what I would consider a beta application, but I think most of the serious issues have been eliminated.
There are several similar apps out there, none of them particularly fit into the same niche... This is pretty cool sounding though, I will run it.
As with most apps I assume that one needs to be on 2G for it to reliably work? I still don't understand this limitation, as I used several cell tracking programs in Windows Mobile on 3G, but 2-3 similar things in Android read weird data if on 3G.
I haven't used it yet, but is there any tracking of cell tower locations and estimations of those tower locations based on signal and GPS location? Ideally as it gets more data, the estimation is updated. I ask because there's a tower near my wifes old workplace that has eluded me and it drives me nuts not knowing where the thing is. Otherwise I know where all of the towers are in town from previous mapping, but back to your app would be interesting to see the actual coverage.
EDIT: So far in the maps I only see "road coverage", no interpolation of area coverage. And the terms? Tsk..
khaytsus said:
There are several similar apps out there, none of them particularly fit into the same niche... This is pretty cool sounding though, I will run it.
As with most apps I assume that one needs to be on 2G for it to reliably work? I still don't understand this limitation, as I used several cell tracking programs in Windows Mobile on 3G, but 2-3 similar things in Android read weird data if on 3G.
I haven't used it yet, but is there any tracking of cell tower locations and estimations of those tower locations based on signal and GPS location? Ideally as it gets more data, the estimation is updated. I ask because there's a tower near my wifes old workplace that has eluded me and it drives me nuts not knowing where the thing is. Otherwise I know where all of the towers are in town from previous mapping, but back to your app would be interesting to see the actual coverage.
EDIT: So far in the maps I only see "road coverage", no interpolation of area coverage. And the terms? Tsk..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It works fine for me on 2G and 3G. I don't know why something wouldn't work on 3G.
I am logging the cell's LAC and Cell ID, but I'm not doing anything with the data yet.
For now, all you'll see are the paths people have travelled. The data is all accurate (i.e. no interpolation). I could probably add another layer to guess actual coverage, but one of the purposes of this app was to show carriers where dead spots are. There are definitely areas with a bad signal where a few hundred metres in all directions, you have a great signal. I don't want to interpolate a good signal in spots like that
Related to your tower issue, however, can you not get a list from the FCC? I know in Canada, all that data is public, and updated monthly, allowing things like http://www.candiancow.com/wind
Wow what an awesome Idea! Great way for us to get really accurate coverage maps! Thanks!
If you would consider making it store the data offline and sync it when in wifi range I'd probably install it.
I do not have a dataplan, so 2G/3G would be a bit too costly
minus30 said:
If you would consider making it store the data offline and sync it when in wifi range I'd probably install it.
I do not have a dataplan, so 2G/3G would be a bit too costly
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does do that...
Does anyone use this now? Its been a year now.
I just found this app now (Late to the party) but have already started running it.
Only question i have is I am on Virgin mobile and not sure if my data will appear properly on the map (runs off Sprint Network)
ja5219 said:
Does anyone use this now? Its been a year now.
I just found this app now (Late to the party) but have already started running it.
Only question i have is I am on Virgin mobile and not sure if my data will appear properly on the map (runs off Sprint Network)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also replied to your email, but for the benefit of everyone else:
CDMA devices are notoriously bad at reporting their network ID. About half do it, and half don't. There are a bunch of hard-coded conversions to get it working for some devices/networks, but I'll try to get it working for yours later this week.

[Q] Edge handoff with Nexus S?

Hi I am new here. i have been lurking for a bit but didn't find an answer to the question I have so I decided to sign up. First a little background... first time android user coming from an iphone. I really like the NS, couldn't be happier. I am also pleasantly surprised by T-Mobile's data speeds. I live in Manhattan and as everyone knows ATT is the pits for reliable service and fast data speeds there. I have gotten 5.11mbps down using the speed test app on T-Mo in my apt. With ATT I could only get .78mbps down as the highest. Videos, websites, music downloads are all really quick on the NS. It is actually faster then my cable provider's internet service...probably because time warner sucks and my cable is split about 45 ways. I happen to work in Jersey City, right on the Hudson river overlooking Manhattan. When I am in the World financial center in lower Manhattan commuting to work I get the same high data speeds as I do in my apt. The WFC is right across from where I work. When I check T-Mo's coverage map there are 2 cell towers a stones throw from my building on the river front. That being said I only get Edge coverage. Does anyone else have an issue with bad 3G to Edge handoff with the NS or with T-Mo in general? I feel like I should have solid 3G service there! Is there a way to force 3G?....I would assume that 2 bars on 3G is better then 5 on Edge, at least as far as data speeds are concerned. T-Mo's site list my job site as having excellent coverage. Also, I have eliminated the possibility that the building I work in is causing the issue. When I am outside the issue persists. I have about a .25 mile walk to my building in Jersey and all along the way I am sitting on Edge.
Greg Tolan said:
Hi I am new here. i have been lurking for a bit but didn't find an answer to the question I have so I decided to sign up. First a little background... first time android user coming from an iphone. I really like the NS, couldn't be happier. I am also pleasantly surprised by T-Mobile's data speeds. I live in Manhattan and as everyone knows ATT is the pits for reliable service and fast data speeds there. I have gotten 5.11mbps down using the speed test app on T-Mo in my apt. With ATT I could only get .78mbps down as the highest. Videos, websites, music downloads are all really quick on the NS. It is actually faster then my cable provider's internet service...probably because time warner sucks and my cable is split about 45 ways. I happen to work in Jersey City, right on the Hudson river overlooking Manhattan. When I am in the World financial center in lower Manhattan commuting to work I get the same high data speeds as I do in my apt. The WFC is right across from where I work. When I check T-Mo's coverage map there are 2 cell towers a stones throw from my building on the river front. That being said I only get Edge coverage. Does anyone else have an issue with bad 3G to Edge handoff with the NS or with T-Mo in general? I feel like I should have solid 3G service there! Is there a way to force 3G?....I would assume that 2 bars on 3G is better then 5 on Edge, at least as far as data speeds are concerned. T-Mo's site list my job site as having excellent coverage. Also, I have eliminated the possibility that the building I work in is causing the issue. When I am outside the issue persists. I have about a .25 mile walk to my building in Jersey and all along the way I am sitting on Edge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kinda confused, are you using the phone on ATT or Tmo?
if its on ATT you will only be getting EDGE
Sorry for the confusion...this is on on T-Mo.
To help diagnose the problem ... do you have any friends who can verify that there is in fact T-Mobile 3G coverage at your work? (where you say you only have EDGE)
This could be a service issue that T-Mobile is unaware of; you could also call customer service and request that they test those towers.
may also be a matter of a Tech re associating your device with the tower
@Ravidavi: unfortunately I am the only t-mobile user in my group! everyone else is on vzw or att.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
I've seen this too. This is my first t mobile phone too but it switches to edge and stays there in solid 3g areas. I want to like t mobile more but this is making it hard for me.
I'll call customer service. Complaining a bit might put it on their radar....
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
I called customer service. There is a known issue in the area.... Must be related to the blizzard we had.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
Welcome to Android!
For the future, you can force 3G by going to your dialer and inputting:
*#*#4636#*#*
Phone Information
Flick down to where you see Preferred Network Type
Select 'Wcdma Only"
You will see your signal reset and should 3G be available in that area, you'll pick it up. I'm also a fellow Manhattanite and am too loving the T-Mobile speeds since I came from iPhone in January 2010 with Nexus One
Sweet thanks for that. It indeed showed no service at all on wcdma. That will definitely be a handy trick in the future!
allen099 said:
Welcome to Android!
For the future, you can force 3G by going to your dialer and inputting:
*#*#4636#*#*
Phone Information
Flick down to where you see Preferred Network Type
Select 'Wcdma Only"
You will see your signal reset and should 3G be available in that area, you'll pick it up. I'm also a fellow Manhattanite and am too loving the T-Mobile speeds since I came from iPhone in January 2010 with Nexus One
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App

HSPA+

Yes this info is from a brick and mortar company store, but I absolutely love my company store here. It's what I guess they consider a "Premier" store and it featured in their many in-store live feeds around the country... they always seem to have some higher level people working the floor.
So I'm there picking up a new device to replace my wife's total'd Aria (Inspire 4G) and was chatting with one of these "higher-ups". He saw my Cappy and asked to see it (presumably to see if I had updated to KB1 thinking if I didn't he'd do me a favor and upgrade to the newest Android )
The look on his face was priceless.
Higher-up: "This is a Captivate?"
Me: "Yup"
Higher-up: "But your running an I9000 ROM and modem?"
Me: "Yup, with a custom Kernel as well"
Higher-up: "Looks like your on HSPA. How"
Me: "Yup, and it was a ton faster about a month ago as well what you guys do throttle it back or something? It was almost like you threw a switch or something."
Higher-up: "They did. It should open back up this summer when all the system upgrades are done."
So... those lower speed net numbers.... their real.
I knew it. I just came from Huntsville, AL and the hotel I always stay in overlooks the apple store. My speed used to be higher (July/August) and the past two weeks they seem much slower. I mean I had never seen speeds like I saw this past summer.
modmyphone said:
Yes this info is from a brick and mortar company store, but I absolutely love my company store here. It's what I guess they consider a "Premier" store and it featured in their many in-store live feeds around the country... they always seem to have some higher level people working the floor.
So I'm there picking up a new device to replace my wife's total'd Aria (Inspire 4G) and was chatting with one of these "higher-ups". He saw my Cappy and asked to see it (presumably to see if I had updated to KB1 thinking if I didn't he'd do me a favor and upgrade to the newest Android )
The look on his face was priceless.
Higher-up: "This is a Captivate?"
Me: "Yup"
Higher-up: "But your running an I9000 ROM and modem?"
Me: "Yup, with a custom Kernel as well"
Higher-up: "Looks like your on HSPA. How"
Me: "Yup, and it was a ton faster about a month ago as well what you guys do throttle it back or something? It was almost like you threw a switch or something."
Higher-up: "They did. It should open back up this summer when all the system upgrades are done."
So... those lower speed net numbers.... their real.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sir, are my hero. Thank you for a good laugh to start my day. Now... off to study for my test tonight...
sent from my porcelain throne.
Interesting... I have also seen slower speeds for the past month...as well as a huge increase in dropped connections (both voice and data). I have been a happy Cingular/AT&T customer for 6 years, but I have recently been considering switching because it has been so bad...hopefully there are improvements soon.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
yeap I was wondering. Noticed this as well over the past few weeks...
I also live in Alabama and live 2 blocks from the Apple store and AT&T store, used to have fantastic speeds but now I don't
This guy has been a great source of reliable information when it comes to the network, so I have no reason to doubt him (he sucks when it comes to device support as most in-store folks do). He couldn't go into any details about what the upgrades included since his superior was there next to us assisting someone else. I'll go back in a couple of days and see what I can find out.
For quite some time AT&T has been throttling HSPA access (up and down) in markets where their backhaul is saturated. BTW, it is also possible but less likely that AT&T has set a policy in their PCRF function to throttle back HSPA for certain device types (e.g. Captivate TACs).
BTW, it isn't standard ops for retail employees to be informed about HSPA throttling or just about any other network function so whatever your retail guy hears is through a long and unofficial grapevine and most likely rumor. Network changes at the core are kept quiet for several reasons.
maybe they throttled it down to work on upgrading their system to HSPA+ to support the new 4g devices. if the source is reliable, it could make sense since when the floor manager said the speeds would return mid summer, that is right before AT&t is allegedly supposed to have their LTE network ready (think they said Q3 or Q4... could be wrong)
So basicly you guys are saying its at&t's network that there slowing down causing slow I net speeds and a spike from almost no dropped calls to weekly dropped calls and that its not the ROMs?
We need to investigate with the google.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Yeah, I agree, I doubt this guy knows anything. Higher up in retail customer service still knows very little about how AT&T actually runs their network. Plus, it makes no sense that they would throttle the speeds for the upgrade. Nothing about the upgrade needs speeds throttled. All they have to do is update the software at the towers to support HSPA+, then ADD bandwidth. I think he's talking out of his ass personally.
AJerman said:
Yeah, I agree, I doubt this guy knows anything. Higher up in retail customer service still knows very little about how AT&T actually runs their network. Plus, it makes no sense that they would throttle the speeds for the upgrade. Nothing about the upgrade needs speeds throttled. All they have to do is update the software at the towers to support HSPA+, then ADD bandwidth. I think he's talking out of his ass personally.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, you get it backwards . Add bandwidth to a tower means lay out new fiber cables which means $$$.
So, in order to support the added speed of HSPA+ devices, while not adding any new bandwidth to the backhaul, they have to throttle down everyone that's not on HSPA+ (that's us) so that there is enough bandwidth left for HSPA+ phones.
For business point of view throwing money into HSPA+ network right now is not a good investment. AT&T will rather save that money towards LTE deployement (which will be new infrastructure).
Just to clarify, his first job is not customer service. I'm lucky enough to have what AT&T considers a "Premier" store. So on staff at all times are your normal sales people plus a supervisor, a Network technician and/or supervisor , dedicated U-verse techs and supervisor and usually someone higher than that in store. Walking into the store is kinda like walking into a corporate meeting.
Like I said earlier, he has never wronged me yet with the information that he has given out. Lots of things he'll skirt because he has to, but if you hit him with some leading questions, he'll usually divulge... to a point. Kinda like a smirking nod while telling you he doesn't have that information.
foxbat121 said:
No, you get it backwards . Add bandwidth to a tower means lay out new fiber cables which means $$$.
So, in order to support the added speed of HSPA+ devices, while not adding any new bandwidth to the backhaul, they have to throttle down everyone that's not on HSPA+ (that's us) so that there is enough bandwidth left for HSPA+ phones.
For business point of view throwing money into HSPA+ network right now is not a good investment. AT&T will rather save that money towards LTE deployement (which will be new infrastructure).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're a little over the edge on how evil AT&T is. Besides, they need the bandwidth for LTE as well, just like they need it for HSPA+. HSPA+ is just a software upgrade on the towers, plus more bandwidth, so investing in building HSPA+ is logical while building LTE, which is why they are doing both.
foxbat121 said:
No, you get it backwards . Add bandwidth to a tower means lay out new fiber cables which means $$$.
So, in order to support the added speed of HSPA+ devices, while not adding any new bandwidth to the backhaul, they have to throttle down everyone that's not on HSPA+ (that's us) so that there is enough bandwidth left for HSPA+ phones.
For business point of view throwing money into HSPA+ network right now is not a good investment. AT&T will rather save that money towards LTE deployement (which will be new infrastructure).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't have put it better myself.
AJerman said:
I think you're a little over the edge on how evil AT&T is. Besides, they need the bandwidth for LTE as well, just like they need it for HSPA+. HSPA+ is just a software upgrade on the towers, plus more bandwidth, so investing in building HSPA+ is logical while building LTE, which is why they are doing both.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not evil, just bad network planning. They famously got up at a conference in NYC over a year ago and said "stop using so much bandwidth!" (http://www.businessinsider.com/att-ceo-iphone-data-hogs-were-coming-after-you-2009-12). They thought they could get to LTE without having to put more into HSPA. Well, their CTO should have been fired in my opinion.
Bottom line is don't underestimate the cost of backhaul. And software upgrades to HSPA+ radios are still not cheap. It is pretty well known in the industry that AT&T is turning off and/or throttling specific HSPA services market by market depending on backhaul constraints and other congestion issues. And Foxbat is 100% correct in saying they would rather hold off on further HSPA investments and focus on LTE which is more efficient at both radio access and wired transport.
I have a friend that manages a corporate store. I asked him when I got the Attix, why the speeds were about the same as the Captivate. He said basically the same thing. Until the backhaul is completed we are stuck with the current speeds.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
AJerman said:
I think you're a little over the edge on how evil AT&T is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then, tell me why AT&T goes out of its way to disable HSUPA on our phones via firmware (all except iPhones).
Besides, they need the bandwidth for LTE as well, just like they need it for HSPA+. HSPA+ is just a software upgrade on the towers, plus more bandwidth, so investing in building HSPA+ is logical while building LTE, which is why they are doing both.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I said, LTE is a different deployment project and different network. They will have to keep both LTE and HSPA/HSPA+ running in parallel. And for all we know, LTE deployment probably hasn't started yet.
First off, I have yet to experience any of the issues mentioned in this post. I live in Michigan and I have excellent HSDPA and 3G speeds on my Captivate. They have not changed since before I even had an Android device... (I'm thinkin back to my iPhone3GS...)
Not to mention the fact that, if they were to reduce anyones bandwidth access below the rate that you pay for, you'd be entitled to free service or some other compensation. You pay for a service. That service is required to be consistent or you do not have to pay. (with regard to downed lines and other technical malfunctions)
They cannot just randomly go into their servers and start limiting bandwidth access below what people are paying for simply because they think they will require more bandwidth for some update of some sort. That is a crime. I doubt AT&T wants to flirt with that...
Not to mention, the latest firmware update that went out for Captivate devices was not OverTheAir. Thus that does not apply in this situation.
Also, they do not require increased bandwidth for OTA updates for that matter. Any time an OTA update is scheduled they account for the updates requirements prior to making it live. On scheduled OTA updates they configure the update itself so you can easily obtain the update on your normal 3G connection.
IF there ever was a situation where more bandwidth was required for an update of any kind AT&T would recommend and/or require WiFi access before they would mess around with bandwidth access to their customers!
And if you didn't have access to a WiFi AP then they would recommend taking a trip up to the AT&T store, nearest you.
So all this hoopla about them slowing down bandwidth access and yadda yadda is exactly that, a bunch of hoopla...
It's more than likely either technical maintenance in your area or you're device is not operating properly.
foxbat121 said:
Then, tell me why AT&T goes out of its way to disable HSUPA on our phones via firmware (all except iPhones).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HSUPA is High Speed UPLOAD Packet Access. It's very rare that your device would require these speeds for uploading data. HSUPA is also not part of your contract agreement. Only the download speeds are. Look into it.
foxbat121 said:
As I said, LTE is a different deployment project and different network. They will have to keep both LTE and HSPA/HSPA+ running in parallel. And for all we know, LTE deployment probably hasn't started yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thus how would this type of update affect any of our bandwidth access? Simply put, it wouldn't. Service interruptions are something I'm more than positive AT&T would much rather avoid.
RaptorOne3 said:
First off, I have yet to experience any of the issues mentioned in this post. I live in Michigan and I have excellent HSDPA and 3G speeds on my Captivate. They have not changed since before I even had an Android device... (I'm thinkin back to my iPhone3GS...)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The congestion of the AT&T network varies city by city. If you have excellent connection, good for you because you happen to live in a area that does not have a lot of smartphone traffics. Not so in big cities.
Not to mention the fact that, if they were to reduce anyones bandwidth access below the rate that you pay for, you'd be entitled to free service or some other compensation. You pay for a service. That service is required to be consistent or you do not have to pay. (with regard to downed lines and other technical malfunctions)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're living in fantasy land, my friend. No ISP in US ever guarantees connection speed for consumer grade services. On the contrary, all ISPs oversells its bandwidth (the only way to make money).
They only guarantee bandwidth for commerical grade services. Hence why business pay thousands per month for essential the same bandwidth while individuals pay less than 1/10 of that. So, if a company pays for 10mbps connection, the ISP must ensure the QoS and preserve enough bandwidth for that customer. However, if a consumer pays for 10mbps connection, ISP put 10 or 20 or even more accounts on the same 10mbps pipe to share the bandwidth. So, if you're the only one on line that time, you get all 10mbps. But if 20 ppl is online at the same time, your effective bandwidth is about 500kbps.
RaptorOne3 said:
First off, I have yet to experience any of the issues mentioned in this post. I live in Michigan and I have excellent HSDPA and 3G speeds on my Captivate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said, it's only in specific markets where the backhaul is reaching congestion thresholds on a regular basis. I would venture a guess that smartphone density in Detroit is lower than some other parts of the country.
RaptorOne3 said:
Not to mention the fact that, if they were to reduce anyones bandwidth access below the rate that you pay for, you'd be entitled to free service or some other compensation. You pay for a service. That service is required to be consistent or you do not have to pay. (with regard to downed lines and other technical malfunctions)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? What data rate did you pay for? Is it in your contract? I think you'll find that you have no guaranteed data rate unless you are signed up to some sort of QoS plan that I've never heard of. You are on what everyone else is on and it's called "best effort data" meaning it could be 7.2Mbps or it could be 1kbps. Check the agreed service levels in your contract before making such a claim.
RaptorOne3 said:
They cannot just randomly go into their servers and start limiting bandwidth access below what people are paying for simply because they think they will require more bandwidth for some update of some sort. That is a crime. I doubt AT&T wants to flirt with that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uhhh, they do. They have whole systems dedicated to doing exactly that.

Fun thing I noticed about 4g service while at work.

Welp, here's the background info. I work with AT&T next to a corporate store. I have an rooted Inspire 4g. With my Inspire I'm actually on the media net plan and not the PDA data plan.
So anyway I was bugging a work friend a joking around with him about switching me over to unlimited data (smartphone plan) so I could get off of the medianet plan. I got curious and asked him about the whole 4g provisioning thing that was an argument in another thread. We pulled up a customers account and he showed me, you do in fact need it provisioned to access hspa+. But that's not thing fun part of the story. It's been debated numerous times.
I asked him if we even got HSPA+ where I live. It turns out that we do. I just never noticed it because of the data plan I'm provisioned for. So my curiosity got the best of me. We walked over to the display Inspire and verified it was connected to HSPA+. He had already installed speedtest.net on the phone to try it out. We ran it. And I was shocked. The phone was measuring 1.5 down. We already know the HSUPA shebackle. But really? Only 1.5 down?
In utter disbelief I pull out my phone. He knows what plan I'm on and knows it's rooted. I do have the stock radio on though, and non of the build.prop tweaks that have been mentioned. Standing right next to the Demo, on HSDPA, my phone pulls down 3.5 a second.
Now he's shocked. I'm running straight off HSDPA and the demo is connected at HSPA+. We double check that the phones are testing against the same servers on speedtest. We run multiple tests. And consistently my phone pulls a higher data rate then the demo on HSPA+. To make sure we're not going insane we double check everything again between the two phones.
It turns out an engineer was at the corp. store that day. He pulls out his iPhone 4 and shows us something more interesting. His phone, testing against the same speedtest server, always pulls down around 5.
He informs us that iPhones get preferred treatment over the network. This is nothing new or unsuspected. But HSPA+ connectivity is severely throttled. This is deliberately down by AT&T because the network isnt able to handle the workload yet. There also isn't any time frame when the throttling will be lifted.
This just blew my mind. I expected it to be backed down some with it being a new network that's not completely developed, but this much is astounding to me.
I would be interested to hear from others in HSPA+ enabled areas to run multiple speedtest test with HSPA on and off and see what happens.
Or do I sound completely insane and don't know what I'm talking about?
I would rather AT&T throttle the HSPA+ speeds until the network is ready than to deal with what happened to Sprint's network when the EVO 4g first launched. I heard the entire network went down for maybe up to an hour due to all the bandwidth being eaten up in certain areas.
Maybe AT&T is trying to avoid this from happening?
dacket84 said:
I would rather AT&T throttle the HSPA+ speeds until the network is ready than to deal with what happened to Sprint's network when the EVO 4g first launched. I heard the entire network went down for maybe up to an hour due to all the bandwidth being eaten up in certain areas.
Maybe AT&T is trying to avoid this from happening?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
funny, that is NOT what we are paying for! we are paying for 4G service, we expected to have 4G speeds! (we paying for 4G phone, FAKE!) and we paying for HSPA+/4G data plan, FAKE!).
If i pay for cable internet, i expect to have cable internet speeds!, not 56k dialup speeds!
someone please complain to FCC for me!
When my son gets home with the iPhone 4 tomorrow, I'm going to do some side-to-side comparisons as well....probably followed up with a call to ATT. I was told the Inspire would be faster then the iPhone 4 because it was 4G and not 3G. If that isn't the case, I think some monthly credits should be in store until they turn the 4G speeds on.
I'm paying the same price now for data as I was with my blackberry pearl on EDGE, same when I had my iPhone 3g on 3g. Also same price I'm paying now when I used my Captivate. AT&T openly admits that its 4g service isn't throughout their coverage 100% yet and say that they are working on expanding their 4g service.
Nowhere on my bill does it say I'm paying $30 for 4g service specifically.
edit: I forgot they had specific 4g data plans. Yeah that does suck for those who have to pay for that.
dacket84 said:
AT&T openly admits that its 4g service isn't throughout their coverage 100% yet and say that they are working on expanding their 4g service.
Nowhere on my bill does it say I'm paying $30 for 4g service specifically.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. But when the salesman says it will be faster and your phone has the check box next to H+ and you are getting less than 3G speeds, that is on them. If they are not giving you H+ speeds, and you are even getting less than 3G, they should show Edge instead. Anything less is false advertising.
djeaton said:
I agree. But when the salesman says it will be faster and your phone has the check box next to H+ and you are getting less than 3G speeds, that is on them. If they are not giving you H+ speeds, and you are even getting less than 3G, they should show Edge instead. Anything less is false advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with that as well. I think AT&T should limit the H+ data plans to areas where it is confirmed to avoid these problems with customer satisfaction. They have a coverage map and enough techs out there. I'm sure they could at least tell their store associates to not recommend the H+ data packages to people in areas that aren't getting the speeds.
But instead I'm sure they would rather let people buy something they can't use blindly so they can get more profit.
dacket84 said:
I'm paying the same price now for data as I was with my blackberry pearl on EDGE, same when I had my iPhone 3g on 3g. Also same price I'm paying now when I used my Captivate. AT&T openly admits that its 4g service isn't throughout their coverage 100% yet and say that they are working on expanding their 4g service.
Nowhere on my bill does it say I'm paying $30 for 4g service specifically.
edit: I forgot they had specific 4g data plans. Yeah that does suck for those who have to pay for that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The price is the same if you have a 4g plan or a 3G plan.
Signing up for different plans doesn't matter. At the end of the day its the same cost. The 4g provisioning is only to access hspa+. Its the same cost whether you live in Ohio with 3g or Philly with hspa+. If your gonna get the inspire you might as well have them provision the hspa+ so when it is.available you can access it.
My issue is the throttling on the hspa connection. As I mention, I'm on a medianet plan which doesn't cover hspa. I'm NOT on a pdanet plan. All this was discovered because I was thinking about ditching my $10 a month unlimited data and signing up for the tiered 2gb hspa plan. I wanted to know the speed difference. And then I found out everything I wrote above.
Obviously I'm sticking with my 3g until things change.
Like I said, I would be interested in seeing thorough tests done around the rest of the country to and see if this holds true. In the lower Susquehanna valley in pa the hspa network is.being throttled.
Sent from my HTC Desire HD using XDA Premium App
come on guys, really... ANOTHER thread like this???
Its plain and simple, you are paying for data package, thats it! you are not paying for speeds! This isn't like cable, or DSL where you are paying for speed tier.
You can complain all you want, but they have not advertised a speed that you would be getting, they may have advertised what 4G is capable of, but have made no claims as to what you will be getting.
I'm not just paying for a data package. If all they did was have a data package with no speed reference, that would be one thing. But I'm paying for a 4G data package. "4G" either means something or it doesn't. If they don't really mean 4G speed, they shouldn't call the data package "HSPA+/4G". When the salesman says you will get better performance with 4G over 3G, and then they very publicly say that they are not throttling back the speeds, that means something. Or it should anyway. Whether we should expect to be lied to or expect false advertising from them is an entirely different matter.
I'd love to get faster than 2mb down but I'm not gonna complain. I knew exactly what I was getting myself into when I got the phone. I knew it wouldn't be 4G and so did each and every one of the people posting in the inspire forums. Regardless of at&t excuses and BS.
Sent from my Inspire 4G using XDA Premium App
OH, well then my mistake... i would like to complain that i have a 4G data package but not getting the "4G speeds" while on edge..
Obviously no one is expecting to get HSPA+ speeds while connected on a HSDPA, UMTS, or edge network. Again, the issue is speeds only while connected to HSPA+ networks. I understand not everyone in the country even has access to this yet. And those that do, service is spotty at best.
But I do think when you are in a full coverage area, and compare side by side speeds, and you are getting double the download speeds consistently on HSDPA then HSPA+, then that's an issue.
Actually, that isn't quite accurate. I didn't know about XDA or the speed deception until after the purchase. I knew that some folks had complained about AT&T throttling it back, but also read that they denied it. So I just figured that it was a case of some unique individuals in poor reception areas.
honestly, i think all really depends on the radio. I wish i would have taken pictures before i sold my dell streak, but i was getting consistent speeds of 6 down x 3 up on the stock O2 2.2 rom here in the St. Louis area. Now with the inspire, i have yet to see anything over 2.5 down x 1.8 up. I was using the same media net apn on the dell streak. So unless the caps have changed in the past months, then i am blaming the radio in the inspire.. but i dont care, the speeds are sufficient for my needs.
mepis said:
Welp, here's the background info. I work with AT&T next to a corporate store. I have an rooted Inspire 4g. With my Inspire I'm actually on the media net plan and not the PDA data plan.
So anyway I was bugging a work friend a joking around with him about switching me over to unlimited data (smartphone plan) so I could get off of the medianet plan. I got curious and asked him about the whole 4g provisioning thing that was an argument in another thread. We pulled up a customers account and he showed me, you do in fact need it provisioned to access hspa+. But that's not thing fun part of the story. It's been debated numerous times.
I asked him if we even got HSPA+ where I live. It turns out that we do. I just never noticed it because of the data plan I'm provisioned for. So my curiosity got the best of me. We walked over to the display Inspire and verified it was connected to HSPA+. He had already installed speedtest.net on the phone to try it out. We ran it. And I was shocked. The phone was measuring 1.5 down. We already know the HSUPA shebackle. But really? Only 1.5 down?
In utter disbelief I pull out my phone. He knows what plan I'm on and knows it's rooted. I do have the stock radio on though, and non of the build.prop tweaks that have been mentioned. Standing right next to the Demo, on HSDPA, my phone pulls down 3.5 a second.
Now he's shocked. I'm running straight off HSDPA and the demo is connected at HSPA+. We double check that the phones are testing against the same servers on speedtest. We run multiple tests. And consistently my phone pulls a higher data rate then the demo on HSPA+. To make sure we're not going insane we double check everything again between the two phones.
It turns out an engineer was at the corp. store that day. He pulls out his iPhone 4 and shows us something more interesting. His phone, testing against the same speedtest server, always pulls down around 5.
He informs us that iPhones get preferred treatment over the network. This is nothing new or unsuspected. But HSPA+ connectivity is severely throttled. This is deliberately down by AT&T because the network isnt able to handle the workload yet. There also isn't any time frame when the throttling will be lifted.
This just blew my mind. I expected it to be backed down some with it being a new network that's not completely developed, but this much is astounding to me.
I would be interested to hear from others in HSPA+ enabled areas to run multiple speedtest test with HSPA on and off and see what happens.
Or do I sound completely insane and don't know what I'm talking about?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a really good reason why you out performed the stock inspire. Your build.prop is edited to use Hsdpa and hsupa setting hsxpa=3, but stock inspire has hsxpa=1 which only let's it use 3.6Mbps Hsdpa with 384kbps up. Setting hsxpa=3 let's you connect to hsupa and the 7.2Mbps network speeds.
RogerPodacter said:
There's a really good reason why you out performed the stock inspire. Your build.prop is edited to use Hsdpa and hsupa setting hsxpa=3, but stock inspire has hsxpa=1 which only let's it use 3.6Mbps Hsdpa with 384kbps up. Setting hsxpa=3 let's you connect to hsupa and the 7.2Mbps network speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a way to set hsxpa=30 for broadband speeds? Short of that, can I set hsxpa=3 without rooting the Inspire? I'm not opposed to rooting, but it is more complex than I can handle right now.
You can't edit build prop without rooting first. I think if you get temp root it would revert any changes back to stock.
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk
djeaton said:
Is there a way to set hsxpa=30 for broadband speeds? Short of that, can I set hsxpa=3 without rooting the Inspire? I'm not opposed to rooting, but it is more complex than I can handle right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah you can only edit if you root.

Opinions Sought - Stay With Sprint SERO, or Jump to AT&T MVNO

I've had Sprint SERO for years. I live in the SF Bay Area, and even though the coverage is bad (it ALWAYS drops calls on the Bay Bridge), and the data is slow in most place, it's only $59 per month (with taxes, etc.). Of course, I've always had the hope that it will get better. Those hopes have now been bolstered by the Softbank deal.
Now that I have a Nexus 5 that can be used on multiple carriers, as a test, I got an AT&T Straight Talk SIM ($45 per month) and have been using that for a few days. It's night and day - calls go through and don't drop, data is fast - it's RELIABLE! Although Straight Talk has gotten (deservedly) bad rap for throttling, recently they changed their policy and published a 2.5 GB limit at which point you get throttled. That's enough for me, and, in the rare case that I go over before the end of the month, I can pay the next month's $45 early and get a new 2.5 GB. And, if ST goes bad, there's always AIO or other AT&T MVNOs.
But, I'm reluctant to switch. If Sprint really does get a good LTE network going and I can use unlimited data to watch Netflix without worry, that would be a nice thing. And, once I cancel the SERO plan, there's no going back.
Of course I've hung on for years because I thought Sprint would get better, and it never has. But, with my luck, the month after I cancel my SERO plan Sprint will improve 1000%.
Any thoughts? I can't be the only person going through this.
(I use Google Voice so the (perhaps) temporary change of carrier is not notice by people that call me, except there is no MMS.)
I just dumped Sprint and paid a $140 ETF. It was worth it friend. I did not have the SERO deal, but I now know what it's like to have real phone service. I switched to a Go Phone plan and could not be happier. Living in NYC and being with sprint was BEYOND painful. Each morning, I would try to listen to NPR on my way to work. It would take forever for the stream to get going on LTE and when we would reach a spot in my commute where it had to hand off to 3g, the stream would just die. I would then have to toggle airplane mode until I finally found a usable signal. So yeah, now that I have Go Phone as my provider, even on 3G I can stream my liberal news to my hearts content. Not to mention, that I have LTE almost everywhere I go with actual LTE speeds. Dump those suckers.
AliLaPointe said:
I just dumped Sprint and paid a $140 ETF. It was worth it friend. I did not have the SERO deal, but I now know what it's like to have real phone service. I switched to a Go Phone plan and could not be happier. Living in NYC and being with sprint was BEYOND painful. Each morning, I would try to listen to NPR on my way to work. It would take forever for the stream to get going on LTE and when we would reach a spot in my commute where it had to hand off to 3g, the stream would just die. I would then have to toggle airplane mode until I finally found a usable signal. So yeah, now that I have Go Phone as my provider, even on 3G I can stream my liberal news to my hearts content. Not to mention, that I have LTE almost everywhere I go with actual LTE speeds. Dump those suckers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No car radio?
More seriously, how many GB do you have from Gophone - and can you listen to NPR and not burn up all your GB?
Go to s4gru, donate a couple bucks and look at the map for your area.
Maybe read a little and educate yourself on how sprint is improving their network.
After you do that you can make an informed decision based on facts rather then asking for opinions here.
---------- Post added at 09:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 PM ----------
AliLaPointe said:
I just dumped Sprint and paid a $140 ETF. It was worth it friend. I did not have the SERO deal, but I now know what it's like to have real phone service. I switched to a Go Phone plan and could not be happier. Living in NYC and being with sprint was BEYOND painful. Each morning, I would try to listen to NPR on my way to work. It would take forever for the stream to get going on LTE and when we would reach a spot in my commute where it had to hand off to 3g, the stream would just die. I would then have to toggle airplane mode until I finally found a usable signal. So yeah, now that I have Go Phone as my provider, even on 3G I can stream my liberal news to my hearts content. Not to mention, that I have LTE almost everywhere I go with actual LTE speeds. Dump those suckers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no you can only stream 2.5gb worth assuming you do not use data for anything else.
lafester said:
Go to s4gru, donate a couple bucks and look at the map for your area.
Maybe read a little and educate yourself on how sprint is improving their network.
After you do that you can make an informed decision based on facts rather then asking for opinions here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This may sound stupid, but what exactly is the different between s4gru map and the one from Sprint? That said, I look at the Sprint LTE map before and the current Sprint LTE signal is weak. There are many area in LA county(not city) that even though it show LTE on the map but I only have 3G. And yes Sprint 3G is suck. That said, I'm looking forward to try the Spark(tri-band LTE), which as far as I'm concern, most of the place I'll be around had good WiMax. So if things goes smoothly(meaning I'll have LTE signal like I used to have when I got WiMax), I will be happy to stay w/ Sprint SERO-P. Then again, this is my experience. My term w/ Sprint isn't up yet anyway. So, I will use it and try Spark when I have Nexus 5 until the term is over then decide.
I am in the same boat, no LTE in my town but I am supposed to have LTE at work in Midtown Manhattan. I get an LTE signal on my N5 with Sprint at work but when I do a speedtest I am getting .25Mbps down and like .01 up. I hear Verizon is no better in Midtown and now that they have publicly admitted it, they are not even a consideration. So that leaves ATT or Tmobile, I will not go with Tmo so that leaves ATT. Went to an ATT store on Park Ave close to my office and ran a speedtest on one of their display LG G2s and only got between 1-2mbps down.
So none of the carriers are good for me now in Midtown, but ATT and Verizon would be good at my house, but I am on wifi at my house so coverage at work is more important. I have been waiting and waiting for Sprint and I know their LTE network is going to be great when it finally gets here, but when will that be? How long can you wait and keep paying them for crap service, it is very frustrating.
I agree that you should do some research on S4gru, but that will only take you so far. Sprint was promising a great network back in the Wimax days and that stuff fell apart. They then promised LTE and I have been having spotty coverage for more than a year. I'm really happy after my switch to Go Phone. No issues here. Also, nowhere near to close on my data allotment. I dont use a car radio because, well, I live in NYC and take public transit.
AliLaPointe said:
I agree that you should do some research on S4gru, but that will only take you so far. Sprint was promising a great network back in the Wimax days and that stuff fell apart. They then promised LTE and I have been having spotty coverage for more than a year. I'm really happy after my switch to Go Phone. No issues here. Also, nowhere near to close on my data allotment. I dont use a car radio because, well, I live in NYC and take public transit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maps can only take you so far. For example, the maps show a strong signal (Sprint calls it "Best" voice signal at my house, and calls constantly drop. There are other places on the maps where a strong signal is shown and the calls always drop. The fact that in the entire course of its existence Sprint has not been able to figure out (or hasn't bothered to figure out) how to not drop calls consistently for people driving across the Bay Bridge is amazing. There are places on the map where strong data coverage is shown and the data is so slow as to be unusable.
So, the real thrust of my question was whether Sprint is going to change its spots and have consistent and reliable service, not whether it can show a map which covers a large area but in reality is full of holes.
I'm sure there are a lot of us in this position.
I have this n5 with two SIMs two, AT&T works great just about everywhere I go, Sprint , junk. And now that LTE won't work at all until the 3G/4G towers have been fully completed, more bad news, from bad planning by Sprint.
I like the Google voice integration with Sprint, and my number is not eligible to be ported to Google voice.
It seems that Sprint is always promising a better service is just around the corner. They're doing this again with this 'spark' talk, which really won't do much.
They should their time implementing LTE 1900 Mhz, before they get ahead of themselves and offering LTE 2500 Mhz too, they need to walk before they can run.
I was thinking about using net10's 2 line family plan, over Straight talk, not sure of the different between the two, the same company.
If t-moble had coverage, i'd consider them too.
The S4GRU site will show you the Sprint tower locations, not the coverage.
Edit: One blog post here: http://seth.killey.me/?p=1049
I had sero on sprint and just ditched them for tmobile and could not be happier. I have been hanging on to sero for years waiting for coverage to improve and it has only gotten worse. I finally gave up and have not looked back since.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk

Categories

Resources