Voice over LTE is coming, which is the migration path for both CDMA and GSM. So, in the next generation of cellular voice, there will be no incompatible technologies like CDMA vs GSM.
Creating a real competitor to AT&T and Verizon may be beneficial to consumers. Currently, both Sprint and T-Mobile coverages are limited compared to AT&T and Verizon. My Shared Value unlimited voice plan on AT&T with 10 GB of shared data costs me $130 (two phones) before my discount. In reality, my monthly bill is $115, including tax. I don't think T-Mobile can beat this. Sprint is so bad that I won't even consider it as an alternative.
Provided that T-Mobile coverage is dwarfed by AT&T's, I have no alternative to AT&T right now. Verizon is much more expensive and lacks simultaneous voice and data with iPhones.
I'm getting 68 Mbps download / 22 Mbps upload on AT&T LTE in my house. It's hard to complain - I'm pretty satisfied with AT&T.
There are iPhones that can receive both CDMA and GSM/LTE. Let's see what iPhone 6 brings to the table to ease the merger, which I think might work with Legere at the helm.
iPhone purchase in full is $649
iPhone purchase with a contract is $199 + $350 ETF = $549.
I would save $100 money by simply paying the ETF (which drops by $10 per month with contractual usage) than simply buying outright. Ergo, the ETF is not a barrier when you have money to pay for the device in full.
iPhone purchase with a contract is $199 + $350 ETF = $549.
I would save $100 money by simply paying the ETF (which drops by $10 per month with contractual usage) than simply buying outright. Ergo, the ETF is not a barrier when you have money to pay for the device in full.
And getting the carrier to unlock the phone for you so you can use it on another carrier, after you've terminated their service?
1) This hasn't been an issue in the US for a couple years.
2) That has no barring to the cost barrier which is what you directly disagreed with.
I've known people that have had issues doing this. It was over a year ago so many things are better now?
It wouldn't be a barrier, as long as the carrier unlocked the phone for you.
I don't believe that ATT would just factory unlock the phone that you bought from them after using it less than one month, after paying the termination fees, and canceling the service, so you could use it on T-Mobile. If the retail cost is more than the subsidized cost of the phone + termination fees, then ATT would lose money and have to eat that cost. Have any proof you can give to me that this can be done? Because I think this is the way I want to get my next iPhone (I'm a T-Mobile customer currently)
I've known people that have had issues doing this. It was over a year ago so many things are better now?
It wouldn't be a barrier, as long as the carrier unlocked the phone for you.
I don't believe that ATT would just factory unlock the phone that you bought from them after using it less than one month, after paying the termination fees, and canceling the service, so you could use it on T-Mobile. If the retail cost is more than the subsidized cost of the phone + termination fees, then ATT would lose money and have to eat that cost. Have any proof you can give to me that this can be done? Because I think this is the way I want to get my next iPhone (I'm a T-Mobile customer currently)
This was big news just over 2 years ago. And, YES, in the US this is the cheapest way to buy an iPhone although there is something about having to wait 6(?) months before signing back up with the carrier so this isn't something you can reasonably do repeatedly to make $100, not to mention you're also paying at least a prorated month of fees and a $36 activation fee which eat in into any potential profits. Bottom line, it's something you do when you decide you no longer want to be on a carrier, not something you do to make money.
This was big news just over 2 years ago. And, YES, in the US this is the cheapest way to buy an iPhone although there is something about having to wait 6(?) months before signing back up with the carrier so this isn't something you can reasonably do repeatedly to make $100, not to mention you're also paying at least a prorated month of fees and a $36 activation fee which eat in into any potential profits. Bottom line, it's something you do when you decide you no longer want to be on a carrier, not something you do to make money.
The CMDA iPhone are obviously still tied to those CDMA carriers but the GSM portion isn't locked.
Thanks,
I wonder if T-Mobile will still pay the termination fees when the iPhone 6 comes out... thinking of buying $400 64GB iPhone (maybe this size will be cheaper when the 6 is released?) then going back to T-Mobile and having them pay the fees *wrings fists mischievously*
It is pretty apparent from the comments that none so far at least understand how multi-mode base stations work. Sprint implemented multi-mode stations as a part of the network vision overhaul. It would be a very simple thing to include GSM along with CDMA, LTE, and even wimax on the same stations relatively easily and cheaply. That however is not the main issue. The bigger questions if this happened is the spectrum since they both operate on different bands though there is some overlap. It is possible some spectrum would need to be sold to Dish or others. Also there is the questions of the plans. Would there be a unification around new plans entirely or would there be a timeframe for people to continue to grandfather on their current plans for a few more years.
I am with Sprint and I am very happy with my coverage and service. I average about 20 up 8 down which may not be as fast as AT&T or Verizon but on a phone that is more than sufficient for anything I need to do. I wonder if all these "Sprint sucks" comments are based on actual and current customers or just people expressing their opinion of Sprint based from years ago or just from reading comments continually saying that over and over. I don't claim that Sprint has nearly the coverage of Verizon but I am very content. If done right this could be good for both companies. The Nextel purchase was really an example of what not to do. That fiasco was due to the former CEO of Sprint so you can't really blame Hesse who has begun to actually turn things around. I am not loyal to any cell company. I simply want the best bang for my buck and if I get good voice and data speeds I have no reason to look elsewhere. I only pay $50 a month for unlimited everything on Sprint so I would be a fool to look elsewhere right now especially since LTE is available everywhere I go now. You can even get cheaper than that at $45 on a family plan but with those plans there is no phone subsidy though you can pay it off interest free over 24 months I believe.
Sprint may indeed suck where you live but please don't assume it sucks everywhere or Sprint wouldn't have close to 55 million customers when you include Boost, Virgin, and other MVNO's. They have around 225 million covered with LTE now which is not bad. The reason the rollout has been slower and more painful for current customers is they are doing an far more massive and extensive overhaul than the other carriers which should pay off in a few years once those other carriers will eventually also need to do the same changes. Since I just had a teeth cleaning yesterday I think a good analogy is you can compare what Sprint did to a full debridement as opposed to the others doing a prophylaxis. Their Network Vision updates are way behind schedule though apparently mostly due to Ericson who is contracted to do many of the upgrades. But the good news for Sprint is they should finally have their network upgraded completely by the end of this year.
Even with unlimited LTE data and a bill of only $50 a month if my service ever became complete crap I would switch in a heartbeat. One other reason I am so excited about the iPhone 6 besides the larger screen is the addition of Sprint Spark on the next iPhone which could allow speeds up to 60Mbps.
That seems strange. I mean, the deal hasn't been announced or approved. Further, you are not stuck on a contract with T-Mobile. So, try it out now, if things go bad, you leave.
Not to mention if Legere is the CEO of the merged company, it'll be run like T-Mobile was, not Sprint.
It's almost like Apple buying Next and getting Jobs back in the deal.
It's a bad fit.. Why would DoJ and FCC want a debt laden company to gobble up one thats actually not only making a comeback but kicking competitions butt and taking names.. T-Mobile is forcing some good changes to the industry..
T-Mobile is also the golden reason they Declined the ATT acquisition. All the FCC and DoJ need to do when they tell Sprint no, is point out how right they were and how well T-Mobile is doing..
Why risk dragging 2 down (Sprint and T-Mobile) with merger, when they could just let Sprint live or die and T-Mobile continue to thrive and grow separately? T-Mobile already has new 700Mhz block sale finalized.. and more spectrum to come.. They are not hurting right now and have room to grow..
ONLY way would be if they let John stay on from T-Mobile as CEO and practically scrapped the Sprint network.. It's got way to many issues, legacy problems, etc. T-Mobile would do what they did for MetroPCS, which was CDMA... As customers got new phones, they got ones that worked on the GSM/LTE network of T-Mobile.. migrating them over.. One issue I see is it would take years.. 2-3 year upgrade cycle on Sprint..
I 'd totally agree with you on this. Except there may be some value in having a stronger company with LTE capability. If Legere can manage the Sprint LTE rollout and the merger well, it may well hasten the highly needed revamping of the awful mobile situation in the US. Still, it's abig risk. It could end up distracting T-Mobile and derailing all its momentum. Legere doesn't seem to be publicly averse to it, so maybe he has a plan.
Creating a real competitor to AT&T and Verizon may be beneficial to consumers. Currently, both Sprint and T-Mobile coverages are limited compared to AT&T and Verizon. My Shared Value unlimited voice plan on AT&T with 10 GB of shared data costs me $130 (two phones) before my discount. In reality, my monthly bill is $115, including tax. I don't think T-Mobile can beat this. Sprint is so bad that I won't even consider it as an alternative.
I think T-Mobile can already beat that. My friend is paying $120 for 3 lines on T-Mobile. At least 1 of them is 5GB and 1 is 2GB. Another friend has 5 lines for ~$140. The first 2 lines on T-Mobile are expensive. But the 3rd, 4th and 5th lines are just $10 each with 1GB on each line. Nobody is cheaper than that. Not even MVNOs. The problem though is that both of them are now complaining of poor service and dropped calls. And that's in Atlanta so I'm sure in the boonies it may be worse. Price wise, T-Mobile is heading the right way. But they need to get their BYOD prices down a lot more. At that point a Nexus 5, Moto X or PlusOne would make it a massive saving per month.
It is pretty apparent from the comments that none so far at least understand how multi-mode base stations work. Sprint implemented multi-mode stations as a part of the network vision overhaul. It would be a very simple thing to include GSM along with CDMA, LTE, and even wimax on the same stations relatively easily and cheaply. That however is not the main issue. The bigger questions if this happened is the spectrum since they both operate on different bands though there is some overlap. It is possible some spectrum would need to be sold to Dish or others. Also there is the questions of the plans. Would there be a unification around new plans entirely or would there be a timeframe for people to continue to grandfather on their current plans for a few more years.
I am with Sprint and I am very happy with my coverage and service. I average about 20 up 8 down which may not be as fast as AT&T or Verizon but on a phone that is more than sufficient for anything I need to do. I wonder if all these "Sprint sucks" comments are based on actual and current customers or just people expressing their opinion of Sprint based from years ago or just from reading comments continually saying that over and over. I don't claim that Sprint has nearly the coverage of Verizon but I am very content. If done right this could be good for both companies. The Nextel purchase was really an example of what not to do. That fiasco was due to the former CEO of Sprint so you can't really blame Hesse who has begun to actually turn things around. I am not loyal to any cell company. I simply want the best bang for my buck and if I get good voice and data speeds I have no reason to look elsewhere. I only pay $50 a month for unlimited everything on Sprint so I would be a fool to look elsewhere right now especially since LTE is available everywhere I go now. You can even get cheaper than that at $45 on a family plan but with those plans there is no phone subsidy though you can pay it off interest free over 24 months I believe.
Sprint may indeed suck where you live but please don't assume it sucks everywhere or Sprint wouldn't have close to 55 million customers when you include Boost, Virgin, and other MVNO's. They have around 225 million covered with LTE now which is not bad. The reason the rollout has been slower and more painful for current customers is they are doing an far more massive and extensive overhaul than the other carriers which should pay off in a few years once those other carriers will eventually also need to do the same changes. Since I just had a teeth cleaning yesterday I think a good analogy is you can compare what Sprint did to a full debridement as opposed to the others doing a prophylaxis. Their Network Vision updates are way behind schedule though apparently mostly due to Ericson who is contracted to do many of the upgrades. But the good news for Sprint is they should finally have their network upgraded completely by the end of this year.
Even with unlimited LTE data and a bill of only $50 a month if my service ever became complete crap I would switch in a heartbeat. One other reason I am so excited about the iPhone 6 besides the larger screen is the addition of Sprint Spark on the next iPhone which could allow speeds up to 60Mbps.
Sprint really does suck for me. I'm in Atlanta which is supposed to have LTE. I get LTE in some locations (like home where I don't need it), but a lot of 3G. And Sprint's 3G speeds are like every one else's 2G speeds. At home, where I get LTE, I typically get download speeds of 6Mbps. On my son's T-Mobile connection, it's around 20Mbps. On a friend's Verizon phone, it was 55Mbps. I got Sprint Spark on my LG G2 a few months ago and the speeds didn't improve any. I have been hearing about Sprint's Network Vision overhaul for years and it's always just around the corner.
The reason I stick with Sprint is that I have a no-contract plan paying $45 per month for unlimited everything and I'm still hoping that they will actually deliver on their promise. Customer Service has become really good. I just wish their service would get as good as well. Now that they all their flagship phones are world phones which I can use when I travel abroad, that's one less problem I have with Sprint now.
Sprint really does suck for me. I'm in Atlanta which is supposed to have LTE. I get LTE in some locations (like home where I don't need it), but a lot of 3G. And Sprint's 3G speeds are like every one else's 2G speeds. At home, where I get LTE, I typically get download speeds of 6Mbps. On my son's T-Mobile connection, it's around 20Mbps. On a friend's Verizon phone, it was 55Mbps. I got Sprint Spark on my LG G2 a few months ago and the speeds didn't improve any. I have been hearing about Sprint's Network Vision overhaul for years and it's always just around the corner.
The reason I stick with Sprint is that I have a no-contract plan paying $45 per month for unlimited everything and I'm still hoping that they will actually deliver on their promise. Customer Service has become really good. I just wish their service would get as good as well. Now that they all their flagship phones are world phones which I can use when I travel abroad, that's one less problem I have with Sprint now.
I'm in Atlanta also but it is a huge city so your mileage may vary. I get LTE pretty consistently all over metro Atlanta though on my 5s even at Stone mountain and Six Flag and even down to Henry county. I work in Buckhead and also spend a lot of time in Lenox and midtown areas and live in Dunwoody. Atlanta seems to get great LTE with all the carriers and was also among the very first for all 4 carriers to have LTE so lots of options. All I can tell you is that my 5s gets good LTE in Atlanta wherever I go at least so not sure why you are having problems. What neighborhoods are you mostly in?
I went with Sprint because T-Mobile is horrid in overall coverage. If you don't mind being stuck on EDGE, go for T-Mobile. At least Sprint launched LTE in my area quite some time ago (second batch of launch cities). AT&T has JUST launched it, and T-Mobile is still EDGE... Verizon, well... they've had it for years around here, but I'll NEVER go back to Verizon.
Sprint's service isn't exactly stellar, but we know this. I will say I've been satisfied with them so far. There are very few areas that I don't get service compared to my former AT&T plan. I also have fewer dropped calls. The Sprint Framily Plan is also contract-free, similar to T-Mobile. You have to pay off your phone if you cancel service, just like T-Mobile. I get unlimited data and annual upgrades. That works for me. On top of that, my service gets cheaper every time someone joins my Framily Plan until we're each $25 plus extras (from 7-10 people).
I think the merger could be a good thing, and it should help push Sprint closer to being a GSM network via LTE. I'm excited for Sprint Spark to get here. I've heard it's really good.
Comments
Creating a real competitor to AT&T and Verizon may be beneficial to consumers. Currently, both Sprint and T-Mobile coverages are limited compared to AT&T and Verizon. My Shared Value unlimited voice plan on AT&T with 10 GB of shared data costs me $130 (two phones) before my discount. In reality, my monthly bill is $115, including tax. I don't think T-Mobile can beat this. Sprint is so bad that I won't even consider it as an alternative.
Provided that T-Mobile coverage is dwarfed by AT&T's, I have no alternative to AT&T right now. Verizon is much more expensive and lacks simultaneous voice and data with iPhones.
I'm getting 68 Mbps download / 22 Mbps upload on AT&T LTE in my house. It's hard to complain - I'm pretty satisfied with AT&T.
It affects anyone with an iPhone on T-mobile or Sprint. How a merger would affect their plans or policies is anyone's guess.
iPhone purchase in full is $649
iPhone purchase with a contract is $199 + $350 ETF = $549.
I would save $100 money by simply paying the ETF (which drops by $10 per month with contractual usage) than simply buying outright. Ergo, the ETF is not a barrier when you have money to pay for the device in full.
...[T]he two companies are already thinking about who will take the reigns...
take the reins, as in steer the horse. Don't be a homophone-ophobe.
iPhone purchase in full is $649
iPhone purchase with a contract is $199 + $350 ETF = $549.
I would save $100 money by simply paying the ETF (which drops by $10 per month with contractual usage) than simply buying outright. Ergo, the ETF is not a barrier when you have money to pay for the device in full.
And getting the carrier to unlock the phone for you so you can use it on another carrier, after you've terminated their service?
Good luck with that.
1) This hasn't been an issue in the US for a couple years.
2) That has no barring to the cost barrier which is what you directly disagreed with.
1) This hasn't been an issue in the US for a couple years.
2) That has no barring to the cost barrier which is what you directly disagreed with.
I've known people that have had issues doing this. It was over a year ago so many things are better now?
It wouldn't be a barrier, as long as the carrier unlocked the phone for you.
I don't believe that ATT would just factory unlock the phone that you bought from them after using it less than one month, after paying the termination fees, and canceling the service, so you could use it on T-Mobile. If the retail cost is more than the subsidized cost of the phone + termination fees, then ATT would lose money and have to eat that cost. Have any proof you can give to me that this can be done? Because I think this is the way I want to get my next iPhone (I'm a T-Mobile customer currently)
This was big news just over 2 years ago. And, YES, in the US this is the cheapest way to buy an iPhone although there is something about having to wait 6(?) months before signing back up with the carrier so this isn't something you can reasonably do repeatedly to make $100, not to mention you're also paying at least a prorated month of fees and a $36 activation fee which eat in into any potential profits. Bottom line, it's something you do when you decide you no longer want to be on a carrier, not something you do to make money.
The CMDA iPhone are obviously still tied to those CDMA carriers but the GSM portion isn't locked.
This was big news just over 2 years ago. And, YES, in the US this is the cheapest way to buy an iPhone although there is something about having to wait 6(?) months before signing back up with the carrier so this isn't something you can reasonably do repeatedly to make $100, not to mention you're also paying at least a prorated month of fees and a $36 activation fee which eat in into any potential profits. Bottom line, it's something you do when you decide you no longer want to be on a carrier, not something you do to make money.
The CMDA iPhone are obviously still tied to those CDMA carriers but the GSM portion isn't locked.
Thanks,
I wonder if T-Mobile will still pay the termination fees when the iPhone 6 comes out... thinking of buying $400 64GB iPhone (maybe this size will be cheaper when the 6 is released?) then going back to T-Mobile and having them pay the fees *wrings fists mischievously*
It is pretty apparent from the comments that none so far at least understand how multi-mode base stations work. Sprint implemented multi-mode stations as a part of the network vision overhaul. It would be a very simple thing to include GSM along with CDMA, LTE, and even wimax on the same stations relatively easily and cheaply. That however is not the main issue. The bigger questions if this happened is the spectrum since they both operate on different bands though there is some overlap. It is possible some spectrum would need to be sold to Dish or others. Also there is the questions of the plans. Would there be a unification around new plans entirely or would there be a timeframe for people to continue to grandfather on their current plans for a few more years.
I am with Sprint and I am very happy with my coverage and service. I average about 20 up 8 down which may not be as fast as AT&T or Verizon but on a phone that is more than sufficient for anything I need to do. I wonder if all these "Sprint sucks" comments are based on actual and current customers or just people expressing their opinion of Sprint based from years ago or just from reading comments continually saying that over and over. I don't claim that Sprint has nearly the coverage of Verizon but I am very content. If done right this could be good for both companies. The Nextel purchase was really an example of what not to do. That fiasco was due to the former CEO of Sprint so you can't really blame Hesse who has begun to actually turn things around. I am not loyal to any cell company. I simply want the best bang for my buck and if I get good voice and data speeds I have no reason to look elsewhere. I only pay $50 a month for unlimited everything on Sprint so I would be a fool to look elsewhere right now especially since LTE is available everywhere I go now. You can even get cheaper than that at $45 on a family plan but with those plans there is no phone subsidy though you can pay it off interest free over 24 months I believe.
Sprint may indeed suck where you live but please don't assume it sucks everywhere or Sprint wouldn't have close to 55 million customers when you include Boost, Virgin, and other MVNO's. They have around 225 million covered with LTE now which is not bad. The reason the rollout has been slower and more painful for current customers is they are doing an far more massive and extensive overhaul than the other carriers which should pay off in a few years once those other carriers will eventually also need to do the same changes. Since I just had a teeth cleaning yesterday I think a good analogy is you can compare what Sprint did to a full debridement as opposed to the others doing a prophylaxis. Their Network Vision updates are way behind schedule though apparently mostly due to Ericson who is contracted to do many of the upgrades. But the good news for Sprint is they should finally have their network upgraded completely by the end of this year.
Even with unlimited LTE data and a bill of only $50 a month if my service ever became complete crap I would switch in a heartbeat. One other reason I am so excited about the iPhone 6 besides the larger screen is the addition of Sprint Spark on the next iPhone which could allow speeds up to 60Mbps.
That seems strange. I mean, the deal hasn't been announced or approved. Further, you are not stuck on a contract with T-Mobile. So, try it out now, if things go bad, you leave.
Not to mention if Legere is the CEO of the merged company, it'll be run like T-Mobile was, not Sprint.
It's almost like Apple buying Next and getting Jobs back in the deal.
I thought T-mobile improved their business recently?
Please keep Sprint away from my T-mobile :-(
What color does Magenta and yellow make? Some weird orange? I don't want ORANGE!!!
They'll switch to gold because they're sassy!
It's a bad fit..
T-Mobile is also the golden reason they Declined the ATT acquisition. All the FCC and DoJ need to do when they tell Sprint no, is point out how right they were and how well T-Mobile is doing..
Why risk dragging 2 down (Sprint and T-Mobile) with merger, when they could just let Sprint live or die and T-Mobile continue to thrive and grow separately? T-Mobile already has new 700Mhz block sale finalized.. and more spectrum to come.. They are not hurting right now and have room to grow..
ONLY way would be if they let John stay on from T-Mobile as CEO and practically scrapped the Sprint network.. It's got way to many issues, legacy problems, etc. T-Mobile would do what they did for MetroPCS, which was CDMA... As customers got new phones, they got ones that worked on the GSM/LTE network of T-Mobile.. migrating them over.. One issue I see is it would take years.. 2-3 year upgrade cycle on Sprint..
I 'd totally agree with you on this. Except there may be some value in having a stronger company with LTE capability. If Legere can manage the Sprint LTE rollout and the merger well, it may well hasten the highly needed revamping of the awful mobile situation in the US. Still, it's abig risk. It could end up distracting T-Mobile and derailing all its momentum. Legere doesn't seem to be publicly averse to it, so maybe he has a plan.
Creating a real competitor to AT&T and Verizon may be beneficial to consumers. Currently, both Sprint and T-Mobile coverages are limited compared to AT&T and Verizon. My Shared Value unlimited voice plan on AT&T with 10 GB of shared data costs me $130 (two phones) before my discount. In reality, my monthly bill is $115, including tax. I don't think T-Mobile can beat this. Sprint is so bad that I won't even consider it as an alternative.
I think T-Mobile can already beat that. My friend is paying $120 for 3 lines on T-Mobile. At least 1 of them is 5GB and 1 is 2GB. Another friend has 5 lines for ~$140. The first 2 lines on T-Mobile are expensive. But the 3rd, 4th and 5th lines are just $10 each with 1GB on each line. Nobody is cheaper than that. Not even MVNOs. The problem though is that both of them are now complaining of poor service and dropped calls. And that's in Atlanta so I'm sure in the boonies it may be worse. Price wise, T-Mobile is heading the right way. But they need to get their BYOD prices down a lot more. At that point a Nexus 5, Moto X or PlusOne would make it a massive saving per month.
It is pretty apparent from the comments that none so far at least understand how multi-mode base stations work. Sprint implemented multi-mode stations as a part of the network vision overhaul. It would be a very simple thing to include GSM along with CDMA, LTE, and even wimax on the same stations relatively easily and cheaply. That however is not the main issue. The bigger questions if this happened is the spectrum since they both operate on different bands though there is some overlap. It is possible some spectrum would need to be sold to Dish or others. Also there is the questions of the plans. Would there be a unification around new plans entirely or would there be a timeframe for people to continue to grandfather on their current plans for a few more years.
I am with Sprint and I am very happy with my coverage and service. I average about 20 up 8 down which may not be as fast as AT&T or Verizon but on a phone that is more than sufficient for anything I need to do. I wonder if all these "Sprint sucks" comments are based on actual and current customers or just people expressing their opinion of Sprint based from years ago or just from reading comments continually saying that over and over. I don't claim that Sprint has nearly the coverage of Verizon but I am very content. If done right this could be good for both companies. The Nextel purchase was really an example of what not to do. That fiasco was due to the former CEO of Sprint so you can't really blame Hesse who has begun to actually turn things around. I am not loyal to any cell company. I simply want the best bang for my buck and if I get good voice and data speeds I have no reason to look elsewhere. I only pay $50 a month for unlimited everything on Sprint so I would be a fool to look elsewhere right now especially since LTE is available everywhere I go now. You can even get cheaper than that at $45 on a family plan but with those plans there is no phone subsidy though you can pay it off interest free over 24 months I believe.
Sprint may indeed suck where you live but please don't assume it sucks everywhere or Sprint wouldn't have close to 55 million customers when you include Boost, Virgin, and other MVNO's. They have around 225 million covered with LTE now which is not bad. The reason the rollout has been slower and more painful for current customers is they are doing an far more massive and extensive overhaul than the other carriers which should pay off in a few years once those other carriers will eventually also need to do the same changes. Since I just had a teeth cleaning yesterday I think a good analogy is you can compare what Sprint did to a full debridement as opposed to the others doing a prophylaxis. Their Network Vision updates are way behind schedule though apparently mostly due to Ericson who is contracted to do many of the upgrades. But the good news for Sprint is they should finally have their network upgraded completely by the end of this year.
Even with unlimited LTE data and a bill of only $50 a month if my service ever became complete crap I would switch in a heartbeat. One other reason I am so excited about the iPhone 6 besides the larger screen is the addition of Sprint Spark on the next iPhone which could allow speeds up to 60Mbps.
Sprint really does suck for me. I'm in Atlanta which is supposed to have LTE. I get LTE in some locations (like home where I don't need it), but a lot of 3G. And Sprint's 3G speeds are like every one else's 2G speeds. At home, where I get LTE, I typically get download speeds of 6Mbps. On my son's T-Mobile connection, it's around 20Mbps. On a friend's Verizon phone, it was 55Mbps. I got Sprint Spark on my LG G2 a few months ago and the speeds didn't improve any. I have been hearing about Sprint's Network Vision overhaul for years and it's always just around the corner.
The reason I stick with Sprint is that I have a no-contract plan paying $45 per month for unlimited everything and I'm still hoping that they will actually deliver on their promise. Customer Service has become really good. I just wish their service would get as good as well. Now that they all their flagship phones are world phones which I can use when I travel abroad, that's one less problem I have with Sprint now.
Sprint really does suck for me. I'm in Atlanta which is supposed to have LTE. I get LTE in some locations (like home where I don't need it), but a lot of 3G. And Sprint's 3G speeds are like every one else's 2G speeds. At home, where I get LTE, I typically get download speeds of 6Mbps. On my son's T-Mobile connection, it's around 20Mbps. On a friend's Verizon phone, it was 55Mbps. I got Sprint Spark on my LG G2 a few months ago and the speeds didn't improve any. I have been hearing about Sprint's Network Vision overhaul for years and it's always just around the corner.
The reason I stick with Sprint is that I have a no-contract plan paying $45 per month for unlimited everything and I'm still hoping that they will actually deliver on their promise. Customer Service has become really good. I just wish their service would get as good as well. Now that they all their flagship phones are world phones which I can use when I travel abroad, that's one less problem I have with Sprint now.
I'm in Atlanta also but it is a huge city so your mileage may vary. I get LTE pretty consistently all over metro Atlanta though on my 5s even at Stone mountain and Six Flag and even down to Henry county. I work in Buckhead and also spend a lot of time in Lenox and midtown areas and live in Dunwoody. Atlanta seems to get great LTE with all the carriers and was also among the very first for all 4 carriers to have LTE so lots of options. All I can tell you is that my 5s gets good LTE in Atlanta wherever I go at least so not sure why you are having problems. What neighborhoods are you mostly in?
There is no Sprint Spark in Atlanta yet so I assume you meant in a spark city like Miami. Spark cities are showing up to 77Mbps http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2014/04/29/sprint-shows-off-spark-download-speeds-of-77mbps/
I went with Sprint because T-Mobile is horrid in overall coverage. If you don't mind being stuck on EDGE, go for T-Mobile. At least Sprint launched LTE in my area quite some time ago (second batch of launch cities). AT&T has JUST launched it, and T-Mobile is still EDGE... Verizon, well... they've had it for years around here, but I'll NEVER go back to Verizon.
Sprint's service isn't exactly stellar, but we know this. I will say I've been satisfied with them so far. There are very few areas that I don't get service compared to my former AT&T plan. I also have fewer dropped calls. The Sprint Framily Plan is also contract-free, similar to T-Mobile. You have to pay off your phone if you cancel service, just like T-Mobile. I get unlimited data and annual upgrades. That works for me. On top of that, my service gets cheaper every time someone joins my Framily Plan until we're each $25 plus extras (from 7-10 people).
I think the merger could be a good thing, and it should help push Sprint closer to being a GSM network via LTE. I'm excited for Sprint Spark to get here. I've heard it's really good.