Slashdot Mirror

Now that both phones are paid for, the bill is an additional $50/mo lower; mind you, we paid $650 apiece for the phones, but there were cheaper options if we wanted them; that's not relevant here, though, since you have to buy your phone on Cricket, as well.

I think you're getting the current Cricket, a wholly owned subsidiary of AT&T, confused with the old Cricket (a regional CDMA carrier). They allow you to use any AT&T locked or unlocked GSM phone. The coverage is the same as AT&T's native (non-roaming) network. I use a iPhone 5S originally from Verizon, on Cricket; I certainly didn't have to buy one of their phones.

According to their rates chart, they don't offer unlimited.

T-Mobile and Sprint are the only games in town if you really need truly unlimited data. Once that becomes part of your selection criteria, you know what your options are.

I say nearly because Cricket will cut you off after 5GB, while T-Mobile will throttle, and Cricket no longer offers tethering, so really. No. they're just not a viable option.

Cricket throttles at 128Kbps, the same throttle speed as T-Mobile and Sprint. It's just as unusable on all carriers. You are correct, however, that Cricket does not offer any form of wireless hotspot/tethering add-on. They also don't do anything to stop you from tethering if your phone natively supports it, or if you've enabled it by way of rooting/jailbreaking.

More-or-less, MetroPCS (which is now a wholly owned subsidiary of T-Mobile) offers exactly what you're getting now on the same network, for $120/mo. That's two lines at the base price of $60/mo each, a $5 family plan discount on each line for having two lines, then a $5 fee on each line for adding mobile hotspot functionality to both lines.

What you'd lose is the ability to roam in the few places T-Mobile still has roaming agreements (looking at their map, I can't imagine where) and the ability to finance your next handsets. Is that worth $30/mo?

Now that both phones are paid for, the bill is an additional $50/mo lower; mind you, we paid $650 apiece for the phones, but there were cheaper options if we wanted them; that's not relevant here, though, since you have to buy your phone on Cricket, as well.

I think you're getting the current Cricket, a wholly owned subsidiary of AT&T, confused with the old Cricket (a regional CDMA carrier). They allow you to use any AT&T locked or unlocked GSM phone. The coverage is the same as AT&T's native (non-roaming) network. I use a iPhone 5S originally from Verizon, on Cricket; I certainly didn't have to buy one of their phones.

According to their rates chart, they don't offer unlimited.

T-Mobile and Sprint are the only games in town if you really need truly unlimited data. Once that becomes part of your selection criteria, you know what your options are.

I say nearly because Cricket will cut you off after 5GB, while T-Mobile will throttle, and Cricket no longer offers tethering, so really. No. they're just not a viable option.

Cricket throttles at 128Kbps, the same throttle speed as T-Mobile and Sprint. It's just as unusable on all carriers. You are correct, however, that Cricket does not offer any form of wireless hotspot/tethering add-on. They also don't do anything to stop you from tethering if your phone natively supports it, or if you've enabled it by way of rooting/jailbreaking.

More-or-less, MetroPCS (which is now a wholly owned subsidiary of T-Mobile) offers exactly what you're getting now on the same network, for $120/mo. That's two lines at the base price of $60/mo each, a $5 family plan discount on each line for having two lines, then a $5 fee on each line for adding mobile hotspot functionality to both lines.

What you'd lose is the ability to roam in the few places T-Mobile still has roaming agreements (looking at their map, I can't imagine where) and the ability to finance your next handsets. Is that worth $30/mo?

the typical contract subsidy is $450

Which doesn't apply here. When I first switched to T-Moble, I was paying less while financing 2 phones for unlimited everything (including unlimited LTE data), than I was paying AT&T for 700 shared minutes and 4GB of data per line. $50/mo, to be precise, or $1200 over 2 years. Plus the $100 paid to AT&T for my phone and $200 for my wife's, bringing the 2 year total AT&T ripoff to $1500. Now that both phones are paid for, the bill is an additional $50/mo lower; mind you, we paid $650 apiece for the phones, but there were cheaper options if we wanted them; that's not relevant here, though, since you have to buy your phone on Cricket, as well. That leads me to want to recalculate my savings over AT&T, completely ignoring the cost of the phone.

Well, let's see, and keep in mind this is for 2 lines... AT&T, still $250/mo, whether you bring your own phone or buy from them, this is the cost of service, 700min/mo, 4GB data per line, unlimited texting; mind you, their rates have changed since then, so it may well be cheaper now. T-Mobile, $150/mo for services, unlimited everything, including LTE data. So, really, device cost notwithstanding, AT&T would have cost me $2400 more over the past 2 years that I've been with T-Mobile, had I stayed with them. That's one month's rent, one month's phone bill, and a night out for me and my wife. And, to be honest, unless we were frequent international travelers, or made frequent international calls, there's no way my wife and I could be paying T-Mobile any more than we already do for 2 lines; we have every feature already.

I'm sure you're tempted to argue that I'm comparing AT&T to T-Mobile simply to make a more favorable argument for myself. The reality is, though, that I'm comparing one viable option to another. Cricket doesn't have LTE coverage in my area, while every other provider does. That's an important feature to me, so Cricket holds no value for me at any price; they're not a viable option for me. Now, they may have LTE coverage in your area, or that may not matter to you, in which case, more power to you. But let's go ahead and do the math for 2 lines of unlimited voice, texting, and LTE data on Cricket, anyway. According to their rates chart, they don't offer unlimited. Well, then, let's go with the highest option, 20GB, which is on promo for $60/mo right now, but I see a pattern in their rate options, which allows me to discern that this is probably normally $70/mo. $65 if I trust them to store my payment details, which I don't, so we'll use $70/mo. Times 2, but, oh, they'll give me $10/mo off on the 2nd line. $130/mo for limited LTE, in areas where they actually have LTE coverage, which is *nowhere* that my wife or I would be using our phones. Really, not worth the $20/mo savings; especially as I routinely top 10GB/mo, often topping 30GB, using my phone as a dash cam. Those months, it would be useless to me for 1/3 of the month, or more, as I use maybe 60min/mo; most of my usage is data.

Again, if Cricket works for you, that's great. If their offering truly was viable for more people, more people would use them. I really hate to say it, since it flies in the face of everything I commonly say about people in general, but most people aren't completely stupid, they run through the math on these things (or have a trusted party who does this for them), weigh the pros and cons, and, ultimately, choose what works best for them. The features I'd have to give up to go with Cricket (unlimited LTE... actually, LTE at all) are worth considerably more than $10 per line (e.g. the $20 "savings" I would see with Cricket; and that's *after* T-Mobile adds taxes and fees to the bill) I would save. That I can finance my phone upgrades is simply icing.

Of course, Cricket becomes a viable option at the 5GB level, where it's actually $30/mo cheaper for 2 lines than T-Mobile, f

In the US, you could always use Cricket...it runs on Verizon's network, so not much different if you want budget.

https://www.cricketwireless.co...

it looks like $60 for 20GB, I don't know what other plans they have though to compare directly with your plan.

I didn't see anything in the Cricket Wireless TOS that requires giving permission to circumvent encryption. I skimmed through it though, so if you find something I missed, feel free to point it out.

Most US providers charge $5-10 for a SIM. They often waive it with the purchase of a new phone and, less commonly, with a new contract, but that doesn't mean they don't charge for them. That's beside the point, though; for T-Mobile, AT&T, or Sprint on the current-gen iPads, it's Apple SIM or bust, and you're buying that from Apple, not your carrier; the only carrier-specific SIMs that will work in the current iPads are for carriers not participating in the Apple SIM program, AFAIK. So yes, that AT&T would essentially brick the SIM for other carriers is outrageous.

Furthermore, buying SIMs is fairly common.