Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Even Sprint Beat AT&T and Verizon in Customer Growth (cnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the making-a-return dept.

Customers are turning to Sprint again. From a report on CNET: In fact, they're starting to look to the nation's fourth-largest wireless carrier over stalwarts like AT&T and Verizon Wireless. The company said it added 405,000 net new post-paid subscribers -- people who pay at the end of the month and tend to be more loyal. Of that total, 368,000 were phone customers, Sprint's highest rate of growth in four years. The numbers suggest Sprint is starting to pull itself out of a death spiral, reversing years of losses, customers faced with poor service and a network that lagged behind the competition. Sprint's customer growth came at a time when all the carriers were aggressive with holiday promotions. It's a trend that will likely continue, resulting in more potential deals for consumers. "Sprint is turning the corner," CEO Marcelo Claure said in the company's fiscal third-quarter report on Tuesday.

78 comments

  1. Cool story, bro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But that doesn't really sound like news for nerds, or stuff that matters. It actually looks more like Sprint marketing.

    1. Re: Cool story, bro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just wait until those poor bastards get their first bill and have to spend hours getting it straight, then the same thing keeps happening every month.

    2. Re: Cool story, bro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wait until those public forums are filled with shills. That will really teach them.

    3. Re: Cool story, bro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's every phone company so good luck.

    4. Re: Cool story, bro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never had that problem with Sprint. Had a HUGE problem with that from T-Mobile many years ago.

    5. Re: Cool story, bro. by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

      That's me. With Verizon. Now.

    6. Re: Cool story, bro. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Sprint was my very first wireless provider, about fifteen years ago. Every single fucking month they'd hit me with bogus charges and every fucking month I'd have to spend hours on the phone with their serfs getting it sorted out. It was obvious that upper management at Sprint had figured out that these "mistaken" extraneous fees were worth hitting their customers with as not all of them would've taken the time to fight the charges.

    7. Re: Cool story, bro. by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      There were some winners and some losers for that. For about two years, I had the same discount applied twice by accident (came out to about 34% off). When some audit system finally caught it, I got a form letter apologizing profusely for the 2 years of billing errors "I had to endure". It's true, the extra cash in my wallet was little heavy to carry...

  2. When you're at the bottom... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the only way to go is up.

    1. Re: When you're at the bottom... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Fastest growth" is a meaningless metric.

  3. Simple and straightforward reason for this. by olsmeister · · Score: 4, Funny

    This must be the reason. It's the only thing that makes sense!

  4. Sprint offers sweetheart deals... for now by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Then they will do like all the rest and kill those deals off as time goes by, and then those customers will flip back to AT&T/Verizon. Just another merry-go-round.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  5. Saturated Market by MountainLogic · · Score: 2

    Seems like everyone who is ever likely to have a cell phone (+/- births/deaths) already have one. This is just some banal market share sight: pepsi/coke, Ford/GM. Who cares?

    1. Re:Saturated Market by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      Saturated markets can still have movement of swaths of customers between competing providers.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    2. Re:Saturated Market by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

      Saturated markets can still have movement of swaths of customers between competing providers.
      Indeed, but is that news for tech nerds? Finance nerds, perhaps.

    3. Re:Saturated Market by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      Saturated markets can still have movement of swaths of customers between competing providers. Indeed, but is that news for tech nerds? Finance nerds, perhaps.

      Not just finance nerds, which I am not. But still of interest to me, if for no other reason than of the big 4 mobile providers, it is Sprint I like the most. In order of best to worst:

      1 Sprint - about as good as a root canal
      2 T-Mo - better than having your fingernails ripped off, but not much
      3 Verizon - pretty much equal to having your testicals raked across molten salt and nibbled on by piranahs
      4 At&T - Smells like shit, tastes like shit, treats everyone like shit, I am sort of surprised they won't take turds as payment. About as fun as having a bag of scorpions funneled into various orifices.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    4. Re:Saturated Market by tim620 · · Score: 1

      I would completely flip your list. Mostly because Sprint has no 4G in my area and constantly drops calls. We don't have TMobile, so we are left with Verizon and AT&T. (and cheap carriers and prepaids who use their towers). If Sprint were not shitty here and if we had TMobile, I would likely agree with your list, although lately I've been partial to GSM phones (AT&T / TMobile). They are much nicer to travel internationally with.

    5. Re:Saturated Market by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      In reality I use Project FI. GSM is typically easier to travel with. I used to keep an old GSM phone around just for that when I was a Ting customer (Sprint only MVNO at the time). With Fi I ride Sprint or T-Mo on a nexus 6 that supports GSM and CDMA. Makes it pretty simple.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
  6. Re:Good Lord Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try using the apk spamware host file system. It's so good, it can only be advertised on Slashdot

  7. not being verizon or at&t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    helps!

    who knew?

  8. CDMA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only real problem with Sprint is that they have a network that nobody else supports. If you are on Sprint, you need a different phone to travel internationally, and in some places in the US, you can't even make calls because Sprint's own network doesn't reach those areas. You can't fall back on AT&T or T-Mobile or whoever happens to have a nearby tower.

    CAPTCHA: passport

    1. Re:CDMA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Been under a rock for the last ten years? Most CDMA phones also support GSM and friends internationally. Even the ones that are SIM locked are only locked against other domestic carriers, not international carriers.

  9. Hopefully, Sprint has learned a lesson. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The lesson is: You don't own your customers.

  10. They need to fix their network by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Only reason I stick with AT&T is their 4G LTE coverage and the civilized function of being able to use DATA whine in a call. Verizon and their archaic system that disallows data during a call needs to be thrown out.

    Problem is Sprint uses the same technology as Verizon.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:They need to fix their network by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

      Is there really a use case for having data while in a phone call? Do you really want to get an e-mail notification or listen/watch streaming content while talking to someone on the phone?

      If it is a huge concern, just use a VoIP client (Facetime, Skype, etc).

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:They need to fix their network by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

      Is there really a use case for having data while in a phone call?

      Load a document, discuss an email that was just sent, review an image for approval, look up nearby restaurants to decide where to eat lunch, put in an online order for carry out as your wife tells you what she wants over the phone...

      They're all things that I've done in the recent past and I'm hardly a power business cell phone user. Sure they all could have been done by ending the call, performing whatever task, then calling back. But why not do it while they're on the line if you can?

    3. Re:They need to fix their network by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Talk with your travel partner, drag up reservations/whatever while talking.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:They need to fix their network by mcrbids · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think your facts need updating. As a Verizon customer, I can use data during calls and have been able to do so for years. It's true that you can't use data during a voice call if you're on a 3G tower, but the only place I see those anymore is while at government offices.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    5. Re:They need to fix their network by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is there really a use case for having data while in a phone call?

      I imagine the practical use cases are few, but I have seen a co-worker use Google Maps while on a call productively.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re:They need to fix their network by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Problem is Sprint uses the same technology as Verizon.

      On the other hand... I use Ting with a CDMA phone (Kyocera Hydro Vibe) and the underlying network is Sprint. However, they also have a roaming agreement with Verizon for out-of-Sprint coverage. Also noting that you can get GSM phones from Ting, which (I believe) uses the T-Mobile network.

      I'm not a heavy phone/text/data user so Ting's block pricing works well for me. So far, the coverage seems to be pretty wide and reliable. My monthly bill seems to alternate between $13 and $17 (and change). My highest bill was $24 when I first got my phone and it did a firmware update over the air -- I didn't have WiFi at home at that time.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    7. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm on Sprint and was able to successfully use my phone and data at the same time. I have the LG V20 (Sprint model), so it could be the nature of your phone (or not, I know Sprint has been wonky at times).

    8. Re: They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there really a use case for having data while in a phone call?

      There are a great many use cases for this, but then, I actually have friends and people who want to get in touch with me, so your mileage may vary.

    9. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with RingPlus (uses Sprint network). My monthly bill is $0.00. Pretty good deal if you ask me.

    10. Re:They need to fix their network by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      Trying to decide where to meet for lunch while on the phone and you want to look at a map or check yelp.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    11. Re:They need to fix their network by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

      Or...you can also find 3G towers everywhere that is not a major metropolitan area. Like the country. Where...lots of people still live.

    12. Re:They need to fix their network by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Verizon and their archaic system that disallows data during a call needs to be thrown out.

      Oh my. That hasn't been true since phones got 4G LTE.

      See, CDMA won the GSM vs CDMA war. GSM used TDMA - each phone took turns talking to the tower, so bandwidth is divided by the number of phones even if some (or most) of those phones don't have anything to transmit. CDMA allows each phone to transmit simultaneously. The tower tells them apart because each is assigned an orthogonal code. Each phone see other phones' transmissions as an increase in the noise floor, which drops the signal-to-noise ratio, dividing bandwidth evenly between all phones which are transmitting at any given time. If there are 20 GSM phones with active data connections with a tower, but only one actually transmitting data at a given time, it gets 5% of the total bandwidth. If there are 20 CDMA phones with active data connections with a tower, but only one actually transmitting data at a given time, it gets 100% of the total bandwidth.

      Consequently, CDMA completely wiped the floor with GSM when it came to data connections. This is why CDMA networks got 3G data about a year before GSM networks did. After about a year, GSM threw in the towel, licensed CDMA from Qualcomm, and added it to the GSM spec. Most 3G data connections on GSM phones (HSPA, HSDPA, UMTS) are based on wideband CDMA. Because CDMA was better than the original GSM.

      That is why GSM phones could talk and use data simultaneously. They had to have two separate radios to function - a TDMA radio for voice, and a wideband CDMA radio for data. CDMA phones on Verizon and Sprint only had a single CDMA radio. It had to be put into one mode to make voice calls, into a different mode to support data. Consequently they couldn't do voice and data at the same time. They could've added an extra CDMA radio, but the simultaneous voice + data capability wasn't judged to be important enough to warrant it. It wasn't because GSM was superior. It was because GSM was inferior and needed the crutch of a second radio to handle data competently. Simultaneous voice and data comms was just a pleasant side-effect.

      Most LTE implementations use OFDMA, so requires yet another radio. LTE CDMA phones thus have (at least) two radios and can do voice and data simultaneously (CDMA for voice, LTE for data).

      (As a side note, Sprint's LTE network is different from the other carriers'. The other carriers primarily use 2 LTE frequencies. Sprint converted their old iDEN frequency to LTE, so uses 3 LTE frequencies to create their "Spark" LTE network. Unfortunately, modern phones are limited to only 3 simultaneous communications bands, so Sprint phones which are "Spark-capable" cannot do voice and data simultaneously. If they're doing LTE data, all the phone's resources are committed to LTE data. Older Sprint LTE phones which don't support tri-band LTE can do voice and LTE data simultaneously, just like Verizon's phones.)

      All of you hating on CDMA should actually be thanking it. If the U.S. hadn't allowed CDMA to compete, our data speeds today would probably be down around 1 Mbps. And LTE would probably still be in the experimental stages. (OFDMA also allows all phones to transmit simultaneously, just using orthogonal frequencies instead of orthogonal codes. CDMA was the proof of concept which confirmed that this type of communications could successfully be scaled to a nationwide network. Without CDMA, nobody today would be sure if OFDMA LTE would actually work when scaled.)

    13. Re:They need to fix their network by imidan · · Score: 1

      Is there really a use case for having data while in a phone call?

      I often tether my laptop to my phone while traveling. While tethered, and using data on my laptop, I'd still like to be able to make and receive phone calls.

    14. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most common use case would be to look something up relevant to the call discussion. That may be opening an e-mail attachment to review or a quick google search of a restaurant's hours, etc.. It would not be crazy to assume people would utilize data to help bring information into a phone conversation. If people have never encountered this issue I am shocked.

    15. Re: They need to fix their network by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it might not be a terrible idea for one's GPS app to be able to receive emergency alerts while one is talking...???

    16. Re:They need to fix their network by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting

      CDMA won the GSM vs CDMA war

      No, it didn't. The word CDMA can be two things: a mobile phone standard (IS-95 and its successors), and a type of technology.

      GSM is a family of mobile phone standards.

      So if GSM and CDMA got into a war, you must be comparing GSM with IS-95 and its successors. IS-95 is mostly dead. Sprint and Verizon still operate legacy networks, but they're transitioning to the latest version of GSM, which is called LTE.

      GSM used TDMA..

      The first iteration of GSM originally used TDMA. Version "3", UMTS, used W-CDMA, whose low level protocols (not high level protocols) are similar to IS-95 (etc)'s low level protocols. At a high level, however, the two standards are completely unalike. Version 4 of GSM, LTE, uses OFDMA and SC-FDMA at the lowest levels, which are not remotely similar to anything in IS-95 or its successor.

      All mobile phone operators in the US right now are transitioning to LTE, a GSM standard. CDMA - both the mobile phone standard (IS-95 etc) and the air interface technology are considered obsolete, and the two remaining major operators of IS-95/etc networks are moving off it.

      All of you hating on CDMA should actually be thanking it. If the U.S. hadn't allowed CDMA to compete...

      Yeah yeah. That fucking idiot Steve DeBeste posted this libercrapian propaganda for the longest time, it was wrong when he said it, and it's wrong now. There was never a ban on CDMA systems outside of the US, or even in the EU. Vodafone actually experimented with it in the UK, deciding it was inferior (because it was) to conventional GSM.

      Qualcomm's lobbying, and the US's lobbying on behalf of it, actually held the industry back. The lobbying pretty much forced the 3GPP designing UMTS to include a CDMA air interface, rather than jump straight to more capable protocols based upon OFDMA. We could have had much more power efficient devices with better latency and more scalability 10-15 years ago, but Qualcomm decided it was a giant conspiracy that nobody wanted their system outside of cost-cutting US carriers.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    17. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your info is WAY out of date.

      Verizon has been able to do that since widespread LTE deployments like a full decade+ ago. Every single LTE-capable verizon phone I ever owned has been able to do simultaneous voice+data.

      The first set of SOCS (actually up until only 2-3 years ago), simply had two radios. One LTE and one CDMA, which could obviously function completely independently and simultaneously. The SOC manufacturers finally got some battery-saving units on the market integrating both radios into a single unit a little while back, but now VOLTE is deployed pretty much nationwide. So those phones are still perfectly capable of voice+data.

    18. Re:They need to fix their network by netsavior · · Score: 1

      I connect to webex presentations all the time, the picture comes through data, but you can route the call through voice.

      I google search stuff all the time if there is a question in a call... I add stuff to the grocery list while talking to my wife about it... I have my tablet connected to my wifi hotspot while I order Chinese food... I mean, constant and ubiquitous internet access is expected, why would it halt just because I am using the phone?

    19. Re:They need to fix their network by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Only reason I stick with AT&T is their 4G LTE coverage and the civilized function of being able to use DATA whine in a call. Verizon and their archaic system that disallows data during a call needs to be thrown out.

      Verizon's archaic VoLTE capability that lets you use DATA while in a call, that I used just last week, you mean?

      That feature was introduced in late 2014. Sounds more like your knowledge is archaic.

    20. Re: They need to fix their network by DatbeDank · · Score: 1

      Verizon's 4G coverage is about as good as it gets when it comes to cellular providers. Take a look at their current coverage maps for 4G. I was definitely using data and making phone calls as far back as 2010 on a smartphone.

      I'm going to get laughed at, but after living abroad for a few years now i've come to miss Verizon. Mobile phone carriers in Europe absolutely suck. I can't get consistent service in the middle of my office building. Driving through the countryside makes streaming music a nightmare because of all of the holes in coverage. Have fun going between EU countries and having to roam.

      The ironic part is you'll hear the same tired excuses that you hear in America for the lack of cellurlar services in Europe which is hilarious considering how tiny the continent really is.

      You get what you pay for I guess.

    21. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been able to use LTE Data while on a call on the Verizon network. I don't think this is a problem in most places anymore for since they deployed LTE. Some phones wouldn't allow you to while on Verizon but it wasn't a network limitation.

      If you do have a Verizon phone that you cannot call and use data on at the same time check the settings, make sure 'advanced calling' is enabled, a lot of phones don't enable it by default.

    22. Re:They need to fix their network by vonwilkenstein · · Score: 1

      Or... any metropolitan area. There are a TON of non-volte capable phones out there that still fall back to 3G for voice calls.

    23. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much every single device you can buy from Verizon to use on their network support simultaneous voice and data.

    24. Re:They need to fix their network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use data whilst on a phone call. You need to look for, and enable, the 'Advanced Calling' feature. You need to enable this on your account (through verizonwireless.com) and on your device. It may take a few hours to enable on your account. I believe you need to restart your device after enabling as well.

      I had an LG G4 that advanced calling never worked on. It was replaced because of an unrelated issue and advanced calling now works on my replacement device (also an LG G4), so I have found a faulty device can cause advanced calling to not work (obviously).

  11. Can they hear that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's only a 1% difference in coverage at half the cost, dammit.

    1. Re:Can they hear that? by hey! · · Score: 1

      I've been thinking about this, and I think the significance of 1% in reliability depends on how reliable you're talking about in an absolute sense.

      Compare a service that is 50% reliable to one that is 51% reliable; there's very little to choose between them; failures are a regular feature of both services. But a service that is 99% reliable is bound to feel a lot less reliable than one that is 99.9% reliable, because it fails ten times as often.

      Now reality is probably more complicated; reliability probably depends specifically on where you are, so the aggregate network reliability tells you very little. You pay your money and you take your chances.

      Sprint gaining a lot of subscribers isn't so surprising because they've been offering and advertising aggressive discounts. The trick in business isn't getting customers, however; it's getting profit. Sprint added 2.4x the new customers as Verizon at 1/2 the gross revenue per customer. That works out to a marginal increase of gross revenue that is 1.2x higher. Since each customer costs something to service, if they are adding more, or even any profit.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Can they hear that? by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      It also depends on what you mean by "reliability". Do you mean dropped calls? I haven't experienced or heard of anyone else experiencing a significant problem with any of the major carriers dropping calls for years now. Being within 1% on that metric is totally unimpressive. Do you mean reliability of finding a cell signal on your phone? Because I was a Sprint customer until 2 years ago and dropped them for that very reason. So either my area is part of the 1% where their reliability isn't the same, or they aren't using the same metric that I care about. Either way, the 1% claim is not reflective of my reality and thus completely untrustworthy from my perspective.

  12. Sprint grew faster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And wll continue as long as prices keep going up for the same services...
    Me: 2010 - $27.00/mo for 12/1 DSL
    2017 - $65.00/mo for same.
    No fiber, no higher speeds, just the price increases.

  13. Dear Sprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a fucking clue:

    1) Don't treat your loyal customers like shit. Yeah, you know what I'm talking about.
    2) Don't leave ANY incentive for them to change carriers on the table.

  14. The two best MNVOs I've found by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    I don't know why people use sprint when the sprint MNVO's seem to be better in price and offer the same service.

    There's two MNVO phone companies that use Sprint towers (and some t-mobile towers) that I suspect are growing fast. One is Republic Wireless and the other is Freedompop. If you don't use your phone a lot then freedom pop is totally free. Republic wireless just reshuffled their plans but up until recently unlimited calling and texting was $10 a month. That plan is now only available on some handsets but not newer phones. :-(

    Of the two Republic wireless has wonderful customer service-- basically they let their customers help each other through the forums. And it works really well as the expert customers know a heck of a lot more than your typical call center monkey. The voice quality is awesome and they have the most highly functional blended voip system I've ever come across. It smokes the one verizon and t-mobile offer.

    Freedom pop has a diabolically deceptive website designed explicitly to trick you into paying for services that are not required then hiding the links in 6 point font two scroll pages down on the screen. Their customer response is incpompetent and slow. And they make ludicrous mistakes like shipping you two phones when you order one, or shipping you broken phones rather than new ones. On the otherhand once you get it all sorted out and get a working phone and turn off all the extra charges they lard onto your bill, it acutally is free to use for the first 400 to 500 minutes of cell or text and 500Mb of data. So one can't complain too much!

    My main remaining greivance with freedom pop is it seems that the minutes I use on voip over my home wifi still get counted towards that total.

    Of the two, republic is better if you are a moderate user. It's also less frustrating to deal with them. if you are a very light weigh user freedom pop is free. But adding additional minutes isn't as cheap as Republic wireless (it's unlimited for $10)

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:The two best MNVOs I've found by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting about Ting. If you don't use your phone that much, it's quite cheap. And customer service is excellent. I am, however, looking at switching to Republic Wireless because of the unlimited calls and texts, as my usage of these has gone way up lately due to a new girlfriend. But Ting is still a great option IMO and I recommend checking it out.

      But your general point is great: why does anyone bother with the traditional carriers any more? There's many dozens of MVNOs out there, for all the main services (AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, T-Mo), and it seems to be easy to find a much better deal with one of them. The only thing they don't seem to be good for is if you use a LOT of data, or you really really need to be able to go to a physical store and have someone show you how to use your phone or fix something on it.

    2. Re:The two best MNVOs I've found by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Also, Project Fi.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:The two best MNVOs I've found by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The problem with Republic Wireless is that you're locked into using their phones or an extremely limited number of others; you can't just bring any device like you can with other MVNOs.

    4. Re:The two best MNVOs I've found by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Project Fi sucks; it's a Google service, and it only uses Google's own Nexus and Pixel phones. I'm sorry, a phone service that only lets you use one of a grand total of 3 phones is not a very good option unless you're a giant Google fan. You really should point out this fact about them any time you recommend them, as it's a huge caveat.

      Republic Wireless is similar, though not quite as bad. They have a very limited selection of phones they'll work with, generally very new and expensive ones. If I wanted to spend $700 on a brand-new phone, instead of using a perfectly good 2-year-old model that I can get for a tiny fraction of that price, and I didn't mind buying another $700 phone in a year or two (since these companies' selection is likely to change), I probably wouldn't be that worried about saving money on my phone plan.

  15. Sprint is great... by tim620 · · Score: 1

    Sprint is great....if you live in a city where Sprint has 4G, if you don't travel in rural areas, and if you don't travel internationally. I tried Sprint a few years ago to save money. However, I quickly discovered (should have asked more questions, instead of making assumptions) that they do not have 4G in my city (as far as I know, they still don't). I also travel in rural areas, about once a month, to visit relatives. I had frequent dropped calls (and sometimes no calls) while in rural areas. Also, since Sprint and Verizon are on CDMA, they don't work well (or at least, not as cheaply) as GSM phones do. I switched to AT&T Go (prepaid). I love it. It is fairly cheap ($55 for unlimited text, data in US, Candada and Mexico, 8Gb of rollover data). It is on the AT&T network, it is GSM. I have 4G again, it works well in rural areas and my GSM phone works well internationally.

    1. Re:Sprint is great... by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      Actually Sprint is great if you do travel internationally. They have unlimited global data (though only 3G speeds outside US/Canada) and texting at no additional charge. There's also some sort of $5/month pro-ratable plan that upgrades you to unlimited full speed data/talk/text in some countries, if you ask for it they'll automatically add/take it off during your stay. It ended up being their saving grace for me because their in-store customer service is abysmal.

    2. Re:Sprint is great... by tim620 · · Score: 1

      Actually Sprint and Verizon (CDMA) are crap, if you travel internationally. I'm not sure where you traveled, but international (outside of Canada, USA and Mexico) voice and data are expensive on Sprint (at least in SE Asia). The beauty of having unlocked GSM phones is that you can purchase a cheap local SIM card in whatever country you are in and get great 4G (sometimes it drops to 3G) data and free local calls.

    3. Re:Sprint is great... by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      I just told you they are NOT expensive on Sprint, since mid 2015 or so it is no additional charge. I've used it in four different countries in SE Asia and Oceania. Proof: Sprint Global Roaming. If you're going to "correct" me please do some research first.

    4. Re:Sprint is great... by tim620 · · Score: 1

      I traveled to Malaysia last year (2016). And I was still on Sprint. So, yes, I did research Sprint before I left. Perhaps their global roaming doesn't seem expensive to you, but, it does to me. $0.20 per minute voice and only 2G for free? 3G speeds in Malaysia cost $50 for 2 weeks and 500GB limit. To me, that is expensive. I ended up bringing an unlocked GSM phone and buy a local prepaid SIM card. For about $20, I had 9GB of 4G data for 30 days and free local voice and text. Unlocked GSM (on AT&T's Go plan) is all I use now. CDMA carriers, like Sprint, are way too expensive for me, while travelling overseas.

  16. Becoming bigger than Verizon or AT&T isn't har by geekmux · · Score: 1

    All you have to do is not adopt the same bullshit-fee and fuck-you-charge "sales" model that Verizon and AT&T have been using in recent times to essentially demonstrate their corporate arrogance and ability to fuck over their customers in the name of pure unadulterated greed.

    TL; DR - Don't become a greedy prick, because competition still exists.

  17. Not so easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Market Cap: VZ: $200 billion, T: $256 billion, S: $36 billion

    No, growing bigger than T or VZ will not be easy. I am happy to have my T. Remember, one man's greed is another man's profit.

  18. I'm surprised... by slasher999 · · Score: 1

    I just recently (August - September) completed a way too in depth review of T-Mobile and Sprint for my personal use. I'm a long time AT&T customer, and a happy one, but I was switching to a BYOD phone and thought I might find equal service for a lower price elsewhere. Of the three (ATT, TMOB and Sprint) Sprint's coverage didn't appear to come close, international plans were definitely not as good, and the pricing was no better. TMOB was very close to ATT, and I especially liked VoLTE and WiFi calling on TMOB, something ATT won't do on a BYOD. However in the end I stuck with ATT since the pricing was comparable and TMOB was never able to resolve a couple of sim issues, in fact they couldn't even respond to the inquiry.

  19. Still flakey? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Sprint is still like it was back in the mid 90's, then expect to find yourself in areas where you will not have coverage - even in major metropolitan areas.

  20. Only one who still has Unlimited Data - Sprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VZ,T-Mobile, AT&T still charge for something that should be free. Unlimited Data.
    Not Unlimited with a bandwidth cap.
    Not an "alternate definition of Unlimited"
    Not normal bandwidth speeds until you cross your data cap.

    While my service isn't great in the middle of nowhere places, I Don't care. The service is where when I need it for the most part. Sure, 4G isn't everywhere, but It's becoming MUCH less noticeable if you travel frequently around major citys, Very Rarely am I not without 4G.

    Sure you might have some overloaded towers here and there. but hay. When I need remote access to stuff. It gets the job done.

    Leave the nickel and dimer's for data charging you into the money pit. You pay for Data access, you get Data access. No special circumstances.
    This is why i'm still a Sprint Customer for 8 years.

  21. Re:Good Lord Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many speak highly of it quoted here https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10172213&cid=53775597/ and here too https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10172213&cid=53775689/ no denying it.

  22. Re:Good Lord Slashdot by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    That doesn't mean it is a great choice, only that some praised it. At that, when were those praises spoken? I can imagine a hosts file might have been useful when running on 1GB or less of ram, but now it makes no sense to do all that work, and endure all the speed loss for a couple of MB of ram savings.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  23. Forget to troll by AC, Coren22? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Apk doesn't think DNS servers are worth running & believes Microsoft Active Directory can run w/out DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015

    Prove your quoted words above Coren22: Where'd I say it? Show us. I say AD needs internal DNS far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/windows/25596-how-secure-windows-2000-xp-server-2003-vista-fully-per-cis-tool-scoring-3.html?s=0ae07d5b5389e06fd6bcfd05bc2d2cc0/

    See "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers" there on OpenDNS free (I use it) + AD in my security guide.

    * Others like & use MY work, not your doesn't exist work & they did so in the past few years here!

    You're only NOW replying to that post many DAYS later now, troll to TRY to "get the last word"? I get the last laugh on you, loser exposing your bs!

    APK

    P.S.=> Whose mistake is that quoted above, Coren22? YOURS, lol (again) along w/ https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10141067&cid=53725817/ idiot!

    1. Re:Forget to troll by AC, Coren22? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Wow, the same answered question yet again, so original APK. But I guess you don't have an answer for the question I asked? Does it make you look too bad?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  24. I see you can't backup your lies Coren22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Apk doesn't think DNS servers are worth running & believes Microsoft Active Directory can run w/out DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015

    Prove your quoted words above Coren22: Where'd I say it? Show us. I say AD needs internal DNS far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/windows/25596-how-secure-windows-2000-xp-server-2003-vista-fully-per-cis-tool-scoring-3.html?s=0ae07d5b5389e06fd6bcfd05bc2d2cc0/

    See "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers" there on OpenDNS free (I use it) + AD in my security guide.

    APK

    P.S.=>

    "I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

    /. users say different & so do antivirus programs:

    Safe by 57 antivirus programs in 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/