SoftBank to Pay $20 Billion For 70% of U.S. Carrier Sprint

Status
Not open for further replies.

sykozis

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2008
1,759
5
19,865
37
[citation][nom]RADIO_ACTIVE[/nom]I guess the unlimited data marketing didn't work out for Sprint[/citation]
While the data isn't limited....the coverage area very much is.... They currently have no 4G network....yet they actively market their "4G" smartphones, placing emphasis on the "4G" capability of said phones. Sprint's 3G network has less coverage than AT&T's 4G network, which is pathetic at this point. Their phone selection sucks compared to their competitors (including pre-paid cellular services)... They try to charge customers to replace phones that are covered by a manufacturer's warranty... There's really very little Sprint actually does right....
 

jacobdrj

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2005
1,475
0
19,310
5
They DO have unlimited data. Where 4G is available, it is fine. I just wish their phone selection was better: Their dumb-phone selection is worse than it was a year ago. Their smart-phones REQUIRE a dataplan. So my wife is stuck with an old dumphone for now.

Eventually, I'll get her onto MetroPCS (a T-Mobile subsidiary) though, or Virgin (a Sprint subsidiary). Their service is good in our area, and their prices are virtually unbeatable.

I can't wait to see how MetroPCS' merger with T-Moble will do to Metro's phone selection...
 

bgrt

Distinguished
Dec 25, 2011
153
0
18,710
7
I think most consumer groups agree that this will give AT&T and VZW some badly needed competition. Still, I prefer TMo for their prices and the fact that their phones are portable to any country in the world.
 

tobalaz

Honorable
Jun 26, 2012
276
0
10,780
0
I have Sprint.
I live in a rural area in Ohio.
I have great 3g all around me.

I went to a Browns game (I know, punishment right?) in Cleveland with 2 cousins (one used AT&T, the other Verizon), where Verizon sponsored the event and AT&T sponsored the stadium, and I'm the only one who got 4g or any signal for that matter.

But...

I'm thrilled that Sprint is getting bought out, its new money and I hope this contributes to a big boost in the number of 4g towers, but hey, I've currently got an Evo 4g, so its not like my phone runs fast enough to take advantage of a good data connection anyways.
 

SirGCal

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
310
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]While the data isn't limited....the coverage area very much is.... They currently have no 4G network....yet they actively market their "4G" smartphones, placing emphasis on the "4G" capability of said phones. Sprint's 3G network has less coverage than AT&T's 4G network, which is pathetic at this point. Their phone selection sucks compared to their competitors (including pre-paid cellular services)... They try to charge customers to replace phones that are covered by a manufacturer's warranty... There's really very little Sprint actually does right....[/citation]

Wow, that's simply untrue. They DO have a 4G network. I have 4G almost everywhere I go accept very rural areas. I was on AT&T and around here, their network sucked. But with everything, it is very dependent on where you are to which carrier is best. I always have full bars and internet where on AT&T, even at home I had 1 or no bars and couldn't even get 3G internet speeds. And I live just outside a major metro city less then half a mile from one of the countries most major highways. I've also traveled all over the south (from California to Florida and up to Ohio) and so far have not had a dead spot. Some places don't have 4G but at least on the highways, it's been good. And I couldn't be happier with Sprint. Until now. If they take away unlimited everything, I'll just drop smart-phones all together. I'm not paying for tiered data through anyone. Simple as that.
 

ikyung

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
566
0
19,010
6
If SoftBank is confident enough to dump 1/3rd of their capitalization into Sprint, then they probably have something big planned for the U.S. market. I wonder how they are going to compete against Verizon and AT&T because it will probably take another 10 billion to catch up on coverage area.

Softbank is a huge carrier in Japan, but Japan is small and can easily be fully covered with 4G networks, but U.S. is a whole different ballpark.
 

ironmb

Distinguished
Mar 11, 2011
86
0
18,630
0
First off, SoftBank is one the carriers here in Japan. They have the worst service out of all companies out here. Docomo, and AU far out perform SoftBank.. so the fact that i see Softbank getting into Sprint just makes me laugh. When bad companies take over, they usually turn out bad.
 

siman0

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2011
89
0
18,630
0
SoftBank does suck in Japan... and a extremely high price for nothing. Sprint is good here in the US but they are falling behind now. Their phones have been falling behind and they messed up on the 4g deployment with WiMAX. Given though WiMAX performs better than LTE, LTE can be easily upgraded in insisting towers compared to WiMAX and LTE has a longer rage due to less bit errors.
 

gggplaya

Distinguished
[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]While the data isn't limited....the coverage area very much is.... They currently have no 4G network....yet they actively market their "4G" smartphones, placing emphasis on the "4G" capability of said phones. Sprint's 3G network has less coverage than AT&T's 4G network, which is pathetic at this point. Their phone selection sucks compared to their competitors (including pre-paid cellular services)... They try to charge customers to replace phones that are covered by a manufacturer's warranty... There's really very little Sprint actually does right....[/citation]

Actually you are very very very wrong. Sprint has had actual 4G coverage for a very long time, and is more widespread than Verizon's and ATT. If you look closely at verizon's ads you'll see that it says it has the nations largest "4G LTE" coverage. Take note of the LTE coverage because if you drop those three letters, sprint has the largest TRUE 4G coverage using WiMAX.

ATT's 4G coverage isn't actually 4G, it's HSPA+ 3G which they simply call 4G as there is no standard. Using that protocol, their phones will say 4G even though they are working at 3G speeds, at least that's the way it is in my area. Speeds of 100-400kbps and the phone says 4G? Att is launching it's 4G LTE coverage same as sprint, except sprint has more leverage in that it can convert it's 4G WiMax systems to run 4GLTE which will make for faster set up time than ATT. Verizon is ahead in LTE coverage, but sprint will catch up very quickly. Wimax coverage is still very good in all major U.S. cities.

Unfortunately there is no true map of actual 4G coverage because there is no standard. It would be nice to have a map of data coverage of area's >1Mbps vs which standard they use. A name is just a name, calling it 4G because you use a 4G capable protocol doesn't mean you'll have good speed, especially if the back-haul doesn't have a high speed data connection to the cell towers in your area. It's like having Z rated high speed tires in a car with a crappy 3cylinder engine. One is useless and just for show without the other. That's called good advertising.
 

LukeCWM

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
146
0
18,680
0
I have Sprint with 4G on my Galaxy S2. I drive all over the Twin Cities streaming audio, and if there are places without 4G coverage, they are few enough that my audio never hiccups. The songs buffer quickly, and the next song is automatically buffered with no delay.

I regularly get 10 Mbps down and 2 Mbps up. That is better than most people's home internet (although probably not most Tom's Hardware regulars). People who are saying Sprint doesn't have sufficient coverage or sufficient speed are misinformed. Of course, coverage will very from city to city, but I have no reason to believe that Minneapolis/St. Paul has better coverage than other metropolitan areas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS