back to article Sprint CEO straight out accuses Verizon counterpart of LYING

It has long been a frustrating marketing ploy pushed by mobile phone operators: claiming that they offer better network coverage and speeds than their competitors. But someone has finally gotten fed up with it: the CEO of Sprint, the perennial fourth placed US mobile market. "AS A PUBLIC COMPANY CEO HE HAS TO STOP LYING," …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I haven't used Verizon for a while do to price...

    But comparing T-Mobile vs. Sprint

    I'd say T-Mobile's network is more reliable but has a lower burst speed.

    I'm in an area where there is a lot of a apartments and next to a freeway. The result is poor performance regardless of the provider... but Sprints network appears more susceptible to interference. The data network goes down, and you have to either wait a few minutes, or reset the connection. It also occasionally downgrades to 3G.

    T-Mobile's average speed is lower than Sprints (here), but it never looses the connection completely. I suspect they either have a better system in place to counter higher traffic or the frequencies Sprint uses is more susceptible to interference.

    With regards to who has the "better" network, that's pretty subjective and dependent on location. In my opinion, T-mobile is "superior" because Sprint's support is 'god awful'.

    If you run a business, or are an IT person supporting users on these networks, Sprint should be immediately eliminated as a option.

    FYI: on T-Mobile don't use Apples eSIM, embedded SIM, or whatever they want to call it. Using T-Mobiles SIM will save you a ton of issues when you wipe devices, and attempt to reconnect.

    1. Wade Burchette

      My dad had Sprint once. He called support to get a copy of his bill and instead of "can you confirm your mailing address" he was asked "why?" He didn't have Sprint much longer.

      For the record, I have AT&T and I am not happy with them. However, I am not unhappy enough to switch because I am grandfathered into an excellent rate plan.

  2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    Aren't they all a bit s**t?

    Too many subscribers chasing too little back haul while the network tries to re-coup the actual cost of your "free" mobile phone?

  3. sweh

    AT&T offer free HBO; T-mobile offer free Netflix; it's not surprising Verizon Wireless also offer these promotions just for "feature parity" (especially since Verizon FIOS regularly has free HBO bonuses; there's probably existing commercial agreements between Verizon and HBO).

    It's interesting to note that Sprint's current TV adverts are "within 1% of Verizon in terms of reliability", which doesn't address the coverage issue; yes the service may be as reliable... in the areas where coverage is available, but Verizon have the better coverage. Of course, for 70% of the US population that extra coverage doesn't make a difference. (See https://www.komando.com/happening-now/388850/the-truth-about-these-cellphone-ads for a breakdown).

    It's also interesting that Sprint position themselves as the cheapo option ("would you pay twice as much for 1% more"); given how many people pay for Apple's premium branding, I wonder if they've thought this through :-)

    Me, I still have an area on my daily commute (New Jersey heading to New York) where there's no signal. Yay :-(

    1. James O'Shea

      Sprint around here (south Florida) had noticeably worse performance. The best I could ever get out of Sprint was 4-6 Mb/s. Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile all can manage in excess of 20 Mb/s. Sprint would also drop calls and have bad connections on a regular basis. And they had Verizon-level support. So, despite the fact that Verizon could get in excess of 50 Mb/s in spots and regularly got over 25, and had good call quality, I've dumped Verizon in favor of T-Mob and AT&T. They're slower and have poorer call quality, but have far superior customer service. Which, given that AT&T in particular has problems with their customer service, should say just how abysmal Sprint and Verizon are.

  4. Stevie

    Bah!

    T Mobile had inconvenient holes in its network in the 1990s so we switched to AT&T.

    Who have never managed to offer us anything they were giving to new customers despite our faithful custom ever since (and a half decade before when it came to landline long-distance).

    Actually, I tell a lie: twice we have found very helpful people that have unravelled potentially expensive uckfups on our part (roaming in Canada has some loopholes in the fine print it is crucial to read carefully).

    We only stay because the grandfathered family plan is advantageous to us despite our no longer having a contract, and the occassionally great customer service (varies by support personnel). Well, that and the magically low costs to switch suddenly double when we try out Verizon's "special promotions" when we need a laugh.

  5. whoseyourdaddy

    In the end, Verizon has a ton of 800mhz spectrum

    from their Airtouch/AMPS days.

    Sprint used to be called Sprint PCS.

    PCS indicates the bulk of their spectrum licenses are at 1.8gHz, which has coverage disadvantages compared to 800mHz that Verizon, US Cellular, and AT&T use.

    It's high school physics, y'all.

    In the end, I gladly pay Verizon for two reasons: my iPhone always has Qualcomm inside and I have to be standing in an elevator in a fringe area to drop LTE coverage.

    And, I am on the border of an AT&T dead zone, which I blame San Jose real estate costs on.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like