Dirt cheap data plans: Virgin Mobiles vs T-Mobile

[paperwastage]

* t-mobile prepaid HAS voice/txt roaming with at&t, but no data roaming with at&t... and probably at a lower priority too

 

[soccerballtux]

I think most people think it's slow because 100KB IS slow. That's barely fast decent enough to stream music. I know because I had sprint and my music would always skip. I switched to TMo and average 3mbps, which is what I averaged on sprint LTE. On tmobile LTE I see 10-15. Sprints 3g is horrible and their 4G is still only as fast as others 3g.

that's because you aren't getting 100kBps consistently. More than likely in usual sprint fashion you were getting 1xRTT which they display as "3G" in the status bar so people don't know any better.
Also, the cloud sucks at handling anything except 4g right now. Very limited buffering and fallback code, the whole thing has just been shoehorned onto the customer which is why it sucks so badly.

100kBps is more than sufficient-- you only need 35kBps to stream 256kbps MP3s.

 

[Red Storm]

that's because you aren't getting 100kBps consistently. More than likely in usual sprint fashion you were getting 1xRTT which they display as "3G" in the status bar so people don't know any better.
Also, the cloud sucks at handling anything except 4g right now. Very limited buffering and fallback code, the whole thing has just been shoehorned onto the customer which is why it sucks so badly.

100kBps is more than sufficient-- you only need 35kBps to stream 256kbps MP3s.

100Kbps is too slow to do stuff like quick google searches, loading maps, web browsing, etc.

 

[soccerballtux]

You consider 100KB/s on 3G to be fast? D:
That's just terrible. On Straight Talk, I got 5 times that amount.

Umm...If you "routinely"(translation: once in a while) get 100KB/s, but "a lot of time"(translation: mostly) I get 1xRTT why wouldn't anyone have a right to think Sprint has terrible speeds?

IF you can get 100KBps consistently, then I would say Sprint has great speeds. I can tell when I'm on the 3G, all websites load within 5 seconds. I don't really understand why that's slow or not enough for everyone. If I want to watch a video, I just turn on the 4g/wimax.

I was pretty ticked at VM/Sprint lately until I flashed a modified-Sprint PRL. I'm home only (VM) but am getting much better speeds now, mainly because less 1xRTT.
If you only get 1xRTT or get it most of the time, then yes, I could understand your beef with Sprint.

Personally, I want Sprint around as long as possible to prevent ATT (Straight Talk) from shafting us or jacking prices more, so I will continue to support VM (Sprint) so long as I get 100KBps enough of the time.

If they could get 100KBps to everybody in their home network, consistently, they could go very far. All websites, and all navigation, maps use, data texting, etc. could fit inside 100KBps easily. This would give them room to spend the rest of their cash on LTE.

 

[soccerballtux]

100Kbps is too slow to do stuff like quick google searches, loading maps, web browsing, etc.

100KBps
not 100kbps.
HUGE difference.
I think this is where lot of confusion coming from.
100KBps is 1MB every 10 seconds which is a full 3-5 minute song every 30-40 seconds. IE, more than enough when the average website is <0.5MB

If Sprint wouldn't lie that you're on 3G when you're actually on 1xRTT, people wouldn't think their network is shit (getting 1xRTT speeds on "3G" [lie] pollutes the consumer's perception of what "3G" is and makes them think Sprint "3G" sucks).

 

[Red Storm]

100KBps
not 100kbps.
HUGE difference.
I think this is where lot of confusion coming from.
100KBps is 1MB every 10 seconds which is a full 3-5 minute song every 30-40 seconds. IE, more than enough when the average website is <0.5MB

Yes, 0.7Mbps. It is a whole heck of a lot slower than 10Mbps let alone 35Mbps.

 

[soccerballtux]

Yes, 0.7Mbps. It is a whole heck of a lot slower than 10Mbps let alone 35Mbps.

yeah. it is.

But every website still loads in <5 seconds for me which is plenty fast isn't it? So that's why I don't see it as a big deal. Kinda like how nobody NEEDS a quad core computer these days with 8GB RAM. It's nice, but a dual core at 3Ghz and 4GB RAM is more than sufficient for most people's needs.
Like I am googling for something I open about 5 tabs in the background looking for info on something and by the time I switch to the first one I opened, the first 2 have finished loading. Maybe some people want faster, and maybe some people NEED faster (how?) but I don't really get it.

 

[Midwayman]

If Sprint wouldn't lie that you're on 3G when you're actually on 1xRTT, people wouldn't think their network is shit (getting 1xRTT speeds on "3G" [lie] pollutes the consumer's perception of what "3G" is and makes them think Sprint "3G" sucks).

Sprint's network does suck. Doesn't matter what they label it.

 

[Thegonagle]

I think outside of a few fanboys on S4Guru, everybody knows that Sprint sucks pretty much everywhere. "Sprint Network Vision" is just marketing propaganda for deferred upgrades that they've failed to do over the last decade.

T-Mobile also sucks, but only if you're in an area that can't take advantage of their 4G networks, so they suck much less IF you can use them.

The thing is Sprint is still a mile behind T-Mobile, and 5 miles behind the big 2. They're playing catch-up with 3 fast-moving targets in Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile (who have recently woken from a slumber after the failed AT&T merger).

 

[lothar]

100KBps
not 100kbps.
HUGE difference.
I think this is where lot of confusion coming from.
100KBps is 1MB every 10 seconds which is a full 3-5 minute song every 30-40 seconds. IE, more than enough when the average website is <0.5MB

If Sprint wouldn't lie that you're on 3G when you're actually on 1xRTT, people wouldn't think their network is shit (getting 1xRTT speeds on "3G" [lie] pollutes the consumer's perception of what "3G" is and makes them think Sprint "3G" sucks).

100KBps(0.7Mbps) is not even enough to watch a YouTube video without buffering for days on end.

What is the benefit of Sprint purposely doing that then and why would they want to purposely pollute the consumer's perception of what 3G is?

 

[lothar]

yeah. it is.

But every website still loads in <5 seconds for me which is plenty fast isn't it? So that's why I don't see it as a big deal. Kinda like how nobody NEEDS a quad core computer these days with 8GB RAM. It's nice, but a dual core at 3Ghz and 4GB RAM is more than sufficient for most people's needs.
Like I am googling for something I open about 5 tabs in the background looking for info on something and by the time I switch to the first one I opened, the first 2 have finished loading. Maybe some people want faster, and maybe some people NEED faster (how?) but I don't really get it.

Either you don't use your phone much or you must not visit the desktop version of some websites.

Analogy not found.
A quad core computer with 8GB RAM is NOT 2x faster than a dual core with 4GB RAM.
T-Mobile's LTE is much faster than what you consider to be fast(0.7Mbps) on Sprint, and it's actually noticable thanks to low latency benefit as well, unlike your 4GB RAM dual core/8GB RAM quad core computer analogy which nobody can tell a difference unless they benchmark.

If you don't get it, then you simply don't and I'll leave it at that.
Just like when people ask me "what is the benefit in rooting", I typically respond the same way to them.

 

[lothar]

IF you can get 100KBps consistently, then I would say Sprint has great speeds. I can tell when I'm on the 3G, all websites load within 5 seconds. I don't really understand why that's slow or not enough for everyone. If I want to watch a video, I just turn on the 4g/wimax.

I was pretty ticked at VM/Sprint lately until I flashed a modified-Sprint PRL. I'm home only (VM) but am getting much better speeds now, mainly because less 1xRTT.
If you only get 1xRTT or get it most of the time, then yes, I could understand your beef with Sprint.

Personally, I want Sprint around as long as possible to prevent ATT (Straight Talk) from shafting us or jacking prices more, so I will continue to support VM (Sprint) so long as I get 100KBps enough of the time.

If they could get 100KBps to everybody in their home network, consistently, they could go very far. All websites, and all navigation, maps use, data texting, etc. could fit inside 100KBps easily. This would give them room to spend the rest of their cash on LTE.

If that's what you actually care about then it's T-Mobile you should be with, not Sprint.
AT&T's public enemy #1 is T-Mobile.

Sprint has all the cash they need from SoftBank. They don't need my investment.

 

[soccerballtux]

100KBps(0.7Mbps) is not even enough to watch a YouTube video without buffering for days on end.

What is the benefit of Sprint purposely doing that then and why would they want to purposely pollute the consumer's perception of what 3G is?

like I said earlier the 4G Wimax is for youtube. also, I did stream a vid the other day and was confused as to why it worked-- the 100 must be sufficient.
Most users don't stream youtube videos frequently and 100KBps is more than sufficient.

Sprint-- it's to keep people from complaining about LOS
You have to break open some JAR files to patch it in or install a non-stock ROM to get actual 1xRTT vs. 3G reporting on their phones these days. This started back when AT&T became a "4G" company over night.

 

[soccerballtux]

Either you don't use your phone much or you must not visit the desktop version of some websites.

Analogy not found.
A quad core computer with 8GB RAM is NOT 2x faster than a dual core with 4GB RAM.
T-Mobile's LTE is much faster than what you consider to be fast(0.7Mbps) on Sprint, and it's actually noticable thanks to low latency benefit as well, unlike your 4GB RAM dual core/8GB RAM quad core computer analogy which nobody can tell a difference unless they benchmark.

If you don't get it, then you simply don't and I'll leave it at that.
Just like when people ask me "what is the benefit in rooting", I typically respond the same way to them.

Point isn't about 2x or even 20x (which it is), it's about being "enough" for "most tasks"
Tasks:
-navigation
-maps
-MP3 download
- <10MB app download
-email
-gtalk
-facebook
-web browsing

I just loaded 90% of Slashdot's main non mobile site in 4 seconds (CSS and content all rendered in proper location) on the Sprint 3G.
so, besides streaming Youtube all day, what isn't sufficient about 100KBps?
Nobody has presented any evidence to the contrary thus far.

I used to be on Straighttalk AT&T and went to VM and haven't really missed the bandwidth.
I do miss the coverage+bandwidth but I'd rather support someone not AT&T/Verizon.

 

[soccerballtux]

If that's what you actually care about then it's T-Mobile you should be with, not Sprint.
AT&T's public enemy #1 is T-Mobile.

Sprint has all the cash they need from SoftBank. They don't need my investment.

I would switch but I keep reading posts from people here and there on this forum about only getting GPRS on the interstate between cities, and outside urban environments not getting any data at all. It's been like 2 posts in the past year or something but still that sounds scary enough to stay away.
That cities are fine with T-Mobile, but any time you get out into the boondocks you lose all connectivity except voice/text etc. I saw it on my friend's GS3 when we road tripped last year and it fell back to GPRS or something, THAT was slower than even Sprint's 1x and it was unbearable.
With Sprint at least there's always 1x, which is 3x faster than GRPS.

 

[soccerballtux]

I think outside of a few fanboys on S4Guru, everybody knows that Sprint sucks pretty much everywhere. "Sprint Network Vision" is just marketing propaganda for deferred upgrades that they've failed to do over the last decade.

T-Mobile also sucks, but only if you're in an area that can't take advantage of their 4G networks, so they suck much less IF you can use them.

The thing is Sprint is still a mile behind T-Mobile, and 5 miles behind the big 2. They're playing catch-up with 3 fast-moving targets in Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile (who have recently woken from a slumber after the failed AT&T merger).

Sprint actually did get better after the Network Vision if you load a Sprint or Modified Sprint PRL. Their 3G speeds doubled or tripled back around the time they started charging VM users $35 instead of $30 for the lowest tier of service, justifying the increase because of faster speed.
I'll admit, before that upgrade, their 3G was unacceptable.

 

[desura]

Here's something interesting:

https://www.h2owirelessnow.com/pageControl.php?page=planMin

I think it might be possible to use a smartphone on their prepaid plan. Anyone done this?

Like, my usage would basically result in using data and voice for occasional emergencies and business. Otherwise, for entertainment I'd stick with wifi.

 

[Thegonagle]

Here's something interesting:

https://www.h2owirelessnow.com/pageControl.php?page=planMin

I think it might be possible to use a smartphone on their prepaid plan. Anyone done this?

Like, my usage would basically result in using data and voice for occasional emergencies and business. Otherwise, for entertainment I'd stick with wifi.

As long as you have an AT&T/unlocked phone, and don't mind not being able to check the weather, Facebook, etc., when out without wi-fi, I don't see why not. I would turn off/block mobile data on your phone. 10 cents a MB is ouch!

 

[desura]

As long as you have an AT&T/unlocked phone, and don't mind not being able to check the weather, Facebook, etc., when out without wi-fi, I don't see why not. I would turn off/block mobile data on your phone. 10 cents a MB is ouch!

Well, like right now I"m using an ipod touch with a dumbphone from sprint...

which is alright by me except I don't use the dumbphone at all and so neglect calls and stuff.

I'd probably also pair it with like a Skype number for use as my "main" number while the H2O number would be my emergency number.

Also, seeing as how IMO the biggest use for smartphones is navigation...Nokia has a really really good offline maps app. So data isn't used up there.

I wonder how hard would it be to like on-the-spot upgrade to the monthly plan with 1gb or whatever, when you know that you're going to need a lot of data? Like, if going on a trip to visit a new city upgrade the plan for the month while you're travelling.

So this could work out well I think.