• T-Mobile to Give Users Free Data Toward Pokemon Go for a Full Year. Part of T-mobile Tuesdays
    80 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Dr.C;50713273]It's shitty if you leave the populated urban and suburban areas. I've only ever had bad coverage in South Lake Tahoe(the only place I could get a 4G signal there was literally at the top of the mountain I was skiing on) but apparently it's also because South Lake Tahoe is so technologically behind that Blockbuster still exists there[/QUOTE] This isn't even true anymore, T-Mobile has acquired a ton of band 12 700MHz LTE spectrum and deployed it rapidly. The coverage is a ton better than before, it's night and day difference here. They don't have the spectrum everywhere but it's in a [i]lot[/i] of places now. The key is you need to actually use a device that supports band 12 LTE in an area that has it, otherwise you're only using the usual mid-band spectrum they have which sucks at building penetration. I'm a little uncomfortable with this against net neutrality, though. Binge On and Music Freedom were a little different because any provider can apply for free to be in those programs, but this is a one-off whitelisting. I also think this is a little bit of marketing though because Pokemon Go doesn't really use a lot of data anyway.
besides the fact that this utopian idea of net neutrality has never existed and will never exist
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;50715452]The real reason was that everyone dropped normal calls and text messages and just used skype. Then they wanted to do some taxing bullshit and net neutrality came in.[/QUOTE] That's a additional reason as to why, yes.
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;50715452]The real reason was that everyone dropped normal calls and text messages and just used skype. Then they wanted to do some taxing bullshit and net neutrality came in.[/QUOTE] I mean SMS & MMS are pretty awful technologies on their own, I'm actually pretty annoyed the US still uses them and won't just widely deploy RCS messaging. I was under the impression foreign carriers started offering unlimited data with limited SMS/MMS (before smartphones started really taking off) and that prompted the move to stuff like Whatsapp - but I'll be honest and say I'm not familiar with it and haven't looked into it much. Speaking of RCS, it does make me wonder: RCS is deployed how that would impact net neutrality? Since all RCS messages are data-based? How does that affect other messaging platforms if carriers whitelist RCS messages against data usage? I feel like we'd end up in a situation like this where we're whitelisting a single game's data from data limits...
[QUOTE=darth-veger;50715411] Edit: I checked and countries as Sweden and Finland have the same capped data packages as us[/QUOTE] [URL]https://kauppa.saunalahti.fi/#!/matkapuhelinliittymat[/URL] Oh what's that? Unlimited 50Mbps 4G for 26,90€ a month, on the carrier with the best coverage in Finland? Nice "checking". I'm still on the 3G plan, with grandfathered pricing, so my plan is even less than that. Actually, none of those plans have data caps. I wouldn't be surprised if you fucked up regarding Sweden, either.
[QUOTE=FFStudios;50715415]they do. they focus more on speeds and consistency of their service than they do their service area. quite frankly I'm 100% okay with this business model. if you don't have T-Mobile in your area, go and join another provider. it is the same exact thing with residential cable - if you don't have Verizon, you probably have Comcast or Time Warner. that doesn't mean the other company is shittier, it means you don't live in an area they support. [editline]15th July 2016[/editline] also the people who cry "infringement of net neutrality" when it comes to T-Mobile USA are fucking delusional. an optional program to lower the quality of streaming video in order save you data is not an infringement of net neutrality god fucking damnit. it is totally different than throttling speeds, which you'd get on Verizon or almost any other network[/QUOTE] It absolutely is an infringement of net neutrality. Net neutrality is not just throttling. Why don't you look up what something means before talking about it?
[QUOTE=Cassel;50713296][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T39RxxyLLBs[/media][/QUOTE] Holy shit, this man is god-tier.
i don't care if this infringes net neutrality it's for the better if they're taking something away because 't mobile said so' then maybe that's more of an issue but seriously lol
[QUOTE=nikomo;50715497][URL]https://kauppa.saunalahti.fi/#!/matkapuhelinliittymat[/URL] Oh what's that? Unlimited 50Mbps 4G for 26,90€ a month, on the carrier with the best coverage in Finland? Nice "checking". I'm still on the 3G plan, with grandfathered pricing, so my plan is even less than that. Actually, none of those plans have data caps. I wouldn't be surprised if you fucked up regarding Sweden, either.[/QUOTE] Lol, did someone stole your lunch money or something? Why the hate
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y4rAknuT-w[/media] friendly reminder that the CEO is a jackass
[QUOTE=darth-veger;50715675]Lol, did someone stole your lunch money or something? Why the hate[/QUOTE] Because you're making false claims with no basis, [I]whilst claiming you fact-checked yourself.[/I]
This doesn't change the fact that T-Mobile is an awful company with horrible practices and customer treatment.
[QUOTE=nikomo;50715759]Because you're making false claims with no basis, [I]whilst claiming you fact-checked yourself.[/I][/QUOTE] Doesn't change the [U]fact[/U] that you behave like an massive ass because someone was wrong on the internet
[QUOTE=false prophet;50715861]This doesn't change the fact that T-Mobile is an awful company with horrible practices and customer treatment.[/QUOTE] This doesn't change the fact that this is an anecdote.
[QUOTE=343N;50714039]Reddit are bitching about how apparently this goes against net neutrality or something, it doesn't, doesn't it? I mean it doesn't prioritise PG, it just nulls the bandwidth it uses, right?[/QUOTE] It doesn't. They're not charging you extra for it, they're not throttling other speeds in lieu of PokeGo, they're just saying they WON'T count PokeGo data used as a gimmie. Violating Net Neutrality would be "Pay $5 more and get unlimited data for pokego only" or "If you don't pay $10/mo extra we'll throttle netflix and youtube"
[QUOTE=sgman91;50713146]There's a reason they have all these extra benefits. The coverage is terrible.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage-map.html[/url] Oh yeah wow thats horrible! /s
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;50716272][url]http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage-map.html[/url] Oh yeah wow thats horrible! /s[/QUOTE] Actually that is objectively terrible. For two reasons 1) Obviously this map is showing all coverage LUMPED TOGETHER since it just says "coverage" which means there's nothing to tell us what is covered by voice only and what's got data. 2) The lack of a true legend that shows what KIND of coverage is available in what area shows that T-Mobile isn't necessarily open/trustworthy about their available services. Here's what real coverage maps look like: [url]https://www.att.com/maps/wireless-coverage.html[/url] [url]https://coverage.sprint.com/IMPACT.jsp?INTNAV=LeftNav:More:CoverageMap[/url] Notice how they have the option to see different service coverages? They don't lump it all together. Also compare the coverages available on these maps to T-Mobile's. T-Mobile lacks coverage in a lot of suburban and 'intermediate' areas that Sprint and AT&T cover.
[QUOTE=darth-veger;50715883]Doesn't change the [U]fact[/U] that you behave like an massive ass because someone was wrong on the internet[/QUOTE] I'm an ass for clarifying that you're speaking out of yours? If you don't want to be caught lying, don't lie.
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;50716272][url]http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage-map.html[/url] Oh yeah wow thats horrible! /s[/QUOTE] Tell that to my friend who can't get service all over the place.
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;50716272][url]http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage-map.html[/url] Oh yeah wow thats horrible! /s[/QUOTE] [t]http://maps.t-mobile.com/pcc/images/partnercoverage-map.png[/t] Purple is T-Mobile coverage, and light purple is "partner" networks. As someone that lives in the midwest, that is objectively bad. A lot of areas I spend time in are only non-LTE partner service, and some are not in network at all. Its only really "good" around I-90/I-29 and Minnesota. Even if you say who gives a shit about the Midwest, apparently Verizon and AT&T give a lot of fucks as they both have LTE out here even in literal fuck nowhere. Its getting to the point that not having LTE in your town of 300 is weird. If I had to dump Verizon, I will easily pick AT&T over T-Mobile every time.
You're also comparing a company that only had mid-band spectrum until basically the end of 2014 to companies who have hoarded gobs of low-band spectrum for two decades. Verizon and AT&T needed half the towers to build out in the mid-west and still provide good building penetration. T-Mobile had no network there before (because it was not financially viable), they're going to have to get some equipment out there before it's even a viable comparison, and even then they're unlikely to build out a 5+5 700Mhz network with no 2100/1700 or 1900 overlay anyway. Personally I don't hold that against them, it just makes sense. Don't get me wrong, it sucks for people who want to switch to T-Mobile there, but it's not like they are purposefully ignoring those areas despite having the ability to build out there. The only reason they were able to turn their network into LTE so quickly is that they had a pretty decently dense EDGE network on 1900Mhz and were able to refram that spectrum to 1900 band 2 LTE. Everything beyond that requires new equipment.
[QUOTE=false prophet;50715861]This doesn't change the fact that T-Mobile is an awful company with horrible practices and customer treatment.[/QUOTE] ??? I've had T-Mobile for 2 years now and I've had 0 issues. Miles better than my experience with sprint or Verizon.
My number one complaint is T-Mobile will cancel your service out right for roaming on AT&T too much. Too much is ~33mb iirc. I had service with them since 2008 and then one day I received a text message saying that my phone service has been canceled. Called in to find out why and I was told 30 something megabytes of data is too much... wtf. No warning or anything. Luckily the canceled a day before my billing cycle was due so I had some time to switch to a shittier provider. They also have this habit of letting people into your account without verifying anything. That is my number 2 complaint.
[QUOTE=false prophet;50724631]My number one complaint is T-Mobile will cancel your service out right for roaming on AT&T too much. Too much is ~33mb iirc. I had service with them since 2008 and then one day I received a text message saying that my phone service has been canceled. Called in to find out why and I was told 30 something megabytes of data is too much... wtf. No warning or anything. Luckily the canceled a day before my billing cycle was due so I had some time to switch to a shittier provider. They also have this habit of letting people into your account without verifying anything. That is my number 2 complaint.[/QUOTE] T-Mobile offers either 50MB or 200MB of roaming data on its old Simple Choice and current Simple Choice plans respectively, so it must've been more than that. They also have limits on how long you're allowed to roam - a few months I think - because at some point it costs them more for you to use someone else's service than they make from you on theirs... The roaming department is also responsible for catching people bypassing tethering limits & will terminate them too. I can't speak to the last point really but no one should be able to access your account in-store without some form of ID and customer care will verify with last four of SSN. Sounds like shitty reps. I doubt this problem is unique to T-Mobile though.
yeah haha fuck net neutrality I wanna play pokemon haha
[QUOTE=false prophet;50715861]This doesn't change the fact that T-Mobile is an awful company with horrible practices and customer treatment.[/QUOTE] What horrible practices? I've got nothing but good customer support from them, one place where some asshole workers are at doesn't mean they're all bad.
Just got signed up on a family plan with my roommates today, told them about this yesterday and they immediately wanted to do it, lol.
[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;50724749]yeah haha fuck net neutrality I wanna play pokemon haha[/QUOTE] ..they're not charging or throttling anything to provide this. whatever though
[QUOTE=Banana Lord.;50719149]You're also comparing a company that only had mid-band spectrum until basically the end of 2014 to companies who have hoarded gobs of low-band spectrum for two decades. Verizon and AT&T needed half the towers to build out in the mid-west and still provide good building penetration. T-Mobile had no network there before (because it was not financially viable), they're going to have to get some equipment out there before it's even a viable comparison, and even then they're unlikely to build out a 5+5 700Mhz network with no 2100/1700 or 1900 overlay anyway. Personally I don't hold that against them, it just makes sense. Don't get me wrong, it sucks for people who want to switch to T-Mobile there, but it's not like they are purposefully ignoring those areas despite having the ability to build out there. The only reason they were able to turn their network into LTE so quickly is that they had a pretty decently dense EDGE network on 1900Mhz and were able to refram that spectrum to 1900 band 2 LTE. Everything beyond that requires new equipment.[/QUOTE] If it's not financially viable, why did AT&T and Verizon do it? I'll tell you why, it IS financially viable. If you live in Montana and you need a cell phone, what company are you going to choose? T-Mobile, who only covers your state through non-LTE partner towers, or AT&T/Verizon who have strong company owned network coverage in both voice and 4g/LTE data? Same goes for Same goes for the vast majority of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Nebraska, North & South Dakota, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and huge portions of Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, California, and Iowa. That's a LOT of states to have shitty coverage everywhere except the biggest cities. That's a LOT of customers who now only have two choices for carrier instead of three. [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Banana Lord.;50724659]T-Mobile offers either 50MB or 200MB of roaming data on its old Simple Choice and current Simple Choice plans respectively, so it must've been more than that. They also have limits on how long you're allowed to roam - a few months I think - because at some point it costs them more for you to use someone else's service than they make from you on theirs... The roaming department is also responsible for catching people bypassing tethering limits & will terminate them too. I can't speak to the last point really but no one should be able to access your account in-store without some form of ID and customer care will verify with last four of SSN. Sounds like shitty reps. I doubt this problem is unique to T-Mobile though.[/QUOTE] Do you know how much roaming data I get on AT&T? However the hell much I want.
[QUOTE=butre;50713999]this kinda shits all over net neutrality though[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=darth-veger;50715231]I dunno but i see this as plain net neutrality infringement. T Mobile probably knows this so they went for it anyway and are perhaps hoping for a backlash so they can educate the common people that net neutrality is very bad and that it should not be law because look at us, just trying to bring pokemangs to everyone and we get called out of it because of this silly net neutrality thing. Yeah, not cool with this[/QUOTE] you... do know what... net neutrality is... right? Let's at least double check [t]http://i.imgur.com/QVNbCIU.png[/t] Ok so, yeah, cool, technically it goes under the definition of it, but is it really breaking any actual rules or harming anyone at all? Sure, they're favoring a single app but it's clearly not out of malicious intent or to do anything wrong I'd say they're being harmful if they were to favor one company over the other, and lets say, if you used google for search instead of bing you would get less data usage, or if you used amazon over netflix for videos and they did it to try and undermine netflix, but this isn't the case so what really is the problem? They aren't doing it to undermine another company stealthfuly, or trying to create bias towards another. It seems like a PR stunt if anything, and it's working apparently.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.