Discuss EVDO PC Cards, ExpressCards, EVDO USB, PDAs, Phones, Coverage and Mobile Broadband Cards.
Discuss Verizon and Sprint Coverage. CradlePoint CTR500, MBR1000, PHS300 & Kyocera KR2 & LinkSys WRT54G3G-ST / WRT54G3GV2 Forums!
|
EVDOforums.com
Discussion forum for EVDO users
|
Our sites Include:
EVDO Info :: EVDO Forums :: EVDO Maps :: EVDO Blog :: 3Gstore.com
To purchase your EVDO Card / Antenna / Amplifier / Router from the EVDO Experts, just contact us!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dja2k
EVDO Newbie
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 2
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:31 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Sprint or Verizon for zip 78045 even though EVDO is not currently available? I am guessing with verizon, apps like this http://smartphone.mobiletopsoft.com/getproduct.php?pname=Pocket+XM+Radio%3ASatellite+Radio+1.6 would be considered misuse of unlimited data plans right? I can't seem to find any info on sprint in my area now that the merger with nextel went through, the site keeps saying I am not in the coverage. Anyways, what do you think is better for my zip 78045 and compared to the $79.99 ulimited data and 450 minute voice plan that verizon has, do you know what offer sprint has? I would probably buy the XV-6700 from verizon or the PPC-6700 from sprint. Any opinions are gladly appriciated.
dja2k |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like you are in Laredo, TX. May be a while before you get EVDO from either as there are quite a few larger markets that have no EVDO yet. Sprint has made statements of 100% of network to have EVDO by 2007, but that is something mentioned in passing, not an official announcement.
The pocket XM would likely be OK on Sprint but Verizon seems to only allow streaming services that they offer themselves. You might get away with on Verizon but others are getting cancellation notices for downloading/streaming music on Verizon.
As far as EVDO rates, Sprint and Verizon are the same when it comes to laptop cards. For EVDO phones, Sprint costs less.
Update: Laredo is an Alamosa market, an affiliate of Sprint. Sprint is buying out Alamosa that I think goes into effect this month. Laredo may get EVDO sometime sooner than later after the buyout.
http://alamosapcs.com/footprint_map_2.html
South Carolina and New Mexico also have no Sprint EVDO. Looks like Alamosa covers SC and NM so they may get EVDO sooner than later from Sprint as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Updated post #1 with a summary of EVDO for newbies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
criggs
EVDO Fledgling
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| xenophon wrote: | Sprint
Download Performance
Entries: 120
Average: 664Kbps
Median: 606Kbps
Peak: 1871Kbps
>1Mbps: 15% of tests
>600Kbps: 51%
<400Kbps: 21%
Upld Avg: 91Kbps
Verizon
Download Performance
Entries: 126
Average: 589Kbps
Median: 560Kbps
Peak: 1583Kbps
>1Mbps: 6%
>600Kbps: 47%
<400Kbps: 22%
Upld Avg: 98Kbps
If you find any discrepancies or conflicting sources, please post and I'll update the first post. |
Not a discrepancy exactly, but I suggest that you might want to add another parameter to the above.
Both Sprint and Verizon give the same specs for their EVDO service. That spec consists of a statement to the effect that, when working properly, EVDO will give the user speeds between 400k and 700k. So, when posting the results of the current average of tests for the two services, it might be useful to also include the average RANGE of those numbers.
I took a look at the archive on dslreports.com or broadbandreports.com (the two domains appear to be the same). At the time I did the study a few days ago there were around two hundred test results posted (though, oddly enough, the list of results erroneously CLAIMED the number to be over 400; odd).
My analysis involved two steps. First I totaled up the results and divided the result by the number of results. Verizon's average at that time was 587k and Sprint's average was 592k. Obviously that average speed is well within the claimed spec of both services.
Unfortunately the story doesn't end there.
I then computed the average amount by which the results VARIED from the average. That sentence may be a little confusing, so let me try to be very clear. I added the total deviation from the average in both cases. Here's an example of how it would work. Say the first result listed was 600k for Verizon and the second result was 450k. Since Verizon's average was 587k, the deviation from the average with the first result was 13k and the deviation from the average with the second result was 137k. The total deviation for those first two results therefore is 150k. Then comes another result of 730, which means a deviation total for that result of 147k from the 587k average. I add 147k to the deviation total accumulated so far of 150k for a new deviation total of 297k. And so forth and so on. Eventually I have the accumulated total of deviation for the entire 200-odd test result sample. I then divide that deviation total by the number of test results, in this case around two hundred, and get the deviation results.
In the case of Verizon, the average deviation from the 587k average was +/- 318k. In the case of Sprint, the average deviation from their 592k average was +/- 337k.
In other words, the average range was NOT 400k to 700k, as both services claim. Rather Verizon's average range was 269k to 905k, while Sprint's average range was 255k to 929k.
In other words, anyone experiencing speeds within this range with their EVDO service is, in fact, according to this particular speed test archive, GETTING TOTALLY NORMAL RESULTS, results, in a nutshell, that DO NOT INDICATE THERE IS ANYTHING ABNORMAL OR MALFUNCTIONING in their network.
On the contrary, the only item which is malfunctioning, if you are getting speeds somewhere between 270k and 400k, is the veracity level of those companies offering you this admittedly intriguing service. If you ask me, what needs to happen is that Verizon and Sprint need to publish more realistic specs, and acknowledge the TRUE average performance for this service, rather than some perfect-world idealized dream of EVDO service. EVDO is an interesting and occasionally useful service, which many could find to be of great help. But it doesn't help when the providers of such services indulge in fantasy land that unncessarily damages the credibility and marketing viability of their product.
Cheers,
Charles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
horsessmellfunny
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 356
Location: Castle Rock, CO
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Statistics major I presume? Very good work though. I am thoroughly impressed! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Charles, did you include all entries? I have not based on the methodology posted in post 1. There are some people who test with 1xRTT only devices and will get below 130Kbps. I only compiled entries over 130K and also removed entries from same zipcode in same timeframe to factor out those who test multiple times in a row. Even if a person has an EVDO card, they could be in a 1xRTT area so I removed those. You can argue both ways if those should be included or not but given that I did that for both carriers, the comparison is still generally apples/apples.
I'm also convinced that both carriers are averaging in the marketed range of 400K-700Kbps but that a certain % of people are not getting that. For those deep in a building or distant from a tower, it is completely acceptable that under 400K will happen in some cases. Personally, I get over 1Mbps more than 70% of time so to me, EVDO exceeds my expectations by a long shot. I do see your point about the deviation between tests results and could start tracking those.
But it does look like Verizon has more 1Mbps+ entries in the last couple of weeks than in a long time. In fact, I've never seen that many before since logging this since Nov. I'll recompile with the methodology I've been using when I get a chance.
Thanks for the input. I was hoping no one would accept the results I posted blindly and provide a different perspective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
criggs
EVDO Fledgling
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| xenophon wrote: | | Charles, did you include all entries? I have not based on the methodology posted in post 1. There are some people who test with 1xRTT only devices and will get below 130Kbps. I only compiled entries over 130K and also removed entries from same zipcode in same timeframe to factor out those who test multiple times in a row. Even if a person has an EVDO card, they could be in a 1xRTT area so I removed those. |
You make an excellent point. It takes me about 4 hours per provider to compile this statistic. Tough to find that kind of time, I'll admit, so I may not be able to recompile only those results above 130k and only 1 result per zip code within each timeframe (how have you defined time frame? within five minutes? within one hour? within one day? within one week? within one month?). But you're right that that would perhaps also be useful.
However this brings up a more basic problem I have with EVDO AS IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY SPRINT AND VERIZON. And that is this dropdown "feature". I hate it. I expect broadband, and I always proceed on the assumption that the connection will be broadband. If I am not receiving broadband I usually know right away, feel frustrated right away, and disconnect and reconnect right away, so the dropdown does me absolutely NO GOOD AT ALL, and I just as soon would get rid of it.
So that's exactly what I did. I called Verizon technical support, and requested that my 1XRTT service be disabled. The technician was helpful and knowledgeable, dictated an AT string to my modem which he said would disable the dropdown "feature" and I've had no problems with dropdowns since. My only problem is that I'm not getting the speeds I was promised. Instead of 400 to 700, my average speeds have been very consistently 300 to 370, that is to say that my speeds have been consistently below spec, which is unacceptable in my opinion, given the promise that was made when I signed my one-year contract.
There is a silver lining here however. After thorough investigation of my area by Verizon technical support, they informed me, somewhat shamefacedly, that they would not be able to correct the problem in my area in the near future (10022). So I called up Verizon Customer Service, gave them all the details, including the number of the trouble ticket Verizon had pursued on my behalf for some three weeks, and suggested that I was entitled to some sort of credit on my monthly bill, given the fact that I was consistently not receiving speeds up to the spec promised by Verizon. I was reasonably satisfied when, after being placed on hold for about five minutes, presumably while they checked the accuracy of my statements with their technical support team, they got back on the line, and informed me that under the circumstances they felt it was reasonable to knock $30 off my monthly fee of $80, for a revised monthly total of $50.
In other words, Verizon, to their credit, is NOT pretending that speeds below 400k are within spec. My problem with them remains, however, that they are not telling their customers up front, when they sign up, that the spec is inaccurate and needs to be corrected. Nor are they volunteering any follow-up with new customers to determine whether or not they're getting what they were promised and paying for. They're letting the matter slide unless the customer proactively contacts them about the problem. That strikes me as a bit unethical.
| Quote: | | I'm also convinced that both carriers are averaging in the marketed range of 400K-700Kbps but that a certain % of people are not getting that. For those deep in a building or distant from a tower, it is completely acceptable that under 400K will happen in some cases. |
Here I guess we must just respectfully agree to disagree. People connect from within buildings all the time, whether they're at home or at work or at a friend's house or wherever. If there is a problem connecting to the service under those circumstances then that problem should honestly be factored in when computing the average speed spec put out by marketing. Beyond that, I would say that ANY AVERAGE SPEED UNDER 400K IS AUTOMATICALLY UNACCEPTABLE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES as long as the provider has not honestly told the potential subscriber up front that he or she can expect average speeds as low as 269, in the case of Verizon, or 255, in the case of Sprint. (Yes, I understand that stripping away the <130k results and so on could yield a higher average floor. But as long as that floor remains below 400k Sprint and Verizon are on shaky ethical ground.)
| Quote: | | I do see your point about the deviation between tests results and could start tracking those. |
Fantastic! I'd be really curious to see what the average floor is after stripping the results according to your criteria of >130k and only one test result per zip code within a given timeframe. If the average floor, under those conditions, EXCEEDS 400k, then I think one could legitimately claim that Verizon and Sprint are being completely honest, and the spec is entirely above-board. We will see!
| Quote: | | But it does look like Verizon has more 1Mbps+ entries in the last couple of weeks than in a long time. In fact, I've never seen that many before since logging this since Nov. |
I wonder whether it's barely possible that my insistence that they spec my zip code, and also their decision to give me a credit, has played any role in the improvement you've recently observed. Naah, couldn't be. One subscriber out of how many (140 million?) making that much of a difference? Couldn't be! But it's nice to daydream...
| Quote: | | I'll recompile with the methodology I've been using when I get a chance. |
and hopefully you will also be able to add my average floor/ceiling spec to your next report. I would definitely look forward to that!
| Quote: | | Thanks for the input. |
You're most welcome.
Cheers,
Charles[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the latest update. Post #1 was updated with the following... See post 1 for methodology.
Performance measurements are in bits, not bytes.
1000Kbits/sec = ~125KBytes/sec
600Kbits/sec = ~75KBytes/sec
As of March 20, 2006
Sprint
Download Performance
Entries: 144
Average: 645Kbps
Median: 553Kbps
Peak: 2316Kbps
>1Mbps: 15% of tests
>600Kbps: 44%
<400Kbps: 30%
Upld Avg: 85Kbps
Verizon
Download Performance
Entries: 116
Average: 648Kbps
Median: 577Kbps
Peak: 1834Kbps
>1Mbps: 14% of tests
>600Kbps: 45%
<400Kbps: 23%
Upld Avg: 98Kbps
I'll put some comparisons to previous results when I get a chance. Verizon has really picked up. More are able to get >1Mbps and >600Kbps or perhaps more are just now recording it into the archive.
Another variable this doesn't factor is if a person is using compression or not. When I had a Verizon card a while back, I noticed that Verizon's compression on vs. off varied much more than if Sprint's compression is turned on or off - at least on this test site method.
The bottom line is that Verizon's performance appears more comparable to Sprint's now but for the reverse reasons expected. I would have expected Sprint's numbers to drop as # of users increased, which it did a little, but Verizon's numbers came up too. Note also that for the first time Sprint has more test entries than Verizon.
Sprint is getting a lot more users <400Kbps. I wonder if it is due to the HA Address thing noted in the Sprint ##DATA Tuning thread. It would be interesting if those users changed the HA Address, if it would make a difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
criggs
EVDO Fledgling
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| xenophon wrote: | | Another variable this doesn't factor is if a person is using compression or not. When I had a Verizon card a while back, I noticed that Verizon's compression on vs. off varied much more than if Sprint's compression is turned on or off - at least on this test site method. |
There's an excellent reason for this. The Sprint EVDO network ALWAYS has compression turned on, whether your onboard compression is turned on or not. Certain sites, e.g. Google, the Toast.Net speed test site, the Verizon speed test site, etc. etc., don't load properly at all due to this problem. When I did my 14-day free trial with Sprint a month or so ago, I started to notice that a lot of the graphics looked rather grainy and low-quality. I suspected that compression was turned on, but I couldn't for the life of me figure out where I had it turned on, since I had carefully turned it off on my card, my computer, my faucet, my car, etc. etc. I called up Sprint. After going around the mulberry bush on this issue for about a week they finally called me back with the truth, -- that their network ALWAYS had compression turned on. They have a workaround however which is somewhat clunky. After you load a web site, if you still want the graphics to look good, you can press Control F5 and the graphics will load up without compression. Really silly.
Cheers,
Charles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
horsessmellfunny
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 356
Location: Castle Rock, CO
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yea I know, it is a pain to get around this compression thing,. I just do the control F-5 and deal with it. Somebody on here wrote a program that gets around the compression. Its under the sticky called Sprint Compression software, in the Sprint forum. There is also a work around that can be done with the user agent in Fire Fox and Internet Explorer. The only problem, it loads all of the pages (well mosat like Google) as if it were on a phone browser. So the pages dont look correct, but at least compression is turned off! LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
criggs
EVDO Fledgling
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| horsessmellfunny wrote: | | Somebody on here wrote a program that gets around the compression. Its under the sticky called Sprint Compression software, in the Sprint forum. There is also a work around that can be done with the user agent in Fire Fox and Internet Explorer. The only problem, it loads all of the pages (well mosat like Google) as if it were on a phone browser. So the pages dont look correct, but at least compression is turned off! LOL |
All of which is a good reason to recommend Verizon over Sprint, for now.
Cheers,
Charles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ^Well you have to weigh Sprint's annoying image compression with Verizon's ridiculous terms of service. There is an easy hack for Sprint's compression but not a way around Verizon's strict TOS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 5154
Location: Cary, IL
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They are both stupid and both are easy to get around.
The Sprint image compression is easy to "get around", and is documented in many threads up here - BUT how many people do not find these threads or do not know how to technically do these things - there are many.
Verizon's Terms of Service are ridiculous, BUT, we also have to take them for what they are worth. Verizon has these in place for the abusers. I am not sure how many wireless data customers that Verizon has, but lets just guess it is 200,000 (probably higher). Up here on the EVDOforums, I think it is documented that there were 5-6 people that got "the letter", and maybe 2-3 got disconnected. So, maybe for every 100,000 customers, 1 has been disconnected. Seems like pretty good odds you are not going to get cut off, especially since, 99% of customers (guessing again), have probably streamed something or downloaded a song.
So, even though things are in the Terms of Service, in reality, they are not very strict.
_________________
EVDO :: EVDO News :: EVDO Antennas :: Buy Verizon :: Buy Sprint :: EVDO Amplifier |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Verizon's TOS does very specifically say (in bold) you cannot download music or video, use webcams or do online gaming. That's pretty strict and Sprint actually promotes such use. Verizon may not go after most people for that but I do recall someone saying they were not a heavy user but got 'the letter' for legal music downloading - iTunes if I recall. Granted, most probably don't need to worry about it but it puts FUD in your head. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
horsessmellfunny
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 356
Location: Castle Rock, CO
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with the above. Hence the reason I returned my Verizon stuff because if their TOS. Not only that, but their EVDO coverage is sub-par compared to Sprint. Sprint is in many smaller cities and significant outskirts of towns. For example (I beat this like a dead horse.... ha ha ha (maybe that is why the horse smells funny)). Sprint is in CO Springs. They come as far north as Monument, which is a very small town on all standards. It doesnt even have a Wal*Mart! They come so close to my house, I can taste the EVDO, but I cant get the signal. Verizon HAS NO COVERAGE in Co Springs. They "say its coming soon". They have been saying that for 4 months now. They also have all 800 mhz towers in the region, making EVDO not likely. They have one 1900 tower by Peterson, and it ONLY give access to Peterson. So, for me, there were quite a few reasons for me to go with Sprint. The only real turn off for me was the price. I will give kudos to Verizon on 1xRTT roaming though. If you are not near a major city, or even a smaller one, or a major thouroughfare, you wont get any 1xRTT. The lighter green on their maps denotes analog or even some digital voice roaming. No data. They keep saying its coming soon, but I have yet to see it. At least, for the most paert, Verizon will give you alot of 1xRTT roaming. But their coverage tends to be very spotty, even on voice. It truly comes down to who has the best and most to offer for you. If you will be downloading, streaming, gaming,etc I would highly recommend not going with Verizon or Cingular. If you want EVDO in more smaller cities, and the ability to download the internet, then go with Sprint. However, with Sprint, you will be losing a a lot of 1xRTT roaming that both Verizon and Cingular have to offer in a lot more places.
Try all of them out, and see what you like. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Buy from the 3G Experts @ 3Gstore.com
CradlePoint CTR500
Purchase a MBR1000
CTR350 Router
CradlePoint PHS300
Sprint Rev A USB: Compass 597
Sprint Rev A ExpressCard: Merlin EX720
Purchase an V740 Rev A ExpressCard
Purchase an EVDO Booster Antenna
Purchase a LinkSys 3GV2 Router
Purchase an EVDO Amplifier
Your Mac EVDO Experts
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
