| |
Quality over quantity?Why do people always seem concerned with the max speed of a cellular network? As long as there is enough bandwidth to perform usual common tasks, what is the point of having more on a phone? I mean yeah, it could make some difference to datacard users, those I would imagine those numbers are small compared to phone users. I get 7-10mb on LTE in my area. Plenty for the usual tasks including streaming video from Netflix and all. It's not like people are downloading uncompressed blurays and such where 50mbps+ is going to make a big difference over a few mbps, and besides, you'd just hit the cap in no time trying to make good use of a faster connection anyways. I'd much rather them focus on footprint and connection quality then worry about bumping up speed on an already congested network. I would think that is a bigger make or break factor then top speed is. For what I pay with Sprint compared to what others charge, I really could care less that the other carriers are capable of 2x the speed so long as the slower speed on sprint worked well and is actually useable. Luckily I have no complaints with my service in this area, but seems to me for all the poorer quality areas that really earn sprint their rep, it just seems like it's better money spent increasing signal quality, user capacity, etc so that what they have is up to snuff before doing raw speed upgrades. |
