mist668 join:2011-02-15 Middleburg, PA |
QOSSo basically putting them in last place for traffic QOS.
Everyone else gets to use data first and if the tower fills up tough luck you have no connection. | |
|
| w0go.O join:2001-08-30 Springfield, OR
2 recommendations |
w0g
Member
2015-Jun-18 7:12 pm
Re: QOSObviously but a better option would have just been to equally handle each person.
On congested towers, they should allocate bandwidth to all connections and users equally.
To fix congestion, perhaps more capacity should be added such as new microcells, additional channels, MIMO, and even 5G directed energy. | |
|
| | mist668 join:2011-02-15 Middleburg, PA |
Re: QOSI agree however I feel it is a win/loss for sprint. While in this area sprint is terribly slow, having an equal speed including grandma and the heaviest user is unfair.
I don't know the best way to solve this issue, however this is just wording to get around "throttling". | |
|
| | |
1 recommendation |
Re: QOSI thought every Sprint user was throttled Kidding aside this is what Verizon put out last year, but they also put the person in the penalty box for 60 days which I haven't heard of a removal of that crap. I understand network management, but why should someone who buys "unlimited" be throttled/lower QoS for using their data versus someone on a 2GB plan. This is still bs. Either they get rid of unlimited or not, or add a throttle after a known amount (like many prepaid). It will come to pass that the era of over-promising unlimited and under-delivering some throttle/cap will be exposed soon enough or at least PLAINLY advertise with caveats. | |
|
| | | w0go.O join:2001-08-30 Springfield, OR 1 edit
1 recommendation |
to mist668
You know T-Mobile doesn't need to throttle at all..
Unlimited users get unlimited.
Also grandma doesn't really make demands on the network. She is a light user who barely knows what the Internet is for. A power user, on the other hand, uses the network a lot, and puts demands on it.
If the user is legit and not a robot or corporate customer running none human services over the network, they should not be throttled.
Instead, as bandwidth is consumed, the particular tower should divide it equally.
The network should be built around the power users needs honestly, because they will make use of the network, and designing for them ensures capacity needs and performance needs are in line with what everyone actually needs. | |
|
| | | | |
RandomName69
Anon
2015-Jun-19 9:33 am
Re: QOSsaid by w0g:You know T-Mobile doesn't need to throttle at all..
Unlimited users get unlimited. So they get unlimited tethering too! awesome. Oh wait...............So T-Mobile has "unlimited" data not unlimited data. | |
|
| | | ZyXEL VMG4381
|
to mist668
said by mist668:I agree however I feel it is a win/loss for sprint. While in this area sprint is terribly slow, having an equal speed including grandma and the heaviest user is unfair.
I don't know the best way to solve this issue, however this is just wording to get around "throttling". How is that unfair that a heavy data user, who is using the data he has paid Sprint for. The problem is that you are blaming the wrong person instead of blaming the heavy data user for using data he has paid for why not blame Sprint for over selling their network and not upgrading towers or area's that are having congestion issue's. They could add spectrum, more backhaul, and or add small cells. But Sprint chooses not to fix the issue so they try to blame a heavy data user who is using the data that Sprint has sold him and he is paying sprint for the data he was sold. | |
|
| | | | mist668 join:2011-02-15 Middleburg, PA |
mist668
Member
2015-Jun-19 10:16 am
Re: QOSThis is the same argument as having a house full of people sharing the same connection but then don't complain when the kids are streaming crap and slowing everyone else down kind of argument. | |
|
| | | r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
to mist668
said by mist668:having an equal speed including grandma and the heaviest user is unfair. It is 100% fair as everyone is equally paying for the connection. | |
|
| | | | amarryatVerizon FiOS join:2005-05-02 Marshfield, MA |
Re: QOSsaid by r81984:It is 100% fair as everyone is equally paying for the connection. You and I both pay for unlimited as well as 100 other people on the same tower. So far this month I've used 200GB and you've used 10GB. WE all try to download something. Is it fair that congestion due to me causes your connection to be slow? Or do you think you should be able to get to 200GB like me without being throttled? | |
|
| | | | | ZyXEL VMG4381
|
Re: QOSsaid by amarryat:said by r81984:It is 100% fair as everyone is equally paying for the connection. You and I both pay for unlimited as well as 100 other people on the same tower. So far this month I've used 200GB and you've used 10GB. WE all try to download something. Is it fair that congestion due to me causes your connection to be slow? Or do you think you should be able to get to 200GB like me without being throttled? You are blaming a user for using data that Sprint has sold him and is using the data he paid for. If Sprint is overselling the service than they need to discontinue unlimited data and sell what they can support or upgrade to tower to handle the data one of the two. People really need to start blaming the right people which in this case is Sprint. T Mobile and Metro PCS offer unlimited data and are able to provide a stable data speed and service, so what is Sprint's excuse. People need to stop blaming the heavy data user who is using the service that they paid for. | |
|
| | |
Samual to w0g
Anon
2015-Jun-18 11:32 pm
to w0g
Some things will always get priority during congestion; VoLTE is the very obvious example. Business accounts traditionally have gotten priority over residential ones in the wireline world, is wireless any different? What about applications like cellular connections for security systems?
All packets are not created equal.... | |
|
| ZyXEL VMG4381
|
to mist668
The Problem is the wireless carriers can not signal out a heavy data user if they were sold unlimited or metered data if they still have data left. It is not the customers problem if Sprint can not deliver what they sold. If the tower becomes congested they have to throttle everybody equally. Instead of choosing who they are going to throttle and choosing which ones they are not going to throttle. Which would violate the new FCC rules that is why Sprint stopped their old network management policy's and coming up with a new network management policy that complies with the FCC's new rules. | |
|
| | mist668 join:2011-02-15 Middleburg, PA |
mist668
Member
2015-Jun-19 10:18 am
Re: QOSYes so instead of throttling just deny a connection at peak times. Or everyone can fight over the already slow connection that is offered. I would like to know what the definition of network management means from the FCC's new rules. Its a new term for throttling. | |
|
| | | r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2015-Jun-19 2:59 pm
Re: QOSThey can throttle, but it has to be equal of all users. | |
|
|
A Nonymous
Anon
2015-Jun-18 8:14 pm
Fair queueing?Seems like it would be a lot easier to implement some form of FQ to deal with congestion events. | |
|
Pegasus Premium Member join:2008-01-04 united state |
Pegasus
Premium Member
2015-Jun-18 8:41 pm
LOL"resulting in a reduction of throughput or speed" LOL top 5% must be another term for 100% of customers in sprint speak. the network of promising tomorrow.. after tomorrow's tomorrow. | |
|
ocjosh join:2013-03-19 Anaheim, CA |
ocjosh
Member
2015-Jun-18 8:55 pm
This is funny.Sprint is freaking slow. I felt that every Sprint users are throttled and punished here in LA and OC. We hardly can tell who is not throttled. | |
|
| |
Re: This is funny.Well, these changes should clearly help with that. | |
|
| | jazneo join:2014-08-25 Hazel Green, WI |
jazneo
Member
2015-Jun-19 2:05 am
Re: This is funny.well they should not label Unlimited on there plains. i hope they get hard like all other cellphone company did.
If you going to use word Unlimited better keep your agreement not lie to still people money | |
|
|
JasonOD
Anon
2015-Jun-19 9:32 am
Sprint's real problem....is they've sold out to dozens of MVNO's, cramping tower bandwidth for Sprint's post-paid users. | |
|
|
RandomName69
Anon
2015-Jun-19 9:33 am
In other newsSprint announces it is eliminating unlimited data. | |
|
|
tommyanon
Anon
2015-Jun-19 9:33 am
prepaid also?what about boost and virgin mobile?
i find it completely idiotic that a company can come public to say they are changing a non-consumer friendly policy for fear of legal consequence but than only do it for certain customers are certain brands when they have many brands. that tells me this is 100% about publicity and competitive marketing versus other carriers and nothing about actual fear of consequence. | |
|
|
Flyonthewall
Anon
2015-Jun-19 10:10 am
They as much admit you don't have to throttle to control congestionAll you have to do is develop your network to handle the traffic, it's called spending money. If left alone, they'd pay a fine to the FCC. If they build out network increases for usage by their paying customers, they continue to make money, and the amount spent is the cost of doing business.
Good on them. | |
|
|
|