novaBBS - comp.mobile.android - For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443 Mbps in my tests

PSA for badgolferman that T-Mobile is just getting better and better and
better with respect to 5G UC speeds where I recently got 443 Mbps in SJ.
<https://i.postimg.cc/vTfn0HB6/speedtest21.jpg> T-Mobile 377 to 443 Mbps
<https://i.postimg.cc/SsXCzGbd/speedtest22.jpg> T-mo 377, 414, 443 Mbps
<https://i.postimg.cc/tTLPdVXj/speedtest23.jpg> T-mo 419 & 390 Mbps 5G UC
<https://i.postimg.cc/BvnxJ0hd/speedtest24.jpg> T-mo RSRP -91 to -96 dBm
<https://i.postimg.cc/x17ChVzf/speedtest25.jpg> Verizon femtocell setup
Notice that's 5G UC, whatever that means (I didn't look it up).

At home, inside, I get only about 20Mbps (LTE) while my WISP is about
30Mbps, neither of which is all that good of course, but I live in the
boonies where we have 40 acres between homes because they don't want anyone
to live here anymore.

Outside my house when it's 5G it can jump as high as in the 200Mbps or so,
but usually my 5G outside at home is in the 100Mbps range as I had already
many times reported in depth many times earlier this year in this ng.

However... a new bit of data just happened where Steve will be very unhappy
to hear that today I was at a friend's home in the Santa Cruz mountains
where Steve claims Verizon is so great, and Verizon sucked like you can't
believe. Even the T-Mobile at his house sucked at around 5Mbps to 10Mbps
but at least T-Mobile was on 5G inside his home and the upload speeds were
bad at about half the download speeds but at least T-mobile was usable.

Steve isn't gonna like the next paragraph though...

By way of atrocious contrast, his Verizon LTE speeds on his 5G Samsung
phone were less than half what my T-Mobile speeds were for download, and
literally 0.01Mbps for the upload (which makes Verizon Internet in the
Santa Cruz mountains at that particular location in a side-by-side
comparison with T-Mobile the exact opposite of what Steve always claims).

Of course, that's one rather bad location for Verizon, but it shows what
we've been saying all along which is that Steve bullshits like there's no
tomorrow when he shills for Verizon. The reason we were testing Verizon was
because I was able to talk Verizon into giving him a free femtocell (see
photos) which we were trying to get running.

Interestingly for those of you who have Verizon, they first tried to talk
me into having him pay $250 for what they call a Network Extender, and then
they gave me a "deal" at $125 but when I asked to speak to the supervisor,
after a long wait, they gave it to him for free.

One more aside, we were on the phone for about an hour with Verizon and
they suck like you can't believe compared to T-Mobile in terms of getting a
real human (we got transferred twice before anyone competent answered).

While I provide proof of what was on my phone, I understand that this is
just one datapoint where I don't make money shilling for any company,
unlike Steve who apparently does - so you can trust my data is correct.
--
PS: We still haven't gotten the Verizon femtocell to work where we may set
it up at my house even though the GPS location is different (dunno if that
will matter to Verizon or not as I unplugged my femtocell GPS years ago).

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> PSA for badgolferman that T-Mobile is just getting better and better and
> better with respect to 5G UC speeds where I recently got 443 Mbps in SJ.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/vTfn0HB6/speedtest21.jpg> T-Mobile 377 to 443 Mbps
> <https://i.postimg.cc/SsXCzGbd/speedtest22.jpg> T-mo 377, 414, 443 Mbps
> <https://i.postimg.cc/tTLPdVXj/speedtest23.jpg> T-mo 419 & 390 Mbps 5G UC
> <https://i.postimg.cc/BvnxJ0hd/speedtest24.jpg> T-mo RSRP -91 to -96 dBm
> <https://i.postimg.cc/x17ChVzf/speedtest25.jpg> Verizon femtocell setup
> Notice that's 5G UC, whatever that means (I didn't look it up).
>
> At home, inside, I get only about 20Mbps (LTE) while my WISP is about
> 30Mbps, neither of which is all that good of course, but I live in the
> boonies where we have 40 acres between homes because they don't want anyone
> to live here anymore.
>
> Outside my house when it's 5G it can jump as high as in the 200Mbps or so,
> but usually my 5G outside at home is in the 100Mbps range as I had already
> many times reported in depth many times earlier this year in this ng.
>
> However... a new bit of data just happened where Steve will be very unhappy
> to hear that today I was at a friend's home in the Santa Cruz mountains
> where Steve claims Verizon is so great, and Verizon sucked like you can't
> believe. Even the T-Mobile at his house sucked at around 5Mbps to 10Mbps
> but at least T-Mobile was on 5G inside his home and the upload speeds were
> bad at about half the download speeds but at least T-mobile was usable.
>
> Steve isn't gonna like the next paragraph though...
>
> By way of atrocious contrast, his Verizon LTE speeds on his 5G Samsung
> phone were less than half what my T-Mobile speeds were for download, and
> literally 0.01Mbps for the upload (which makes Verizon Internet in the
> Santa Cruz mountains at that particular location in a side-by-side
> comparison with T-Mobile the exact opposite of what Steve always claims).
>
> Of course, that's one rather bad location for Verizon, but it shows what
> we've been saying all along which is that Steve bullshits like there's no
> tomorrow when he shills for Verizon. The reason we were testing Verizon was
> because I was able to talk Verizon into giving him a free femtocell (see
> photos) which we were trying to get running.
>
> Interestingly for those of you who have Verizon, they first tried to talk
> me into having him pay $250 for what they call a Network Extender, and then
> they gave me a "deal" at $125 but when I asked to speak to the supervisor,
> after a long wait, they gave it to him for free.
>
> One more aside, we were on the phone for about an hour with Verizon and
> they suck like you can't believe compared to T-Mobile in terms of getting a
> real human (we got transferred twice before anyone competent answered).
>
> While I provide proof of what was on my phone, I understand that this is
> just one datapoint where I don't make money shilling for any company,
> unlike Steve who apparently does - so you can trust my data is correct.

Yes, this has been my experience as well. Better reception and speed
results wherever I go. I also read an article yesterday where Verizon and
AT&T are raising their rates significantly. So far my T-Mobile bill has
held steady.

Re: For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443 Mbps in my tests

<t84tv1$1thp$1@gioia.aioe.org>

copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=32759&group=comp.mobile.android#32759

copy link Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone comp.mobile.android alt.internet.wireless

Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!YJ9T4Jrl0F+pWyDRfaeX/g.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: spa...@nospam.com (Andy Burnelli)
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android,alt.internet.wireless
Subject: Re: For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443 Mbps in my tests
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2022 15:42:01 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t84tv1$1thp$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <t83sjv$1qak$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t84ga7$fht$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="63033"; posting-host="YJ9T4Jrl0F+pWyDRfaeX/g.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-GB

by: Andy Burnelli - Sun, 12 Jun 2022 14:42 UTC

badgolferman wrote:

> Yes, this has been my experience as well. Better reception and speed
> results wherever I go. I also read an article yesterday where Verizon and
> AT&T are raising their rates significantly. So far my T-Mobile bill has
> held steady.

And as you noted above, our bills didn't go up, and, we could say in some
ways they went down in so much as they granted everyone postpaid in the USA
last April 2021 unlimited data if they had any data (which I was a
beneficiary of), at no extra cost.

They also granted everyone a free 5G phone if they wanted it, and, I got my
iPhone for less than half price at the time, while the service has remained
consistently decent.

What was so _different_ and the same about the Verizon experience I had,
side by side, at my friend's house was...
a. His customer support was fine - but it took far longer to get a human.
b. They tried to extort $250 and then $125 for the free cellular femtocell.
c. His Verizon signal strength was about -110 decibels (T-Mo was about 100)
d. His Verizon Internet speeds were unusable at 2Mbps down but 0.01Mbps up!
e. Mine weren't great at about 5 to 10 down and about half that up

But what was interesting is this guy's wife insists on Verizon claiming
they don't get good T-mobile signal, and yet, a quantitative look at their
signal and speeds show that, while T-mobile isn't great, Verizon is dismal.

Of course, I'm not doing what Steve does which is I'm not using this one
example as a proof for all examples; but I did find it interesting to see
how entrenched they were in a belief system that, as far as I could tell,
had no sound basis in actual facts.

The husband has a smartphone so I had him put all the tools that I use to
test signal while the wife has a flip phone which will stop working in
December.

My main point was to let folks know that in San Jose (where I wasn't in the
city proper but only in the outskirts of the sprawling town), the 5G
T-Mobile signal was consistently in the 350 to 450 Mbps range, which is
fantastic.

Even in the boonies, I sometimes get 200Mbps, where the funny thing about
our Verizon call is that they told this customer his nearest cell tower was
over 20 miles away (which I don't believe given that I know where the
towers are and I'd estimate them to be less than 3 miles as the crow
flies), which are the same towers for T-Mobile & AT&T as far as I know).

Useful data tidbits for Verizon customers that I found out on the call:
1. Verizon said that after 5 miles they give people femtocells
2. Verizon eventually gave us the femtocell for free but tried to charge us
3. Verizon said it can only work with "broadband" (we're on WISP)

The Verizon setup is easy but it still hasn't been set up yet:
a. You plug it into the router & into the power outlet
b. You string the 30-foot long GPS cable somehow to the outside
c. You wait, and wait (T-Mobile was the same way) and wait (like an hour)

Then you're supposed to dial #48 (as I recall); but we had to call Verizon
and they still weren't able to set it up. They claimed it was the broadband
but I don't believe that as others have Verizon femtocells on the same
service (which is about 40Mbps using brand new AC GPS enabled stuff below)
<https://i.postimg.cc/dtFnFCrX/speedtest26.jpg> WISP AC PRISM uses GPS

BTW, note that this new AC WISP equipment has a GPS built inside of it!

In summary, I'm _not_ saying Verizon is better or worse than T-Mobile in
the Santa Cruz mountains as it depends on a lot of factors, but I am saying
that in this one case Verizon is far worse than T-Mobile to the point that
T-mobile is usable and Verizon is unusable in terms of both cellular signal
strength and Internet speeds (although with Wi-Fi calling & when the
femtocell starts working, that won't matter except when the power or the
WISP goes out - where out here - the power goes out rather frequently).
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information.

The Macintosh is Xerox technology at its best.

computers / comp.mobile.android / For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443 Mbps in my tests

Subject	Author
For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443 Mbps in my tests	Andy Burnelli
Re: For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443	badgolferman
Re: For badgolferman - T-Mobile 5G UC in San Jose was 443 Mbps in my tests	Andy Burnelli