Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Visible--worse signal, slower speeds than T and T-Mo

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,074
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post
    same thing here. And Visible is putting right on their front page, no speed caps for people signing up at this point. So go figure.

    Ah, well. It was cheap for me to test--only the first month $25 promo price. I had an old LG V10 I sent them in exchange for a new free Visible phone, so that was good.

    Now I'm wondering if maybe their system is horribly misconfigured, and they haven't figured it out yet. 0.30 speeds are not rational. But you're seeing it, same as me.
    If you're talking about the R2 that device uses the snapdragon 425. That only has 2X 10 MHz carrier aggregation so yes you are going to get lower speeds on that device. Any testing using different devices that have different modems is not a fair comparison.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,059
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Are you using the same phone? That's going to matter. Also It's doubtful that Verizon and T-Mobile are sharing a tower.
    No. I had my T-Mo and Visible phones out, side by side, checking Network Signal Info Pro and Speedtest.

    Of course I don't expect they're sharing a tower. I don't know where you came up with that idea for this discussion.

    My point is, even with a midrange phone, my Visible service should be SERIOUSLY better than 0.77 down and 0.01 up.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,059
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    If you're talking about the R2
    no, the freebie they're handing out for tradeins is the ZTE Blade A7 Prime.

    Homie don't play the R2.

    Overall, I'm seeing what many others are seeing--that VZW's LTE service sucks.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    43
    Device(s)
    Nexus 5
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    The bottom line with Visible, Verizon, and recently with AT&T, has more to do with deprioritization than coverage, signal strength, or anything else. They have figured out that aggressive "depri" can be a huge tool in network mgmt. In other words, they can promise unlimited coverage, etc ... but at the end of the day, simply throw switch to limit usage. Without oversight and more competition, the future is looking decidedly dark.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    527
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy S10e
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by wmdunn View Post
    In other words, they can promise unlimited coverage, etc ... but at the end of the day, simply throw switch to limit usage. Without oversight and more competition, the future is looking decidedly dark.
    I agree that this industry is devoid of needed oversight. That being said, a network operator should be able to give more to those who pay more. There is only so much room on any given RAN and backhaul. If a post paid customer such as myself pays $85 a month, and a prepaid customer on an MVNO is only paying $30, it seems that the one who pays more should be getting more, and in most cases, this means a better quality of service (data throughput, lower latency, etc) for the price paid.

    The carriers do need to be honest about what it is one can get at the prices offered. If one is paying for a low cost prepaid plan with "unlimited" than the carrier needs to explain that, in layman's terms, one is at the end of the line and won't get the same consistent performance and quality of service the guy/gal paying a premium price will.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,409
    Device(s)
    Google Pixel 3a XL, Pixel 2 XL
    Carrier(s)
    Visible, Sprint
    Feedback Score
    0
    So Cricket is being deprioritized and now Visible? I tried Visible awhile ago with an iPhone 7 Plus and in the same areas Verizon struggled with signal Visible also did as well but not surprising.

    I know that at least in Tualatin, OR Visible would do horrible there since even Verizon Prepaid struggles with speeds below 500kbps starting at 3PM. In a sense, if your city does not have 5G enabled and it is a medium to major metro area, LTE is going to be very loaded until 5G becomes available and offloads a bunch of users.

    Also in some areas if allowed by Verizon, if you bring a phone or buy a phone with Band 66 and Verizon has it deployed it may help with your speeds.
    Home Entertainment: Xfinity Double Play with 140+ channels and 200 Meg Per Second Internet.

    Landline: Google Voice

    Mobile Entertainment: Visible as my Primary, Sprint as my secondary.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    7,082
    Device(s)
    Cricket Moto g7 supra,metro Moto g7pwr, visible g7bpwr
    Carrier(s)
    Cricket,visible,metro pcs
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by adam1991 View Post
    I'm a T-Mobile user from way back. I'm currently grandfathered into their highest speed everything plan, including unlimited tethering (in addition to a bunch of international stuff). I use a Galaxy S10+.

    I wasn't entirely happy with the T-Mo service at my house, and it was worse where I went on vacation. So I got AT&T service to try and I spent the summer and early fall testing AT&T's then-highest plan against my T-Mobile, using a branded Galaxy S9+. I wanted it to be as apples-to-apples as possible. I took both phones wherever I went (I travel in a very wide geography for work), and compared service using Network Signal Info Pro and Ookla Speedtest. In the end, I came to the conclusion that there was no significant difference between the two. T was $10 more for less of what I wanted, with no improvement in service over T-Mo.

    Now I'm curious about Visible. I've never had VZW service ever, and really don't want it. But I ordered it up anyway, to test (after all, the price is right, right?). I got my Visible-branded ZTE Blade A7 Prime an hour ago (yay trade-in freebie), and got it all set up and I got Network Signal Info and Speedtest installed.

    This is significantly worse service than what T-Mo and AT&T give me, in the same location. I live in an upper-middle-class neighborhood in a metro area; inside my house or outside on my street, on Visible service Network Signal Info Pro shows my signal strength to be between -101 dBm and -112 dBm. Speedtest shows me 2 down/5 up. Once I saw 0.70 down, and once I saw 15 up. But overall, it's 2-5 down and 5-6 up.--inside or out.

    While I was for the longest time getting those kind of numbers on T-Mo (which led me to test AT&T), right now Speedtest is showing me T-Mo service of 38 down/5 up--inside--on a signal strength of -107 dBm.

    One more Visible test. Ah, nothing's changed: 1.17 down/2.79 up.

    I'll carry it around for a month or so to see, but I expect nothing different than what I saw on the AT&T test.
    Sorry you're having issues, could you reveal your general location, as most service issues are location specific. Also, although speeds are a consideration, but perhaps a more significant consideration might be, do you have service, be it maybe a little slow.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    840
    Device(s)
    iPhone 11
    Carrier(s)
    310-150
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MTS2000 View Post
    I agree that this industry is devoid of needed oversight. That being said, a network operator should be able to give more to those who pay more. There is only so much room on any given RAN and backhaul. If a post paid customer such as myself pays $85 a month, and a prepaid customer on an MVNO is only paying $30, it seems that the one who pays more should be getting more, and in most cases, this means a better quality of service (data throughput, lower latency, etc) for the price paid.

    The carriers do need to be honest about what it is one can get at the prices offered. If one is paying for a low cost prepaid plan with "unlimited" than the carrier needs to explain that, in layman's terms, one is at the end of the line and won't get the same consistent performance and quality of service the guy/gal paying a premium price will.
    I agree—tiers make some sense and I think anyone expecting the highest performance everywhere all the time on a lower-cost plan probably doesn't understand that there are some constraints to work around. The part that I do think needs reworking is essentially how much the "cheapskates" are punished. AT&T has usually been pretty good about making the always-deprioritized plans usable (more capacity/spectrum/etc. or something else?), while Verizon has been known all over these boards for feeling painful to prepaid if more than ten people show up in one location. /s

    Quote Originally Posted by Vicpdx17 View Post
    So Cricket is being deprioritized and now Visible? I tried Visible awhile ago with an iPhone 7 Plus and in the same areas Verizon struggled with signal Visible also did as well but not surprising.
    That may have been signal issues, too. I've been testing Visible on an iPhone 11 and have had a mostly positive experience, but I'm not as familiar with Verizon's network in my area to determine if it's signal or deprioritization. I've had a few moments of the telltale full-bars, low-download-speed, high-upload-speed to take a guess, but there's so much that happens behind the scenes that it can only be a guess.

    I think Cricket has been AT&T's testing ground for finding ways to offer a lower-cost service and figure out what users will endure. First, there was the 3Mbps-throttled plan (with 22GB before deprioritization); then there was the no-throttled, but always-deprioritized Unlimited Extra; then the 3Mbps got always-deprioritized. I've used all of these and have family members on them and haven't really felt where service has been unusable (I'm sure it exists somewhere). Some people have posted about issues, but it seems like a side-effect of AT&T touching every tower and a previously-working area suddenly having all sorts of problems.

    AT&T has also started offering always-depriorized plans on Prepaid and now postpaid, too. Maybe they'll just deprioritize everyone except for those paying the most and it'll start to feel more like the pre-deprioritization days?

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    88
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Are you using the same phone? That's going to matter. Also It's doubtful that Verizon and T-Mobile are sharing a tower.
    In Northern NJ things are changing from block to block. Visible is usable at work next to a major train station - Mint was given to me for free and I still can't use it because speeds are 2G/3G in quality and responsiveness. I thought it might be bands in the phone but my latest gear should have key T-Mobile bands (unlocked Moto E6).

    Visible works well enough compared to Cricket 3mbps to be a keeper but being "uncapped" has not meant anything - I rarely get over 5mbps no matter where I am uploading or downloading.

    Dan

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    76
    Feedback Score
    0
    I just switched from Cricket to Visible. Cricket is slower, but has a better coverage area.

    I'm now paying $20-$25 a month with Visible, plus I get $100 rebate credit card after 2 months, so I'm basically getting 4 months free with Visible.

    Cricket was charging $35 for 5 gig/month. They have a good unlimited deal, but it's only available to new customers. Their lawyers must have wrote this line "Our Fastest 4G LTE Speeds", which is a total joke.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    365
    Device(s)
    Pixel 3a
    Carrier(s)
    Visible
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by saverdan View Post
    In Northern NJ things are changing from block to block. Visible is usable at work next to a major train station - Mint was given to me for free and I still can't use it because speeds are 2G/3G in quality and responsiveness. I thought it might be bands in the phone but my latest gear should have key T-Mobile bands (unlocked Moto E6).

    Visible works well enough compared to Cricket 3mbps to be a keeper but being "uncapped" has not meant anything - I rarely get over 5mbps no matter where I am uploading or downloading.

    Dan
    Something might be wrong with your phone or how they set you up. Everyday I travel all over Northern NJ, Bergen and Passaic Counties. No issues and can easily get 50+mbs down/up all over.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    212
    Device(s)
    iPhone 8 Plus Product Red
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    IMO this isn't a good test. Visible- which is deprioritized to hell compared to post paid. Pony up $~80 and get play / do more unlimited. This is an apples to oranges test. Like comparing verizon postpaid to metro by t-mobile.

    I tried verizon prepaid a few months ago. Went to an event in Annapolis, data didn't work til we left the area and connected to a different tower. While AT&T was fine pulling 25 Mbps down and 3 up(postpaid business). Data at home in the afternoon- forget about it. But come 12AM-2AM no problem getting 100+ down. I thought prepaid on verizon wouldn't be this bad with verizon having fiber everywhere (i have fios) but i was wrong. I can see the tower from my back deck.
    Personal Highest on LTE - US RT 1 and MD-152

    Home internet - Verizon Fios 150/150 (Upgraded to Gigabit Jan. 26 2019)


    Fios Gigabit:

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    11
    Device(s)
    iphone 7
    Feedback Score
    0
    I could not believe how bad Verizon prepaid was either. Same thing I was at an event and I had bars on me phone but data locked up. Many times I had speeds so slow that is was unusable.

    I am now on AT&T prepaid and get bars in almost as many places, but always have a usable data, pretty fast most of the time too. I haven't looked back on leaving Verizon.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Stronger LTE signal, slower speeds
    By randamin in forum AT&T
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-26-2014, 10:19 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-17-2013, 08:53 PM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-04-2012, 02:16 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-01-2006, 11:42 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-23-2004, 09:10 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks