Why Does VM USA Suck So Hard?


  1. Jambi619

    Jambi619 Member

    I've been using the Triumph for about a year now, and, while it is a good phone, there are much better phones out there. The EVO V is a good step up, but not good enough for me to ditch my Triumph just yet. There's also the Iphone 4, but if I had that kind of money to blow on a phone, I would be using VM.

    Anyway, I recently checked the Virgin Mobile sites for the UK, Canada, and Australia and they have all kinds of next-gen smart phones! HTC One X, Galaxy SIII, Iphone 5, WHAT THE FKN FK!?!?!?!

    Is Richard Branson punishing us for Bush, or is there some technical reason for this discrepancy?

    Advertisement
    :
  2. GARClA

    GARClA New Member

    Same name basically different company
  3. riggerman0421

    riggerman0421 Well-Known Member

    Completely different companies. They are all individually owned and operated, just like Sprint owns Virgin Mobile USA here. They only thing they have in common is the name.
  4. Petrah

    Petrah Psychotic Female Guide

    The above posters are correct. The only thing VM USA shares with those other companies is a name. ie: VM USA = owned by Sprint, VM Canada = owned by Bell Mobility.
  5. MT Rotor

    MT Rotor Guest

    Just be grateful VM USA isn't charging those ridiculous prices for those plans...100min for $50?
  6. Kamau

    Kamau Well-Known Member

    It also has a lot to do with the country. Most develpoed countries put money into more than military. They have internet networks that are far superior to ours, and therefore have much better phones. Take a look at the phones in other developed countries, and compare them to ours. We are just getting into 4g, where it has been the norm for years overseas.
    The companies are only as good as the network, and here it is just starting to try to catch up to the rest of the world.
  7. notebooko

    notebooko Well-Known Member

    What? LOL! Most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. US has had LTE for what seems like ages before Europe who is just getting it now.
  8. Kamau

    Kamau Well-Known Member

    Then you must have not researched. Just look at the phones offered in other countries, and compare them to ours.
    And LTE has not been here for ages because it's still very limited.
  9. notebooko

    notebooko Well-Known Member

    Examples? I don't know what phones you are talking about. Other countries have been releasing quad core phones with no LTE capabilities while the US has been having to downgrade phone processors to dual core because LTE is not compatible with quad core chips. That's why there are variants of phones such as international variant and US variant. The US is in no way behind the standard and you could even say it is ahead with the exception of a few countries. LTE in Sprint may be very limited at the moment because of their hasty decision to implement WiMax and claim the title as first 4G provider in America, but look at carriers like Verizon...how is that "very limited"?
  10. tcomotcom

    tcomotcom Well-Known Member

    Kamau, you are pretty confused about a number of things.

    You seem to be mashing up land-line, last-mile Internet access infrastructure with wireless handset technology. That's nonsense - the two are not directly related. (and you're wrong about the superiority of foreign land-line Internet connections, anyway.)

    When it comes to the core Internet, the U.S. is far, far ahead of every other country. No matter which metric you pick - total available bandwidth, number and speed of interconnections, amount of traffic, number and bandwidth of international connections...the U.S. dominates. Insanely so. The U.S. has 65% more deployed IP addresses than China, the next closest country. The U.S. core Intranet infrastructure is currently the biggest/best/fastest simply because it has to be.

    When it comes to last-mile, wired, average Internet connection speed, the U.S. is 9th in the world - that's a great showing. Only two countries - South Korea and Japan - have what can reasonably be called "far superior" networks to everyone else, but that's it, just two. Korea and Japan are both small, densely populated countries, so it's foolish to compare them to the U.S., China, Russia, Canada, Brazil and every other massive country with huge areas of low population density.

    Again, none of this land-line Internet stuff has anything to do with wireless handset technology. I don't understand why'd you'd even try to make that connection.

    So what you believe is that subscribers in other countries have the iPhone 7, the Samsung Galaxy S VI and the HTC One Z+ Super Extra while we're stuck with the lame, hum drum iPhone 5, Galaxy S III and HTC One X? The phones available in the U.S. are just as advanced as those available anywhere else because they are the exact same GSM and CDMA phones. What exactly can these magical, foreign-availability-only phones do that phones available in the U.S. can not? Transform into a yellow Camaro?

    That's just incorrect. Before LTE became operational in the U.S., there were operational LTE networks in Hong Kong, Japan and some countries in Europe and that's it. (OK, and Uzbekistan - we don't want to leave out Uzbekistan.) That is not even remotely close to being "the norm".
  11. Nate456

    Nate456 Well-Known Member

    That would be freaking awesome though.:rolleyes:
Loading...

Share This Page