IPhone 5 vs iPhone 4s

Between Apple and Android, I agree. Between iPhone models, its a huge difference.

Oh well, yeah. But the normal iphone user wont notice.

This made me laugh for some reason

loving my 5, loving the screen, the battery, LTE, plus more, I hope iOS 6 gets jailbroken ASAP

Bought a 4s a few months ago. I have 6 gbs of data month and unlimited talk and text with 10 people plus my family. The plan is 65 bucks a month. I'm pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to get a deal like that if you go with the 5. The whole plan situation would be the deal-breaker for me.

not following your logic...why would you think plans would be more expensive with a different phone?

Because the demand is there, people are willing to pay for it.

Got my 5 in the mail today loving this thing so sleek and light its baller, very fast. i had the original 3g, the original droid and then the droid x after that sick of android happy i went back to the iPhone again

clearly you don't understand cell contracts at all then.... if you have the same plan, a two year contract's price is the exact same whether you get an iPhone 5 or some shitty free Android phone

which is precisely the reason why its idiotic to fall for the "FREE iPHONE" trap, you get an outdated, 8gb phone that your stuck with for two years, while still paying the exact same month-per-month as someone who payed a couple hundred at the beginning for current hardware

original sprint 4g is wi-max, but they now have LTE as well. unlimited data too.

Have fun with that sprint coverage...



Verizon is obviously dominating the LTE coverage right now, just like they dominated 3g coverage.

^Yay! Unlabeled, vague graphs! That tells us so much!

Within a few months Sprint will be in over 100 cities. As long as you don't live in bum fuck egypt you're fine.

although I do agree that vague graphs can alter info, there's really no way to dispute the fact that Verizon dominates LTE in the US, AT&T has less than half the coverage, and Sprint is in like 5 markets...

No denying that Verizon has superior coverage, but Sprint is in 24 markets currently and expanding into another 100 shortly. If you are living in a market covered already, price point and unlimited data make Sprint a solid option.

I don't understand why people are so attracted to 'Unlimited Data'...do you not have wi-fi at home/school/work? it's usually much faster/better for the phone's battery/and doesn't use your phone's data

I don't have wi-fi in my car streaming spotify or pandora

LTE is faster than the average wifi connection

at max bandwidth this MIGHT be true but real-world LTE speeds hover around 10-20mbit/s with latency about twice that of a typical cable modem/wi-fi connection.

and are people consistently going over their data caps? mine is at 4gb and IIRC the base verizon plan is 2gb. it seems like people are upset because 'it's the principal of a data cap' rather than actually going over the data cap

Not really unlabled, left is US markets with 4gLTE and bottom is 4 different service providers. Yes, its older probably from a few months ago, but I was just trying to establish a point. Verizon has more market, as you can see almost 400 (probably close to over 400 now) and its soon not going to be about citys but coverage maps, like 3g was.

You can't deny verizons coverage,at&t will have pretty good coverage EVENTUALLY but saying sprint will be the best is just completely wrong. They are a smaller provider than verizon and at&t. Sure, if you live in a city, it doesn't really matter which provider you have. I think the big kicker (as least with 3g coverage for me) was how I had 3g ANYWHERE i went and I travelled to alot of remote places in the country (wyoming and montana mostly) and i never lost 3g coverage unless i lost phone service, which is understandable. I will always stick with verizon for this reason because by late 2013 their 4g coverage will be the same as their 3g coverage, they have so many damn towers.

Now, when it comes to unlimited data, thats an interesting argument. First of all, who the fuck doesn't have wifi or internet where they spend the majority of their time? If you got a sprint plan for the sole reason to get rid of your internet at home, okay then I get it. But who actually does that here? Between going to school, going to work and being at home, i'd say most of the people here have wifi at least 80% of the time. Now, I understand in a car you don't have wifi, but unless you're spending 40 hours a week in your car listening to streamed music all the time (which actually doesn't take up THAT much data) how are you getting close to 2-4gb? I had one month where I got to 1.9gb (my max WAS unlimited but I had to activate a non-smart phone so i got downgraded, bastards so now i have 4gb) and what was because I didn't have internet in the house i was staying it for like 10 days and for like 5 of those days i sat around on my phone most of the day. Unless you watch youtube/netflix for 3-4hrs a day all month, i dont get how you can go past your limit.

And everyone is saying 4gLTE is faster than average broadband... i mean, if you have shitty broadband. Even before i got my internet updated, my wifi was still faster. and now i upgraded to a plan alot of people have and its 35 down 6 up 10ms and my phone is like 10-15 down 3-4 up and like 100ms (latency sucks with 4g).