Sprint Moto X

Can your choice of carrier hamper an otherwise great phone experience?

It has been almost two months since the Moto X was introduced to the world as Motorola's refreshed philosophy on the smart phone. AT&T was the first US carrier to have the phone on sale, and although Sprint lagged behind by a few weeks it now carries the woven black and white varieties for the same $199 on-contract price as the other carriers.

Motorola made it a point to ensure that the Moto X is nearly identical across the major carriers in the US, so when looking at the Sprint model there aren't that many things to distinguish it from the others. This isn't a carbon copy of what you can get on AT&T, Verizon or T-Mobile, though. Let's take a look at what it's like to use the Moto X on the Sprint Network.

Sprint Moto X hardware and so​ftware

Sprint Moto X

Taking the Sprint Moto X out of the box, there is absolutely nothing to indicate that it is a carrier-branded device until you actually power it on and look at the carrier info on the lock screen. Unlike the AT&T and Verizon versions, there is no external branding on the case (even though the other models are extremely subtle) anywhere to be seen. AT&T still has the exclusive locked up on Moto Maker so we have our hands on a woven white version, but it is still just as beautiful a phone as any in this form.

Read: Moto X review

Once you start up the phone and start flicking through the home screens and app drawer, you'll start to notice Sprint's touches into the software. The default home screens are loaded up with a few different Sprint widgets and a folder or two to highlight its pre-installed apps, just as you'd expect. There are a few different stub apps that work as links to the Play Store in the app drawer and on the home screen, but they're a few quick taps from uninstalling.

A couple things that you won't be able to uninstall are Sprint Zone, Voicemail and Sprint ID. Sprint Zone is a window to everything from the carrier — account info, promotions and apps. It can be disabled, and it isn't nearly as pushy as having 12 pre-installed apps to do the same things like other carriers. Voicemail you'll want to keep enabled, but Sprint ID can't really go away no matter what your preference is. Sprint ID is tied into the default home launcher, so disabling or clearing its data at any point causes some issues with the phone if you intend to use the stock launcher.

Overall your software experience is going to be pretty much the same as any other carrier branded Moto X, that is once you disable a few of the Sprint apps to clean things up. Once you do that, you still have access to all of the Motorola tweaks like Touchless Control and Active Display. Performance is right on par with its blue, red and magenta-powered brethren.

The Sprint network

Sprint Moto X

It seems as though any time we have in a Sprint phone to review, we have to go through the same motions. The phone itself may be great, but the network just can't do a high-end phone justice anymore. Of course when talking about any nationwide network, we can never make generalizations and expect them to apply to everyone in every market. For our use of the Moto X, we spent our time in and around the greater Seattle area.

That's getting better, though — it just takes time.

While we're happy to report that LTE has started to show up in the most densely populated areas of Seattle — which wasn't the case four months ago — it is still a hit-and-miss affair. While walking around, staying connected to LTE was on a block-by-block basis. Some areas had a moderately good signal, but we can easily say a majority of our time was spent on 3G still.

Beside just making you wait longer for data to come and go, we're suspicious that the Sprint network had a negative effect on battery life on the Moto X. Whether its just because the radios have to stay on and active longer to transfer even small amounts of data or the relatively constant bouncing between 3G and LTE — or because LTE isn't yet officially turned on in Seattle — the battery on our Moto X drained a bit quicker than what we had experienced on our Motorola Droid Ultra (which is much the same device, on Verizon) and what we've been seeing on Moto X's on other carriers.

Choosing the Now Network

Sprint Moto X

It's great to see the Moto X make its way to all of the big carriers (and even some smaller ones) in the U.S., and even greater for the phones to be generally the same across the board. It's because of this that recommending buying the Moto X on Sprint is an even tougher proposition to handle — why choose Sprint when you can have the exact same phone somewhere else?

If you're not on Sprint right now, you can know that Sprint isn't offering anything with its own Moto X itself that should persuade you to want to switch. If you like what the Moto X has to offer, pick one up on the carrier that works best for you.

Naturally if you're already on Sprint and have an upgrade available — or are maybe ready to try One Up — and have no intentions of leaving, you can sleep well knowing you're getting the same Moto X experience as your friends on other carriers. But if you're willing to make a shift to a new carrier, you're possibly going to be rewarded with a better overall network offering on one of the other three big carriers than you'll continue to find on the Now Network.

 
There are 133 comments

Reader comments

Using the Moto X on Sprint

133 Comments
Sort by Rating

I wish that people testing a Sprint device could use a two tiered approach.
1> Test it in an area with little or no LTE.
2> Test it somewhere that has decent LTE.

This way, those of us in a heavy LTE area would be able to figure out how well the device works somplace where the LTE is fairly decent. I'm in Dallas, for example, and my EVO 4G LTE worked really well on Data before I decided to bathe it. (On the old EVO these days, and even the 3G is fairly acceptable for my usage)

Yea the lte in my area is nice. If its a minus to the author i wll be happy to take that phone off his hands and give it a proper lte test(for a couple of weeks).

On Sprint? When did LTE come to Detroit on Sprint? In this specific universe or some parallel reality?

Posted via Android Central App

Sprint has LTE in a lot of places in SE Michigan. Detroit to Brighton to Ann Arbor is covered pretty well, Dundee has it, and even little podunk Adrian has it.

I travel all 48 regularly & am impressed how fast they are rolling out decent 4g but they seem to roll it out backwards from other carriers, I get 4g in tiny noname places all over. Personally the data caps on ATT & VZ make both carriers irrelevant

Same here, I travel quite a bit for work with my personal Verizon phone and a work provided Sprint iPhone 5 and I have solid LTE coverage in many cities. Verizon still has more LTE deployed but you can't compare deployment as Verizon had a big head start with LTE and Sprint is doing a full rebuild of their network from the ground up, not just adding LTE, which would be much quicker. With that said in areas where I get LTE on both Verizon and Sprint, the coverage is similar as Sprint has very good coverage, and Sprint LTE speeds have been averaging 10-20mbps with some areas as high as 32mbps.

AT&T, Sprint and TMO are playing catchup with Verizon and will naturally have less coverage as they began deployment later. As mentioned above, Sprint is the only carrier rebuilding their entire network from the ground up, upgrading 3G, adding LTE on 1900 and 800, refarming Nextel's 800mhz spectrum, adding HD Voice, deploying TD-LTE on Clearwire's 2600mhz spectrum and replacing all old network equipment with state of the art multi-mode base stations, so the scope of work is much greater which require timely city and county gov't approvals. You simply can't compare deployment speed with other carriers as Sprint is taking the time to future proof it's network.

With that said, areas that have been upgraded by Sprint have excellent coverage and speeds on my experience traveling all over the country, in many cases to rural areas.

Well it surely isn't here in Las Vegas. You know the 1st place they offered 4G to begin with. I drop calls in my own home with sprint. And I have the galaxy s4.

LTE towers have a very strong signal up to Four miles around the tower, after four miles the signal weakens exponentially worse the further you get away and the speeds slow down. I live between 2 lte towers that are both five to six miles away from me in opposite directions and get speeds of 8 down 3 up. Inside the 4 miles I can get speeds of 15 and 10, depending what time of day cause speeds are worse at rush hour and the towers are close to major highways, these are vzw towers.

I volunteer to test it in a great lte area. I will make that sacrifice for you, my fellow Android Central users. Only for you

Posted via your wifes, girlfriends phone

I live in one of the major metropolitan areas in the US. I shouldn't have to travel to a completely new market just to find Sprint LTE and test it — and it certainly isn't a selling point for a Sprint device in my market.. That in itself shows why Sprint is failing to prove to anyone that it has a good network. You should be able to go to any major city and have good service, not some specific places.

Are you aware of how Sprint is updating the towers? It's not like the other three. Network Vision takes a lot longer to complete rather than just some simple upgrades

Posted via Android Central App

And I'm supposed to care why exactly?

If I'm a normal customer and I buy a Sprint LTE phone today, my speeds are terrible more often than not. I don't care what Sprint is doing to the towers or how they're doing it, all I know is I can't even stream Google Play Music on its network. That's a shitty user experience for people, and explaining that Network Vision takes time doesn't make that experience any better.

+1 Andrew!

I've been on Sprint for 13 years and I can't stand it anymore. The voice call coverage and connections are great, but the data speeds are abysmal. I could sign a new two year contract and very likely never see LTE or decent data speeds. That's not a bet I'm willing to make anymore.

I'm with you. I'm done, done, done with sprint where we live. 4G?? LTE??? what's that?? We can barely get decent 3 g in our city of over a million people. Plus even standard phone service stinks majorly. I've been suffering with this for years now and at the end of our contract this time, we are going to Verizon. We may pay more but what the heck, at least we can get data and phone when we need it. BYE SPRINT.

I'm with you on this. I have almost non existent 3g speeds and 4g lte no where near where i live. If i want to try sprints 4g, I would have to drive to either L.A or San Francisco which both are 3 hour drives. Ugggh, I hate sprint right now.

Because it would give you somewhat a better perspective on what going here....Rather than coming off a clueless idiot to how Networks are built and function...

I find it laughable how so-called Phone-Geeks, can be completely Clueless to the Network Technology used to power these phones and what goes into Building a Network... IT DOESN'T HAPPEN OVER NIGHT.

Sure we can all sit here and blame Sprint for past Management screw up which caused them to be behind in LTE and why the network cashed in the first place. That doesn't mean Sprint or any carrier can just Flip a Switch and now the Network is perfect.

Sprint is doing a COMPLETE OVERHAUL of their ENTIRE NETWORK, its not just adding LTE panels to the tower and we're done ala Verizon, ATT, TMO LTE upgrades. Everything at each tower is being replaced this TAKES TIME. If you don't have the patients for the time it takes that Understandable. But you come off as some whinny Phone-Geek who doesn't understand Network Building and what it takes to overhaul a network.

I Guarantee you most Sprint-haters Now....Will be eating Crow come next year, and When Sprint has the fastest most consistent LTE thanks to its Nationwide Triband-LTE, especially the vast amounts of 2.5 (Clearwire) you Clueless Phone-Geeks will be scratching your heads about how Sprint got be so fast.

That 2.5GHz spectrum sucks. They should just sell it off.

It is the sole reason that LTE won over Wimax in the US. Sprint's terrible example of the technology made every consumer think Wimax was "bad", when it was Sprint that was bad at doing it. 

We've been hearing "next year" for Sprint for the past 3 years. The only thing Sprint will have more of next year is unsatisfied iPhone customers. Run away from them if you can. 

I'm running away, but not because I'm dissatisfied. Most of my time is spent in one of the first markets to be upgraded, and aside from the occasional trouble spot, I don't have much of a problem with their coverage or speeds

I'm just switching next summer because I need a GSM phone for traveling internationally.

Posted from my 1st gen Nexus 7 via Android Central App

No Jerry - The way Clearwire built out on it SUCKED!...2.5 is very beneficial because there's tons of it and can carry much more traffic at higher speeds. No to mention its the perfect supplement to Sprint's 800/1900 LTE.

This isn't SprintNextel anymore that company's dead and gone. This is now Sprint/SOFTBANK with a ton of Cash and Spectrum and the network will soon reflect that.

Again if the AC brass wasn't totally ignorant to Network infrastructures themselves. You and Andrew would see where people defending Sprint are coming from.

Andrew gave an Analysis on an Incomplete NV Market, that makes his review/Bashing of the network somewhat irrelevant except to say he used a Moto X on an Unfinished LTE network in Seattle.

All the foreign investment in the world won't fix the inherent flaws with HF spectrum like 2.5GHz.

You continue to dream, I'll continue to understand electrical theory and physics. Sprint has a lot of something that's worthless and nobody else wants.

"Temporary inconvenience, permanent improvement". The 'all me' and 'instant gratification' stuff bores me. Don't need the silly stress.

Sprint is rebuilding from ground up. It takes much more time. Please don't include everyone or as you say prove to anyone in your frustration. I'm very happy with the coverage. Is it everywhere I travel, no.

Posted via Android Central App

This exactly. Excellent service in Austin, TX and the surrounding areas. I clocked close to 25 mbps the other day downtown.

Hate to bust your bubble Robbzilla, but the EVO 4G was never a LTE phone. It worked off of the WIMAX system, which is totally different system...

What? The HTC One is a completely different phone, released a year later. The Evo 4G LTE is most comparable to the One X, which was only released on one carrier, AT&T. Verizon and T-Mobile got no equivalent.

I Really want sprint to step up there game, Verizon and AT&T need the competition... But it might be to late...

Posted via Android Central App

You know, I'm relatively optimistic when it comes to Sprint. I've been with them for a few years now, and their service was absolutely WRETCHED for most of the last year. However, in the last few months they've really stepped up LTE coverage in my city (Chicago), to the point where most neighborhoods are actually covered in it (compare to last year, where the entire city had mostly unusable 3G).

They've got a LOT of ground to cover, but I think with Softbank backing them, they've got a chance; they just need to make sure they continue improving their infrastructure to build on what little goodwill they currently have.

I agree, it's so sad seeing a great carrier who still offers unlimited data have such a slow network that it doesn't even matter that you get unlimited!

I want to switch my whole family plan over to AT&T, for a 10 GB shared plan it's the same price for all 5 of us. And we only use about 8 GB, and that's the extreme high end.

Here's to hoping it turns on soon in Utah, because my wife doesn't care to switch!! Haha

Why don't you guys try T-Mobile? They have true unlimited plans and fast HSPA+/LTE. I live in San Diego California and their network is nearly perfect for me. Unfortunately I don't have an LTE phone (Nexus 4) but I get on average at work 16-18 megabytes down and at home an average of 6-8. My brother has the HTC One with T-Mobile's LTE network and he gets 32 megabytes down! I switched from Sprint when I realized their Unlimited data plans were useless since you can't do anything with slow data... I waited to 2 years and I couldn't be happier now.

Posted via Android Central App

I tried T-Mobile and there service is worse then sprint. Who still had AOL dial up speeds? Yep T-Mobile. And there not truly unlimited they only give u a few mb for data roaming. I don't have that issue with VZW.

Posted via Android Central App

Interesting. I actually get much faster AND stronger Tmobile signals and I did on Verizon (LTE Gnex/GS3/GN2) ~10miles from center city Philly. Even better, I usually get faster HSPA+ speeds on my Nexus4 than I did LTE on Verizon.

Now, Tmobile LTE speeds on my Nexus 4 (yes, it has it with minor hacking) absolutely KILL what I got on Verizon. Peak times still get ~30mbps down ~10mbps up. Oh, and I save $75 a month ; ) Love it.

Yeah, Verizon's coverage and speeds are great, but you pay through the nose for it. My wife has Verizon for her iPhone and we pay over $100 (with taxes included) for 1GB of data. Yeah, no thanks. I'll take the occasional poor T-Mo zones to save $70 a month with my Nexus 4 (and escape Verizon's stranglehold on devices).

Troll? T-Mobile's speeds have actually been objectively tested and are, on average, three times Sprint's speeds. Most users having experience with both get better speeds on T-Mobile 3G than on Sprint LTE. And T-Mobile actually does have truly unlimited data, seems like you chose and old plan.

Tmo is worse than sprint unless you are in a major city or live on a highway median strip

Posted via your wifes, girlfriends phone

Ok, so they have 90% of the people covered. What's your point? So I can't stream HD Netflix in Idaho...so what? Even in the extreme boonies I've visisted since leaving Verizon my actual PHONE always works when I need it.

Really? Most places I've gone that are in rural areas, I've gotten coverage on T-Mobile but others with Sprint and even AT&T didn't get coverage.

My wife consistently uses 20-24 gb & I use 10-15 regularly on Sprints so slow network & a lot of that usage is on 3g, the caps VZ & ATT impose for the prices you pay should be illegal

FOR THOSE OF YOU GETTING GOOD LTE SIGNAL, HOW FAST IS IT?

In Salt Lake City there's a couple spots that have it, just like it was mentioned in Seattle in the article. Even though it's not official.

But I only get like 6 Mbps down... Is that what I have to look forward to with LTE?!

I'm getting 20-30 Mbps down but not always. It's pretty fast most of the time when I'm connected, it's not official in my area either. Huntington village on Long Island, NY

I am in an official area of a state capital. Inside some buildings I have issues but generally and in the burbs I see constant 20's. I sometimes use the hotshot on the deck when my router goes wonky and I do not miss a beat

Posted via your wifes, girlfriends phone

I have a Galaxy S4 on Sprint. In San Francisco (well, at least in North Beach, not so much in other areas), I get pretty good LTE coverage on Sprint. But even with good LTE coverage, I get MAXIMUM 8 mbps download and about 3 mbps upload, which is fine to stream music or watch Netflix in my opinion.

Sprint's LTE is a little faster in the peninsula, like San Bruno, where I usually get about 8 to 15 mbps download (mostly closer to 8). But I have noticed that even when I'm on 3G, it is decent enough to stream music (usually about 2 to 3 mbps download). Sprint has improved a lot with their 3G speeds (well, speaking relatively, of course, as I used to get under 100 kbps, and now I get about 2 mbps with Sprint which is not great in my opinion, but BETTER than it used to be).

I also have a Verizon Note 2 provided by my work. And Verizon -- as most would expect -- blows Sprint out of the water in terms of coverage and speed (I consistently get between 20 to 35 mbps on Verizon).

Having said all that, I'd still choose Sprint if I were to have to choose one phone that I had to pay for since it's a good amount cheaper than Verizon, has unlimited data and has passable LTE coverage in the areas I use my phone.

Andrew, I think your article is really unfair to Sprint.

It seems to me that unless you are trying to purposely hurt Sprint by suggesting their customers switch carriers, then the fair and objective thing to do would have been to test the phone in a market where Sprint's LTE network is fully operational.

Granted At&t and Verizon have better nationwide coverage for their LTE network than Sprint does, but if you had knowingly tested this phone in a market where you knew At&t and Verizon DID NOT have coverage, the masses would be screaming foul.

The fair and honest thing to do would have been to either go to a market where Sprint's network is strong so a true comparison could be made, or forego the test altogether and give the assignment to another reviewer who lives in such an area.

I know it's easy to bash Sprint, after all, even in school there was always one kid who had to take the lion's share of ridicule (sometime warranted and sometimes not). But in their defense, their network struggles not because they don't care or are not trying hard to make it better. Sprint just doesn't have the resources of an At&T or Verizon so it's taking them quite a bit a longer.

But please don't bash them unfairly, and even worse, go so far as to write an article on a respected website that all but calls for it's customers to leave them for another network.

I think this is a good point. I used to have T-Mobile, and had no problems with them in Chicago, but in Wisconsin (where I go every other weekend), I had terrible signal, especially data-wise. Now that I have Sprint, the service in Chicago isn't as good from a data perspective, but it's getting MUCH better, and I've had plenty of success in Wisconsin, and in Puerto Rico (where I vacation every few years). Hell, San Juan, PR gets pretty solid LTE!

Like you said, it IS all about where you're at; some places aren't viable for LTE regardless, and in some places, Sprint is actually better than T-Mobile or ATT. Either way, review the phone, not the location the phone's at.

It is not Andrew's fault that Verizon and AT&T are so far ahead of Sprint. Or, more accurately, that Sprint is so far behind. Sprint's Now Network is false advertising and no amount of preferential treatment given to Sprint is going to change that. If Sprint can't provide good coverage in a major metropolitan area such as Seattle, why should Andrew make apologies for that? He's reporting the truth as it occurs where he is testing. And the grass really isn't going to be greener enough in other markets to warrant biased reporting - it's the network as a whole that is important. And here Sprint is at a significant disadvantage nationwide.

As a whole (or should I sale hole?), Sprint sucks. The truth hurts.

^^This (in reply to DAS). I've been with Sprint for over 12 years in Massachusetts. I lost count of how many times I called them to complain that I could pull faster data downloads on a dial up modem than I could on their network. To add insult to injury I was paying them a $10 premium for the privilege of using their terrible network because I was using a smartphone.

But last year things changed. LTE arrived and I am getting better a better LTE signal from Sprint than I am from Verizon. Of course cell tower location probably has something to do with that, but just the same I am amazed that the data speeds I get with Sprint match that of AT&T and Verizon. Yes, I am one of the lucky few who has LTE from each of the major carriers in my area, and the coverage map from T-Mobile shows their LTE as being available here as well.

Sprint is definitely playing catchup with their expansion. Their rollout however is expected to be largely complete by the end of 2014. In the meantime Sprint is re-purposing spectrum from the old Nextel Network and after all is said and done Sprint will have enabled LTE over 3 different spectrums and their phones (starting with the LG G2) will be able to connect with each of them as needed, possibly making their coverage greater than that of both AT&T and Verizon.

The future is bright for Sprint in my opinion and I suspect that AT&T will be the first of the "Big Two" to return to an unlimited data option in the not too distant future as a result of Sprint's rise from the ashes.

DAS, I think you're ignoring the fact that Sprint wasted a ton of resources trying WiMAX instead of LTE. Absent that "little" fiasco, imagine where Sprint's LTE could be today.

This is their own doing...

I understand what you're saying, and yes Sprint created some of their own challenges.

However, I was commenting on how unfair it was to judge the speed of Sprint's network against At&t, Verizon and T-Mo, when the reviewer knows the test is not on equal ground.

If you owned a Corvette because you made good choices and saved up your money, and I also owned a Corvette, but because of bad choices I only have access to it on Tuesday, Thursday, & Saturday. However, Monday, Wednesday & Friday because of those bad choices I'm forced to drive a used Ford Pinto.

When a friend comes over and says he wants to test the speed of your car against mine, and picks Monday to perform the test who would argue and say that's fair?

Granted I made some bad choices, but since the test isn't about our choices but rather the speed of our vehicles then I'd want the opportunity (and so would anyone) to use our best car and perform the test on a day when the comparison does not put one or the other at an obvious disadvantage.

But to make matters worse, my "friend" goes around and tells the other people I associate with to ditch me as an association, based solely on the test performed on Monday, and jump over to your side because your car beat mine in the test.

They didn't waste the resources. They had to build wimax or lose the spectrum. Lte was still be set as the defacto standard so the had to use it or lose it.

The bandwidth on the way with the softbank money will more than pay off in the next few years.

Vzw and att will have a closer race soon

Posted via your wifes, girlfriends phone

I live in Sacramento CA. I have Sprint, I wish I didn't. But right now i'm to cheap to move off of my family's "family plan". Sprint never told me that during their whole LTE rollout the current network would degrade so poorly. When I had my old EVO, 3G was never a problem and I even had WiMax for most of it's life. I have had 2 LTE phones, the EVO LTE and now the GS4. I barley have 3G now. I average about .01 mbps when i'm away from WiFi. I love the Android OS, but it's relying on the "cloud" more and more with each update. And that is becoming very problematic as a Sprint customer, I can't even stream a radio station on Google Play Music for 90% of my commute. I don't think the article is bashing sprint unfairly. I think the point is, it doesn't matter how smart the smartphone in your pocket is, if it's running on a crap network your phone will be crap too. So pick the network first.

I live in Davis, CA. Everything you say is true. I am off contract now and moving three phones over to Verizon. We did a drive to LA recently down I-5. Could stream Pandora the whole way using someones Verizon. Was awesome. Our sprint phones couldnt even hold a phone call.

One point the article misses that IS relevant. For those of us on Sprint who have zero to no signal most of the time the phone has to work hard to look for that signal. That batters battery life but ALSO because the battery has to go through more charging cycles it shortens the life of the battery (in time not cycles).

I completely agree, Hey A.C., we get it, you don't like Sprint. I am getting tired of all the Sprint bashing, esp in actual articles, by a respected website.
You should bring a Verizon phone out here to my neck of the woods & you would see how Sprint beats them , since there is no Verizon signal, at all.
Everybody's experience is different, so please, at least, be fair.

All I can report is what I see when using Sprint devices. And this is how Sprint devices are for everyone at AC who has used (or is currently using) one. We don't all live in the same city and we sure as hell travel a lot, and it's the same case every single place that we go.

As I note in the article above I don't expect to make blanket statements and have them apply to everywhere nationwide, but the network does seem to be that way more often than not. And the other carriers do a better job in every place that we go as well.

We spend a lot of time with all of the major carriers, and they each have their issues — as I note above phones on Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile all slow down considerably during the day in the city. The difference is at 7pm I can get 10mbps+ out of the other 3 carriers, and Sprint is suck giving me 1-3mbps if I'm lucky. And in the middle of the day the phone basically doesn't work.

I'm not going to review a phone on Sprint and act like I don't notice the network speeds — I'm not going to lie to you guys and I'm not going to lie to myself. The point here is to show how my experience with the Sprint network is, and the experience was bad.

We're happy to "bash" any of the other carriers when they do something wrong, and we're happy to report whenever Sprint starts working better. The former doesn't happen as often and the latter has yet to happen.

I'm new here & a few of those statements are why I have just learned very early not to take your articles seriously, to say in the middle of the day your phone basically barely works??? I literally live in the road traveling so I know for a fact that is a very false statement

What incentive do I have to lie to you? The phone barely works in the middle of the day in Seattle. Speeds on Sprint range from 0.1mbps to "network communication error", and it's not a fluke. Its every. single. day. The speeds are so slow you can't stream music, load a web page or even keep a consistent connection to Skype to receive messages.

Just because that's not the case where you are doesn't mean you can say that I'm not being truthful about what I see here.

Are you a Sprint employee or a Sprint shareholder, because no one without a personal stake in Sprint would bleat such nonsense.

As Andrew mentioned in another comment, one shouldn't have to go find the isolated spots where Sprint has non-terrible service and that users can't just have the reasonable expectation of service in major metropolitan areas is exactly why Sprint fails.

What you want is like someone demanding that beauty contests be held in darkness because bright lights disadvantage the ugly contestants and it's not fair to the unattractive to judge them the same as the pretty people.

Posted via Android Central App

Huh? I get that AT&T and Verizon are ahead of Sprint, but even T-Mobile (who has less customers than Sprint and cheaper plans) is beating them. T-Mo started LTE rollout much later than Sprint but already matches their LTE coverage. And speeds are already much better.

I absolutely agree with DAS, completely ridiculous to test the phone in a market without LTE deployed yet. Especially when I know how good Sprint's network is in upgraded markets. See my comment several posts above, I have Verizon and my employer provides me an iPhone 5 through Sprint and in upgraded markets the difference is negligible. Obviously Verizon does have better coverage in rural areas but Sprint has very good coverage. Just giving an objective opinion of my experience because when I see these posts bashing Sprint I can't help but think how it's just simply not true in upgraded markets. They still have a ways to go to finish their network project but the service has been very good.

I agree, if sprint works for you republic is a much more frugal choice. The defy xt is almost as low end as you can get for a current smart phone but when the moto x comes to republic, for $25 a month unlimited 3g or $40 with unlimited LTE(if you are lucky to live somewhere sprint LTE is ) and only $299, the extra hundred bucks is worth it for the monthly savings, contract fee, same network, same phone.

The only thing I wonder with Republic is roaming. I don't use it often but I have used it recently. Do they have the luxury of the same roaming as Sprint, which roams to Verizon?

One of my sisters has been on Sprint since she worked for them when they entered the Milwaukee area. She gets an awesome discount, even after no longer working for them all these years. It's still a rip-off, considering she can recite all the areas in Wisconsin that she can't use her phone. Hell, I was with Sprint for two weeks and ditched them because I couldn't make outgoing calls from the living room of my girlfriend's house.

Now I'm on Verizon with one of my other sisters. There are still lines available on the family plan and I occasionally try convincing the other sister to ditch Sprint and join us. She still refuses. I guess the allure of getting 20% off lousy coverage outweighs bulletproof service. Either that or she's just stubborn and/or independent.

Sprint is a joke.

Your girlfriends living room must be in a dungeon. Correct? I get GREAT service with Sprint where I live. Besides, you just keep receiving the enema from VZW when your bill arrives.

The ex-girlfriend's house is made out of concrete blocks, which could be a factor. And as far as my Verizon bill goes, I pay less than $60 per month for unlimited text and data (yes, I still have unlimited data and plan to keep it that way) and 1400 minutes. I would not call that an "enema."

I have the LG Optimus G on Sprint. The Trade Zove Ave Industrial Park area in Upper Marlboro MD, I get 19+ down (highest 28), and 12+ up (highest 19+) on average. And this is indoors! That location has the fastest speeds I've ever recorded. There are spotty LTE areas in the MD/DC/VA areas.

There is hope for Sprint.

At least Sprint offers decent pricing and we know 4G isn't available everywhere. I'm with Verizon and get NO data whatsoever where I should get 4G

Posted via Android Central App from my rooted Verizon S3

Andrew if you dont want that phone let me know, I will take it off you're hands. I live accross the sound lol.

Guys - find a reviewer in a decent sprint LTE area - it's not that hard...you're never going to get it in Pensecola and probably not decent connections in Seattle anytime soon. Try someone in Atlanta :)

I'm not sure how that changes anything. It simply reviews the phone for use in the Atlanta area and ignores the fact that Andrew was pointing out here: Sprint's network is inconsistent across the nation at a greater rate than the others.

You can say that about any carrier . In my area sprint and Verizon are good speed wise. T-Mobile and AT&T lag. Especially when you go into rural areas. Straight GSM not even edge.

Posted via Android Central App on my HTC One

Except that I said "at a greater rate" - I agree that every network is inconsistent and when anybody asks which carrier I should get I tell them to choose the carrier that has the best signal in the place(s) they use the phone most often.

But I'm not going out on a limb here by saying that Sprint's network is less consistent as the others as I was a 12 year Sprint customer and have lived on both coasts. They acknowledged the problem themselves as part of their network upgrade discussion with shareholders.

I agree with what you're saying but I think throwing the Network comparison into this post is kinda misleading. I would have rather seen a "results may vary" or "depend on your area" because at this point with the network overhaul that's going on it will vary one way or the other.

Posted via Android Central App on my HTC One

You can say that about any carrier . In my area sprint and Verizon are good speed wise. T-Mobile and AT&T lag. Especially when you go into rural areas. Straight GSM not even edge.

Posted via Android Central App on my HTC One

You might want to do a little research or maybe in your area this is the case. But in my area and 2 hours north of me and south sprint is horrible with data speed. Not only from actual use but from reviews and site info. Also verizon once was getting around 30mbps here in my area, now my cousin says he only gets 13 on a good day. On hspa+ my wife's tmobile phone doesn't go below 5 on a bad day and on good days its 8-10mbps and that's not even lte. Of course edge is slow but out of the whole time I hit edge 15% of the time. As for at&t my friend has done several speed tests and with lte he never goes below 10mbps. I used to always fight for sprint and cdma but after real world testing and having all 4 and trying them I will stick with tmobile. I would choose att if they weren't so expensive.

Only reason I am with Sprint is because it is the only carrier that has a deal with our Hospital. They have installed antennas in the basement so I get signal at my desk. The unlimited data is a huge sales gimmick for anyone who doesn't get LTE. Even the LTE a lot of people get is less than 1 Mbps down due to it not being fully rolled out most places. If it wasn't for the signal issue at my work I'd switch. Sprint has made way too many promises than are not getting met or if they are it is taking magnitudes of time longer than they initially stated.

Unfortunately not. Google Wallet for NFC payments just... isn't really making enough of a push with retailers to work. Around here if you see any "next generation" payment systems, it's Square on an iPad.

Yeah you should be good to go then. I just noticed that Sprint ID was tightly tied into the stock launcher — messing with it caused launcher issues (like everything being reset to default).

The main reason I am still with Sprint is one I never see talked about and don't understand why. Google Voice integration. If other carriers would add the ability to make your cell phone number your Voice number, I would leave in a heartbeat. We get decent LTE coverage with Sprint here in Austin, and when I visit family in Houston, but when it does drop to 3G it's so painful. But I've had my phone number integrated with Google Voice for so long now, I don't think I could give up the ability to make calls and texts from my computer or Nexus 10, when I don't have my phone on me. I will never understand why other carriers won't allow you to do this; especially now that all of their smartphone plans include unlimited talk and text, and just make you pay for data in bunches. When will AT&T or T-Mobile get on the ball with this so I can get a Nexus phone with Voice integration?

DeskSMS and TabletSMS have fixed that limitation for me. I no longer need GVoice integration and can text from my tablet and my computer through my Nexus 4. Better support for MMS too, though it's still a little confusing when I can see them and when I can't.

What about the ability to make phone calls directly from within Gmail / Voice / Google+? I know there are apps to take care of the texting issue, but I haven't really seen anything for phone calls.

This plus using GV app to text while traveling overseas is great. I use it constantly while I travel...just need wifi and a SIP app (plus some additional configuration) and I can text and call US numbers without international charges. It is definitely a selling factor for Sprint (to me) for this reason.

I've been with Sprint a little over two years now. I live in Houston Texas. About a year and a half ago Sprint turned on LTE. In the beginning I was getting speeds of 30 to 40 Mbps down and 15 to 20 Mbps up. I ran my mouth to every body I met about Sprint. Now that everyone switched to Sprint, I get Verizon speeds of about 15Mbps down and 8 to 10 Mbps up. Moral of the story is all those people need to go back to Verizon.

The bigger moral here is don't go into Verizon or AT&T stores showing off. People will leave their carrier for yours. (When showing off, don't show people that you use 60 Gigabytes of fast 4G LTE data a month for half the price they pay the Big Two for 10 Gigs.)

P.S.
Its a whole lot of fun to walk into a Verizon or AT&T store and tell them that you're thinking about switching to them, then letting the rep get all the way to the data plans, and ask you how much data you use a month. It's a beautiful thing to see the look on their faces when they see 60+Gigs of data on the data usage section of your device and they know you only pay $80 to $90 a month, when their going to charge you over $175 a month just to get close to what you already have.

Posted from my Beta Tester AC app!

Andrew, i tried really hard to wipe that spec of dirt off my phone's screen. (first photo).

Maybe take photos, THEN eat lunch?
B-)

That is my biggest complaint with sprint. On google now features it sucks, on my wifes tmobile phone when you use google now voice feature it pulls it up immediately, on my sprint phone i get "network unavailable" over half the time. It makes me want to throw my phone through a window. Sprint is really screwing up the experience of owning a high end phone.

There is a benefit to sprint being so late to the lte game. The new lte stuff that is being installed also supports lte advanced. So when that comes to life all it will be for sprint is a software upgrade. The towers will be ready to go. Also they are putting the radios near the top of the tower. There is now only a six foot lead of coax. Less loss. So there is a plus side to them being late to the lte game.

Posted via Android Central App

Somehow that sounds unconvincing.

Never mind how horrible the service is today, just you wait till we have our 6 foot coax installed, THEN we will show you, by golly!

No. That's not what I was saying. I was simply stating there Is a benefit to them being late to the LTE game. The coax portion was an interesting fact being an RF GEEK. Yes the longer the coax the more loss. I'm more pointing out that when LTE advanced arrives all the other Carriers will need a hardware upgrade. For sprint it will be easy.

Posted via Android Central App

While I think we can understand that in the long run Sprint may have some good things going for them, that does absolutely nothing to help me try and justify using a phone on Sprint that can't do anything because the data speeds are so slow and inconsistent.

Saying "we'll have a better network in the future" doesn't make me want to buy a phone now.

Actually, yes, please everyone leave Sprint. It just ensures I'll never have a problem with bandwidth! Network Vision is awesome when/where implemented...and guess what? even in those places, it's not fully tuned and turned up. This will happen after all towers are live with 1900/800 LTE, 800SMR/1900PCS in an area. Then the icing on the cake will be TDD-LTE (2600) and LTE-Advanced which most of hardware will be in place. 1 year from now, everyone will be talking about how to catch up to Sprint's network. Fact. (but also Fact: it sucks donkey bawls now any place without LTE towers, oh my, oh my its turrible)

Almost 8 years with sprint. I use 15gb-20gb a month. $50/month with S4. Perfect service. Sure it sucked a bit with 3g years ago but wimax and lte gave/give me data service all the time.

This review is completely inappropriate. Even the subtitle is horribly slanted right from the start.

He claims he shouldn't generalize based on his one little area, and then proceeds to do so anyway. Then questions why someone would want the phone on Sprint when you can get it elsewhere.... DUH, maybe because of lower price, or better coverage in your target area, or better service.

We should expect better from AC. -FAIL-

I think the review is appropriate. Sprint has VERY small LTE coverage in the USA right now based on square miles or population. The review is representative of the average sprint customer.

Being on Sprint is like being married to an abusive spouse. they keep saying they will change but they never will. (after 2+ years they haven't)

Used to have great Sprint coverage in the Tampa Bay Area. Both WiMax and LTE were awesome and 3g was usable but over the last 4-5 months 3g is absolutely useless. Speed tests would get .3/.8 MB/s. Dunno about wimax anymore but LTE coverage got worse and 2g seemed to degrade as well. Neither my coworkers nor I could use our phones inside the warehouse anymore even though we could less than a year ago. Building penetration is also terrible. Switched to TMO a couple weeks ago and almost everything is better. I get 3g speeds north of 8MB/s and (though my Nexus 4 doesn't support it) we can make calls and send texts over wifi. Rural signal is just as bad as Sprint was but that's not worse than before. Altogether with 4 lines I'm paying $30 more than I was with 2 on Sprint.

Ugh, Sprint. As a former subscriber to, and champion for Sprint, I've really soured on it this past year. Happens when it claims you owe it $700 that you really don't.

I'll admit, its 3G service in Little Rock, AR was phenomenal and the tiny strip of LTE that lit up on the western boulevard 3 months ago is good, even if nobody lives in the LTE zone (just stores and shopping centers), but my experience elsewhere was horrid and getting worse before SPRINT cut ME loose.

After upgrading to the EVO LTE last December from an older EVO, I visited family in Fort Smith and found that 3G slowed down enough to kill my battery faster than using data was worth. Fort Smith ain't some boonie town off the map. It was unusable in my large residential neighborhood I grew up in, I had to turn my phone off in the movie theater just to save on battery, and by this summer 3G became practically useless anywhere there.

Sprint coverage is comically inconsistent. There is a more than 3 hour stretch from central Arkansas (north of Conway, outside of Greenbrier) to fucking Branson, MO where Sprint doesn't even exist! It roams all the way, so much so that after relocating to just south of the MO border, Sprint wanted me out. It's rural here, but it's not depopulated either. I mean, Verizon has LTE up here, and it works fine.

Sprint is terrible because one hand doesn't know what the other's doing. It was supposed to send return kits for my EVOs the end of August. I relied on it to send them and I waited the week to 10 days it would take, accounting for Labor Day too.

They never arrived, and I had to sic my hatchetgirl on Sprint to actually send them out this time. I packed the LTEs, boxes, chargers, cables and all and sent them out over two weeks ago, and Sprint STILL hasn't finished processing the return.

Guess who still has a $700 ETF Sprint wants paid today? Not doing it, sorry, I did my part but Sprint won't do its own. I hope it dies a painful death, Softbank bailout notwithstanding.

I can't believe how such a slow,;shoddy business still exists today, it's almost like dealing with the Fed. I don't care if people here say bashing Sprint is kicking it while it's down, it makes it too easy, and it wholly deserves it.

Posted via Android Central App and Droid Mini

As smartphones become used by more and more average people, a national network signal is not very important as it is to business travelers. I only leave my general area for vacation, so I really just need great coverage in my general home area. What's needed is the ability to rent a phone, for say a week. That way you could test a different network before you committed to it. And you could rent one for vacation too. I had Verizon for over a decade with great coverage. I switched to T-mobile and have all the speed I need at a price that saves me enough to buy a new phone off contract each year, if I wanted.

As a sprint customer right now with an upgrade due, I would not recommend getting any sprint phone that is not triband LTE including the note 3.

So should a person go with a Blackberry on sprint? I really want this phone but if its battery hungry why bother until we get lte in the Orlando Market

Posted via Android Central App

2 questions.

What is impact of having Sprint ID on the launcher?

What LTE bands are supported by the Moto x?

Sprint ID has no affect whatsoever enabled or disabled on my HTC One, not sure what the writers talking about but I suspect user error. 2nd question..... I don't know

CORRECTION - the Sprint price for the phone is $99.99 with 2 year contract. Other carriers have it for $199.99. The $100 slot for this phone is more reasonable. I wouldn't be surprised if other carriers drop their price.

So many comments here show extreme technical ignorance, but that is understandable.
This industry is highly technical and not something easy to wrap your head around. Sprint generally uses frequencies 3 or 4 times higher than others like Verizon. You just can't compare network coverage on a tower-by-tower basis due to the propagation of the different frequencies. Each band has its pros and cons. With Sprint securing Clearwire's block of frequencies AND the conversion of the old NEXTEL band, Sprint will have a very diverse group of frequency blocks offering a wide range of possibilities. However, the amount of capital to build it out is incredible (enter Softbank), to say nothing about the time it will take.
Don't be so fast to blame a network. You also have to realize half the system is the radio you hold in your hand operating at peanut-power levels. Even things like tinted windows in your vehicle can significantly attenuate a cell phone signal.

This review irritates me for one reason: it sings songs of praise for Verizon and at&t based on their superior data speeds, but makes no mention of the fact that neither of those carriers offer unlimited data plans anymore. If you're a heavy data user and haven't already been with one of them for long enough to still be on a grandfathered data plan, your ONLY real choices are Sprint or T-mobile. Verizon and at&t may be faster, but what that really means is that you'll just burn through your monthly data allowance that much faster.

I've been with T-Mobile for years, and I'm really not very happy with the data speeds I get. I went to the MotoMaker website to get this new flagship phone, and find that T-mobile doesn't even offer a discount for it. So staying with T-mobile is, I'm sorry to say, not an option anymore. So I checked Verizon. Their highest data plan offering is 10 GB. I've already used 14.4 GB and have a week to go in my bill cycle. at&t offers higher-allotment data plans but they start getting pricey real quick and there's still NO unlimited option.

So if you don't care for T-mobile and you plan to use a lot of data (and let's be honest, this is a flagship Android smartphone. If you aren't using a lot of data why are you getting such a phone?) then Sprint is your only real choice of the main carriers. Granted, there's always Boost, Virgin, and Cricket, but their coverage is worse than Sprint's and they don't subsidize the cost of your phone so you'll pay at lot more.

Bottom line: for me, Sprint is my great hope for the future lol I'm really hoping I don't get disappointed but I'm already SO disappointed with T-mobile that I don't think that's likely. Being one of only two carriers to offer unlimited data plans is a HUGE plus for Sprint, and the other carriers really oughtta be boycotted for not offering it. Owning a smartphone on a limited data plan is like owning a sportscar with a 1 gallon fuel tank.

Love the phone except for one deal breaker. the text box field only shows 3 lines of your text. you will have to scroll through to see your text or make changes. so many time I have accidently hit send when only trying to scroll through the text that you can't see. This is a deal breaker. Also, no directional arrows on the key board. you are suppose to manually move a blue marker through the text and place it where you want. one problem, it doesn't go where you want it. I have had the moto x for month and only able to move it exactly where I wanted it less than 10 times. so I end up placing it before the spot I want it and then delete back to the place I need it. then I have to retype the deleted text and the text I wanted to add/change. If you text more than 3 lines at a time this phone isn't for you.
I was able to get a keyboard app with directional arrows.
Does anyone know of an app with expanding text box/field so you see all you are texting and no scrolling?