Sprint + Mobile Broadband = teh awesome

I'm almost embarrassed to say this, but I'm really happy with Sprint right now. I mean, sure, the state of freedom in the US cellular market is heinous, and we're basically structurally captive to a system of no choice and slow innovation, but given the shitty state of US telecommunications Sprint is doing pretty damned well.

I'm writing write now from the Caltrain as I wend my way to work. No, Caltrain did not implement its free on-train wi-fi; in fact, they've cancelled their plans to do so. That spurred me to think about other options, specifically mobile broadband. Mobile broadband uses the existing cellular networks to achieve broadband speeds (1.5 Mbps down, 500 Kbps up) pretty much anywhere you have cell coverage... which is pretty much anywhere.

But which carrier do you choose? There are at least 4 major options: Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, and T-mobile. And fear not... I've done the legwork on these 4 carriers and I'm happy to break down the results for you right here, right now.

1. Verizon – I eliminated Verizon because they have a 5 GB/month cap on their "unlimited" wireless broadband service, at which point they reserve the right to just up and cancel your account since they believe only people with evil intentions could ever use that much bandwidth. And thank god I eliminated them. In the 3 days since I got my Sprint card I've already downloaded and uploaded *each* over 1 GB. And that's just standard web browsing and e-mailing! Dumbasses. And yes, this little tidbit on the bandwidth cap is completely buried in the fine print. But it's there.
2. T-mobile – I eliminated T-mobile because their network isn’t broadband. It’s only 56-125k.
3. AT&T – I eliminated AT&T because of a few reasons. I like the fact that their Aircard is the Sierra Wireless 875U, which is quad-band and supports download speeds up to 3.6 Mbps. AT&T’s network is only max of 700k now, but it could theoretically get up to 3.6. However, the quad-band is essentially useless because outside the US you’re limited to 100 MB/month in a select roaming zone, and are otherwise charged 2 cents/KB. Which is $20/MB. Which apparently I do 1000 times over each day, thus potentially costing me $20,000/day at normal usage rates. So yeah, screw that. Plus, AT&T’s terms and conditions EXPRESSLY FORBID: webcams, video/audio streaming, p2p, machine2machine, and VOIP. So no Skype, no internet radio, no Youtube, no videoconferencing, no eMule... They’re assholes like that. Ummm, knock knock AT&T, welcome to 2007. Hell, welcome to 2005. Jeebiz.
4. Sprint – The only drawback to Sprint is that their card isn’t quad-band, so it’s not usable outside the US like AT&T’s is. And the Sierra 595U isn’t as fast as the 875U of AT&T, capping out at ~1.4 Mbps (I believe). But Sprint’s network RIGHT NOW is 1.4Mbps. And their terms and conditions actually permit all those things AT&T forbids. In fact, they explicitly permit these modern uses of the web, and instead only prohibit I think 3 things, which boil down to "don't do anything illegal with your connection". Damn right! Now *that's* service!

So yeah... the moral of the story is that Sprint is actually doing everything RIGHT in the arena of mobile broadband, while AT&T and Verizon are just embarrassing themselves. I'm waiting for T-mobile to get its act together... I have a feeling they'll get it right as well. Oh, and in case you were wondering... mobile broadband service is a separate contract from your cell service. So you can have mobile broadband service from Sprint even if your cell carrier isn't.

Oh yeah... I don't work for Sprint. =D And in fact I've been contemplating leaving them because of their lack of quad-band support. But instead I'm going to stay with them a while longer as a show of support for their modern attitude towards the web. =)