Virgin Mobile Underrated?

[gamikzone]

I have googled some reviews about virgin mobile 95% of people always have something negative to say about it, why are they all being so negative if you only have to pay $35 a month for service dont expect to have top notch customer service and great 4g lte coverage like verizon or at&t, in my personal opinion i love virgin, i have used boost in the past its good but virging is cheaper and has better phone selections, i have great coverage with sprints network too i rarely lose service even in rural areas, i had t-mobile for a period of time and i was constantly losing service and i never got on a 3g connection on my gs3 which was a real downer for me .

 

[Prinny]

Its a great service in my eyes...

The only thing is sometimes you get a rude rep...is that specific to them? No because its everywhere....I think why people complain the most is because most phones never see an update or anything like that...

 

[gamikzone]

Its a great service in my eyes...

The only thing is sometimes you get a rude rep...is that specific to them? No because its everywhere....I think why people complain the most is because most phones never see an update or anything like that...

its not the specific reason but it defintly is one of them i dont think their customer service is that bad atleast they try

 

[Petrah]

I was with VM USA for several years, and my daughter is still with them. I wouldn't recommend them to anyone. The Sprint mobile network is hideous.

Much better coverage with T-Mobile, and the prepaid plans are more affordable.

 

[Prinny]

Petrah it depends where you are for that. Where I lived in New Jersey, it was a T-Mobile dead zone for a twenty mile radius. Sprint and Verizon had coverage there, though. In SC now where I am, I get great coverage. And its cheap. So I'm satisfied

 

[Petrah]

Petrah it depends where you are for that. Where I lived in New Jersey, it was a T-Mobile dead zone for a twenty mile radius. Sprint and Verizon had coverage there, though. In SC now where I am, I get great coverage. And its cheap. So I'm satisfied

http://androidforums.com/virgin-mobile/610948-question-about-35-dollar-plan.html#post4912464

 

[gamikzone]

Petrah it depends where you are for that. Where I lived in New Jersey, it was a T-Mobile dead zone for a twenty mile radius. Sprint and Verizon had coverage there, though. In SC now where I am, I get great coverage. And its cheap. So I'm satisfied

correct depends in you live in a metro area or not seems to be a major one, i rarely see any of my friends use t-mobile here but if i go in to bigger cities i see it everywhere

 

[euphan1555]

all i here is what great coverage and speeds t mobile has but when i had them i didnt get either.why not post a screencap of your dbm at home and take 6 back to back speed tests to show people what they are missing

 

[gamikzone]

all i here is what great coverage and speeds t mobile has but when i had them i didnt get either.why not post a screencap of your dbm at home and take 6 back to back speed tests to show people what they are missing

their not missing out on much
T-mobile vs Virgin
t-mobile is white themed image. virgin is the black themed one.

 

[agentc13]

Well, from my personal experience Virgin Mobile had good customer service (usually, there was one person I dealt with who was clueless). But I had all kinds of issues with the network like not receiving calls/texts when I had a decent signal or ridiculously slow data speeds (both happened on different phones). Regardless of what you pay you should receive the calls/texts that are sent your way if you have a signal. VM didn't do that on multiple occasions.

Also, this isn't T-Mobile vs Virgin Mobile, so let's keep the discussion on Virgin Mobile and what you like/dislike about it.

 

[mogelijk]

Virgin Mobile can be good where they work. But the problem isn't a lack of LTE, the problem tends to be extremely slow 3G. PC Mag's review of the Fastest Mobile Networks really tended to point that out. While there are a few good cities, most are pretty bad. The column that really shows it is the percentage of the time the data rate was above 144 kbps and, in most cities, Virgin Mobile was 65% or lower, while other carriers are typically above 90%. In essence, over 1/3 of the time (and in many cities over half the time) Virgin Mobile is running at dialup speeds. And even in a city like Chicago where they beat the 65% threshold (they were 77%), they still had an average 3G speed of 380kbps ... very slow for 3G.

Hopefully, once Network Vision is fully online, Sprints speeds will improve greatly. Until then, however, it is very hard to recommend them in most cities or for anyone who will travel.

 

[lou61166]

Where i never had issues with the phone working,texts would get lost,and the dial up 3G speeds where getting to me,if you just want to use a basic phone, VM is a great deal,but for smartphone users it can be a nightmare.

 

[Kamau]

I have googled some reviews about virgin mobile 95% of people always have something negative to say about it, why are they all being so negative if you only have to pay $35 a month for service dont expect to have top notch customer service and great 4g lte coverage like verizon or at&t, in my personal opinion i love virgin, i have used boost in the past its good but virging is cheaper and has better phone selections, i have great coverage with sprints network too i rarely lose service even in rural areas, i had t-mobile for a period of time and i was constantly losing service and i never got on a 3g connection on my gs3 which was a real downer for me .

That's because you have great coverage. Not everyone does, and that makes the $35/month a pain. I believe that most of the problems people have with their phones can be attributed to the coverage in their area. My coverage is piss poor, even though VM's coverage map says I have excellent service. That means I paid $300 for a phone, and the monthly fee, for unstable service. I'm not bitter or upset, but I am disappointed enough to say that unless I move to a area with good VM coverage, I will not ever get another Virgin phone.

 

[aurora40]

$35 isn't that cheap anymore.

Boost can be as low as $40 for completely unlimited usage, though on the same network. Straight Talk is only $10 more for unlimited, and generally much better/higher data speeds. T-Mobile is $5 less for substantially better data, though with pretty rough minute limitations.

Their phones used to be really cheap too, at least by comparison. The OV was a relatively great phone for "cheap", at least back then. But android phones are getting cheaper and cheaper. A brand new GN is only $350. You can get SII's brand new off-contract for $300. Yet Virgin is introducing a new single-core phone at $250. They've released two phones at the $300 mark. That's not that cheap anymore. That's premium android territory.

So people are paying relatively a lot for phones, relatively a lot (or at least not dirt cheap) for the plan, but their data speeds, connectivity, and upgrade record have stayed the same (or gotten worse).

I think there is more expectation that you have 3G data consistently. And that updates are issued for obvious phone problems, or that phones they are still selling not be on Froyo with no upgrade path in sight.

The "magic" of an Optimus V for $150 on a $25 plan, when many Android phones cost $300 on contract with an $80+ plan, well that's gone. Those days are over. Virgin needs to deliver more now than they used to.

 

[aurora40]

Virgin Mobile can be good where they work. But the problem isn't a lack of LTE, the problem tends to be extremely slow 3G. PC Mag's review of the Fastest Mobile Networks really tended to point that out.

For me, that was the huge problem. I had very sporadic speeds, and often was on 1x. With the OV, I didn't use "web" stuff so much, and didn't really notice. But upgrading to a phone with a large screen, I surfed the web more and watched videos more. The 3g network was basically useless for this, at least where I lived.

You raise a good point, Sprint is the only big provider who's 3G speeds actually got worse year over year:

 

[gamikzone]

For me, that was the huge problem. I had very sporadic speeds, and often was on 1x. With the OV, I didn't use "web" stuff so much, and didn't really notice. But upgrading to a phone with a large screen, I surfed the web more and watched videos more. The 3g network was basically useless for this, at least where I lived.

You raise a good point, Sprint is the only big provider who's 3G speeds actually got worse year over year:

you are correct sprint's 3g has gone downhill but hopefully in 2013 when they start network vision they should have major improvements, i check their network vision map maybe twice a week and i see many tower upgrades in my area, so hopefully the towers upgrades their doing will boost our speeds, i considered straight talk on at&t but their data rules seemed a little crazy the 200 mb a day and 2gb a month, if i had to leave virgin i would probably go back to boost, but i save money on virgin right now i don't use many minutes i just text and use data. i think it depends on your needs aswell.

 

[Petrah]

That's because you have great coverage.

I wouldn't call that great coverage.

 

[Petrah]

Here's my daughters speed test on her OpV. Surprisingly decent considering there's 0 coverage here (unless I leave the housing area) on my old OpV.

 

[Petrah]

$35 isn't that cheap anymore.

Boost can be as low as $40 for completely unlimited usage, though on the same network. Straight Talk is only $10 more for unlimited, and generally much better/higher data speeds. T-Mobile is $5 less for substantially better data, though with pretty rough minute limitations.

Their phones used to be really cheap too, at least by comparison. The OV was a relatively great phone for "cheap", at least back then. But android phones are getting cheaper and cheaper. A brand new GN is only $350. You can get SII's brand new off-contract for $300. Yet Virgin is introducing a new single-core phone at $250. They've released two phones at the $300 mark. That's not that cheap anymore. That's premium android territory.

So people are paying relatively a lot for phones, relatively a lot (or at least not dirt cheap) for the plan, but their data speeds, connectivity, and upgrade record have stayed the same (or gotten worse).

I think there is more expectation that you have 3G data consistently. And that updates are issued for obvious phone problems, or that phones they are still selling not be on Froyo with no upgrade path in sight.

The "magic" of an Optimus V for $150 on a $25 plan, when many Android phones cost $300 on contract with an $80+ plan, well that's gone. Those days are over. Virgin needs to deliver more now than they used to.

Going to agree 100% here with you. I honestly couldn't afford my G-Nex and had to dig deep into my savings to get it. I figured that over the long run it would pay for itself considering I went from extremely poor service with VM to awesome service at a cheaper price with T-Mobile.

I honestly do miss using my little OpV as it was a solidly sturdy little phone that ran amazingly well for being a low end Android. Id recommend the phone to anyone.. just not VM.

 

[gamikzone]

Going to agree 100% here with you. I honestly couldn't afford my G-Nex and had to dig deep into my savings to get it. I figured that over the long run it would pay for itself considering I went from extremely poor service with VM to awesome service at a cheaper price with T-Mobile.

I honestly do miss using my little OpV as it was a solidly sturdy little phone that ran amazingly well for being a low end Android. Id recommend the phone to anyone.. just not VM.

tomorrow is my last day for the 30 day return policy but it would be alot of work to return it and get another phone on something else considering if i went to straight talk on at&t with BYOD. i think i will stick with virgin for now i havent had many problems with bad service, i dont mind the slow speeds

 

[Kamau]

I wouldn't call that great coverage.

It was just quoting what the OP stated.

 

[Petrah]

It was just quoting what the OP stated.

I'm sorry... I misunderstood. /hugs

 

[Kamau]

I'm sorry... I misunderstood. /hugs

:beer:

Couldn't find a huge one, but back at ya times 2.

 

[ScottColbert]

I have googled some reviews about virgin mobile 95% of people always have something negative to say about it, why are they all being so negative if you only have to pay $35 a month for service dont expect to have top notch customer service and great 4g lte coverage like verizon or at&t, in my personal opinion i love virgin, i have used boost in the past its good but virging is cheaper and has better phone selections, i have great coverage with sprints network too i rarely lose service even in rural areas, i had t-mobile for a period of time and i was constantly losing service and i never got on a 3g connection on my gs3 which was a real downer for me .

Whether I pay 35. or 85 for service I still expect service. I don't expect Verizon's speeds but I do expect something faster than dial up. What's hard to understand about that?

 

[Ranhead]

Whether I pay 35. or 85 for service I still expect service. I don't expect Verizon's speeds but I do expect something faster than dial up. What's hard to understand about that?

VM fits some people's needs, where Verizon meets others. Personally I am saving around $50 a month coming from a Verizon plan that had no data and 250 messages. Now I get intermitted data and unlimited messages. This fits my needs just fine, but understandably not everyone is going to be happy with VM.