قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Tips and Tricks / Crickets unlimited plan is still the best bang for your buck – Review Geek

Crickets unlimited plan is still the best bang for your buck – Review Geek



  Cricket Wireless Unlimited Data Plan
Cricket Wireless

Around mid-year, we published a couple of pieces about the best phone plans for families and simple lines. Cricket was near the top of both lists, and today it's probably the best unlimited plan you can get.

Cool, so why do we talk about it again if nothing really changed? Since I recently switched to Cricket Unlimited and you let me tell you: I wish I would have done this time ago. Ages .

Here is the scenario. Back in December, I was away from home for about two weeks visiting family in Virginia, Tennessee and Georgia. Lots of driving, lots of hotel time. Hotel Wi-Fi was shit, so I quickly reached my 8 GB data limit on Cricket.

Then I struck myself: I would also travel to Vegas for CES in early January, where I would undoubtedly need much more data. Then I had two choices: Add more data as needed, one gigabyte (at $ 1

0 per pop) or change my plan.

But here's the thing: I have four lines on my Cricket plan and became grandfathered into an old pricing schedule. Even a change would have killed this pricing and raise my invoice by SEK 30 in addition to the increased plan itself.

Then I remembered that Cricket's killing prize for its unlimited plan: only $ 100 for four lines. It was smaller than I paid then, but I was worried because the specific plan picks up the speed at 3 Mbps (as opposed to the Crickets usual 8 Mbps cap). Can you really survive with only 3 Mbps?

  Crickets Unlimted data packets
The fine print, shown with single line prices.

I had a little choice, so I took the plunge and hoped for the best. I wish I would have done it a long time ago.

Is 3 Mbps really enough? (Spoiler: Yes)

That's the question, right? Can you survive with such long speeds? That's the biggest thing I wanted to know, and it was especially scary to know that if I were to try to return to my old plan later, I'd pay more money for the same thing (who wants hell?). 19659005] But here I am almost two months later and wish I would have done so much earlier. Here's the most important thing: I haven't noticed a really noticeable difference in my service. Maybe do some Instagram videos take a little longer to load? Or maybe I just pay attention now. Hard to say!

And it's really takeaway there. If I am not sure there is a difference, then there is no difference (even though it is indeed ). But mostly it is not something I like or even know about. Facebook is loading well. Streaming music has not changed. Google Maps is loaded as it always has. All things I've on my mobile been quite good at Crickets 3Mbps Unlimited plan.

3Mbps may be slower on paper, but in practice I never once felt about switching from the full speed plan to the blocked unlimited plan.

Of course, there are also things in place by Cricket to optimize the experience for you and relieve some of the load on their network. For example, all video is limited to SD-480p, that is, which is good on the mobile. As much as I have looked at YouTube on my phone, I'm not sure I could ever tell you what resolution the video clips were regardless of which network I was on. 480p is good on a relatively small screen.

It is also the question of being disturbed if you use a lot of data. Cricket "can temporarily slow down data rates when the network is overloaded" if you use more than 22 GB, which probably only applies to a very small subset of users. To put that type of data usage into perspective, 22 GB of data is about 92 hours of standard YouTube video. You would have to watch almost 4 days hosting video streaming with only cellular data to hit the lid on unlimited planes.

With that in mind, this is a good plan for most . The most data-heavy users who spend all their time away from reliable Wi-Fi will probably not love the 3Mbps connection, but for everyone else-I say go for it. You will probably save money without any real impact on performance.


Source link