Jump to content

Contributors to this blog

[PSA] Carrier Aggregation Now Officially Live

lilotimz

17,317 views

blog-0544608001436983713.jpg

by Tim Yu

Sprint 4G Rollout Updates

Wednesday, July 15, 2015 - 3:17 PM MDT

 

Consider this just a public service announcement. Sprint Spark Band 41 Carrier Aggregation (2x CA) now is officially live according to a Sprint internal announcement leaked on Reddit today by a verified Sprint employee in the Sprint subreddit. Late last month, S4GRU found evidence of 2x CA being live in Atlanta, but this now is a formal notice that Sprint has sent to its employees.

 

This is the present lineup of 2x CA capable devices:

  1. Samsung Galaxy S6
  2. Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge
  3. Samsung Galaxy Note Edge
  4. LG G Flex 2
  5. LG G4
  6. HTC One M9
  7. ZTE Hot Spot

Edit: S4GRU has been fielding numerous questions on other devices. To make this very clear, the above are the only devices right now capable of 2xB41 Carrier Aggregation because they have the hardware (category 6 modem) that is required. Any other phones that were released previously are not compatible because their modems are not category 6 (or higher).

 

As detailed in the internal document (posted below), the seven devices may receive automatic profile updates this week to enable 2x CA. Alternatively, as some S4GRU users have discovered, 2x CA may already be enabled or can be enabled manually via the hidden Data programming screen.

 

Next, these are the initial markets in which Sprint is rolling out 2x CA:

  1. Boston
  2. New Jersey
  3. Long Island
  4. Philadelphia Metro
  5. Providence
  6. Southern Connecticut
  7. Baltimore
  8. Cincinnati
  9. Columbus
  10. East Michigan
  11. West Michigan
  12. Indianapolis
  13. Washington DC
  14. Austin
  15. Dallas Fort Worth
  16. Houston
  17. Kansas
  18. Missouri
  19. San Antonia
  20. Atlanta / Athens
  21. Miami / West Palm
  22. Orlando
  23. South West Florida
  24. Tampa
  25. Chicago
  26. Colorado
  27. Milwaukee
  28. Minnesota
  29. Oregon / SW Washington
  30. West Washington
  31. Utah
  32. LA Metro
  33. Las Vegas
  34. North LA
  35. Orange County
  36. Riverside / San Bernardino
  37. San Diego
  38. SF Bay
  39. South Bay

For reference, here is a S4GRU map of all Sprint markets:

 

gallery_1_5_299248.jpg

 

Finally, this is the internal document posted on Reddit:

 

lBk9ap5.png

 

Source(s): Reddit

  • Like 24


52 Comments


Recommended Comments



Great to see a fairly large number of ALU cities despite what we've all heard. However, it is disappointing that NYC is not on that list. It kind of makes me wonder why certain ALU cities made it and others didn't. Is it because NYC doesn't have enough 8T8R ( which it doesn't in my opinion) compared to a city like Boston which has a ton of Sprint Band 41?

  • Like 3

Share this comment


Link to comment

I wonder what hot spot they are referring to, the live pro ?

 

Also, is there any particular forum thread/discussion that relates to this article?

Share this comment


Link to comment

I wonder what hot spot they are referring to, the live pro ?

 

Also, is there any particular forum thread/discussion that relates to this article?

 

Here?

Share this comment


Link to comment

Surprised DC is on this list. Just assumed ALU markets will wait until end of this year. Very good news!!

 

And surprised to see Baltimore as well.

  • Like 5

Share this comment


Link to comment

This popped up in my G+ feed. I don't understand why this conversation never changes so sad. It was the same with wimax, lte, spark, and whatever this is. Are you guys not tired??

Share this comment


Link to comment

This popped up in my G+ feed. I don't understand why this conversation never changes so sad. It was the same with wimax, lte, spark, and whatever this is. Are you guys not tired??

what are you talking about/ LTE/spark is nothing like wimax. I dont get people. wimax was only in 71 cities. spark is over 100 or way more.

  • Like 2

Share this comment


Link to comment

what are you talking about/ LTE/spark is nothing like wimax. I dont get people. wimax was only in 71 cities. spark is over 100 or way more.

 

 It looks like we have a troll in qhinton.....

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

Is Colorado not an initial market for CA? I see them in the second list but not the first? It was mentioned on Reddit that CA was spotted in Denver a couple weeks ago

Share this comment


Link to comment
Is Colorado not an initial market for CA? I see them in the second list but not the first? It was mentioned on Reddit that CA was spotted in Denver a couple weeks ago

 

#26 on the first list?

  • Like 2

Share this comment


Link to comment
Is Colorado not an initial market for CA? I see them in the second list but not the first? It was mentioned on Reddit that CA was spotted in Denver a couple weeks ago

"Colorado" is clearly listed.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

I have carrier aggregation on my two most used towers.  Unfortunately, I only get band 25 and 26 in my house.   

Share this comment


Link to comment

Picked up carrier aggregation in one spot in Philadelphia metro once i get it again ill screen shot it. Optimization is done as well most signals are significantly better than -77 on all bands where i was lucky to see 90 to 115 all the time

Share this comment


Link to comment

This is absolutely fantastic (even though my iPhone can't take advantage)! Go Sprint!

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

I seem to notice more B41 CA enabled tower this morning during my commute compared to the past few weeks.  I will pay more attention during the evening commute when i'm not rushing to work :P

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

Haven't seen B41 at all here in Fort Myers. Have seen it in the county to the north of us, and not sure about the south toward Naples. I've been on the phone with Customer Care a couple times in the past month about how poor the LTE speeds are here. I'm lucky to get 1 up or down on B26, and I live less than 2.25 miles from 3 towers. Hopeful that it will improve soon.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I am glad to see this happening, though many people (magentans *cough* *cough*) won't see through the rosy glasses and pink fog and still say Sprint blah blah. All I can say is..

 

c5b8f1ff8552cf574697247de1b81f04.jpg

Share this comment


Link to comment

S4GRU has talked at length on The Wall and in The Forums about carrier aggregation.  But some of our readers may have missed those discussions, thus be unclear on CA fundamentals.  The following forum post at The Verge is from a Qualcomm employee and is a nice primer written in mostly layman's terms, not overly technical language.

 

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/7/8909127/carrier-aggregation-explained-how-lte-speeds-can-be-doubled-or-even

 

AJ

  • Like 3

Share this comment


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • The Wall Articles

  • Wall Comments

    • to me rural coverage matters most....because i like being able to make phone calls and send texts in remote areas of the country ...i dont care about speeds i just care about per square mile coverage and over all usability and reliability
    • Tell us how you really feel @MrZorbatron!

      I think that most cellular players exaggerate their coverage. Yes, I suspected a long time ago that T-Mobile was one of the most egregious. Now according to the merger presentation, they will end up with 85,000 macro sites. That will be enough to match the coverage of pretty much everybody.

      Like you, I appreciate not having dropped calls or undelivered texts. In my area on my T-Mobile MVNO, I don't get any but can't say it won't happen elsewhere. Once Charter offers service via their Verizon MVNO, I think I will move my 4 personal lines there. My business line will stay on Sprint/T-Mobile, well, because I can't control that.
    • I do not welcome any part of this.  I don't think T-Mobile really cares about doing anything they say they care about.  I have seen how truly bad their network is in the ways that matter for essential communication, and I want nothing to do with it.  Say what you want about Verizon, but the one thing they have in common with Sprint is that they have historically built out a solid network before trying to make it extremely fast.  I don't care about 50 Mbps to my phone.  I care about calls that don't get disconnected constantly.  I care about that stock trade getting through when I send it, even if carried by EVDO, because EVDO still gets it through. Sprint's "Outdoor coverage" maps might seem exaggerated to some, but T-Mobile's maps are a complete joke.  Maybe Michigan is a bubble, the only state where this is true, but it really is very true here.  T-Mobile is the network of dropped and undelivered calls, mysterious disconnection, and "call failed" error messages. If this goes through, look for me at the nearest Verizon store because price to me is absolutely irrelevant.  I see two things happening if this merger goes through:  1:  Sprint spectrum is used to bolster capacity at T-Mobile sites, and 2:  As much of the current Sprint network as possible goes away, even if it means losing sites that would provide valuable fill-in density.  I saw the latter happen with Sprint and Nextel, after they insisted that all Nextel sites that could serve to increase Sprint coverage would be used.  Similarly, there were locations T-Mobile could have used MetroPCS locations to improve their own coverage but didn't, even where it left holes in their network.
    • Not when Verizon just bought 1GHz of mmwave spectrum. Those were the policies of the past. If it does not get approved, it would the loss of jobs and the fact that it might not be good for consumers. Although when I look at the table on this page, comparing unlimited plans, it is already evident that the other three are not really competing and Sprint's lower prices are not working since they did not manage to steal anybody from the other other three. To me it is evident that were Sprint to remain independent they need massive investment in their network since competing on price is not enough anymore and low prices just deprive their network of investment.
    • And I would definitely say that merger probably or probably not won't be approved. If not I would have to say it would be on the grounds of cellular asset divestiture.
×