Jump to content
joshuam

Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, S4GRU said:

I do not recall ever seeing Sprint count Airaves in new customer counts/new line additions.

do they break that stuff down at a granular level like that when sharing they added X number of lines for the quarter?  they may not pad the numbers with them though, my OP was more or less thinking out loud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, swintec said:

do they break that stuff down at a granular level like that when sharing they added X number of lines for the quarter?  they may not pad the numbers with them though, my OP was more or less thinking out loud.

I accept that you were thinking out loud. And actually assumed as much. I also think it is a fair question. Especially considering how free tablet adds have been tabulated in the past. As far as the granularity, I do not recall. I just remember specifically discussions about tablets padding adds in the past, but never having any discussions about Airaves padding adds as we discuss new subscribers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2017 at 2:22 AM, RedSpark said:

2.2M Magic Boxes? That's a serious production run. Perhaps we'll see models which transmit more than single carrier of Band 41 as a clean signal?

Why?  What advantage would be gained by having a Magic Box locally transmit 2x CA, for example?

The relay back to the donor cell is not CA.  And the Magic Box needs to avoid interference with the macro network.  Adding another Magic Box carrier could cause spectrum management issues.

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, WiWavelength said:

Why?  What advantage would be gained by having a Magic Box locally transmit 2x CA, for example?

The relay back to the donor cell is not CA.  And the Magic Box needs to avoid interference with the macro network.  Adding another Magic Box carrier could cause spectrum management issues.

AJ

I'm curious how much headroom the technology has going forward and if it would be possible. Based on what you've said, doesn't sound like it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RedSpark said:

I'm curious how much headroom the technology has going forward.

Not much on the spectrum side.  For anything greater, users need to be supplying the backhaul, not relying on relay backhaul.

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, WiWavelength said:

Not much on the spectrum side.  For anything greater, users need to be supplying the backhaul, not relying on relay backhaul.

AJ

AJ,

Do you know if the Magic box can pick the best B-41carrier of the 3 that might be available?

Or, can Sprint manage to keep all 3 carriers fairly evenly loaded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask Tim.  In some markets, Sprint may be running Magic Box specific band 41 relay carriers on the macro network that are not accessible to other devices.

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WiWavelength said:

Why?  What advantage would be gained by having a Magic Box locally transmit 2x CA, for example?

The relay back to the donor cell is not CA.  And the Magic Box needs to avoid interference with the macro network.  Adding another Magic Box carrier could cause spectrum management issues.

AJ

The Relay module operates up to 3xCA on B41 depending on what's available on a local donor site. The small cell unit itself must broadcast on frequencies that are not being used by the relay module and by extension the current macro network. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong quote, Tim.  Or you misconstrue my meaning.  The Magic Box receiving CA is not the same as the Magic Box transmitting CA.

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, swintec said:

but do you have a bill from before you had an airave to compare taxes and fees?  Because, guess what...i do.  Actually, i returned my airave earlier this year after three years of not using it.  the bills after returning the device are about $2.50 LOWER.  The difference came from lower admin fees and other surcharges that are charged per line.

I do and I believe the price is the same...at least for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

I do and I believe the price is the same...at least for me. 

I don't have a bill from ²ⁿⁿ⅞ to compare. I had the Samsung Airave... That was the first one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jonathanm1978 said:

a bill from ²ⁿⁿ⅞

= 1.75n²

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MarshieZballer said:

See... now maybe what I saw wasn't so weird after all.

I was most certainly roaming with an "R" listed, however SCP represented it as Sprint data. And 2 days later I have an updated usage account still with 0 data used for roaming. I still don't know, but I'm happy about it. Because it filled the gaps in nicely.

This was between Steven's Point, Waupaca and New London.

was this on USCC?  i did a few quick downloads again today while on USCC and i *think* it got added to my regular, non-roaming LTE totals for my usage.  still need more data points though.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, swintec said:

was this on USCC?  i did a few quick downloads again today while on USCC and i *think* it got added to my regular, non-roaming LTE totals for my usage.  still need more data points though.

Cool. Keep messing around with it and keep us posted. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, greenbastard said:

It should be a top priority. Upload is very important as more and more people upload pictures, videos, and host live streams on social media. Those UL speeds reflect this. Too many people uploading junk to the internet.

 

Personally, I don't get the need for people to have their lives displayed 24/7. But I'm sure I'm in the minority...now get off my lawn.

I have no interest in social media, personally. The only thing I have that could be consider it, is a LinkedIn account, but I got it way before Microsoft bought LinkedIn and made it more social media-like. I may not keep the account if it gets more that way than not. I figure LinkedIn eventually will become more like Facebook.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, WiWavelength said:

Does the average, non educated user conclude that about his/her home broadband Internet, which almost always is skewed heavily toward downlink? By the above rationale, I should conclude that something is wrong with my 30/5 Mbps home broadband.  But I do not.  And maybe average, non educated users do not either.

AJ

Dang AJ, the hits keep on coming.  :tu:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

T-Mobile has increased its Deprioritization threshold from 32GB to 50GB:

https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news-and-blogs/unlimited-prioritzation-increase.htm

Should Sprint respond by increasing its Deprioritization threshold up from 23GB?

I do not think this is something most users truly are affected by. This is more a show and tell for Tmobile. No real reason to respond. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, RedSpark said:

T-Mobile has increased its Deprioritization threshold from 32GB to 50GB:

https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news-and-blogs/unlimited-prioritzation-increase.htm

Should Sprint respond by increasing its Deprioritization threshold up from 23GB?

I don't think it matters to 99.9 percent of end users.  I use a lot of data and it never impacts me in any meaningful way. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedSpark said:

T-Mobile has increased its Deprioritization threshold from 32GB to 50GB:

https://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news-and-blogs/unlimited-prioritzation-increase.htm

Should Sprint respond by increasing its Deprioritization threshold up from 23GB?

IF anything -- it's a bullet point John and the press can hit VZW and ATT about.   What your network can't handle the extra overhead?  (of course they have almost 2x the subscriber base) 

but that's just my opinion 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Johnner1999 said:

IF anything -- it's a bullet point John and the press can hit VZW and ATT about.   What your network can't handle the extra overhead?  (of course they have almost 2x the subscriber base) 

but that's just my opinion 

 

Yeah I agree, it's mainly a marketing move focused on differentiating themselves from everyone else, since everyone sells unlimited data now. If anyone responds, it will probably evolve into a new form of tiered data plans - where all of them are unlimited and unthrottled but will have different de-pri thresholds. If anyone is to be credited for what may potentially happen here It would be Verizon who started it by offering an always-depri plan and one with a 22 gig threshold. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well ATT already has their 3mbps unlimited vs Highspeed Unlimited --- I'm actually on that 3mbps plan currently.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah true, if speed tiers take off we can credit AT&T for that lol. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, swintec said:

was this on USCC?  i did a few quick downloads again today while on USCC and i *think* it got added to my regular, non-roaming LTE totals for my usage.  still need more data points though.

I would assume it would be, being at where I was. But I have no way to confirm it because of SCP saying it was a "Sprint" LTE signal. But my Note 5 was roaming for sure. This is all an area where I'm lucky to get a decent 3G signal. So it definitely was from another provider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MarshieZballer said:

I would assume it would be, being at where I was. But I have no way to confirm it because of SCP saying it was a "Sprint" LTE signal. But my Note 5 was roaming for sure. This is all an area where I'm lucky to get a decent 3G signal. So it definitely was from another provider.

i saw the same today with SCP but it is a display bug of cached data i believe.  during this behavior, if you completely exit the SCP app and then reopen it you will see it now shows USCC correctly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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


  • TAPATALK VERSION
    BACK ONLINE

  • PROGRESSIVE RAFFLE
    FOR AN iPHONE 8

    iphonexiphone8.jpg

    WHICH CAN PROGRESS TO AN iPHONE 8+ OR AN iPHONE X
    **or an Android device of equal or lesser value**

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • The other thing I found in his video presentation was the clear lack of anything "Sprint".   John jabbed at AT&T and Verizon but nothing on or against Sprint.  Also, I don't know if you guys noticed, but the word "Duopoly" is the power word of late and is being used with more frequency! (no pun intended)....   I think it's about conditioning  the FCC and DOJ by hearing it.
    • The DOJ reviews potential antitrust issues in mergers. The FCC is supposed to look at whether the merger is in the public interest, which includes reduced competition. So the FCC could reject the merger on the grounds that the reduced competition is not in the public interest. I do not, however, see Chairman Pai doing that because he is so pro-business. From the FCC's FAQ about merger reviews:
      Q: What is the FCC’s public interest standard/test?
      A: Under section 310(d) of the Communications Act, we determine whether a proposed transaction will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. First, we determine if the application complies with provisions of the Act and our Commission rules. If it does, then we consider whether granting the application could result in public interest harms by substantially frustrating or impairing the objectives or implementation of the Communications Act or related statutes. Competition, diversity, localism, and encouraging the provision of advanced services to all Americans are among the principle objectives of the Act. We also consider what potential public benefits might occur because of the transaction. We balance the potential public interest harms against the potential benefits. The Applicants bear the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed transaction, on balance, will serve the public interest.
    • Before we jump to this conclusion we need to see sustained financial growth over a period of time and a much larger increase in net additions to the network. Sprint is still offering the best deals in wireless and their growth is lagging the competition. This is not sustainable over the long term. Honestly, I see a merger as inevitable as the larger providers will have much more flexible cash for network enhancements in the near future, which they can then leverage to gain more customers. 
    • For exurban and rural sites, microwave and satellite backhaul are often used. 
  • Recently Browsing

×