Jump to content
joshuam

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

Recommended Posts

Native roaming is still roaming. I'm not sure why Sprint "needs" two million square miles of native coverage if they can start signing agreements that allow roam-like-native or at least roam-with-okay-service in rural areas. Call/text is fine (as far as I'm aware) in roaming areas, so it's only data that really needs to be negotiated on some sort of reasonable playing field with AT&T and VZW. That'll be difficult, but it's not impossible that they'll be able to get something in place.

I think writing off roaming as an option in rural areas that aren't near major highways rules out a quite viable solution to fill in those gaps that a budget carrier like Sprint simply can't justify competing in natively. Ideally, that roaming would offer usable data speeds (1.5Mb would be a minimum qualification for "usable," in my opinion.) However, if Sprint can build a solid core network that covers most people where they are most of the time, people can probably put up with a less-than-stellar experience the 1% of the time they're in an extremely rural area.

I'd much rather see investment in making the core network strong, covering urban and suburban areas well and the travel corridors that connect them. Targeted investment in known frequent roaming areas is also fine; if there's a place where a lot of people visit cover that well even if it's extremely rural. But there should also be some savings by not covering every square inch, which can be passed along to the customers in the form of a lower rate. Let AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile battle it out for those who need native rural coverage, and let Sprint differentiate themselves with a value price that offers a solid network experience most places but is okay with relying on roaming for the last 1-2% of the time when people are away from the highly-populated/traveled/visited areas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Native roaming is still roaming. I'm not sure why Sprint "needs" two million square miles of native coverage if they can start signing agreements that allow roam-like-native or at least roam-with-okay-service in rural areas. Call/text is fine (as far as I'm aware) in roaming areas, so it's only data that really needs to be negotiated on some sort of reasonable playing field with AT&T and VZW. That'll be difficult, but it's not impossible that they'll be able to get something in place. I think writing off roaming as an option in rural areas that aren't near major highways rules out a quite viable solution to fill in those gaps that a budget carrier like Sprint simply can't justify competing in natively. Ideally, that roaming would offer usable data speeds (1.5Mb would be a minimum qualification for "usable," in my opinion.) However, if Sprint can build a solid core network that covers most people where they are most of the time, people can probably put up with a less-than-stellar experience the 1% of the time they're in an extremely rural area.

I'd much rather see investment in making the core network strong, covering urban and suburban areas well and the travel corridors that connect them. Targeted investment in known frequent roaming areas is also fine; if there's a place where a lot of people visit cover that well even if it's extremely rural. But there should also be some savings by not covering every square inch, which can be passed along to the customers in the form of a lower rate. Let AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile battle it out for those who need native rural coverage, and let Sprint differentiate themselves with a value price that offers a solid network experience most places but is okay with relying on roaming for the last 1-2% of the time when people are away from the highly-populated/traveled/visited areas.

 

Sprint will not gain more customers with all that roaming. They can not be the only hold out. Coverage is the biggest complain I've seen. Sprint is not the carrier for people who travel alot. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why won't Sprint gain more customers with "all that roaming?" They'll almost certainly go broke if they try to duplicate completely AT&T's coverage, much less Verizon's coverage. This is especially true now that T-Mobile is trying to fight in that same space.

Does Sprint need to cover more places natively/roam-like-native than they do today? Sure. But there's certainly enough people who don't need like-native coverage next to every forest and prairie with no people for miles around that Sprint could cater to. Sprint just needs to expand their network to the point where most (90% or so?) people are covered where they live, work, and spend most of their time outside of home/work, let roaming coverage offer essential connectivity when they're well off the beaten path, and let the other three carriers fight for the 10% of customers who wouldn't be well-covered by Sprint's network.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Sprint will not gain more customers with all that roaming. They can not be the only hold out. Coverage is the biggest complain I've seen. Sprint is not the carrier for people who travel alot. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I think you're overestimating how many people live outside or regularly travel outside of urban centers. There are many small local carriers that serve these areas and it makes more sense for Sprint to lease out their spectrum in return for native network usage as is the case for Sprint's RRPP program or simply negotiate "roam like home" deals with them instead of building out coverage that'll get used infrequently.

If Sprint wants to cover popular destinations in rural areas and the highways that connect big cities to them, that will pay off faster than building a site in a town of 2,000 people that's already covered by Verizon and AT&T.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you're overestimating how many people live outside or regularly travel outside of urban centers. There are many small local carriers that serve these areas and it makes more sense for Sprint to lease out their spectrum in return for native network usage as is the case for Sprint's RRPP program or simply negotiate "roam like home" deals with them instead of building out coverage that'll get used infrequently. If Sprint wants to cover popular destinations in rural areas and the highways that connect big cities to them, that will pay off faster than building a site in a town of 2,000 people that's already covered by Verizon and AT&T.

 

Not what I'm talking about I agree with useing other carriers. I mean vzw/att only areas. The Dakota's being a Example.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean if people want "coverage" smacking down  a B26 mini Mac and an omnidirectional antenna gives you that.

*totally not because we found such a site in a rural previously no native coverage area*

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone listen on the interview with Saw today?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, derrph said:

Did anyone listen on the interview with Saw today?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its happening right this moment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ha, I guess I heard a rebroadcast...

It seems like it was just a rehash of what they’ve been saying for 2018. Just another person saying it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


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


It seems like it was just a rehash of what they’ve been saying for 2018. Just another person saying it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would have loved to see VoLTE talk and the future of mini macros since 4x4 mimo cant be done on them and whole cities are starting to see only this equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have loved to see VoLTE talk and the future of mini macros since 4x4 mimo cant be done on them and whole cities are starting to see only this equipment.

Agreed. All I know with the constant and repeated big talk about what they plan to do to the network this year. I hope they deliver or exceed.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. All I know with the constant and repeated big talk about what they plan to do to the network this year. I hope they deliver or exceed.  

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I have seen permits in my city 3 weeks straight for b41 equipment when there was no permits for over 18 months so if that's just here I think this year is going to be a good year to watch Sprint. What I don't understand is at the last conference they said they waited so long to build out 2.5 is so they wouldn't have to go back to towers but then they are deploying thousands of mini macros that are not future proof(2xCA and no 4x4 Mimo)that means you have to go back eventually and replace with full builds. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Terrell352 said:

I have seen permits in my city 3 weeks straight for b41 equipment when there was no permits for over 18 months so if that's just here I think this year is going to be a good year to watch Sprint. What I don't understand is at the last conference they said they waited so long to build out 2.5 is so they wouldn't have to go back to towers but then they are deploying thousands of mini macros that are not future proof(no 2xCA and no 4x4 Mimo)that means you have to go back eventually and replace with full builds.

 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

i thought mini macros do have 2xca?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought mini macros do have 2xca?

That "no" slipped by be. I corrected it. It does support 2xCA

 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have seen permits in my city 3 weeks straight for b41 equipment when there was no permits for over 18 months so if that's just here I think this year is going to be a good year to watch Sprint. What I don't understand is at the last conference they said they waited so long to build out 2.5 is so they wouldn't have to go back to towers but then they are deploying thousands of mini macros that are not future proof(2xCA and no 4x4 Mimo)that means you have to go back eventually and replace with full builds. Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
 
 
 
 

Sounds like they want to get the network where it can complete and then they’ll go back and make the changes. Gain trust and then go back and upgrade. It’s sorta like what tmobile is doing. Some b12 only areas they will go back to add other bands at a later time. Because they have the trust of their customers, they can do that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Tengen31 said:

Sprint will not gain more customers with all that roaming. They can not be the only hold out. Coverage is the biggest complain I've seen. Sprint is not the carrier for people who travel alot. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

The general rule for mobile coverage is that coverage needs to match up to the road network.  If you want to know where the population lives and works, More than 95% of the population are always within about 10 miles of anywhere where there are roads with 2 or more lanes in each direction or are driving on those roads with 2 or more lanes in each direction passing through that area.  Once you get about 10 miles outside of the multi-lane road area to single lane in each direction roads,  you are in rural areas with very few customers.  In my opinion, native or native-like roaming coverage covering the multi-lane road areas makes the most financial sense for Sprint with slower limited roaming outside of those areas.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2018 at 6:48 PM, Terrell352 said:

I would have loved to see VoLTE talk and the future of mini macros since 4x4 mimo cant be done on them and whole cities are starting to see only this equipment.

I think they are fine. Go back and replace them once B41 gets congested. 160Mbps is a great starting point and with Config 2 that goes up to +200Mbps and if it can do Q256 we are almost at 300Mbps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they are fine. Go back and replace them once B41 gets congested. 160Mbps is a great starting point and with Config 2 that goes up to +200Mbps and if it can do Q256 we are almost at 300Mbps.
Can Clearwire macro site do 4x4 mimo and 256qam?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2018 at 6:56 PM, Terrell352 said:

I have seen permits in my city 3 weeks straight for b41 equipment when there was no permits for over 18 months so if that's just here I think this year is going to be a good year to watch Sprint. What I don't understand is at the last conference they said they waited so long to build out 2.5 is so they wouldn't have to go back to towers but then they are deploying thousands of mini macros that are not future proof(2xCA and no 4x4 Mimo)that means you have to go back eventually and replace with full builds. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

That’s been my thinking on this as well. Why was Sprint investing in equipment that was limited in tech and coverage? Perhaps the plan all along was to have these Mini Macros be a stop gap due to price and then Sprint would remove them and move them to another market once the macro tower build progressed enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they are fine. Go back and replace them once B41 gets congested. 160Mbps is a great starting point and with Config 2 that goes up to +200Mbps and if it can do Q256 we are almost at 300Mbps.
That's just it they stated that the whole reason they waited to fully build out b41 is so they would not have to go back to towers. Going back to towers to replace them instead of just spending the funds and getting it over with cost alot more money. They now have tier 1(mini macro), tier 2(8t8r) and tier 3(64t64r) for macro sites. Mini macros should be used the least in my opinion cost effective or not. If they put out a mini macro capable of 3xCA and 4x4 mimo then that would be different because at least it would be future proof and cost effective at the same time.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Terrell352 said:

That's just it they stated that the whole reason they waited to fully build out b41 is so they would not have to go back to towers. Going back to towers to replace them instead of just spending the funds and getting it over with cost alot more money. They now have tier 1(mini macro), tier 2(8t8r) and tier 3(64t64r) for macro sites. Mini macros should be used the least in my opinion cost effective or not. If they put out a mini macro capable of 3xCA and 4x4 mimo then that would be different because at least it would be future proof and cost effective at the same time.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

Perhaps the jump to Massive MIMO was worth waiting for instead of accelerating an 8T8R deployment? Isn’t the installation footprint for Massive MIMO about the same as 8T8R? 

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


×