Jump to content

LTE Network Buildout - A Comparison between carriers


Recommended Posts

With the abundance of spectrum that Clearwire has, could they not do both?

 

As I wrote somewhere on here before, I don't believe carrier aggregation between Sprint and Clear will ever work because they use two different subnets & IP gateways. LTE Advanced could easily aggregate Sprint's various LTE carriers on PCS (and evenually ESMR) since they all come from the same gateway and IP network / subnet; however, since Clear has an independent network with separate backhaul gateways, etc., you couldn't aggregate that carrier with your other-- your phone could use EITHER Clearwire's LTE OR Sprint's. They have separate IP networks entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tulsa is PCS as well. US Cellular got the 850 license here.

 

Yeah-- I think San Antonio is like that too-- a few markets that are PCS-only. But who knows what will end up happening in this game?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah-- I think San Antonio is like that too-- a few markets that are PCS-only. But who knows what will end up happening in this game?!?

 

VZW's former PrimeCo PCS 1900 MHz only markets are Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, Miami, Milwaukee, and Jacksonville. Tampa, Orlando, and New Orleans were also PrimeCo PCS only markets, but the Alltel acquisition brought Cellular 850 MHz licenses into the fold in those markets. Several other markets -- Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Little Rock -- were not PrimeCo markets but were actual VZW PCS construction -- some of the very little new footprint buildout that VZW itself has ever accomplished. But, of those markets, only Tulsa remains PCS only, as the Alltel acquisition rounded up Cellular spectrum in those markets, too.

 

VZW is great at buying out competitors, but not so hot at building up competition.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VZW is great at buying out competitors, but not so hot at building up competition.

 

AJ

 

Buying out versus building up is just another decision that has its pros and cons. One might think buying up is quicker and easier, but it does have pitfalls when you have to assume that company's debt and issues (ala Sprint-Nextel merger). Our market is a prime example of buying out done right AND wrong... Verizon in this market wasn't a major player until they bought Alltel and successfully integrated their network into VZW's-- now they dominate this market-- the buyout was a great success for them. On the flipside, Sprint bought out Gulf Coast Wireless here in 2005 and left the network untouched. As a result, myself and just about everyone I know that used to have and love Sprint here are now on VZW (and some have even subjected themselves to AT&T). This buyout did NOT go well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buying out versus building up is just another decision that has its pros and cons. One might think buying up is quicker and easier, but it does have pitfalls when you have to assume that company's debt and issues (ala Sprint-Nextel merger). Our market is a prime example of buying out done right AND wrong... Verizon in this market wasn't a major player until they bought Alltel and successfully integrated their network into VZW's-- now they dominate this market-- the buyout was a great success for them. On the flipside, Sprint bought out Gulf Coast Wireless here in 2005 and left the network untouched. As a result, myself and just about everyone I know that used to have and love Sprint here are now on VZW (and some have even subjected themselves to AT&T). This buyout did NOT go well.

 

Verizon was "ok" in our market before the Alltel buyout, but I agree with you in that they are the best carrier here now. ATT probably has the most cell sites, but I will never be on their network (dropped calls, data capacity issues, dropped calls). Sprint bought Gulf Coast Wireless, whom we all can agree may have been the worst regional wireless provider to ever exist. You are correct in that Sprint put no money into the network after the buyout and just let it get worse and worse. The introduction of the EVO really exposed how bad it was. But Sprint's biggest mistake in the Baton Rouge market was not utilizing any of the iDEN sites to beef up coverage and fill gaping holes in the middle of the city. I believe they did add CMDA to iDEN sites in New Orleans, but I don't have the details of which sites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I go through an area daily where you sometimes go to roaming. Right there at the stop light is a tower with nextel panels all by themselves.

 

Now that is a prime example that Sprint could make the most of Nextel towers to expand their network in certain areas that don't have Sprint coverage. I sure hope they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now that is a prime example that Sprint could make the most of Nextel towers to expand their network in certain areas that don't have Sprint coverage. I sure hope they do.

 

Sprint was slated to add their panels to a tower about 1.5 miles south of this area but the NV plans came out and the future tower icon disappeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sprint was slated to add their panels to a tower about 1.5 miles south of this area but the NV plans came out and the future tower icon disappeared.

 

Ouch. Now that's depressing.

 

Sent from Joshs Evo Shift using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is when the carrier makes a promise and then falls back on that promise.

 

Sent from Joshs iPhone 3Gs using Forum Runner

 

I hear where you're coming from, Josh. But, Not really the point I was getting at. I understand the frustration, however if Sprint exchanged the "band-aid" fixes in my area for true Network Vision upgrades, I would gladly accept... even if it meant waiting a bit longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear where you're coming from, Josh. But, Not really the point I was getting at. I understand the frustration, however if Sprint exchanged the "band-aid" fixes in my area for true Network Vision upgrades, I would gladly accept... even if it meant waiting a bit longer.

 

I understand that. And for Visalia, the bandaid fixes are actually going well, and for some strange reason, every day data seems to improve. It's really quite weird.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that. And for Visalia, the bandaid fixes are actually going well, and for some strange reason, every day data seems to improve. It's really quite weird.

 

Right on! Sounds like a good thing to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep' date=' I go through an area daily where you sometimes go to roaming. Right there at the stop light is a tower with nextel panels all by themselves.[/quote']

 

Depressing. Ive got friends who live in rural places who would have given their left tit for a sprint android phone ( vs cspire phones *prior to iphone* and verizon prices) but live in fringe coverage or none at all. My point is people do love sprint pricing and theres still gobs of growth potential, even with a big regional competitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AT&T is also rolling out a 10x10 configuration in markets that they can thanks to the acquisition of the Qualcomm 700 MHz spectrum. Everywhere else AT&T plans to launch a 5x5 configuration at 700 MHz.

 

Tmobile is planning to rollout LTE in 2013 and they are planning on a 10x10 configuration on their AWS spectrum in their top 25-50 markets. I would assume for the rest of the markets it would use a 5x5 configuration.

 

T-Mobile has no plans to roll out nationwide 4G LTE only has plans for top 50 markets. Also they will only be 5x5 configuration because most spectrum is being devoted to HSPA+42 and HSPA+84 which have speeds equivalent to 4G LTE. I personally believe T-Mobile should just role out HSPA+42 and HSPA+84 which will actually be faster then ATT and Verizon's 4G LTE Netowrk because T-Mobile has less customers and we have already seen in comparisons between HSPA+42 on T-Mobile and ATT's 4G LTE are almost equivalent in speeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Mobile has no plans to roll out nationwide 4G LTE only has plans for top 50 markets. Also they will only be 5x5 configuration because most spectrum is being devoted to HSPA+42 and HSPA+84 which have speeds equivalent to 4G LTE. I personally believe T-Mobile should just role out HSPA+42 and HSPA+84 which will actually be faster then ATT and Verizon's 4G LTE Netowrk because T-Mobile has less customers and we have already seen in comparisons between HSPA+42 on T-Mobile and ATT's 4G LTE are almost equivalent in speeds.

 

Well that makes sense, and as long as they use 1900mhz for HSPA+, they will be in great shape in terms of network connectivity for devices which they do not carry such as the iPhone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand why T-mobile would want to roll out LTE at all. I don't see it having any advantage for them over HSPA+.

 

I don't either, except for the fact that every other carrier in the US is transitioning over to it. T-Mobile's HSPA+ network is already faster in some areas than at&t & VZW, and the next step is to go to HSPA+84.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't either, except for the fact that every other carrier in the US is transitioning over to it. T-Mobile's HSPA+ network is already faster in some areas than at&t & VZW, and the next step is to go to HSPA+84.

 

I'm assuming more capacity? Or just future proofing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Mobile has no plans to roll out nationwide 4G LTE only has plans for top 50 markets. Also they will only be 5x5 configuration because most spectrum is being devoted to HSPA+42 and HSPA+84 which have speeds equivalent to 4G LTE. I personally believe T-Mobile should just role out HSPA+42 and HSPA+84 which will actually be faster then ATT and Verizon's 4G LTE Netowrk because T-Mobile has less customers and we have already seen in comparisons between HSPA+42 on T-Mobile and ATT's 4G LTE are almost equivalent in speeds.

 

T-Mobile just announced that they just contracted with Ericsson and Nokia Siemens to upgrade all 37,000 sites with LTE Rel 10.

 

The contracts cover LTE network installation at 37,000 cell sites as part of a two-year, $4 billion network modernization plan designed by T-Mobile parent Deutsche Telekom AG (DTE), which has said it will fund the work with cash flow from Bellevue, Washington-based T-Mobile. The contracts end in 2013.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-08/nokia-siemens-ericsson-win-t-mobile-lte-u-s-contract.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The future is LTE. However, I don't understand T-Mobile's rush to join the parade. They could wait couple of years and get a mature network built cheaply, rather than been on the bleeding edge. HSPA+ has plenty of headroom for them.

Both Verizon and Sprint have to move to LTE because of the lack of headroom on EVDO. Neither AT&T nor T-Mobile needed to move that fast. Oh, well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Mobile's existing HSPA+ network is great, they would be better off converting their Edge/GSM markets and expanding their coverage instead of converting to LTE. They have a lot of unused spectrum around the country unused, just like the other cell companies.

 

Maybe LTE is a marketing buzz word, even better than using a 'g' in 4g adverts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand why T-mobile would want to roll out LTE at all. I don't see it having any advantage for them over HSPA+.

 

I suspect spectral efficiency, carrier aggregation in release 10, roaming (part of the att breakup deal) and VoLTE play prominent roles

 

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that 37,000 tower modernization includes more 3G... The press release on this mentioned, in the end, that Tmobile launched HSPA+42 in Hattiesburg, MS (my location). True? Yep. There are either 1 or 2 towers on the west side of town that have been upgraded. The truth? They deployed it to "midtown hattiesburg. I live in the "Avenues", the most popular historic area in town and adjacent to downtown. The upgrade is completely absent in downtown hattiesburg and most of hattiesburg proper. The fall from this to 2G is also pretty stark once you're 5 miles out of town. Tmobile has taken this approach in all MS cities where its deployed HSPA+.... Just upgrade a tower or two (3 in our capitol, Jackson) and add it to the coverage list.

 

While Sprint's native network is by no means the best here, its all 3G in the areas I frequent and 3G roaming is enabled in most places.

 

I wonder..... is the 4 billion pricetag of tmobile's modernization accurate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...