Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'LTE'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Blogs

  • The Wall

Categories

  • Announcements
  • Articles
  • Pages
  • Miscellaneous
  • Offsite Reading
  • Site Guidelines & Rules

Forums

  • Read Me First, and other Important Items
    • Important Threads
  • The Network Forum
    • Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment
    • WiMax
    • International Networks
  • The Device Forum
    • Smartphones
    • OS'es/ROM's & Themes
    • Tablets
    • Hotspots/USB Modems
  • The News Forum
  • The Everything Else Forum
    • Welcome
    • Suggestion Box
    • General Topics

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Phones/Devices


Location


Twitter Handle


Favorite Quotation


Interests

Found 195 results

  1. From GigaOM: Interesting excerpt from the AT&T public policy blog post: Details are thin on what that "software feature" is, or how it works to remove Ch. 51- 700 MHz B-block interference that the smaller carriers deny is even present. Also, if it's true that AT&T has been investing "considerable time" in modifying it's 700 MHz LTE equipment, you'd think they'd have tipped off Google (Nexus 5) or Apple (iPhone 5C/S) about that. Still, this seems like a step in the right direction toward LTE roaming, or at least a step away from further industry consolidation. Telecompetitor also has some nice maps that give an overview of where the major players own A and B block spectrum, and make the good point that after the upcoming 600 MHz incentive auctions, DTV Channel 51 will be the first to be cleared, rendering the A block interference controversy moot, and Band 17 entirely redundant. Perhaps that is why AT&T is making this move now.
  2. CDMA is leaps and bounds better then GSM... And LTE was built upon GSM... And WiMAX is a little something different. What did Qualcomm have as their 4G initiative? Was it better then LTE/WiMAX? Was Qualcomm involved in either LTE/WiMAX development? Any CDMA goodness within either?
  3. They are constantly doing work on this tower I know its not the best photo but they just put these white panels on the tower I have checked and found that the tower is owned by STC Two LLC which is a subsidiary owner of sprint towers, my thing is, is that on the sprint website it's not marked for an LTE upgrade. I've seen lots of trucks with huge metal box like building things along with tons of people working in and out of there. I live in a small rural community in florida known as lithia, the sad thing is I'm just outside the 4g coverage of sprint. heres the link https://plus.google.com/u/0/113947387432572563827/posts the site wouldn't allow me to post the photo.
  4. derrph

    NV LTE Speeds

    I do not know if there is already a thread for this but I left Sprint back in June due to the horrible speeds after 10 years with them I went to T-Mobile. I plan on switching back before the year is over once NV is more blanketed in Ohio more so Columbus OH. But for anyone who has a good amount of LTE in their state, How are you LTE speeds. Currently I am pulling in 30mbps on T-Mobile which is nice but I do not need all that. So how are Sprint's LTE speeds and how consistent are they?
  5. This would be a sub-section (or at minimum, thread) strictly dedicated to airports. Users could contribute the airport code and associated LTE experiences, e.g. whether there was an LTE signal, in what terminal(s), concourse(s), etc. The thread could eventually be organized with an index where one can jump to the right thread or page by clicking the shortcut for that airport name or code. This could be Public or an additional incentive for the Sponsor section. We generally don't care much about one another's market updates on a day-to-day basis, right, but as free airport WiFi is generally crap in my experience, I bet a lot of us are interested in other markets' buildouts just in terms of what to expect from our data experience while passing through -- evaluating and preparing for flight layovers/connections, and the like. Thoughts?
  6. Two sites that I know of have what look like NV RRUs but are not "broadcasting" (for lack of a better word) LTE. One is at 8016 Strawberry Lane, Charlotte NC and the other is at 1759 Echo Forest Drive, Charlotte NC ("flagpole"). I have more photos of both sites, and can provide them if needed. Explanations welcome.
  7. I have no idea which processor I have in my Galaxy s4. I just purchased it through sprint on Friday. I read on wikipedia that there are a few processors, including an octa-core processor, and an GT-I9500 that DOESNT support LTE How do I know which processor I have in mine? Hardware Version: L720.08 Model Number SPH-L720 Let me know if you need any more information from my 'about device' options.
  8. http://m.androidcentral.com/ee-double-speed-lte-officially-launches-july-4 EE just launched a 2x20 LTE network in the UK and claim that it has peaks above 100Mbps. They are only advertising average speeds of 40Mbps though. Do you guys think that Sprint/Clearwire will be able to offer average speeds similar although that maximum throughput will be lower? Do you think that Verizon and T-Mobile will follow suit and under promise to over achieve? Not that the speed of the network matters much to me, I'd just like to see how you guys think Verizon or T-Mobile woukd market such a network.
  9. I've seen various times around the site that Verizon's 700 Mhz LTE site spacing is rather large and they don't have it deployed on all the towers they have EVDO, whereas Sprint is going to deploy 800 Mhz LTE on most (I think I've seen 85%?) of their sites. Meaning for in-building coverage Sprint would have a better set-up. Has AT&T done the same thing as Verizon and used the fact that 700 has a large range and deployed it to just achieve coverage? I haven't really seen a lot of mention of AT&T's LTE on this site and was curious how Sprint's 800 Mhz will likely compare to theirs once completed in an area.
  10. Good article on network buildout, MiFi device selection, decision on device manufacturing, and good general info from an official Sprint PR person. Read on: http://www.wirelessweek.com/articles/2013/06/sprint%E2%80%99s-tri-band-lte-could-be-valuable-differentiator PW
  11. I have a question, outside of the data issue, Why is it that people refuse to be on sprint? I have seen people talk bad about Sprint more than T-Mobile.
  12. shawn_aten

    AIO Wireless DIscussion

    Making this thread for discussion about the new AT&T MVNO Aio Wireless. Curious to see what anybody has to say that's tried them. What kind of speeds you get (also pings), coverage (especially in larger buildings), and whatever else. Had a response from a person in another thread who said they got longer pings (100-200 ms) than normal for AT&T LTE (attributed it to a Aio proxy) so if anybody else has seen the same it would be interesting to know. Also if anyone has used both Aio (or AT&T) and Sprint LTE and can provide some comparison that'd be cool especially since this is a Sprint forum. Also any comments about AT&T's network (HSPA+, LTE, 2G) would be great.
  13. derrph

    Sprint Unlimited Data

    Honest opinion, once sprint is near complete with the Network Vision build out do you guys think that sprint will still offer unlimited data? I know with lte comes increased usage and because of that do you think sprint may turn to data limits to keep the network from being hit to hard?
  14. Does Sprint have Network Vision LTE COWs? The College World Series would be a great time to share some NV LTE love in downtown Omaha. Has anyone gotten an LTE signal at TD Ameritrade Park?
  15. just wondering from people in areas where NV is starting to go live and LTE is coming on for the first time if anything happened consistently in all markets just before you got your first LTE signal.
  16. I've searched the forums a bit but was not able to find an answer to this.. A little backstory.. I was advised by a sprint rep to leave my S3's preferred network mode on LTE / CDMA so I can get an LTE signal once it's live in our area. Everything was working great until recently, I've been having random issues connecting to data. SMS, and calls were flawless. So I called up sprint and they did their refreshes and whatnot to no avail. Got to tier two and they recommended that I go to Settings > Wireless and networks > Network mode and turn the network mode to CDMA only. The rep advised me that I'll still get LTE with this setting once it's live in my area. She also advised me that engineers will send out a SMS letting us know when LTE is live. Can anyone confirm these please? I'm stoked to get LTE and I don't want to miss the launch. Based on the timing of the permits, I'm guessing (total stab in the dark here) the connection problems I've had recently could have something to do with tower upgrades around me, which makes me excited :clap:
  17. darnell89

    4G Blackberry?

    Do you think Sprint will ever get a 4G Blackberry?
  18. Just wondering if other people have noticed increased battery life after alot of the NV upgrades as I have here in NYC. I typically would get between 7-8hrs on a GS3 on full charge. Now, using my girlfriends GS3, I get nearly 10hrs. That is a solid 20-30% increase in battery life. I did expect a slight bump in battery life..but not as much as I have ended up getting.. As a side note, I purchased an HTC ONE on release date and get about 12hrs on one charge with heavy use.
  19. Just thought I'd share some early results as I grow in my quest for gig to the home. I am paying for 50/5 from TWC.
  20. supersanborn

    Galaxy S3 Drops LTE Every 2-3 Hours

    Has anyone noticed that their Sprint Galaxy S3's occasionally seem to drop LTE after being steadily connected and not changing locations? My signal is -90dbm, and the connection seems relatively strong, but like clockwork, after 3 hours maximum, I switch back to 3G and am unable to get LTE back without toggling airplane mode.
  21. I've noticed some sites in Tucson are being set up with 2 RRUs per sector, while others are receiving only one RRU per sector. Was it ever determined if current Alca-lu RRUs can run CDMA+LTE? Are they possibly skipping LTE deployment on otherwise full-build sites?
  22. I filmed this morning on my way into office. <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://youtube.com/watch?v=aI0o6z7RRFI&vq=hd1080" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="1"></iframe>
  23. There are 21 new markets about to launch according to PhoneArena. One of them being LA! http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sprint-to-announce-21-new-LTE-markets-on-April-12_id41757
  24. http://www.tmonews.com/2013/04/t-mobile-set-to-launch-new-lte-markets-in-may-two-dozen-markets-in-june/
  25. So as my curiosity got the best of me, i figured id run down the basics of Sprint`s future plans to deploy LTE on the 800Mhz band. This topic is for anyone new to the site, and individuals who want to know the difference between lower, and higher frequency networks. Lower radio bands: Becomming a golden standard for most mobile network companies today, network carriers recently started to use the lower bands of spectrum, mainly for their LTE networks. Why is a lower band better: *Wider Geographical coverage(Better in-building access) *Faster speeds(Depending on the distance of the tower, and other factors that may influence the signal, and or speed of the network connection.) How a lower band can be hurtful: *The network on the lower band(800Mhz for example) is more affected by weather, and or other interfearences. Higher radio bands: Used mainly for 3G networks, as well as some LTE networks(Not very common for LTE networks). AT&T is one of the carriers who runs thier 3G/HSPA+ network on the 1800/1900 Mhz band. Although the numbers may seem pleasing, which at times they can be, everything has its ups and downs. Why a higher band is better: *Less affected by weather *Allows more spectrum for smaller cities *More efficient(Since the higher bands have less geographical reach, towers need less power to operate the networks. How higher bands can be hurtful: *Poor in-building coverage(Depending on the location of the serving cell site) *Less geographical range(towers that may be 3 miles away would not be accessable, as to where towers with lower bands at the same distance would be accessable.) Wrapping that bit of information up, we now get to sprint`s future plans to deploy their LTE network on the 800Mhz band, which was previously occupied by sprints iDEN network(Push to talk service). Not too long ago, sprint gloated about thier WIMAX network, which was deployed on the 2500Mhz band from the internet provider Clearwire. As we all know here, the speeds with wimax were not that bad when it all began, but then came a list of operating fees, maitenance, and poor speeds due to the available amount of spectrum. We also know that wimax did not work well at times in structures, mainly due to the high frequency band it was deployed on. From my guess, sprint does not want a repeat of the terror their WIMAX network brought them, so this time around, sprint is going to do things the right way. With LTE being on a lower band, more users with LTE capable devices will be able to access it, because of its wider geographical range. Also, since lower bands offer faster speeds, users can enjoy even faster downloads and youtube browsing. Also, due to the wider geographical range of lower frequency networks, less towers wil exist in areas, since one single tower running a lower frequency network can cover as much as two towers can that operate a higher frequency network, which leads to lowered operating costs, and better management. Do you guys think sprint is doing something right this time around?
×