Why did Sprint skip Ev-Do RevB?

[Ascertion]

The competitors went with hspa+, which is the game counterpart of evdo RevB. Anyone know why Sprint went the route of avoiding implementation?

 

Evdo RevB allows for

Higher rates per carrier (up to 4.9 Mbit/s on the downlink per carrier). Typical deployments are expected to include 2 or 3 carriers for a peak rate of 14.7 Mbit/s. Higher rates by bundling multiple channels together enhance the user experience and enables new services such as high definition video streaming.Reduced latency by using statistical multiplexing across channels—enhances the experience for latency sensitive services such as gaming, video telephony, remote console sessions and web browsing.Increased talk-time and standby timeReduced interference from the adjacent sectors especially to users at the edge of the cell signal which improves the rates that can be offered by using Hybrid frequency re-use.Efficient support for services that have asymmetric download and upload requirements (i.e. different data rates required in each direction) such as file transfers, web browsing, and broadband multimedia content delivery.

[WiWavelength]

The competitors went with hspa+, which is the game counterpart of evdo RevB. Anyone know why Sprint went the route of avoiding implementation?

 

Two possible explanations: WiMAX and economy of scale.

 

Had Sprint not gone with WiMAX in 2008 as its 4G solution, then Sprint potentially would have deployed EV-DO Rev B as an interim solution prior to UMB or LTE. But WiMAX precluded the need for EV-DO Rev B.

 

That said, no major carrier that I can think of has pursued EV-DO Rev B enhancements. So, the economy of scale for EV-DO Rev B infrastructure would be small.

 

AJ

[Ascertion]

 

Two possible explanations: WiMAX and economy of scale.

 

Had Sprint not gone with WiMAX in 2008 as its 4G solution, then Sprint potentially would have deployed EV-DO Rev B as an interim solution prior to UMB or LTE. But WiMAX precluded the need for EV-DO Rev B.

 

That said, no major carrier that I can think of has pursued EV-DO Rev B enhancements. So, the economy of scale for EV-DO Rev B infrastructure would be small.

 

AJ

But was wimax really better than RevB? It looks like wimax was a bad choice, just basing it on what's happened since it's release.

[WiWavelength]

But was wimax really better than RevB? It looks like wimax was a bad choice, just basing it on what's happened since it's release.

 

Okay, could you have made that case in 2008? If not, then your suggestion that EV-DO Rev B would have been a better choice is just revisionist history.

 

Also, FCC consent bound Sprint to deploy its BRS/EBS 2600 MHz spectrum, which is/was suitable for WiMAX but not for EV-DO of any flavor.

 

For further discussion, see this thread on WiMAX:

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/11-ill-say-it-wimax-was-a-good-decision/

 

AJ

[Thomas L.]

But was wimax really better than RevB? It looks like wimax was a bad choice, just basing it on what's happened since it's release.

 

Wimax was more established at the time, I don't think EV-DO Rev. B had launched anywhere in the world by the time Sprint needed to have WiMax launched because of the conditions placed on their 2500mhz spectrum. In addition, it was apparent that for WiMax there was going to be an evolution of some sort - EV-DO Rev. B was recognized as being a sort of dead-end, especially considering it also needed a hardware upgrade. In addition, at the time WiMax was chosen, it was far ahead of LTE in its development and availability... the World GSM Association also hadn't chosen to endorse LTE at the time, if I remember correctly... if WiMax had been chosen by the GSMA, WiMax would have been an incredibly good decision. There was also the fact that Intel was a huge backer of WiMax at the time and it just plain looked like a really good decision at the time...

[Ascertion]

 

Wimax was more established at the time, I don't think EV-DO Rev. B had launched anywhere in the world by the time Sprint needed to have WiMax launched because of the conditions placed on their 2500mhz spectrum. In addition, it was apparent that for WiMax there was going to be an evolution of some sort - EV-DO Rev. B was recognized as being a sort of dead-end, especially considering it also needed a hardware upgrade. In addition, at the time WiMax was chosen, it was far ahead of LTE in its development and availability... the World GSM Association also hadn't chosen to endorse LTE at the time, if I remember correctly... if WiMax had been chosen by the GSMA, WiMax would have been an incredibly good decision. There was also the fact that Intel was a huge backer of WiMax at the time and it just plain looked like a really good decision at the time...

Thank you for explaining that. RevC is coming out soon, do you think Sprint will jump on that or just focus 100% on LTE?

[WiWavelength]

RevC is coming out soon, do you think Sprint will jump on that or just focus 100% on LTE?

 

Not a chance. All further EV-DO revisions focus on multi carrier (e.g. 2xEV-DO, 3xEV-DO, etc.). Sprint would have to rejigger many of its current EV-DO carriers and potentially eat up available spectrum that could be used to deploy additional LTE carriers.

 

AJ

[ericdabbs]

Thank you for explaining that. RevC is coming out soon, do you think Sprint will jump on that or just focus 100% on LTE?

 

There is no EVDO Rev C coming out soon. By the way Rev C was later renamed to Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB) back in Dec 2006. However UMB never took off since Qualcomm in 2008 decided to kill UMB in favor of LTE and started focusing on building chipsets for it.

 

http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/08/ev-do-revision-c-becomes-ultra-mobile-broadband/

[Thomas L.]

Thank you for explaining that. RevC is coming out soon, do you think Sprint will jump on that or just focus 100% on LTE?

 

I can't see any reason for them to do that, they're pretty much all in with Network Vision and since it's a complete network overlay and LTE is better with spectral efficiency with data I believe, it just isn't useful long term. Also, real EV-DO Rev. C had its name changed by Qualcomm to UMB (Ultra Mobile Broadband) - it competed with LTE and WiMax but when adoption was essentially 0% and it was clear WiMax and then LTE had the market locked up, they discontinued its development. I think what you're talking about is DO Advanced, which is essentially a software upgrade to more efficiently manage traffic/up capacity. It's just an extension of EV-DO Rev. B in the end and doesn't offer higher speeds than the theoretical maxes of Rev. B.

 

From what I can Sprint is looking to use CDMA pretty much for voice from here on out. They will most likely try to shift data traffic to LTE and refarm as much CDMA spectrum as possible to use for LTE.

[irev210]

I think in a world of no spectrum limitations, EVDO Rev B would have made sense.

 

But when you only got so much powder in the keg - keep it for the best stuff (LTE).

[lynyrd65]

 

I can't see any reason for them to do that, they're pretty much all in with Network Vision and since it's a complete network overlay and LTE is better with spectral efficiency with data I believe, it just isn't useful long term. Also, real EV-DO Rev. C had its name changed by Qualcomm to UMB (Ultra Mobile Broadband) - it competed with LTE and WiMax but when adoption was essentially 0% and it was clear WiMax and then LTE had the market locked up, they discontinued its development. I think what you're talking about is DO Advanced, which is essentially a software upgrade to more efficiently manage traffic/up capacity. It's just an extension of EV-DO Rev. B in the end and doesn't offer higher speeds than the theoretical maxes of Rev. B.

 

From what I can Sprint is looking to use CDMA pretty much for voice from here on out. They will most likely try to shift data traffic to LTE and refarm as much CDMA spectrum as possible to use for LTE.

A smart decision. They also will be transitioning voice to VoLTE which brings them closer than ever to being standardized with the rest of the industry.

 

I do wish Sprint had done what they're doing with nv now back with rev b and wimax in 2008 and deployed their BRS spectrum on their own so more people could have enjoyed the higher speeds but eh, I'll probably be quite satisfied with nv in a year or so.

 

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

[Rasta Cheesehead]

 

A smart decision. They also will be transitioning voice to VoLTE which brings them closer than ever to being standardized with the rest of the industry.

 

I do wish Sprint had done what they're doing with nv now back with rev b and wimax in 2008 and deployed their BRS spectrum on their own so more people could have enjoyed the higher speeds but eh, I'll probably be quite satisfied with nv in a year or so.

 

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Network vision did not exist back in 2008. The multi-mode base stations , radios and chipset were only dreams back then with very few work prototypes , less more than multiple vendors that can make and supply the equipment. sprint is one of the first with this technology, so they are basically the beta testers if you will for this type of network in commercial and real world application. Also Rev.B is like 3g+ tech like Hspa+ , WiMAX just like the LTE Verizon deployed was pre 4G tech. There isn't much difference between WiMAX and lte technology both are ofdm techs, this is why clear can easily go from WiMAX to lte without much change to there towers.

 

 

[BenChase7]

Maybe my thinking is off but, Why would Sprint want to deploy rev. b? That would only promote people to stay on the 3G network in a world that is clearly moving to LTE.

[Bob Newhart]

It wouldn't have made a difference with Sprint in the past if they did implement EVDO RevB or anything else if they kept feeding their towers with T1s. Look at what they did with Rev0/A, you can't even get max EVDO speeds right now...

 

It is the same as me installing 802.11ac in my house and only having 1.5 Mbps DSL..... I still have 1.5 Mbps DSL.

[Ascertion]

It wouldn't have made a difference with Sprint in the past if they did implement EVDO RevB or anything else if they kept feeding their towers with T1s. Look at what they did with Rev0/A, you can't even get max EVDO speeds right now...

 

It is the same as me installing 802.11ac in my house and only having 1.5 Mbps DSL..... I still have 1.5 Mbps DSL.

Well, I am getting 2.65 mbps on 3G, which I have never seen a faster Sprint 3G speed yet.

[Josh]

Two possible explanations: WiMAX and economy of scale.

 

Had Sprint not gone with WiMAX in 2008 as its 4G solution, then Sprint potentially would have deployed EV-DO Rev B as an interim solution prior to UMB or LTE. But WiMAX precluded the need for EV-DO Rev B.

 

That said, no major carrier that I can think of has pursued EV-DO Rev B enhancements. So, the economy of scale for EV-DO Rev B infrastructure would be small.

 

AJ

 

Don't forget that another reason that they deployed WiMax was because it was already being deployed with clearwire. They had a partner to share the costs and it did not require them to use any of their PCS spectrum. They got exactly what they needed at the time when LTE was still 2 years away... spectrum protection, and the first mover's advantage on 4G. With Google and Intel as well as the cable companies backing Clearwire, it did not seem like such a bad move at the time. They had to deploy something to keep the license for the 25-2600Mhz spectrum, we all see that in hindsight it was a bad idea... but who would have thought that the technology would have been abandoned and deployment would have been so tough.

 

Maybe my thinking is off but, Why would Sprint want to deploy rev. b? That would only promote people to stay on the 3G network in a world that is clearly moving to LTE.

 

One of the only reasons that they might keep a portion of their network for CDMA 1X and EVDO is because of their prepaid brands and their networking sharing/hosting agreements. They probably will not go to Rev.B, unless there was increased capacity and spectral efficiency. I say this to agree with other posts that state that they will want to re-farm some of their EVDO spectrum to be used for additional LTE carriers, so if they can get better transfer rates and more people connected using less spectrum, they will probably do that.

I will say that eventually every carrier will probably be using LTE for voice and data, with only a few legacy voice carriers for people with old phones and as an emergency for calls if the LTE was to ever go down.