MetroPCS LTE handsets reportedly to add band 25

[WiWavelength]

There's one last hurdle to be overcome: frequency bands. Fortunately, the AWS and 1900Mhz frequency bands MetroPCS uses for LTE will be used by several other carriers, Chao said. Sprint's LTE is in a corner of 1900Mhz (the G Block) that Metro's current phones don't cover, but that will come standard on many new MetroPCS devices in 2013.

 

http://www.pcmag.com...,2408748,00.asp

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

I was kind of daydreaming along these lines. Creating a new wireless carrier using cheap leftover spectrum pieces from several bands. Like what USCC is doing in their new LTE devices. Frankencarrier.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[lynyrd65]

I have a feeling the Sprint LTE network will be the new network for MVNO's and regionals to roam on to get nationwide coverage for LTE just as they already do for EV-DO.

[S4GRU]

I have a feeling the Sprint LTE network will be the new network for MVNO's and regionals to roam on to get nationwide coverage for LTE just as they already do for EV-DO.

 

And these MVNO's are paying data rates based on the older more expensive network. Meaning that Sprint should be making bank off these MVNO's. A lot of money to go back into the network to keep it purring nicely and well maintained.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[iansltx]

I have a feeling the Sprint LTE network will be the new network for MVNO's and regionals to roam on to get nationwide coverage for LTE just as they already do for EV-DO.

 

Probably.

 

Particularly since antennas built for PCS A-F won't take much additional tuning to be made compatible with G...and my guess is that we'll see CricKet, MetroPCS, USCC, C-Spire and other smaller carriers put LTE on PCS.

 

Glad to see MetroPCS trying to secure LTE roaming agreements, where AT&T and Verizon seem intent on doing everything they can not to do so, except on thier own terms (e.g. Verizon's LTE in Rural America program).

[JonnygATL]

And these MVNO's are paying data rates based on the older more expensive network. Meaning that Sprint should be making bank off these MVNO's. A lot of money to go back into the network to keep it purring nicely and well maintained.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

Robert:

 

I have to wonder if part of what slowed Sprint's legacy EVDO network down so much was the arrival of Virgin and Boost, who obviously use Sprint's network as MVNOs. I recall when 3G first debuted. I was living in Cincinnati and rocking a red Moto Razr. It was pretty bad ass at the time! And 3G was super fast. Sprint speed fast, in fact.

 

Granted, I never ran any speed tests at the time. In fact, I don't even think it would have crossed my mind as the speeds seemed miraculous compared to the previous generation network. But this was pre-iphone. And pre MVNO proliferation.

 

So, my exact question is this: did the presence of MVNO operators play a large role in the massive deterioration of sprint's 3G network? And, if so, could the same happen with their up and coming LTE network?

 

Just thinking here in the ATL...

[S4GRU]

 

Robert:

 

I have to wonder if part of what slowed Sprint's legacy EVDO network down so much was the arrival of Virgin and Boost' date=' who obviously use Sprint's network as MVNOs. I recall when 3G first debuted. I was living in Cincinnati and rocking a red Moto Razr. It was pretty bad ass at the time! And 3G was super fast. Sprint speed fast, in fact.

 

Granted, I never ran any speed tests at the time. In fact, I don't even think it would have crossed my mind as the speeds seemed miraculous compared to the previous generation network. But this was pre-iphone. And pre MVNO proliferation.

 

So, my exact question is this: did the presence of MVNO operators play a large role in the massive deterioration of sprint's 3G network? And, if so, could the same happen with their up and coming LTE network?

 

Just thinking here in the ATL...[/quote']

 

You do realize Sprint did virtually nothing to their network for 2 years while data usage skyrocketed, right? MVNO's have only been a blip on the total network usage on the legacy network. Heck, there are more probably more new iPhones added to the network burden then there has been MVNO's. And since MVNO's are not unlimited, their per user burden to the network is much lower.

 

No matter what, Sprint has to maintain its new network. And Sprint is counting on growth. They need more customers.

 

MVNO's will help Sprint maintain its network, if anything. Because that revenue can be used directly for network upgrades. The network of the last 24 months will never be repeated. Or it will be the end of Sprint.

 

If you have been reading S4GRU, you know that the Network Vision network is nothing like the legacy network. In fact, it will be the most advanced network in America when complete. And its scalable and designed for growth. And it doesn't matter if the growth is via organic Sprint postpaid, partner prepaid, MVNO, or roaming partner usage. It all will come down to how well Sprint maintains it.

 

We need to get past network protectionism. The larger mass Sprint gets, the better it can compete with the big guys. And the better for the American consumer.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[pyroscott]

3G was super fast. Sprint speed fast' date=' in fact.

 

Granted, I never ran any speed tests at the time. In fact, I don't even think it would have crossed my mind as the speeds seemed miraculous compared to the previous generation network. But this was pre-iphone. And pre MVNO proliferation.[/quote']

 

I remember when I was on a T1 at college back in the late 90s and early 00s. You would think I was connected to fiber or something. It seemed faster than I would ever need. Now, it seems pretty slow in comparison to what I have 10-15 years later.

 

Sent from my Amazon Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[JonnygATL]

You do realize Sprint did virtually nothing to their network for 2 years while data usage skyrocketed, right? MVNO's have only been a blip on the total network usage on the legacy network. Heck, there are more probably more new iPhones added to the network burden then there has been MVNO's. And since MVNO's are not unlimited, their per user burden to the network is much lower.

 

No matter what, Sprint has to maintain its new network. And Sprint is counting on growth. They need more customers.

 

MVNO's will help Sprint maintain its network, if anything. Because that revenue can be used directly for network upgrades. The network of the last 24 months will never be repeated. Or it will be the end of Sprint.

 

If you have been reading S4GRU, you know that the Network Vision network is nothing like the legacy network. In fact, it will be the most advanced network in America when complete. And its scalable and designed for growth. And it doesn't matter if the growth is via organic Sprint postpaid, partner prepaid, MVNO, or roaming partner usage. It all will come down to how well Sprint maintains it.

 

We need to get past network protectionism. The larger mass Sprint gets, the better it can compete with the big guys. And the better for the American consumer.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Yep, I certainly do realize that. Like I said, I've been with Sprint for years. 12 to be exact. Going on 13. So I have enjoyed my front seat to their network deterioration crap show. I am Absolutely aware that they failed to maintain it, let alone improve it. That's my exact point.

 

And, yes, I've of course been following all the info here on this site. That's what got me here in the first place. So I am aware of all of the improvements being made and that everyone is saying that these improvements are going to make the network so much better than even the other guys' existing 4G networks.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I just hope they don't let it fall apart the way their once great 3G network did. I'm also saying that I'm not understanding exactly how the MVNOs didn't affect the old 3G EVDO network so much. I would've imagined it would have been a bigger drain. And I also guess I don't understand enough about wireless communications to understand the technical aspects of how this NV project. is going to allow so many extra folks to use the network simultaneously. I'm assuming that is directly tied to bandwidth issues.

 

I will say that I went into an ATT store just the other day, just to run some speedtests. I found a bank of Samsung phones. A Note and a GS3 were the ones I used for the test, along with my own GSII Epic 4GT. I had to download the Speedtest app on the ATT phones from Google Play as it wasn't pre-installed and I also had to disable their wifi to make them connect to LTE. The LTE speeds I got in the store were amazing. 44-52 mbps. I was kinda blown away. I thought they might still be on wifi but a second check confirmed they were not. My own Sprint Wimax phone pulled down over 10 mbps in this location. Absolutely ridiculously awesome as well and the highest I've ever seen on my Sprint phone. This was an ATT store in Atlantic Station in West Midtown here in Atlanta. I know that Sprint LTE will not approach this but, honestly, no one needs speeds even close to that high on their mobile device. I'll be happy with 7 or 8 down and 1 or 2 up.

 

Here's to hoping they (Sprint) just keep their beautiful new network shiny and polished! I hope this message makes sense. It's very late and I'm extremely sleepy!

[iansltx]

Just keep in mind that hitting 40 Mbps on AT&T and keeping that up for three and a half minutes will net you a gigabyte of data usage. That's $10 or $15 right there. The network is really fast because everyone has to watch their usage or pay a lot when they go over...and also because AT&T can sell themselves a ton of backhaul if they want, since they're the ILEC in Atlanta.

 

As for MVNOs taking/not taking a ton of bandwidth, until recently MVNOs coudln't get good smartphones on Sprint. You use more data when you have a phone that is worth using more data on, and phones like the Optimus V (as much as I like the OV) weren't the ticket.

 

As for how Sprint's adding capacity via Network Vision, let's put things into perspective. Its 3G network has around 10 Mbps of capacity, in real-world terms, on the downlink of any given 5x5 spectrum slice if it's all dedicated to EvDO (which, in many cases, it isn't...many cell sites have fewer EvDO carriers than that). LTE on that same spectrum is on the order of 35 Mbps, though 25-30 Mbps is probably more realistic. So spectrum is much more efficiently used here, even if Sprint didn't have a whole new band (PCS G) that they could use for LTE (so they're getting 30+ Mbps per sector without impacting capacity elsewhere). In many markets, Sprint has enough "spare" spectrum in PCS A-F that they could launch two LTE carriers (one in G, one in A-F) without issue, for 60+ Mbps of capacity per sector, compared with 10 Mbps or less on a 3G site (and that's assuming 3G had proper backhaul, which in many cases it didn't). And that's just on the PCS side. Throw in a 20MHz TDD-LTE channel on 2500MHz and you have another 60+ Mbps of capacity over a portion of the cell. Throw in a 5x5 LTE carrier on SMR and you have another 30 Mbps with better coverage. Granted, PCS is the only thing we're seeing right now, but even with PCS-only LTE (and the associated backhaul bear) Sprint has much more bandwidth to go around, allowing more people to experience better speeds without things slowing down to a crawl like they have on EvDO (except where I now live ).

[vandi]

 

I will say that I went into an ATT store just the other day, just to run some speedtests. I found a bank of Samsung phones. A Note and a GS3 were the ones I used for the test, along with my own GSII Epic 4GT. I had to download the Speedtest app on the ATT phones from Google Play as it wasn't pre-installed and I also had to disable their wifi to make them connect to LTE. The LTE speeds I got in the store were amazing. 44-52 mbps. I was kinda blown away. I thought they might still be on wifi but a second check confirmed they were not. My own Sprint Wimax phone pulled down over 10 mbps in this location. Absolutely ridiculously awesome as well and the highest I've ever seen on my Sprint phone. This was an ATT store in Atlantic Station in West Midtown here in Atlanta. I know that Sprint LTE will not approach this but, honestly, no one needs speeds even close to that high on their mobile device. I'll be happy with 7 or 8 down and 1 or 2 up.

 

 

Even at home, who really needs 30+MB/s speeds. It's nice for downloading updates, but for general web browsing/day to day email reading/even video streaming, 7-8 works just fine. Also, some carrier stores will have a private cell site to make it look really good.

[S4GRU]

Also' date=' some carrier stores will have a private cell site to make it look really good.[/quote']

 

About 20% of Sprint stores do. It's not that Sprint is trying to fool people, its just that reception is not good at that location. So they add an In Store solution, because it is a high usage location, no doubt. In many instances, it is because of the building materials of the store location.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[digiblur]

You do realize Sprint did virtually nothing to their network for 2 years while data usage skyrocketed, right?

 

Hmm..I think I stated that in another thread. I know a bunch of us hated the fact that almost zero was being budgeted for network CAPEX, including myself, but I believe this was a blessing in disguise. But I fully believe it paved the way for NV, which is an awesome and huge undertaking that I haven't seen any other company even attempt to do on paper, and Sprint is doing it for real! Sprint got caught with their pants down and it started with the EVO release then the Epic release. Wimax fell on it's face and EVDO got hit hard, real hard!

 

The MVNO's are a great opportunity for Sprint and I welcome them to the network. It's more money for the network and more usage to promote future upgrades and expansion of the network.

[pyroscott]

About 20% of Sprint stores do. It's not that Sprint is trying to fool people, its just that reception is not good at that location. So they add an In Store solution, because it is a high usage location, no doubt. In many instances, it is because of the building materials of the store location.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

I need to go take a picture of the sprint store at the base of a Sprint cell site. It is rather humorous. Needless to say, you get perfect reception in the store...

[MacinJosh]

About 20% of Sprint stores do. It's not that Sprint is trying to fool people, its just that reception is not good at that location. So they add an In Store solution, because it is a high usage location, no doubt. In many instances, it is because of the building materials of the store location.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

I need to go take a picture of the sprint store at the base of a Sprint cell site. It is rather humorous. Needless to say, you get perfect reception in the store...

 

The Sprint Store in Visalia has a tower less than a mile away and it is pretty much line of sight between the two, so inside they pretty much have perfect reception.

[JonnygATL]

Just keep in mind that hitting 40 Mbps on AT&T and keeping that up for three and a half minutes will net you a gigabyte of data usage. That's $10 or $15 right there. The network is really fast because everyone has to watch their usage or pay a lot when they go over...and also because AT&T can sell themselves a ton of backhaul if they want, since they're the ILEC in Atlanta.

 

As for MVNOs taking/not taking a ton of bandwidth, until recently MVNOs coudln't get good smartphones on Sprint. You use more data when you have a phone that is worth using more data on, and phones like the Optimus V (as much as I like the OV) weren't the ticket.

 

As for how Sprint's adding capacity via Network Vision, let's put things into perspective. Its 3G network has around 10 Mbps of capacity, in real-world terms, on the downlink of any given 5x5 spectrum slice if it's all dedicated to EvDO (which, in many cases, it isn't...many cell sites have fewer EvDO carriers than that). LTE on that same spectrum is on the order of 35 Mbps, though 25-30 Mbps is probably more realistic. So spectrum is much more efficiently used here, even if Sprint didn't have a whole new band (PCS G) that they could use for LTE (so they're getting 30+ Mbps per sector without impacting capacity elsewhere). In many markets, Sprint has enough "spare" spectrum in PCS A-F that they could launch two LTE carriers (one in G, one in A-F) without issue, for 60+ Mbps of capacity per sector, compared with 10 Mbps or less on a 3G site (and that's assuming 3G had proper backhaul, which in many cases it didn't). And that's just on the PCS side. Throw in a 20MHz TDD-LTE channel on 2500MHz and you have another 60+ Mbps of capacity over a portion of the cell. Throw in a 5x5 LTE carrier on SMR and you have another 30 Mbps with better coverage. Granted, PCS is the only thing we're seeing right now, but even with PCS-only LTE (and the associated backhaul bear) Sprint has much more bandwidth to go around, allowing more people to experience better speeds without things slowing down to a crawl like they have on EvDO (except where I now live ).

Thanks for the detail! It really helps! I'm even more motivated by this information!

[JonnygATL]

Even at home, who really needs 30+MB/s speeds. It's nice for downloading updates, but for general web browsing/day to day email reading/even video streaming, 7-8 works just fine. Also, some carrier stores will have a private cell site to make it look really good.

 

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't need such insane speeds. For instance, I quite regulary stream Netflix on my E4GT here at home over my 1.2 (roughly) mbps 3G connection without issue as 4G Wimax is only available at my address on-street. So I can't imagine speeds 20x higher than that would really benefit me, to be quite honest.

[Boosted20V]

Going forward this would make it even easier to absorb Metro if they so choose (not that I'm a fan of it).

[iansltx]

In an ideal world, if Sprint bought MetroPCS, they'd pretty quickly shutter MetroPCS's own CDMA and LTE networks, add MetroPCS's PCS holdings to Sprint's on Sprint's own cell sites, sell MetroPCS's AWS spectru to T-Mobile and either set up MetroPCS as an MVNO like Virgin Mobile and Boost or just push MetroPCS customers over to one of Virgin Mobile's plans. The bonus here would be Virgin Mobile customers probably getting LTE.

 

Not that this will happen...unless MetroPCS offers a really good price (since Sprint tried recently). However if something did go down I think the above would be the most intelligent way to go about things. Heck, MetroPCS's relationships with handset manufacturers might be worthwhile to keep, since they've gotten manufacturers to turn out handsets in the $150 range with halfway-decent specs and LTE...

[digiblur]

 

I need to go take a picture of the sprint store at the base of a Sprint cell site. It is rather humorous. Needless to say, you get perfect reception in the store...

 

If I remember right there used to be one of those goofy telephone pole towers attached to a Sprint store here... Yes, a tall wooden telephone pole for a tower with three panels on it. Alltel used to own them. Verizon still uses many of them here today. The ones that were decommissioned are still up along with the building but the panels are gone.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge