Jump to content

Thoughts on bailing Sprint for Verizon San Diego?


snowtrooper1966

Recommended Posts

Just wanted to thank everyone for all the input and patience.

 

 

Looking back over the past 11 months, our highest monthly data usage was 1.8 GB.

 

 

We obviously are not data hogs, and do most of any serious usage at home on WiFi, so I'm not even certain that unlimited data is a carrot worth chasing. I would like to have that available, should those usage needs increase due to technology or changing family habits.

 

 

What I'm currently struggling with is the frustration over the past year over slow data speeds on Sprint while out and about in town. I did believe in network vision, and that Apple would not have released flagship device on a crippled network if there was no resolution in site.

 

A little background:

 

My family is using 3 iPhone 4S's, purchased on launch day last October when we started Sprint service.

I noticed right away the slow 3G data speeds, and opened a trouble ticked within a few days. After the initial runaround from the low level CSR's of endless phantom tower outages, PRL update suggestions and shifting the blame to Apple, and with a bit of persistence, I was able to get credit for premium data charges on all three lines for the first 5 moths. I then ht a wall with them, and it was getting increasingly difficult to get any real time frame for expected upgrades. I decided to file a FCC complaint. It was effective in regard that I now had a top level trouble ticket that could not be closed and had a easier time with continued premium data fee credits to my account, but the communication was sporadic at best.

Through my conversations with sprint techs, I was able to glean that build-out here would start near the end of 2011, and may be online as soon as 1st quarter 2012.

As an early adopter, I was looking forward to the newest iPhone 5, and was hopeful that the inclusion of LTE and better reception via redesigned antenna would afford me a small modicum of improved data speeds now, and a HUGE improvement once network vision was initiated in my area and shortly after deployed.

I approached my contact in Executive and Regulatory Services department in an effort to secure permission for a subsidized early upgrade on my line with a new two year contract. After nearly a week, she returned my call. To my great surprise, she informed me they were prepared to let me out of my contract without any ETF's. They were adamant that was all they could (were willing) do and that was my only choice. It was unbelievable they would rather churn me as opposed to letting me get a device that would possibly alleviate my issues in the short term and likely completely eradicate them once network vision was deployed in my city.

Unless....they don't see any relief in the future for my speed issue and/or they are looking for an easy out to get rid of a customer that filed an FCC complaint.

 

 

At this time I started my research into LTE deployment on various carriers. From that admittedly limited effort from less than cohesive sources, I really started to doubt network vision's ability to provide me with the quality of LTE service I was looking for. By all appearances the big two were offering that in abundance.

It was my limited understanding the best (ease of transmission, superior building penetration) LTE frequencies were the lower 700 to 900 range, and that big blue and red had snatched most of that up while Sprint was fumbling about with WinMax.

Since Sprint was left scrambling for appropriate LTE frequency, they had very little spectrum of what they did have, forcing them to broadcast on a less than efficient single carrier configuration.

That was my thought joining this forum, and since joining in a effort to discern real time line for LTE deployment (which has corroborated my info of the first quarter 2013.

 

 

I have since come to the realization that my conclusions were way off base, but it has not been made clear why Sprint’s LTE may or may not be better than the other 2 big providers. While I appreciate the participation of members here in this thread, I think I'm more confused than ever.

 

 

I really hope to be able to make an informed choice based on at least a basic idea of best LTE deployment strategies, frequency use and spectrum availability for each carrier.

 

 

I also worry that Sprint may not survive for long, may be gobbled up by one of the big two, merge with T-Mobile or even bought by Apple.

With less than a week until my penalty free contract dissolution offer expires, I appreciate everyone’s efforts to help me make that decision.

 

 

Again, thanks and apologies for butchering any of the technical info above...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was my limited understanding the best (ease of transmission, superior building penetration) LTE frequencies were the lower 700 to 900 range, and that big blue and red had snatched most of that up while Sprint was fumbling about with WinMax.

Since Sprint was left scrambling for appropriate LTE frequency, they had very little spectrum of what they did have, forcing them to broadcast on a less than efficient single carrier configuration.

 

That was my thought joining this forum, and since joining in a effort to discern real time line for LTE deployment (which has corroborated my info of the first quarter 2013.

 

I have since come to the realization that my conclusions were way off base, but it has not been made clear why Sprint’s LTE may or may not be better than the other 2 big providers. While I appreciate the participation of members here in this thread, I think I'm more confused than ever.

 

What spectrum a carrier is using is only half the story. There is no "best" spectrum, only different. Sprint is deploying LTE on an unused portion of the spectrum they currently run voice and data on (hence my comment, if your Sprint voice/3G coverage is good, so will Sprint's 4G coverage). Since sprint is upgrading every 3G site with new equipment, new antennas, new backhaul, the only constant that will remain is coverage.

 

So, by looking at your current coverage where you live/work/play, this will give you an idea of what coverage will be like on 4G since sprint is overhauling every site. Basically, if Sprint's 3G site spacing (how far sprint spaces each tower) works for you now, so will 4G. The same can not be said about other carriers.

 

Now, onto the issue you seem most concerned about - performance. Right now Sprint has a legacy network running off of old T-1 lines. Each T-1 line offers 1.5mbit up, 1.50mbpit down. Each site has about 2-3 T-1 lines servicing it for a total of 3-4.5mbit of capacity up and down, and it was very hard to add more capacity (horrible, right?). With the complete overhaul of each sprint tower (new base stations, new antennas and new backhaul), backhaul is going to 300mbit with the ability for Sprint to easily ask for more. On top of that, Sprint is installing new 4G "cores" or switches to replace the legacy 3G switches across the country, which improves latency and removes a potential bottleneck.

 

The result? Well in Boston, we are just starting to get 4G and the speeds are amazing. I went from 50kbps on 3G to over 25mbit/10mbit on 4G LTE. I tested indoors around the tower that was upgraded in my area and indoor coverage is excellent. It's a night and day experience between old sprint and new sprint.

 

As for the future - I think sprint is the best positioned to address future data growth. Next year they will add more LTE using Nextel's 800MHz spectrum which will add capacity and greatly improve coverage and they will start using Clearwire's spectrum to offer additional capacity in densely populated urban markets. With Clearwire's ability to add more "LTE bandwidth" than all other carriers combined is compelling.

 

I tried to make this as easy to understand, but if you have specific questions, don't hesitate to ask. We are all here to help.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no "best" spectrum, only different. Sprint is deploying LTE on an unused portion of the spectrum they currently run voice and data on (hence my comment, if your Sprint voice/3G coverage is good, so will Sprint's 4G coverage).

 

I appreciate your effort to simplify this as much as possible, but you may have gone to far there. I thought voice and data use different frequencies.

With the above statement, I take away that I should have good 3G data now, as I have had zero voice issues to date. I'm sure that’s not what you meant. …

 

 

I’m really just struggling to wrap my head around what carrier is going to be the best choice long term, based on my needs. Looking to base this decision on quantifiable technical data and stay away from emotional subjective reasoning.

I suppose if it was that easy, everyone wold be on one carrier.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Verizon has made a requirement for all phones on their network to be LTE. As people have mentioned above as the network gets saturated the speeds will come down. This lead they have is only temporary until AT&T and Sprint catch up. I would wait it out...

 

That would seem to indicate the conventional wisdom is with VZN, they have a backhaul limit, and once they acheive a specific density with subscribers will be in the same boat Sprint is now.

I don't wnat to have to deal with this again.

 

I prefer not to wait it out, as I am unhappy with current data speeds and have a short window to terminate service without early termination fees.....

 

Struggling to make an informed decision based on available data now, while still looking to the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would seem to indicate the conventional wisdom is with VZN, they have a backhaul limit, and once they acheive a specific density with subscribers will be in the same boat Sprint is now.

I don't wnat to have to deal with this again.

 

I prefer not to wait it out, as I am unhappy with current data speeds and have a short window to terminate service without early termination fees.....

 

Struggling to make an informed decision based on available data now, while still looking to the future.

 

Verizon doesn't have a backhaul limit, they have a spectrum limit. The way to address the spectrum limit is to add more sites (infill). Backhaul refers to the physical connection at the tower that essentially takes it from wireless to wired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate your effort to simplify this as much as possible, but you may have gone to far there. I thought voice and data use different frequencies.

With the above statement, I take away that I should have good 3G data now, as I have had zero voice issues to date. I'm sure that’s not what you meant. …

 

 

I’m really just struggling to wrap my head around what carrier is going to be the best choice long term, based on my needs. Looking to base this decision on quantifiable technical data and stay away from emotional subjective reasoning.

I suppose if it was that easy, everyone wold be on one carrier.....

 

Everyone has different needs/priorities - each nationwide carrier is different. No carrier is "best".

 

I think you are presuming that frequency = performance, which it doesn't.

 

When we talk about spectrum, we refer to it in chunks (bands). Sprint's voice network operates in the same band as Sprint's data network. So within that band, Sprint's voice network and data network cover roughly the same area.

 

The reasons why data speeds are poor on sprint is not because of spectrum (or frequency). The reason why you never have any voice problems has to do with the fact that sprint has sufficient voice carriers and backhaul to handle voice traffic. Data is a different ballgame. Sprint doesn't have enough 3G carriers or backhaul to provide the data speeds you would like to see, that's why they are doing network vision. Network vision adds a lot more data capacity, a LOT more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snowtrooper1966, after reading your "full story" on your experience with Sprint, I fully encourage you to go to ATT or Verizon. You seem to be focused on obtaining LTE/4G coverage and taking the cost to upgrade without rebate(on sprint) and your low data usage into consideration, leaving makes the most financial sense for you. Sprint's 3G is always improving ( my towers just got more T1's added again this last week here in po-dunk MS), but you're still looking to be shackled to 3G for months. Did your contact tell you if they would require you send the hardware back in order to return to get the ETF's credited? That has been more and more common in recent months.

 

There will be thousands if not millions of Iphone 4/4s Sprint customers shackled to 2 year agreements who will beg, plead and kick to get sprint to give them a discount on the Iphone 5 for the next 14-20 months. Whether their reasoning is quality, speed, dependability.... whatever it is, Sprint is going to be very, very firm. Keep in mind, they're still trying to recoup their subsidy from you on your 4S purchases. Letting you upgrade now would forgo that ever being recouped and start you all over with a new subsidy to recoup. Leaving makes most sense for them and given your experience, it makes more sense for you.

 

Verizon nor ATT will be perfect, but its better to know and accept that to stay and regret. Maybe you can come back in 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little perspective on unlimited data. My family usually uses about 2 gb a month so on the surface I would be fine with another provider that does not offer unlimited data. However, i do have those occasions when I blow past 2 gb. Like vacation or when my job deploys me. Just this month I had to reload all my apps(don't ask). Having unlimited data was great because I could do it on the fly and not have to wait until I found a secure wifi. What it boils down to for my family is we have peice of mind. I don't have to check my data every month. I just use my phone and pay my bill, the same price every month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little perspective on unlimited data. My family usually uses about 2 gb a month so on the surface I would be fine with another provider that does not offer unlimited data. However' date=' i do have those occasions when I blow past 2 gb. Like vacation or when my job deploys me. Just this month I had to reload all my apps(don't ask). Having unlimited data was great because I could do it on the fly and not have to wait until I found a secure wifi. What it boils down to for my family is we have peice of mind. I don't have to check my data every month. I just use my phone and pay my bill, the same price every month.[/quote']

 

I'm in the same boat. About 2-3GB per month. But vacation or when I travel a lot for work and my usage doubles or triples for a short time. I just dont want to monitor it. Its a pain.

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy S-III 32GB using Forum Runner

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would seem to indicate the conventional wisdom is with VZN, they have a backhaul limit, and once they acheive a specific density with subscribers will be in the same boat Sprint is now.

I don't wnat to have to deal with this again.

 

I prefer not to wait it out, as I am unhappy with current data speeds and have a short window to terminate service without early termination fees.....

 

Struggling to make an informed decision based on available data now, while still looking to the future.

 

It seems to me from reading your responses and other responses in this thread that you are leaning towards VZW. If anything, why not just do a 14 day trial with Verizon to see it works out for you? Maybe you learn that it is not worth the extra costs for VZW. Don't port your number entirely or else you'll be committed to VZW for 2 years and just use the temporary phone number. Also you claim that you use only 1.8 GB/month but I can tell you that this is only a fallacy because when you start getting faster speeds, you tend to use more data. For example if you only had 300 Kbps internet (Sprint) but then you upgrade to a 10-15 Mbps internet (Verizon LTE), I can pretty much tell you your data usage habits will likely change a bit knowing that you have access to faster speeds. I am not trying to say that you'll use like 15 GB/month but instead of just 1.8 GB/month on Sprint you may use up to 4-5 GB/month on Verizon which means higher costs.

 

I don't see why this is a big struggle. I think its ridiculous how much the cell phone takes over people's lives like its a bigger decision over a house or car. If you don't care to learn or understand about why Sprint is in their current pickle and can't envision what the huge benefits are for Sprint doing Network Vision when its done or can't wait until Network Vision lands in San Diego, then just sign up with Verizon or AT&T and be done with it. Worst case is 2 years from now you can just resign up with Sprint when things get better. Just don't have any regrets. I just don't think people should get some wrapped up about their cell phone. You seem to be in a situation where you don't want to wait so then just switch carriers.

 

Sorry for being really blunt or even rude but i just can't stand it when people obsess over their cell phone like its a life or death situation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would highly recommend trying out Verizon or AT&T. I saw that you've made a post over at Verizon's 4G LTE forum and received 2 negative responses on how well their experience was with Verizon. But even then I personally would still trial the service for 14 days as most subscribers only visits a carrier's forum to vent about a particular issue hoping to find a solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me from reading your responses and other responses in this thread that you are leaning towards VZW. If anything, why not just do a 14 day trial with Verizon to see it works out for you? Maybe you learn that it is not worth the extra costs for VZW. Don't port your number entirely or else you'll be committed to VZW for 2 years and just use the temporary phone number. Also you claim that you use only 1.8 GB/month but I can tell you that this is only a fallacy because when you start getting faster speeds, you tend to use more data. For example if you only had 300 Kbps internet (Sprint) but then you upgrade to a 10-15 Mbps internet (Verizon LTE), I can pretty much tell you your data usage habits will likely change a bit knowing that you have access to faster speeds. I am not trying to say that you'll use like 15 GB/month but instead of just 1.8 GB/month on Sprint you may use up to 4-5 GB/month on Verizon which means higher costs.

 

Unfortunately, I'm not in a position for a trial. I have to sell my current devices to cover cost of subsidized units, and my window to exit Sprint without fees is on the 21st, iPhone 5 launch day.

 

I do suspect we will see an incrimental increase in our data usage due to speed upgrade. If I do switch, I am willing to deal with the inconvience of having to monitor a few billing cycles and adjust if needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why this is a big struggle. If you don't care to learn or understand about why Sprint is in their current pickle and can't envision what the huge benefits are for Sprint doing Network Vision when its done or can't wait until Network Vision lands in San Diego, then just sign up with Verizon or AT&T and be done with it

 

It's a struggle as I am in a time crunch and there are many technolocical factors to try and soak in. I learn by by doing, so it's challenging for me to jamb all this in my cranium on short notice and feel like I "got it".

 

Seems a bit odd that you would question my desire to learn, as I am here on the only site I felt could give me a reasonable crash course.

 

If I could not see the future potential of network vision, I would have been gone already.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its ridiculous how much the cell phone takes over people's lives like its a bigger decision over a house or car.

I just don't think people should get some wrapped up about their cell phone.

Sorry for being really blunt or even rude but i just can't stand it when people obsess over their cell phone like its a life or death situation.

 

 

I think it's ridiculous that folks feel the need to offer unsolicited judgment to others. For you to presume your view of what should be important in others lives seems a bit narcissistic and myopic.

 

 

I would not be surprised to see similar comments on FB or Twitter. I am surprised to see them here on a tech savvy forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not quite unsolicited, you did ask for help and opinions.

 

In any case, even if you jump to vz or att, it is just as possible to jump back to sprint at a later date if you choose to. Whether by waiting for a contract change to let you out, or paying the etf and selling your old devices to recoup the costs of the etf and new devices, or waiting out a new contract.

 

Further, you can limit your exposure on a new network by *not buying the newest phones*, ie get a free or 50-100 phone instead of dropping 200 or more. If you go with free phones, all you lose is the etf fee, which effectively goes down every month anyway.

 

And you still might get some cash on craigslist or ebay for them if it comes to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Unfortunately, I'm not in a position for a trial. I have to sell my current devices to cover cost of subsidized units, and my window to exit Sprint without fees is on the 21st, iPhone 5 launch day.

 

I do suspect we will see an incrimental increase in our data usage due to speed upgrade. If I do switch, I am willing to deal with the inconvience of having to monitor a few billing cycles and adjust if needed.

Why is your window the 21st? If you are out of contract then it will stay that way unless you do something to renew. I don't understand the timecrunch you mention. Contracts don't auto renew...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is your window the 21st? If you are out of contract then it will stay that way unless you do something to renew. I don't understand the timecrunch you mention. Contracts don't auto renew...

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

If they are going to refund ETF fees, there is a deadline. They will not just mark your contract fulfilled. This way they can avoid abuse. Otherwise every time Sprint changed anything in contracts they would have millions of subscribers calling to get their contract fulfilled so they can get a free early upgrade credit. It makes sense, even if they lose a few subscribers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a struggle as I am in a time crunch and there are many technolocical factors to try and soak in. I learn by by doing, so it's challenging for me to jamb all this in my cranium on short notice and feel like I "got it".

 

Seems a bit odd that you would question my desire to learn, as I am here on the only site I felt could give me a reasonable crash course.

 

If I could not see the future potential of network vision, I would have been gone already.....

 

Then have you read this thread below?

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...t-running-list/

 

It says that San Diego is estimated to have LTE launched in January 2013. The information is out there so its not like its a mystery. San Diego is one of the bigger cities in the US. It seems like even January 2013 is a stretch for you so I suggested you move to Verizon and AT&T based on what I read so far but I could be wrong. I thought people have explained it clear enough how Network Visioin works and the potential benefits of faster 3G and 4G speeds. What else did you want to know? I can explain it further.

 

My suggestion to try out Verizon is not really too late. You still have a few days to try it out before the 21st. Of course you will incur some additional fees for having both Sprint and Verizon but you won't really know how Verizon service is like until you try them for yourself. Don't assume that Verizon will be 10x better than Sprint by just assumptions you read on coverage maps. Many people have stated in this thread that Verizon has a spectrum advantage in terms of coverage with 700 MHz. That doesn't mean that what Sprint is using with 1900 MHz is less inferior than 700 MHz. The best combination for LTE for any carrier is a combination of low freq (700 MHz) and high freq (1700 MHz) in Verizon's case and in Sprint's case its low freq (800 MHz) and high freq (1900 MHz).

 

The reason this is the case is because the high freq1900 MHz is good to handle huge capacity to handle heavy traffic with less range and the low freq (800 MHz) is good to handle huge coverage to ensure LTE is everywhere but doesn't have the capacity to handle heavy traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am aware of Sprin't timeline for LTE deployment locally, and said as much here:

 

 

....since joining in a effort to discern real time line for LTE deployment (which has corroborated my info of the first quarter 2013.)

 

 

Many people have stated in this thread that Verizon has a spectrum advantage in terms of coverage with 700 MHz. That doesn't mean that what Sprint is using with 1900 MHz is less inferior than 700 MHz. The best combination for LTE for any carrier is a combination of low freq (700 MHz) and high freq (1700 MHz) in Verizon's case and in Sprint's case its low freq (800 MHz) and high freq (1900 MHz).

 

 

That is helpfull, thanks for your patience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my take on LTE offered by the carriers:

 

Verizon: Currently king of LTE. Had a huge head start, and "beachfront" 700MHz spectrum which made for a quick rollout. They did not use the same equipment that Sprint (and others) is using for NV, which will force them to update their cell sites with new hardware much sooner than Sprint. Their current offering of LTE has superior building penetration, but the rollout in many smaller markets is set so far apart, that while they have blanket outdoor coverage, the indoor coverage is comparable to Sprint. Larger cities, where the cell sites are closer, see the benefit of building penetration once Verizon comes back and thickens their cell sites for capacity. They also have no ability to throw more spectrum at LTE with the current crop of devices, the only options are to roll out LTE on cellular band or PCS for the iPhone 5, or roll out on AWS, but they have zero phones that support AWS LTE at this time. Verizon sells something similar to the airave for improving coverage in dead spots.

 

Positives: Most mature LTE network, covers the most cities, signal propagation, CDMA voice, reliable 3G network, coverage area

 

Negatives: Aging equipment, rural areas not a priority, spectrum is loading up with no quick solution to remedy, slower 3G than AT&T or T-Mobile, tiered data, customer service

 

AT&T: LTE rollout is just slightly ahead of Sprint, but won't go nationwide, or to rural areas anytime soon. AT&T has their spectrum wrapped up in a wide variety of different network technologies, making it difficult to refarm. They have "beachfront" 700 MHz spectrum, although it isn't nationwide. GSM carrier, which allows for unlocked world phones to be used. 3G network is generally faster than CDMA carriers, and can give speeds comparable to Sprint's LTE in some areas. GSM voice is known for lower quality than CDMA and harder handoffs which can lead to dropped calls. Also, equipment used for LTE is on par with Sprint's making for a longer period of time before network upgrades and the pains that brings.

 

Positives: 3G network, coverage area, easier to BYOD, backhaul upgrades at most cell sites, (nearly) all phones have simultaneous voice and data, modern network equipment (at least for LTE upgraded towers)

 

Negatives: GSM Voice, spectrum tied up in multiple network technologies, LTE future is up in the air, tiered data

 

T-Mobile: LTE rollout is still in the planning stage, but they have a mature HSPA+ 4G network is many large markets. They have a smaller nationwide footprint, but roam on AT&T. Data is unlimited, for certain plans. WiFi calling is available, eliminating the need for specific technology (airave) to improve coverage in dead spots. The network is notorious for being good in urban areas and dropping to low signal/old network tech once one leaves the urban area. They also have upgraded backhaul at many cell sites for HSPA+ and will be deploying network equipment that is on par with Sprint's. They have zero spectrum in the "beachfront" category, leaving them with less signal propagation and building penetration. They made a deal with Verizon to improve their portfolio of AWS spectrum. They have very low spectrum reserves, and have to aggressively refarm spectrum, purchase more spectrum, or contract use out (Clearwire) to keep up with other carriers and increased demand. As with AT&T, their 3G network is very fast, in fact it was rated the fastest of the big 4 carriers in a study earlier this year. They also use GSM for voice, making BYOD easier, but voice quality is less desirable and dropped calls are increased. Deutche Telekom is finally dropping some cash into upgrading the network, but it could be just to make it more attractive for a buyer.

 

Positives: 3G network, easier to BYOD, backhaul upgrades at urban sites, simultaneous voice and data, modern network equip, WIFi calling, cost, unlimited data, clear plan for LTE rollout, spokeswoman

 

Negatives: GSM voice, spectrum constrained, less native coverage, tech drops to 2G in many rural areas, less building penetration, LTE rollout will be last of all the carriers, carrier is perpetually for sale

 

Sprint: Sprint's legacy network's shortcomings are well documented on nearly every tech website in existance, so I will not go into that. They have a multi-phased plan to completely overhaul every piece of their network. Every cell site will be receiving modern scalable backhaul, new multi-mode antennas, with RRUs directly behind the antenna which will decrease signal loss (giving slightly richer coverage than legacy systems) and new base equipment. Phase 1 of the network vision rollout is to roll out LTE on the PCS band and upgrade all the equipment on the cell site. This should eliminate the current problems with the legacy network, bring 3G up to par with Verizon, and open up 4G LTE on every cell site in a market. LTE should be present everywhere 3G signal is available presently, once the rollout is complete in a market. There are also many cell sites that are receiving 800MHz voice upgrades with wave 1 of network vision. This will give expanded voice coverage and enhanced building penetration. Also, since it is going on almost every cell site, coverage will be very rich, and building penetration might be the best of any carrier. Wave 2, once Nextel is completely shut down, will consist of LTE being rolled out on 800MHz on nearly every cell site. This will give the same increase of range and building penetration that I detailed for 800MHz voice, as well as doubling the amount of spectrum dedicated to LTE (unless some PCS spectrum was already refarmed). In order to avoid spectrum crunches in the future, Sprint has partnered with Clearwire to dictate areas where Clearwire needs to supplement Sprint's LTE with their mass amounts of Spectrum as a sort of "hot-spot" that will take burden off of Sprint's base network without the consumer noticing much of anything different. There are definitely growing pains as Sprint is not able to deploy the new equipment without interfering with coverage some. LTE uses spectrum that is not currently used, as well as 800MHz voice, but PCS voice and 3G EV-DO have to remain on the same spectrum.

 

Positives: Unlimited data, modern equipment, CDMA voice, rural areas will be upgraded with the market instead of as an afterthought, future network will offer everything any other network will offer, HD voice, aggressive NV rollout

 

Negatives: Upgrades disturb service of legacy network, slightly slower max LTE speeds than carriers with 10x10 carriers, LEGACY NETWORK, slower 3G network than GSM, no 800MHz or 2600MHz LTE compatible equipment on the market yet, less native coverage but roam on Verizon

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woo hoo' date=' excellent evaluation pyroscott!

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2[/quote']

 

Thanks, obviously I know a lot more about Sprint's rollout... but I should be pretty accurate on the others.

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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...