Sprint engineering study

[S4GRU]

Given this report' date=' and Sprint's fairly lame response, does anyone really believe that Sprint's Chicago build-out is going to be solid within a few months? I read opinions here that the Sprint LTE network here will soon exceed that of Verizon and AT&T, and I want to believe it, but the little skeptic in me is shouting no way based on available evidence.[/quote']

 

Yes. Yes I do believe it. If you watch the site map expand week after week, you can see how impressive it is. They have completed over 500 sites in the market already and still going strong.

 

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

[bollar]

 

Yes. Yes I do believe it. If you watch the site map expand week after week, you can see how impressive it is. They have completed over 500 sites in the market already and still going strong.

 

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

 

That would be an interesting animation!

 

No, I'm not suggesting you actually do that.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[llk121]

Given this report, and Sprint's fairly lame response, does anyone really believe that Sprint's Chicago build-out is going to be solid within a few months? I read opinions here that the Sprint LTE network here will soon exceed that of Verizon and AT&T, and I want to believe it, but the little skeptic in me is shouting no way based on available evidence.

 

I think the fact (reality) that they are ranked dead last in any rootmetric ranking speaks for itself. Sprint's bizarre Fanboy base needs to grasp that you are not doing yourself or the network any favors by defending poor service. Let alone this never-ending coming soon story of Sprint, which got old a good 7 years ago.

 

There is ZERO chance Sprint can compete with either VZ or AT&T. They're just too big, cashed up, and have coast to coast coverage. Outside metro areas, Sprint has huge holes in their network.

 

When people talk about combing spectrum, they fail to grasp that the others are also going to do this too. In fact, down the track, both AT&T and VZ could offer 60Mhz LTE-Advanced without an issue. Verizon has a good 130MhZ of bandwidth in my area, versus Sprint's 40MhZ max.

Edited October 9, 2012 by llk121

[koiulpoi]

I think the fact (reality) that they are ranked dead last in any rootmetric ranking speaks for itself. Sprint's bizarre Fanboy base needs to grasp that you are not doing yourself or the network any favors by defending poor service. Let alone this never-ending coming soon story of Sprint, which got old a good 7 years ago.

Frankly, I don't think they care. I don't. What Sprint is doing is actually really fun and exciting to follow. A 38,000+ tower buildout with LTE is really, really cool. That the network sucks now doesn't really bother me; I know all my local towers are getting 300 Mbps backhaul. That's awesome. I know that LTE and ESMR and Clear's TD-LTE are coming. Which are awesome.

 

In my opinion, if Sprint isn't giving you what you need, then, well, why stay around? Go with the service that suits you best. Nobody here is going to beg you to stay with half-promises, as nobody here is selling anything. We're just following the network.

[WiWavelength]

In my opinion, if Sprint isn't giving you what you need, then, well, why stay around? Go with the service that suits you best. Nobody here is going to beg you to stay with half-promises, as nobody here is selling anything. We're just following the network.

 

I could be wrong, but I doubt that llk121 is a Sprint user. He/she strikes me as someone with a little bit of network knowledge who is here to rabble-rouse, especially with the post up the page. If the criticism is constructive, that is perfectly fine. llk121's post remains within posting guidelines, but just barely, as it veers close to flame bait. And S4GRU will not tolerate overtly incendiary posts, as this is not a complaint board.

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

Given this report, and Sprint's fairly lame response, does anyone really believe that Sprint's Chicago build-out is going to be solid within a few months? I read opinions here that the Sprint LTE network here will soon exceed that of Verizon and AT&T, and I want to believe it, but the little skeptic in me is shouting no way based on available evidence.

 

You do know how poor EV-DO on Verizon and HSPA+ on AT&T is in the Loop, right?

[Deval]

 

I think the fact (reality) that they are ranked dead last in any rootmetric ranking speaks for itself. Sprint's bizarre Fanboy base needs to grasp that you are not doing yourself or the network any favors by defending poor service. Let alone this never-ending coming soon story of Sprint, which got old a good 7 years ago.

 

There is ZERO chance Sprint can compete with either VZ or AT&T. They're just too big, cashed up, and have coast to coast coverage. Outside metro areas, Sprint has huge holes in their network.

 

When people talk about combing spectrum, they fail to grasp that the others are also going to do this too. In fact, down the track, both AT&T and VZ could offer 60Mhz LTE-Advanced without an issue. Verizon has a good 130MhZ of bandwidth in my area, versus Sprint's 40MhZ max.

 

I'd like to see where Verizon has 130mhz of combined spectrum, unless you're also counting their existing 1900 and 800 holdings. Please, enlighten me?

[WiWavelength]

I'd like to see where Verizon has 130mhz of combined spectrum, unless you're also counting their existing 1900 and 800 holdings. Please, enlighten me?

 

Deval, yes, that figure obviously counts extant Cellular 850 MHz and PCS 1900 MHz spectrum. Let me use your neck of the woods, NYC, as an example. Here are VZW's total spectrum holdings in NYC:

 

Cellular 850 MHz: 25 MHz

PCS 1900 MHz: 40 MHz

AWS 2100+1700 MHz: 40 MHz

Lower 700 MHz: 12 MHz

Upper 700 MHz: 22 MHz

 

Total: 139 MHz

 

However, VZW has told the FCC that it will divest the Lower 700 MHz A block 12 MHz license. Additionally, of the Upper 700 MHz C block 22 MHz license, 2 MHz is unusable for LTE, and of the Cellular 850 MHz B block 25 MHz license, arguably 5 MHz is unusable for LTE. So, VZW's total potentially usable spectrum for LTE stands at 120 MHz right now.

 

AJ

[Deval]

Deval, yes, that figure obviously counts extant Cellular 850 MHz and PCS 1900 MHz spectrum. Let me use your neck of the woods, NYC, as an example. Here are VZW's total spectrum holdings in NYC:

 

Cellular 850 MHz: 25 MHz

PCS 1900 MHz: 40 MHz

AWS 2100+1700 MHz: 40 MHz

Lower 700 MHz: 12 MHz

Upper 700 MHz: 22 MHz

 

Total: 139 MHz

 

However, VZW has told the FCC that it will divest the Lower 700 MHz A block 12 MHz license. Additionally, of the Upper 700 MHz C block 22 MHz license, 2 MHz is unusable for LTE, and of the Cellular 850 MHz B block 25 MHz license, arguably 5 MHz is unusable for LTE. So, VZW's total potentially usable spectrum for LTE stands at 120 MHz right now.

 

AJ

 

That makes sense, but from a practical, deploy today approach, most of that is unusable.

 

When I think spectrum holdings, I think available, not refarm.

[llk121]

Frankly, I don't think they care. I don't. What Sprint is doing is actually really fun and exciting to follow. A 38,000+ tower buildout with LTE is really, really cool. That the network sucks now doesn't really bother me; I know all my local towers are getting 300 Mbps backhaul. That's awesome. I know that LTE and ESMR and Clear's TD-LTE are coming. Which are awesome.

 

In my opinion, if Sprint isn't giving you what you need, then, well, why stay around? Go with the service that suits you best. Nobody here is going to beg you to stay with half-promises, as nobody here is selling anything. We're just following the network.

 

Fair enough, but then why respond if you have no interest in discussing anything about Sprint. You clearly have no qualms with talking up the network, yet don’t seem to want to discuss anything that challenges this view.

 

I’m not with sprint any more. I am just curious as to what they are doing and if the network has improved. Unfortunately, Sprint needs all the customers it can get. I always find it funny that there are so many sprint forums devoted towards telling anyone dissatisfied to leave.

 

Hate to bear bad news but without customers, networks fold or get bought out. Particularly networks that have not delivered a profit for nearly a decade.

[llk121]

I could be wrong, but I doubt that llk121 is a Sprint user. He/she strikes me as someone with a little bit of network knowledge who is here to rabble-rouse, especially with the post up the page. If the criticism is constructive, that is perfectly fine. llk121's post remains within posting guidelines, but just barely, as it veers close to flame bait. And S4GRU will not tolerate overtly incendiary posts, as this is not a complaint board.

 

I was very close to signup up again with the iphone 5, even had an order placed but then checked the speedtests.

 

My criticism is always constructive. Where it's not constructive is with regards to Sprint's strategy (including previous) and plan. Personally, I really want them to succeed and do well, however, they're still on life support.

 

As someone who has actually worked on upgrading and building wireless networks abroad, from a practical, engineering, and business perspective, I don't agree with their unlimited stance. They would also win a hell of a lot more customers if they simply included at least 0.5GB in their plans, without the premium fee.

[koiulpoi]

Fair enough, but then why respond if you have no interest in discussing anything about Sprint. You clearly have no qualms with talking up the network, yet don’t seem to want to discuss anything that challenges this view.

My dear sir, I work as an ASC. I spend all day talking to people who tell me the state of the network. I am well aware of how people feel about it, and I agree that there are issues. Many, in my personal opinion, are due to Sprint waiting on network improvements, and many are thanks to Ericsson. That there are issues really does not concern me, with a complete network overhaul coming over the horizon. That is, they do not concern me beyond what I have to do every day.

 

What I have no interest in discussing, is negativity just for its own sake. Learning, on this forum, that somebody has slow data speeds or dropped calls, isn't particularly interesting nor apropos. Learning that certain markets are behind schedule on NV upgrades? Ahh, while that is a very real, definite negative, it's still much more interesting.

 

I’m not with sprint any more. I am just curious as to what they are doing and if the network has improved. Unfortunately, Sprint needs all the customers it can get. I always find it funny that there are so many sprint forums devoted towards telling anyone dissatisfied to leave.

 

Hate to bear bad news but without customers, networks fold or get bought out. Particularly networks that have not delivered a profit for nearly a decade.

When one is looking for negativity, they find it. There's a lot of happy customers, at least around here, and enough that are referring new people. More people are jumping ship from Verizon and AT&T than one might think, and Sprint's unlimited data is a very attractive choice. I can't speak to specifics, of course...

[llk121]

Well, I have no issue with anyone offering a different opinion. Having a discussion is the point of a forum after all. Otherwise it should just be a blog.

Edited October 9, 2012 by llk121

[WiWavelength]

I was very close to signup up again with the iphone 5, even had an order placed but then checked the speedtests.

 

My criticism is always constructive. Where it's not constructive is with regards to Sprint's strategy (including previous) and plan. Personally, I really want them to succeed and do well, however, they're still on life support.

 

As someone who has actually worked on upgrading and building wireless networks abroad, from a practical, engineering, and business perspective, I don't agree with their unlimited stance. They would also win a hell of a lot more customers if they simply included at least 0.5GB in their plans, without the premium fee.

 

llk121, we welcome you to S4GRU. I could tell immediately from your posts that, like many of us, you have some knowledge of or experience in the wireless field. Your constructive criticism, too, is welcome. As for the non constructive criticism -- well, keep in mind that this is the Sprint 4G Rollout Updates web site. Poking sore spots with a sharp stick will get you nowhere. But asking probing yet neutral questions will get you answers. I will let you take it from there.

 

AJ

[Chriscic]

Yes. Yes I do believe it. If you watch the site map expand week after week, you can see how impressive it is. They have completed over 500 sites in the market already and still going strong.

 

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

 

As I said, I am still trying to believe it (since I'd much rather have unlimited when I very soon upgrade to the iPhone 5), but if Sprint's several existing launch markets are in bad shape, why would they launch Chicago in good shape?

[S4GRU]

As I said, I am still trying to believe it (since I'd much rather have unlimited when I very soon upgrade to the iPhone 5), but if Sprint's several existing launch markets are in bad shape, why would they launch Chicago in good shape?

 

Do you even read our Sponsor maps and keep up with the deployment in Chicago? The Chicago deployment is so much farther ahead than all the other markets. You can clearly see if you look exactly where the deployment is in your market. There are 591 sites complete to date in Chicago. That's 52% of the total number of sites. And deployment is still continuing gangbusters. Every week, Chicago has another 20-50 sites gets accepted from Sprint as complete.

 

Most of the other Sprint markets launched to date were launched with 15%-25% site completion. Chicago is already over 50%, and Chicago has not even been launched yet. The Chicago launch will be much better than the other markets. In fact, Chicago deployment should be the model for all the other remaining markets in the country. You do realize that Verizon only converts 40% to 50% of their sites within a market initially, right?

 

And even after launch, they will still be deploying, making the network denser and denser. It's not my job to convince you. I am just amazed you cannot see this with all the data available on this site to Sponsors.

 

Robert

[Chriscic]

Do you even read our Sponsor maps and keep up with the deployment in Chicago?

Robert

 

Robert,

Believe it or not, I'm not so heavily invested in this that I've done extensive research: ) Even though I've looked at the sponsor maps for Chicago, I've never compared to other launch markets, and regardless it is certainly is not intuitive as to why Sprint would launch their other markets with crap and then Chicago in pristine condition with a best-in-class network. So what may be obvious to an expert is less obvious to me : ) Thanks for the assurance (which is what I was looking for) and as always the great site. I'll wait until the official launch and then get a Sprint iPhone 5 with the option to return within 14 days if not satisfied with the network. Cheers.

[Boosted20V]

Robert,

Believe it or not, I'm not so heavily invested in this that I've done extensive research: ) Even though I've looked at the sponsor maps for Chicago, I've never compared to other launch markets, and regardless it is certainly is not intuitive as to why Sprint would launch their other markets with crap and then Chicago in pristine condition with a best-in-class network. So what may be obvious to an expert is less obvious to me : ) Thanks for the assurance (which is what I was looking for) and as always the great site. I'll wait until the official launch and then get a Sprint iPhone 5 with the option to return within 14 days if not satisfied with the network. Cheers.

 

I would say Chicago is different simply based on the issue they had with legacy hardware and NV hardware. I wouldn't think they would launch a market when calls are dropping like crazy.

[WiWavelength]

Fierce Wireless published an article about the author of the study. The guy is a former Sprint employee and seems, just maybe, a bit disgruntled.

 

http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/sprint-critic-defends-his-research-lte-coverage/2012-10-08

 

AJ

[bollar]

Fierce Wireless published an article about the author of the study. The guy is a former Sprint employee and seems, just maybe, a bit disgruntled.

 

http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/sprint-critic-defends-his-research-lte-coverage/2012-10-08

 

AJ

 

Nice. His reports do ring true, though... At least in the markets I have visited.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rawvega]

I'm sure there is truth in his reports. What I question though is why he didn't do these exhaustive tests on at&t and VZW's LTE networks a month after their respective launches...or if he did, where are those reports? Around the time when he compiled the data for his report, VZW had had LTE launched for over a year and a half. At&t had had LTE deployed for a year. Not to mention both of those networks are using 700MHz spectrum. Yet he feels the need to compare Sprint's nascent PCS LTE network to these established LTE networks. Yeah, there seems to be some kind of ex-employee motive there imo....

[S4GRU]

I'm sure there is truth in his reports. What I question though is why he didn't do these exhaustive tests on at&t and VZW's LTE networks a month after launch...or if he did' date=' where are those reports? Around the time when he compiled the data for his report, VZW had had LTE launched for a year and a half. At&t had had LTE deployed for a year. Not to mention both of those networks are using 700MHz spectrum. Yet he feels the need to compare Sprint's nascent PCS LTE network to these established LTE networks. Yeah, there seems to be some kind of ex-employee motive there imo....[/quote']

 

This is a great point. In my area, Verizon has officially launched LTE service. They are on 3 of 10 sites, which are 850MHz spaced. Less than one third. We have huge areas without coverage, even though it is launched. And Verizon isn't even actively continuing to deploy in our area even though they are launched. They will likely not be back until next year to catch more.

 

Very similar to Sprint's early launched markets. This was not objective. It's a hit piece. The big boys are afraid of having to compete with Sprint.

 

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