Everything 800mhz (1xA, LTE, coverage, timeline, etc)

[digiblur]

I think even an Airave with PCS LTE is dumb.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

[Thomas L.]

I think even an Airave with PCS LTE is dumb.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

Well it's sort of counterintuitive - as far as I know there are no devices that are LTE compatible and not wifi compatible, so it would be a redundant addition, at least until we start seeing VoLTE.

[SpenceSouth]

Well it's sort of counterintuitive - as far as I know there are no devices that are LTE compatible and not wifi compatible, so it would be a redundant addition, at least until we start seeing VoLTE.

 

I remember people asking for a WiMax Airave for the longest time lol. Shows that the truth of it is that people want to see that little 4G icon more than they want a fast connection- when setup through your own internet, WiFi is certainly always going to be superior in every way.

[WiWavelength]

Well it's sort of counterintuitive - as far as I know there are no devices that are LTE compatible and not wifi compatible, so it would be a redundant addition, at least until we start seeing VoLTE.

 

And as soon as we have VoLTE, if not sooner, voice can also seamlessly run over Wi-Fi. So, the point of the Airave will become less and less.

 

AJ

[SpenceSouth]

 

And as soon as we have VoLTE, if not sooner, voice can also seamlessly run over Wi-Fi. So, the point of the Airave will become less and less.

 

AJ

 

One of my favorite things about T-Mobile when I was trying them was that you could have seemless voice and text everywhere that had WiFi. Would love to see that on Sprint.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[supert0nes]

One of my favorite things about T-Mobile when I was trying them was that you could have seemless voice and text everywhere that had WiFi. Would love to see that on Sprint.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

You might find this a hackish way to achieve the same thing, but I find grooveip lite + google voice is pretty friggen awesome. The only issue is transitioning from WIFI to Cellular while on a call.

[Thomas L.]

One of my favorite things about T-Mobile when I was trying them was that you could have seemless voice and text everywhere that had WiFi. Would love to see that on Sprint.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

Same here! I know there are a lot of naysayers on this forum who don't think wifi calling is a useful/needed feature, but there are always going to be places where it is more reliable than a cellular signal.

[WiWavelength]

You might find this a hackish way to achieve the same thing, but I find grooveip lite + google voice is pretty friggen awesome. The only issue is transitioning from WIFI to Cellular while on a call.

 

And if my understanding is correct, even recent T-Mobile handsets do not support Wi-Fi to cellular handoff any longer. That requires optimized hardware, but recent T-Mobile handsets have transitioned to an Android app to support Wi-Fi calling.

 

AJ

[supert0nes]

And if my understanding is correct, even recent T-Mobile handsets do not support Wi-Fi to cellular handoff any longer. That requires optimized hardware, but recent T-Mobile handsets have transitioned to an Android app to support Wi-Fi calling.

 

AJ

 

I can only attribute this to customer ignorance / not caring. Also T-Mobile doesn't really market this feature. Maybe in the future it will become important again. I don't think carriers like to advertise wifi offloading, though because the ISP's feel their bandwidth is being improperly used to alleviate a competitors bandwidth.

[Dkoellerwx]

You might find this a hackish way to achieve the same thing, but I find grooveip lite + google voice is pretty friggen awesome. The only issue is transitioning from WIFI to Cellular while on a call.

 

I use this as well, works great at my house, good WiFi and internet speeds, but terrible Sprint coverage. Best sound quality I've ever gotten on a cell phone lol.

[supert0nes]

I use this as well, works great at my house, good WiFi and internet speeds, but terrible Sprint coverage. Best sound quality I've ever gotten on a cell phone lol.

 

And time it takes to connect a call is so fast it's surprising. If you've ever made a call from Gmail you know what I mean! Instant.

[SpenceSouth]

 

And if my understanding is correct, even recent T-Mobile handsets do not support Wi-Fi to cellular handoff any longer. That requires optimized hardware, but recent T-Mobile handsets have transitioned to an Android app to support Wi-Fi calling.

 

AJ

 

WiFi to cellular hand off was certainly the weakness with that feature, but that is far outweighed by its advantages. In my experience it wasn't an app that allowed this functionality, it was an option baked into the network settings. No need to use any app to initiate WiFi calling or texting. It simply switched to sending voice calls and texts over the WiFi connection whenever you were in range and used the native phone and texting apps. Most users wouldn't even know the difference apart from the impeccable service they gained.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[gusherb]

Took a little weekend trip out to my great aunt & uncles cottage on a lake in Knox, IN, a little rural town. Was connected to SMR 800 til about 3/4's of the way there and coverage was fantastic as you would expect! I remember back in October I barely had any signal on this little back road I took, now it's quite good. After that coverage was ok.

 

Once I got to the cottage signal was pretty sucky, going back and forth between 1xrtt and Evdo, the serving Sprint site is 6.5 miles from this cottage. Average signal strength inside was -102 db, not much better outside. Phone was flip flopping between the Verizon site 2 miles away and staying connected to the weaker and less usable Sprint signal 6.5 miles away (this is where I would have liked to just lock into Verizon!)

 

Albeit slow I was able to surf and download photo's on VZW 1x, after hearing what I've heard I thought it would be way worse... This place will benefit greatly when they get SMR 800 turned on, it's a fringe area on the map and it is in reality too.

 

T-Mobile had NO service at all, nearest site was in a town several miles away. AT&T? nothing but 2G/Edge even though get this......there map shows 3G all around the area!! (go figure!) So it goes Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and very distant last T-Mobile for service quality out in this rural Indiana town. AT&T did have the best signal strength on the lake though, and that was it.

[SpenceSouth]

Took a little weekend trip out to my great aunt & uncles cottage on a lake in Knox, IN, a little rural town. Was connected to SMR 800 til about 3/4's of the way there and coverage was fantastic as you would expect! I remember back in October I barely had any signal on this little back road I took, now it's quite good. After that coverage was ok.

 

Once I got to the cottage signal was pretty sucky, going back and forth between 1xrtt and Evdo, the serving Sprint site is 6.5 miles from this cottage. Average signal strength inside was -102 db, not much better outside. Phone was flip flopping between the Verizon site 2 miles away and staying connected to the weaker and less usable Sprint signal 6.5 miles away (this is where I would have liked to just lock into Verizon!)

 

Albeit slow I was able to surf and download photo's on VZW 1x, after hearing what I've heard I thought it would be way worse... This place will benefit greatly when they get SMR 800 turned on, it's a fringe area on the map and it is in reality too.

 

T-Mobile had NO service at all, nearest site was in a town several miles away. AT&T? nothing but 2G/Edge even though get this......there map shows 3G all around the area!! (go figure!) So it goes Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and very distant last T-Mobile for service quality out in this rural Indiana town. AT&T did have the best signal strength on the lake though, and that was it.

 

I'm looking forward to that coverage most of all. LTE is nice and fun, but that kind of coverage is really what we all need.

[jefbal99]

I seem to remember that an agreement was hashed out with the Mexican equivalent of the FCC on using SMR for LTE and 1xA, any word on anything with the Canadian equivalent?

[S4GRU]

I seem to remember that an agreement was hashed out with the Mexican equivalent of the FCC on using SMR for LTE and 1xA, any word on anything with the Canadian equivalent?

 

I don't recall that. I just remember them agreeing that they will work it out. How much of their Mexican border spectrum are they going to be able to use? You make it sound like they can use all of it. That would be highly unusual. Because that would mean the Mexican license holder couldn't use any its border region.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[jefbal99]

 

I don't recall that. I just remember them agreeing that they will work it out. How much of their Mexican border spectrum are they going to be able to use? You make it sound like they can use all of it. That would be highly unusual. Because that would mean the Mexican license holder couldn't use any its border region.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

{In my best MLB star before a congressional steroid hearing voice} After going back and rereading the news, it was just an agreement to figure it out. I mis-remembered it as a final agreement.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Forum Runner

[Rawvega]

I seem to remember that an agreement was hashed out with the Mexican equivalent of the FCC on using SMR for LTE and 1xA, any word on anything with the Canadian equivalent?

 

I don't know if that was the exact wording or intent, but I believe that this is the relevant document on the subject: http://transition.fcc.gov/bureaus/ib/sand/agree/files/800.pdf

[S4GRU]

 

I don't know if that was the exact wording or intent, but I believe that this is the relevant document on the subject: http://transition.fcc.gov/bureaus/ib/sand/agree/files/800.pdf

 

The way I read the attached PDF is this is the agreed to protocol for SMR narrowband operations within the border zone. SMR wideband operations (which both CDMA and LTE would be wideband) within the border zone would require one year notice and further cooperation/agreement. That's how I read it.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[doug526]

Took a little weekend trip out to my great aunt & uncles cottage on a lake in Knox, IN, a little rural town. Was connected to SMR 800 til about 3/4's of the way there and coverage was fantastic as you would expect! I remember back in October I barely had any signal on this little back road I took, now it's quite good. After that coverage was ok.

[snip]

This place will benefit greatly when they get SMR 800 turned on, it's a fringe area on the map and it is in reality too.

 

Am I missing something here? You say you were on SMR 800 but then later in the post you make it sound as if SMR 800 service is not turned on.

 

Do you have field test/screen shots showing that you were on an 800 mhz cell? Did you acquire the Cell ID / Identity values? If not, how do you know you were on 800?

 

BTW, I was under the impression there was no SMR 800 capacity currently up and running other than in the FIT towns... since the Nextel network isn't scheduled to sunset until June 2013.

 

Last month when I was in Waco I ran field tests all over the city and not once did I register an 800mhz signal. And Waco was one of the first NV launch cities. So you'd think they would be first to have NV SMR service.

[S4GRU]

[/size]

 

Am I missing something here? You say you were on SMR 800 but then later in the post you make it sound as if SMR 800 service is not turned on.

 

Do you have field test/screen shots showing that you were on an 800 mhz cell? Did you acquire the Cell ID / Identity values? If not, how do you know you were on 800?

 

BTW, I was under the impression there was no SMR 800 capacity currently up and running other than in the FIT towns... since the Nextel network isn't scheduled to sunset until June 2013.

 

SMR Channel 476 has been confirmed broadcasting over most of NE Illinois and NW Indiana. As well as Maryland and North Texas. There have also been some reports in Massachusetts, DC and California by members using a custom PRL.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[gusherb]

[/size]

 

Am I missing something here? You say you were on SMR 800 but then later in the post you make it sound as if SMR 800 service is not turned on.

 

Do you have field test/screen shots showing that you were on an 800 mhz cell? Did you acquire the Cell ID / Identity values? If not, how do you know you were on 800?

 

BTW, I was under the impression there was no SMR 800 capacity currently up and running other than in the FIT towns... since the Nextel network isn't scheduled to sunset until June 2013.

 

Last month when I was in Waco I ran field tests all over the city and not once did I register an 800mhz signal. And Waco was one of the first NV launch cities. So you'd think they would be first to have NV SMR service.

 

Well that's because it is and isn't. Not every site in my area has SMR 800 live yet, but most of the sites along the route I took to my destination did. The site serving at my destination did not have SMR 800 turned on yet...

[vryan44]

I know this question has many variables, but lets say in a mostly flat rural area, with minimal downtilt (tower optimized for coverage, not capacity) does anyone know how much further 800 mhz on 1x can travel vs 1900 mhz on 1x while on the same tower broadcasting at the same power/downtilt?

[WiWavelength]

I know this question has many variables, but lets say in a mostly flat rural area, with minimal downtilt (tower optimized for coverage, not capacity) does anyone know how much further 800 mhz on 1x can travel vs 1900 mhz on 1x while on the same tower broadcasting at the same power/downtilt?

 

This is a commonly misunderstood topic. Technically, no frequency travels any farther than does any other frequency. So, 850 MHz does not travel any farther than does 1900 MHz.

 

But from a communications standpoint, lower frequencies tend to be easier to receive at greater distances than do higher frequencies because lower frequencies have larger antenna apertures. That means more of the available RF power is received by the antenna.

 

If talking free space path loss, 850 MHz is able to receive about 7 dB greater power than 1900 MHz is at the same distance. Solving the free space path loss equation for distance instead, 850 MHz is able to receive equivalent power to 1900 MHz at approximately double the distance (or four times the coverage area).

 

AJ

[vryan44]

Thank you for clarifying AJ. Four times the coverage area is a huge difference. Can't wait until I get rid of this iPhone 4s so I can take advantage of the extended coverage.