Jump to content
Kevster1321

Verizon will make LTE only phone in 2014

Recommended Posts

Guys, this is the last word on the matter. Cellular 850 MHz carriers will not transition to VoLTE only anytime soon because those licensees have always faced FCC mandated geographic build out requirements. If VoLTE were to cause their coverage areas to shrink, they would lose that as Cellular Unserved Area. The FCC would not allow hundreds of thousands of square miles of coverage to just evaporate.

 

So, if Cellular 850 MHz carriers ever want to switch away from CDMA1X and W-CDMA, they will have to wait for greater than Release 10 enhancements, such as CoMP, and/or they will have to build out many additional rural sites. Either way, that requires a lot of time and money. VoLTE only is a mirage for still many years to come.

 

AJ

 

I completely agree with this assessment. I just want to add that Verizon may add VoLTE to their handsets and networks as supplemental capacity and may transition to a point where they only leave one CDMA 850 carrier active for the purposes of protecting spectrum. And that would be the ultimate middle finger to America. One measly 850 CDMA carrier to protect spectrum.

 

Robert

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cellular 850 still isn't universal for rural coverage. Clearing out the 450 band would be the ideal here.

 

Southern Illinois lost coverage after the transition from analog to CDMA. I don't expect anything different from CDMA to VoLTE.

 

I agree with the basic point you make AJ, but I have little faith in our regulators to do the right thing. As such, I bet on failure. There are common sense solutions that can work. I just don't expect the FCC, or the 3GPP, or Qualcomm, to see them though Bell lobbying.

 

Out of all three groups you'd probably have the best luck with the 3GPP. That's a sad, sad commentary. It is the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearing out the 450 band would be the ideal here.

 

That would bump up against DTV channel 14 at 470 MHz -- the best UHF channel. Broadcasters would go berserk. It would be the DTV channel 51 and Lower 700 MHz A block issue, but worse. Not gonna happen.

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That would bump up against DTV channel 14 at 470 MHz -- the best UHF channel. Broadcasters would go berserk. It would be the DTV channel 51 and Lower 700 MHz A block issue, but worse. Not gonna happen.

 

AJ

 

Looks like I forgot to add "broadcasters" to my list. Duly noted.

 

They're part of the problem too.

 

The Bells are a big part of the Channel 51 mess as well. Anything to stamp out competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Southern Illinois lost coverage after the transition from analog to CDMA.

 

Here is a quick question: are you certain that Cellular 850 MHz carriers in Southern Illinois are no longer running any AMPS?

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here is a quick question: are you certain that Cellular 850 MHz carriers in Southern Illinois are no longer running any AMPS?

 

AJ

 

I'd have to contact the Verizon engineers I know. I have no such contacts within ATNI.

 

If I had to make a guess I'd say no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to contact the Verizon engineers I know. I have no such contacts within ATNI.

 

If I had to make a guess I'd say no.

 

Do you have an old, pre EV-DO handset that you can set to AMPS only mode? I have several and should do some drive testing in rural Kansas. Of course, my spectrum analyzer would also tell the tale.

 

But the AMPS sunset was not a mandated AMPS shut down. I know that you are aware of that. However, some are not. AMPS still operates in many rural areas -- especially in mountainous terrain that makes coverage challenging and in agricultural areas where automated machinery may be controlled by AMPS.

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I turn up any old handsets during Spring Cleaning, I'll check. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US Cellular has no problem with DTV channel 51 and Lower 700 MHz A. I'm guessing that they have service in rural areas and there are no Channel 51s in the boondocks. Or they use decent filters or both. The 450MHz band can be be used the same way.

 

If the Lower 700 MHz A band was owned by AT&T or Verizon, how much you want to bet that they would have bought all the stations operating on channel 51 and put them out of business?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looks like I forgot to add "broadcasters" to my list. Duly noted.

 

They're part of the problem too.

 

The Bells are a big part of the Channel 51 mess as well. Anything to stamp out competition.

 

Along with the millions and millions of people watching TV everyday ;)

 

Going to a frequency that low we might have to get some pull out antennas on our phones.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along with the millions and millions of people watching TV everyday ;)

 

Going to a frequency that low we might have to get some pull out antennas on our phones.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

No need for that. Antenna technology has advanced quite a bit since the yagis of yesteryear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No need for that. Antenna technology has advanced quite a bit since the yagis of yesteryear.

 

I haven't seen any radical changes or breakthroughs.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen any radical changes or breakthroughs.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

Then you have not been looking particularly when it comes to handset antennas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you have not been looking particularly when it comes to handset antennas.

 

So who has this mythical tech and is just sitting on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need for that. Antenna technology has advanced quite a bit since the yagis of yesteryear.

 

When have cellphones ever used Yagis? External antennas were mostly whips or rubber duckies. Internal antennas now are mostly PIFAs.

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be viable for Verizon to just convert to 3GPP completely? If they had one UMTS carrier deployed on 850 MHz, it would be easy to migrate people to a primarily VoLTE network. LTE would handle the vast majority of calls, and UMTS would be available as a fallback in marginal signal areas. The UMTS carrier would be under little load compared to Verizon's current 1x carriers because of offloading to LTE, so it might even improve effective coverage.

 

I suppose this would only make sense given several conditions. Seamless handover would need to be possible from VoLTE to UMTS (either VoIP or circuit-switched). The benefits from lower licencing/device costs, improvement in voice quality, and possible improvement in coverage would need to outweigh the cost of deployment and transient reduction in usable capacity while users upgrade to new devices compatible with the new configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be viable for Verizon to just convert to 3GPP completely? If they had one UMTS carrier deployed on 850 MHz, it would be easy to migrate people to a primarily VoLTE network. LTE would handle the vast majority of calls, and UMTS would be available as a fallback in marginal signal areas. The UMTS carrier would be under little load compared to Verizon's current 1x carriers because of offloading to LTE, so it might even improve effective coverage.

 

I suppose this would only make sense given several conditions. Seamless handover would need to be possible from VoLTE to UMTS (either VoIP or circuit-switched). The benefits from lower licencing/device costs, improvement in voice quality, and possible improvement in coverage would need to outweigh the cost of deployment and transient reduction in usable capacity while users upgrade to new devices compatible with the new configuration.

 

That sounds like what the Canadian CDMA carriers did. Transition from CDMA to UMTS and then to LTE. They even kept the CDMA network up for roaming and legacy devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who has this mythical tech and is just sitting on it?

 

Look up fractal antennas or tree antennas (no, not towers disguised as trees).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, the urban dweller who thinks that he is self sufficient. It is an unsupportable, idiotic viewpoint.

 

That would be very stupid, you know... If I actually thought that. I don't care in the same way I don't care about LTE in NYC. I don't live there so it doesn't impact me. As far as urban vs rural: both need each other to sustain our current lifestyles. Without cities you can kiss most of the economy, transportation networks, almost all technological inventions, etc goodbye. Without rural communities we can't eat.

 

 

No, it will not. VZW's Upper 700 MHz does not even solve the problem. You really should stop talking when you do not know what you are talking about.

 

Stop moving goalposts. You claimed VoLTE would lead to a decrease in voice coverage area, presumably based on the current tower footprints. SMR certainly travels farther than 1900, at worst making it a trade-off, but I suspect VoLTE on 800 SMR would beat CDMA 1900 for coverage off the same tower in the same conditions. Whether Sprint deploys it that way is another matter entirely. We shall shortly find out when SMR LTE is deployed. I suspect we will see expanded data coverage compared to the existing EVDO footprint, and anywhere you can get even 1Mbps LTE you can support voice traffic.

 

As a practical matter the equipment manufacturers, handset makers, et al aren't going to continue cranking out CDMA support for an ever shrinking market, let alone paying extra royalties to QualComm. It won't go away permanently but I am 100% not-shocked to see Verizon announcing LTE-only handsets. Sprint will do the same before NV is done deploying or I'll eat my hat.

 

 

Your comeuppance should be that you get in a car accident in a rural area and have your frail VoLTE only voice coverage fail. It will be fine...you hope...

 

AJ

 

I grew up in a rural area. The only thing that would "fix" rural coverage to any great degree would be deploying thousands and thousands of additional towers. There is no magic bullet. You're quibbling over minor adjustments in the coverage based on the technology used, as if that somehow deals with the huge 20 mile or larger gaps in coverage. Besides the fact that rural populations are so spread out even a 1/2 mile increase in coverage might, at best, give 5 people additional marginal service levels.

 

And for the record if you need medical attention or the sheriff, they're at least 15 minutes away, maybe 40 even if you dialed them on a landline immediately. Or were you talking about the not-really-rural exurbs? In Tyler we had cell service in town but good luck outside Flint or Whitehouse, you were on your own.

 

 

 

Bottom line is I'm right and I'll put 100 bux on it, Sprint starts trials of VoLTE or a similar VoIP solution by 2015, half of the voice calls are over LTE by 2018.

 

I've literally had this same exact argument twice before, once about AMPS, once about VoIP in general (replacing PBX systems, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My house alarm has a directional large yagi antenna for monitoring purposes, works well just about most of the time, as I'm on the edge of any service area. It is pointed at an AT&T tower, through a hill, through trees, I'm surprised it works at all.

 

The word 'rural' could mean different things to different people, to city dwellers it might mean anywhere there isn't a starbucks.

 

City dwellers do drive to rural places and expect there to be service. People from the cities have sued the national park service because of lack of service in Mount Rainier park, as a family member did something stupid and expected help at a moments notice.

 

I do wonder why Sprint just updated their coverage maps to remove a lot of coverage that does exist in our area, I would've hoped/expect that to be the opposite after they expand the 800 Mhz CDMA tower upgrades. It could mean they are removing towers, hope not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we're on this topic, let's remember that Sprint introduced HD Voice with EVRC-NW in May 2012, saying that it was going to be introduced later that year on the Sprint platform. So far, to my knowledge, EVRC-NW hasn't been enabled yet. The performer in the US mobile market that will get to claim they were first to VoLTE is MetroPCS, and the first to HD Voice is T-Mobile's implementation of AMR-WB over UMTS circuit switched voice channels. Metro's current VoLTE implementation is encoded as AMR-NB, but Roger Lindquist, CEO of MetroPCS has said that voice quality was "better than what we have over the CDMA network."

 

http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/gsma-planning-volte-how-guide-carriers/2013-03-03

 

I think one thing we can all agree on is that Sprint is nowhere near pushing for VoLTE. They have to finish Network Vision first. I'd just like to know what the hang up with EVRC-NW is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're going to need a lot of water to wash that hat down.

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...