T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[maximus1987/lou99]

He definitely avoided it, no doubt. But I wasn't expecting him to answer it though. Tmo just needs to withdraw their useless EDGE coverage and save a lot of operational expenses. Roaming costs for just phone calls in these areas can't be much. If they want to be the urban provider, they need to just embrace it.

 

Robert

It may be more than we think. In this thread, I asked "where does Tmobile have no EDGE and still disallows VOICE roaming" and I got two responses detailing where.

And one of said locations, Muskegon, I've actually experienced it, or rather my sister did, on a vacation.

 

If voice roaming were truly cheap, TMO wouldn't be blocking it in edge of EDGE markets.

 

[S4GRU]

It may be more than we think. In this thread, I asked "where does Tmobile have no EDGE and still disallows VOICE roaming" and I got two responses detailing where.

And one of said locations, Muskegon, I've actually experienced it, or rather my sister did, on a vacation.

 

If voice roaming were truly cheap, TMO wouldn't be blocking it in edge of EDGE markets.

 

The way Sprint is really liberal with voice roaming, I have drawn the conclusion it is inexpensive.  I may be incorrect, though.  It is just an assumption on my part.

 

Robert

[maximus1987/lou99]

The way Sprint is really liberal with voice roaming, I have drawn the conclusion it is inexpensive. I may be in correct, though. It is just an assumption on my part.

 

Robert

What does it take to get the roaming rates?

 

I'm surprised you at least haven't gotten them given how much info you're able to get for NV.

[iansltx]

The tone of the message counds about right for John himself. And, honestly, that was about the best thing he could have said. In 2016 T-Mobile will have 20x20 LTE in some places, on AWS, and probably PCS LTE where they've got 15x15 or more of spectrum (remember, they have to put HSPA and GSM somewhere).

 

And Sprint will have NV complete and tri-band LTE-A deployed over their whole footprint, with download speeds on LTE on 2600-enabled sites reaching somewhere between 10x10 and 20x20 FD-LTE numbers. Or maybe they've shut down WiMAX by that point and launch 2x20 TD data sticks and tablets that can hit 90 Mbps in real life, much as 20x20 Band 7 LTE has done in Canada (for the ~140 sites that have it).

 

And Verizon will have completed their AWS overlay, and started refarming PCS for LTE. And AT&T will have started refarming whatever spectrum they can get to LTE, whether that's AWS, WCS, PCS, CLR or 700MHz...yuck. Or maybe WCS won't be online yet.

 

My guess is that 40/10 Mbps will be pretty standard LTE speeds at that point, dropping to 20/5 in less competitive/more rural areas. At which point the question is how much territory/population each carrier covers with the faster variety, rather than the slower one...or no LTE at all.

 

My guess is that Verizon will lead here, and AT&T will bring up the rear. Sprint will have more "slow" LTE than T-Mobile has overall non-roaming coverage, but where they fall on the "fast" LTE side very much depends on how far Sprint goes with BRS/EBS. T-Mobile will probably continue to win here, but if Son goes insane (e.g. 2x20 TD-LTE on every site that has wireline backhaul) then there will be places that are GPRS or EDGE on T-Mobile and can hit 100 Mbps on Sprint.

[iansltx]

What does it take to get the roaming rates?

 

I'm surprised you at least haven't gotten them given how much info you're able to get for NV.

 

Probably a completely different department. I could ping a guy who used to do roaming negotiations for a local carrier, but I guarantee that the rates are 10x lower now. For voice anyway.

 

Even if rates were relatively high (say, 5¢ per minute), having a built-out network means that you don't incur those costs much at all. My guess is that I've used less than 500 roaming minutes over the lift of my account...and that's about six years of service. I'm not certain on this, because there's no easy way to check on my bills...which reinforces the idea that Sprint just doesn't care because rates are low and usage is low as well.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Probably a completely different department. I could ping a guy who used to do roaming negotiations for a local carrier, but I guarantee that the rates are 10x lower now. For voice anyway.

 

Even if rates were relatively high (say, 5¢ per minute), having a built-out network means that you don't incur those costs much at all. My guess is that I've used less than 500 roaming minutes over the lift of my account...and that's about six years of service. I'm not certain on this, because there's no easy way to check on my bills...which reinforces the idea that Sprint just doesn't care because rates are low and usage is low as well.

If that's true then why won't TMO do what Robert said and pull out of rural EDGE markets?

[iansltx]

If that's true then why won't TMO do what Robert said and pull out of rural EDGE markets?

 

Maybe Sprint has had a better time at getting roaming deals than T-Mobile? Which by the way can't leverage its MetroPCS base for better roaming deals, because those deals are all on CDMA.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if AT&T, despite the mandated roaming agreement with T-Mobile post-merger-breakup, still charges the carrier plenty per minute, SMS and MB, such that prematurely terminating below-3G site licenses in rural areas in favor of roaming agreements wouldn't be a cash-positive move.

 

Plus, if you're roaming on AT&T you're probably using AMR-NB Half Rate, which sounds atrocious. Whereas T-Mobile uses Full Rate on its network, which is why it sounds better than AT&T, generally speaking.

[irev210]

John Legere ‏@john_legere 5h

@WiWavelength yes they are.... The next 2.5 years ... See you in 2016

 

 

Pretty hilarious.  Probably really is John.

[maxsilver]

Why won't TMO do what Robert said and pull out of rural EDGE markets?

I don't see how pulling out of EDGE markets helps T-Mobile, or anyone really.

 

EDGE towers aren't all that expensive to run. They allow the potential for cheaper data costs than roaming. They allow calls to continue seamlessly between cities (otherwise, they'd drop when switching to roaming, and drop again when re-entering a TMO market, since TMO blocks in-market roaming).

 

They are also already scouted, leased, licensed (where necessary), installed, and operational. If they decide, for any reason, they need better coverage there, they'd have to re-pay those costs.

 

- - -

 

It's not like T-Mobile is ever going to drop the spectrum. If T-Mobile didn't have their EDGE network, they'd still hang on to all that PCS spectrum in those areas, and no one would be allowed to use it.

 

Surely some EDGE is better than no service?

 

- - -

 

I think T-Mobile's already doing what others mentioned and "embracing the urban-only carrier". I think their EDGE network is a testament to that. From everything I've seen so far, it appears that cheapest thing T-Mobile could do in the short term is simply not touch the EDGE network. And right now, that looks like what they are doing.

 

(It's also worth noting that, when EDGE sites break down right now, they are typically replacing them with HSPA+ radios and panels. Granted, they are still attached to single T1 lines, so speeds are still effectively EDGE-like. But you get the benefit of lower latency)

[maximus1987/lou99]

The cities that TMO officially launched yesterday are available.

 

http://click.myt-force.com/track/click.php?u=30006566&id=b9f3970fdc274a43819a344f080d0d24&url=http://support.t-mobile.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/5626-26-557849/LTE_Sheet.pdf&url_id=62c7ce8cf7c56d563cf7e732160d366b3a4aeeb8&tags=_all%2c_senddo-not-reply%40myt-force.com%2cdocument

[S4GRU]

(It's also worth noting that, when EDGE sites break down right now, they are typically replacing them with HSPA+ radios and panels. Granted, they are still attached to single T1 lines, so speeds are still effectively EDGE-like. But you get the benefit of lower latency)

There are several sites like this in Northern New Mexico. They typically run at 500-800kbps. They are much more desirable for data use than EDGE/GPRS. I'd like them to be more common, though. These are 3G type speeds at least.

 

Although I do hear frequent complaints that people think they have Tmo 4G running at 500kbps. Its kind of like hooking LTE to T1 lines. But I do prefer it over EDGE.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[ericdabbs]

The cities that TMO officially launched yesterday are available.

 

http://click.myt-force.com/track/click.php?u=30006566&id=b9f3970fdc274a43819a344f080d0d24&url=http://support.t-mobile.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/5626-26-557849/LTE_Sheet.pdf&url_id=62c7ce8cf7c56d563cf7e732160d366b3a4aeeb8&tags=_all%2c_senddo-not-reply%40myt-force.com%2cdocument

 

Looks like Tmobile is making great progress with their LTE rollout. 

[S4GRU]

The cities that TMO officially launched yesterday are available.

 

http://click.myt-force.com/track/click.php?u=30006566&id=b9f3970fdc274a43819a344f080d0d24&url=http://support.t-mobile.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/5626-26-557849/LTE_Sheet.pdf&url_id=62c7ce8cf7c56d563cf7e732160d366b3a4aeeb8&tags=_all%2c_senddo-not-reply%40myt-force.com%2cdocument

Thanks for the link. I was looking for this earlier.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

Thanks for the link. I was looking for this earlier.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

As you can see, it looks like an internal TMO site. The "permanent" link is:

 

http://t-mobile-coverage.t-mobile.com/#150million4glte

Click:

Check latest 4G LTE cities

[bucdenny]

As you can see, it looks like an internal TMO site. The "permanent" link is:

 

http://t-mobile-coverage.t-mobile.com/#150million4glte

Click:

Check latest 4G LTE cities

 

Do they really have LTE in all those cities?

[S4GRU]

Do they really have LTE in all those cities?

Yep, it's legit. I can verify the Albuquerque listing. I use Tmo LTE there in about 60% of the metro area. The indoor coverage is atrocious still, but LTE is no panacea for reception just speed.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[lilotimz]

Do they really have LTE in all those cities?

 

Probably but complete coverage? Most definitely not. Major complaints on most of the t-mobile sections are still on the spottiness of LTE and 2G only areas. 

[Dkoellerwx]

Do they really have LTE in all those cities?

Just checkout Sensorly. It's there. Not a whole lot in some cases, but it is there.

 

Sent from my HTC ONE

 

 

[digiblur]

Do they really have LTE in all those cities?

I saw them up on a site that Sprint needs to locate and saw them one day and out the next. At first I thought it could be possible the nextel stuff was leaving but it was Tmobile.

 

I still laugh at their coverage maps.. They are worse than Sprint's LTE ones in exaggeration factor.

[Fraydog]

It's brass balled for John to defend T-Mobile like that, and no doubt, they've moved faster than I thought they would on LTE. That said, it's time to get some upgrades to rural areas.  I have nothing against T-Mobile, and in cities they've improved 100%, but their rural network is still hot garbage. 

[milan03]

And how about T-Mobile using Verizon's A Block during the press event in NYC, boosting the indoor network to 2x10Mhz, while on the streets of NYC you get sub 30Mbps on an unloaded network?!

 

 

John Legere tweeting himself 67Mbps at the event: https://twitter.com/john_legere/status/354971407375011841

 

How deceiving is that!

[bucdenny]

And how about T-Mobile using Verizon's A Block during the press event in NYC, boosting the indoor network to 2x10Mhz, while on the streets of NYC you get sub 30Mbps on an unloaded network?!

 

 

John Legere tweeting himself 67Mbps at the event: https://twitter.com/john_legere/status/354971407375011841

 

How deceiving is that!

 

Someone needs to set the record straight and tweet!  

[iansltx]

Wow, that is a bit disingenuous. I wonder how much T-Mobile paid Verizon to borrow that 10x10 swath for the length of the presentation and then some.

 

What's funny is that you won't hear T-Mobile taking on Verizon directly in so many cases because, well, they got a nice chunk of spectrum from that carrier.

[Nickel]

Wow, that is a bit disingenuous. I wonder how much T-Mobile paid Verizon to borrow that 10x10 swath for the length of the presentation and then some.

 

What's funny is that you won't hear T-Mobile taking on Verizon directly in so many cases because, well, they got a nice chunk of spectrum from that carrier.

Hmmm? what spectrum are you referring to? The one where Verizon and T-Mobile swapped AWS about a year ago or is this something much older?

[irev210]

Probably but complete coverage? Most definitely not. Major complaints on most of the t-mobile sections are still on the spottiness of LTE and 2G only areas. 

 

Complete and total coverage in Boston (except for the subway system, which is still HSPA+, which Sprint does not service).  Zero holes.

 

Before T-Mobile launched LTE in Boston, there wasn't a place I could go without getting coverage.  When I could first connect to LTE, it was full of holes - within weeks though, they finished the overlay and completed coverage.

 

Granted, yes, as I mentioned before, their backhaul remains unchanged... so the biggest improvement is latency.  There seems to be an issue with the upload (gets stuck on speedtest) but otherwise, the service is awesome.

 

It's night and day compared to Sprint.  Sprint launched Boston six months ago and there are major major gaps (wimax has better coverage in Boston, to put it in perspective).

 

While Sprint's deployment is much more involved, it was still a mistake to launch a city with such low coverage for such a long period of time.  Obviously, you get out rural and the story changes a bit.  It's odd going from LTE to edge - but I rarely go rural, so it works for me.