T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion

[Terrell352]

How many people actually have android 4.3 to use these features? Don't worry I'll wait.

I checked and android 4.3 also has an auto block for sure under call settings > call rejection. If no connection was made it would be rerouted at the egress switch to vm. The only completed call would be to vm within the states although I wouldn't put it past any cellco to charge you for it. When custard services is open I will give them a call and see what they say.

 

It's great to see an interesting product, no matter who it is from. This walks the balance between being just useful enough not to buy a foreign sim and just useless enough to make you say sod it and cough up a few bucks for calls and some 4g. Seems to be nicely played on their part. Any carrier making a move like this makes it interesting for everyone, look at the whole update your phone whenever thing, now every carrier is at it one way or another. You can bet every carrier is taking a look at this if they haven't already. They probably won't all adopt it, at&t would be the most likely given GSM, but it will at least prompt them to run a cost benefit analysis on it. Now if only I could pay tmo to let me roam on at&t when I can't get a tmo signal lol.

[richy]

How many people actually have android 4.3 to use these features? Don't worry I'll wait.

There are many apps that also do the same thing, it's just been integrated into android now as well. It basically just presses the reject button for you, nothing fancy.

 

I guess you can also have tmo add call forwarding to your account. It might not be unlimited 4G and calls for free but is a step in the right direction.

[compuwizz]

T-Mobile offers International Call blocking, International Text blocking, and International data blocking to make sure you don't have unexpected roaming charges.

[mozamcrew]

Contrary to popular belief, I liked using CDMA2000 when it first arrived. It was superior to FD-TDMA systems like D-AMPS and GSM. But, I switched to UMTS as soon as it arrived, because I felt that it sufficiently incorporated the advantages of CDMA technology with some advancement and interesting capabilities of its own. And of course, it was a global technology being adopted by all regions. I've never made it a secret that I prefer UMTS over CDMA2000. I personally like that operators in Canada, Latin America, and most of Asia have switched from CDMA2000 to UMTS as they've realized the socioeconomical weakness of the CDMA2000 platform. For a company like Sprint, who is deploying multi-mode gear, it's very easy to add UMTS to it and transition over time to UMTS/LTE. T-Mobile is doing the same thing in MetroPCS CDMA/LTE markets, and it's been going along very swimmingly. I think that operators in the US should move to a common UMTS/LTE platform, especially since our spectrum for LTE is so screwed up that we've practically broke the key benefit of everyone using LTE.

 

Why should Sprint and VZW bother converting to UMTS? By the time option arrived they had both decided to be early adopters of LTE. I know it feels like Sprint is "behind" on LTE, and that may be true compared to VZW, but compared to most of the world the big US carriers tend to be earlier adopters of new technology. If you already know you are converting to LTE, why waste money converting to UMTS first. There is a lot of UE you'd have to junk and replace too. Why not just add LTE and slowly push CDMA out of the UE over the next 10 years. Hopefully by that time your LTE network is very robust.

[Nickel]

Why should Sprint and VZW bother converting to UMTS? By the time option arrived they had both decided to be early adopters of LTE. I know it feels like Sprint is "behind" on LTE, and that may be true compared to VZW, but compared to most of the world the big US carriers tend to be earlier adopters of new technology. If you already know you are converting to LTE, why waste money converting to UMTS first. There is a lot of UE you'd have to junk and replace too. Why not just add LTE and slowly push CDMA out of the UE over the next 10 years. Hopefully by that time your LTE network is very robust.

What he's saying is that if Sprint started putting their UMTS bands on handsets that it would be pretty easy for them to aggressively phase out CDMA.

[mozamcrew]

What he's saying is that if Sprint started putting their UMTS bands on handsets that it would be pretty easy for them to aggressively phase out CDMA.

But what would be the point?! It would be a tremendous additional expenditure both for its customers and for Sprint. You are already moving to an all LTE network. Why add additional costly intermediate steps? In the areas where Sprint has a full 7x7 of 800 spectrum, which is most of the US outside the SE (SoLinc) and the IBEZ, I suppose you could go from one 5x5 of LTE to a pair of 3x3 LTE channels, You would get a negligible gain of capacity though. I imagine the 1xA channels of CDMA on 800 will be the last part of the CDMA network Sprint shutters. To take advantage of the spectral efficiencies of FD-LTE, you really want to have spectrum allocations that are 5x5, 10x10, 15x15, or 20x20. Since the PCS spectrum was all auctioned as 5x5, 10x10 or 15x15, this fits perfectly. Sprint's 800 and the CLR 850 band allocations aren't nice contiguous 5Mhz paired allocations. Thus you might as well use the leftover slivers to continue to run a few channels of CDMA right up until the bitter end.

[derrph]

I signed up for T-Mobile service and it has been great but this weekend  went out of town to Cincinnati and dropped down to edge leaving the phone unusable besides calling and texting the whole ride to and from. I still had my sprint phone with me and was able to stream music. Sprint may not have the best network but what I will say is that Sprint is on the same page with Verizon and AT&T as far as data coverage out of major cities. T-Mobile is a great in city but I do not see T-Mobile being a major threat to Sprint UNLESS they do something about their edge network. 

[ericdabbs]

I signed up for T-Mobile service and it has been great but this weekend  went out of town to Cincinnati and dropped down to edge leaving the phone unusable besides calling and texting the whole ride to and from. I still had my sprint phone with me and was able to stream music. Sprint may not have the best network but what I will say is that Sprint is on the same page with Verizon and AT&T as far as data coverage out of major cities. T-Mobile is a great in city but I do not see T-Mobile being a major threat to Sprint UNLESS they do something about their edge network. 

 

I am sure Tmobile is banking on the 600 MHz spectrum to help with their lack of low band spectrum to help expand its network.  Tmobile has said in the past that they are waiting on 600 MHz spectrum before expanding their network.  I presume that once they get 600 MHz that all those 2G towers only towers would be upgraded to LTE in the rural areas and maximize their coverage.

 

However that is still many years away and we don't know how much 600 MHz spectrum will be available for auction.  This is why Tmobile is so active in the 600 MHz discussions to establish rules for limiting the amount of 600 MHz spectrum purchased by Verizon and ATT.

[Conan Kudo]

But what would be the point?! It would be a tremendous additional expenditure both for its customers and for Sprint. You are already moving to an all LTE network. Why add additional costly intermediate steps? In the areas where Sprint has a full 7x7 of 800 spectrum, which is most of the US outside the SE (SoLinc) and the IBEZ, I suppose you could go from one 5x5 of LTE to a pair of 3x3 LTE channels, You would get a negligible gain of capacity though. I imagine the 1xA channels of CDMA on 800 will be the last part of the CDMA network Sprint shutters. To take advantage of the spectral efficiencies of FD-LTE, you really want to have spectrum allocations that are 5x5, 10x10, 15x15, or 20x20. Since the PCS spectrum was all auctioned as 5x5, 10x10 or 15x15, this fits perfectly. Sprint's 800 and the CLR 850 band allocations aren't nice contiguous 5Mhz paired allocations. Thus you might as well use the leftover slivers to continue to run a few channels of CDMA right up until the bitter end.

Sprint has plenty of non-contiguous allocations that prevent any large efficiency with PCS LTE. The only shot Sprint has with PCS LTE to go up to a larger channel is if it gets PCS H block. But that doesn't matter either. SoftBank does not care about the PCS network (because it is CDMA on PCS A-F, there's no confidence in a band 25 LTE ecosystem right now, and there are no synergies to realize here because of CDMA instead of UMTS on PCS A-F). It doesn't care about the ESMR network. It cares about the IMT-E TDD network. SoftBank has already enforced a strategic change to Sprint that has refocused capacity efforts around Band 41 instead of the other bands.

 

Sprint has been offering UMTS band 2 service support on a large number of its devices for a few years now, so it could do that. ESMR would likely retain a single CDMA 1X-Advanced carrier alongside the 3MHz FDD LTE carrier. As you said, there's no real reason to not retain the legacy CDMA 1X-A service on ESMR until the bitter end. And it wouldn't cost that much more to support it, since nearly the entire system is already in place. Nearly all of the equipment deployed in Network Vision can be reused for a UMTS/LTE infrastructure on ESMR/PCS/TD-IMT-E spectrum.

[Nickel]

Sprint has plenty of non-contiguous allocations that prevent any large efficiency with PCS LTE. The only shot Sprint has with PCS LTE to go up to a larger channel is if it gets PCS H block. But that doesn't matter either. SoftBank does not care about the PCS network (because it is CDMA on PCS A-F, there's no confidence in a band 25 LTE ecosystem right now, and there are no synergies to realize here because of CDMA instead of UMTS on PCS A-F). It doesn't care about the ESMR network. It cares about the IMT-E TDD network. SoftBank has already enforced a strategic change to Sprint that has refocused capacity efforts around Band 41 instead of the other bands.

 

Sprint has been offering UMTS band 2 service support on a large number of its devices for a few years now, so it could do that. ESMR would likely retain a single CDMA 1X-Advanced carrier alongside the 3MHz FDD LTE carrier. As you said, there's no real reason to not retain the legacy CDMA 1X-A service on ESMR until the bitter end. And it wouldn't cost that much more to support it, since nearly the entire system is already in place. Nearly all of the equipment deployed in Network Vision can be reused for a UMTS/LTE infrastructure on ESMR/PCS/TD-IMT-E spectrum.

1. Couldn't they do a spectrum swap to make PCS more contiguous?

 

2. I don't think it's fair to say that SoftBank doesn't care about PCS or ESMR. I think what SoftBank is trying to do is take advantage of Sprint's (arguably) greatest asset.

[Fraydog]

I still think there's big advantage in using bands 26 and 41 in concert. 

 

But yeah, it is kind of a puzzle for SoftBank to synchronize their band puzzle here and in Japan. I'm not familiar with their band allocation in Japan other than Platinum Band which matches up with 900 MHz European GSM/UMTS if I'm correct. 

 

VoLTE is close enough that it makes sense for Sprint to hang on with CDMA2000 in the interim, which isn't long at all. 

[Conan Kudo]

I still think there's big advantage in using bands 26 and 41 in concert. 

 

But yeah, it is kind of a puzzle for SoftBank to synchronize their band puzzle here and in Japan. I'm not familiar with their band allocation in Japan other than Platinum Band which matches up with 900 MHz European GSM/UMTS if I'm correct. 

 

VoLTE is close enough that it makes sense for Sprint to hang on with CDMA2000 in the interim, which isn't long at all. 

SoftBank's network uses the following technology and bands:

• UMTS 900/1500/1700/2100 (3GPP bands 8, 11, 9, 1)
• LTE 700/1800/2100 (3GPP bands 28, 3, 1)

Most of their handsets support UMTS 900/1500/1900/2100, as UMTS 1700 is being dropped for LTE 1800.

 

The reason UMTS 1900 (3GPP band 2) is supported on a vast majority of their handsets is because there's a lot of roaming with Latin America and Europe/Japan. Both Europe and Japan have been active in the Latin American economy for quite some time now. PCS was the first band that UMTS was deployed on in the Americas, though now it's on 850 and 1900. It's also for this reason that the vast majority of European handsets are tri-band UMTS 900/1900/2100. It's also fairly easy to support it, too.

[irev210]

Thanks. Around two weeks ago I switched one of my Sprint lines (of 5) to test-drive T-Mobile's network and at that time they had 5mhz in Miami. However, a few days ago I checked again and Miami is now 10mhz. Is 20mhz (10x10mhz) the maximum that T-Mobile has in AWS in Miami?

 

It seems like that happened in some parts of Boston.

 

Nice watching my speeds double.

[JohnHovah]

I checked and android 4.3 also has an auto block for sure under call settings > call rejection. If no connection was made it would be rerouted at the egress switch to vm. The only completed call would be to vm within the states although I wouldn't put it past any cellco to charge you for it. When custard services is open I will give them a call and see what they say. 

 

It's great to see an interesting product, no matter who it is from. This walks the balance between being just useful enough not to buy a foreign sim and just useless enough to make you say sod it and cough up a few bucks for calls and some 4g. Seems to be nicely played on their part. Any carrier making a move like this makes it interesting for everyone, look at the whole update your phone whenever thing, now every carrier is at it one way or another. You can bet every carrier is taking a look at this if they haven't already. They probably won't all adopt it, at&t would be the most likely given GSM, but it will at least prompt them to run a cost benefit analysis on it. Now if only I could pay tmo to let me roam on at&t when I can't get a tmo signal lol.  

Richy, this plan provides international 2G data, not 4G.

[JohnHovah]

Well, I suggest that anyone potentially affected research these apps before using them.

 

If a sub roaming abroad does not answer an incoming call, the call can get forwarded back to the US for voicemail.  In such case, the sub can still be on the hook for international long distance and roaming airtime, as the call has been forwarded from the US to the foreign operator and then back to the US.

 

AJ

AJ, I hope that this is the case for them.  Carriers used to charge a minute of talk time for incoming calls that were unanswered.  It looks like they have revised their T&C to include data and texting now which was not how their site read for the simple choice plan when it was announced, so I will retract my earlier texting comment. http://www.t-mobile.com/simple-choice-international-plans.html

 

 

Of course there is a new caveat in the fine print, calls/text over wifi will still have the 20 cent per minute/text charge. It is a little unnerving that the fine print changes with such speed that what was true yesterday may not be tomorrow.  So I will take this with a grain of salt.  

 

 

Simple Choice International Service: Additional charges apply in excluded destinations; see here for included destinations (subject to change at T-Mobile’s discretion). Qualifying postpaid Simple Choice plan and capable device required. Taxes additional; usage taxed in some countries. Voice and text features for direct communications between 2 people. Communications with premium-rate (e.g., 900, entertainment, high-rate helpline) numbers not included and may incur additional charges. Calls over Wi-Fi are $.20/min; texts over Wi-Fi are $.20 each (no charge for Wi-Fi calls or texts to US). Coverage not available in some areas; we are not responsible for the performance of our roaming partners’ networks. Standard speeds approx. 128 Kbps. No tethering.

[WiWavelength]

I checked and android 4.3 also has an auto block for sure under call settings > call rejection. If no connection was made it would be rerouted at the egress switch to vm. The only completed call would be to vm within the states although I wouldn't put it past any cellco to charge you for it. When custard services is open I will give them a call and see what they say.

 

No, barring further evidence, I do not believe that for a second.  The phone does not need to be answered.  If a traffic channel is set up on the airlink, then the connection has been made -- whether the call is actually answered or rejected.  And that would mean international routing, then international rerouting back to voicemail.  If you want to avoid that altogether, then you need to be on only LTE, since it does not support circuit switched voice.

 

AJ

[maxsilver]

It looks like they have revised their T&C to include data and texting now which was not how their site read for the simple choice plan when it was announced[/url]

 

They've been 100% consistent in message since they announced the change, live in front of hundreds of journalists.

 

It's certainly possible bad data got onto the site, but if so, it was a typo or similar. The terms and conditions have not changed in any meaningful way.

 

Of course there is a new caveat in the fine print, calls/text over wifi will still have the 20 cent per minute/text charge.

Your mis-reading that.

 

Wifi calling is no different than calling from the US. That means, all calls (incoming and outgoing) from your T-Mobile USA phone, to any USA phone, are *free* on Wifi calling (assuming your plan supports unlimited calling). No matter where you are in the world, your Wifi calling will never be billed at the 20c/minute rate, if your calling to or from other USA-based numbers.

 

Calls to *foreign* countries are 20c/minute, even if made over Wifi calling. That's the portion your reading.

 

Source : T-Mobile's own support website at http://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-1680

 

(the section you are looking for reads "[no monthly charge to use wifi calling for the following:] Calls made from outside the US to US numbers [are] (not charged roaming)"

 

EDIT : Notice the support document above was created a while ago, but updated on Oct 12, 2013 (to include the newly announced roaming price drop).

[Fraydog]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-plans-lte-coverage-around-225m-pops/2013-10-14

 

Yeah, good luck with not taking your major problem head on, TMUS. I could kind of understand it in 2013 given you had to focus on your core markets going LTE, but to stick with your guns on this going forward? Verizon and AT&T executives are laughing at this while lighting dollar bills on fire.

[maxsilver]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-plans-lte-coverage-around-225m-pops/2013-10-14

 

Yeah, good luck with not taking your major problem head on, TMUS. I could kind of understand it in 2013 given you had to focus on your core markets going LTE, but to stick with your guns on this going forward?

It sounds like they will eventually, from the article you linked to :

 

"We simply haven't announced LTE expansion plans beyond 225 million POPs yet"

"We do have plans to expand beyond that," she added. "We will, and we will do it quickly."

 

 

They probably just want to wait a bit for the new subscriber cash to roll in.

 

Or more likely, they're waiting to bring back Shakira and call it "Uncarrier 4.0" first... 

[Paynefanbro]

It sounds like they will eventually, from the article you linked to :

"We simply haven't announced LTE expansion plans beyond 225 million POPs yet"

"We do have plans to expand beyond that," she added. "We will, and we will do it quickly."

They probably just want to wait a bit for the new subscriber cash to roll in.

 

Or more likely, they're waiting to bring back Shakira and call it "Uncarrier 4.0" first... 

They'll probably start getting fiber backhaul now so that when it comes time to deploy the LTE on 600, they'll breeze through it.

[Fraydog]

Or they're preparing to sell out to SoftBank.       

 

*ducks*

[richy]

Richy, this plan provides international 2G data, not 4G.

 

Kinda It provides 2g speeds for free. That could be capped on 3g or 4g like on the limited plans when you exceed your allowance. What I was meant was the 'passes' you can buy that give you X amount of international 4g / 3g speed data and minutes on top of the free service. Their proposition is pretty sensible, you get a bare minimum free service with a chance to purchase a faster service at a vaguely sane price, no carrying (and activating, and funding and purchasing in the first place) a sim for each country (that gets really old fast travelling around Europe). This isn't about being as cheap as a prepaid provider in each country, just about moving tmo's proposition closer so you'll say sod it and give tmo the money instead.  

 

 

No, barring further evidence, I do not believe that for a second.  The phone does not need to be answered.  If a traffic channel is set up on the airlink, then the connection has been made -- whether the call is actually answered or rejected.  And that would mean international routing, then international rerouting back to voicemail.  If you want to avoid that altogether, then you need to be on only LTE, since it does not support circuit switched voice.

 

AJ

 

Fair enough Whilst custard services advised it will not attract a charge I won't take their word for it. I will see how my bill looks next time I'm away on a shoot which is probably the only surefire way to tell how they will bill in this circumstance. Anyone worried and just wanting free international 2g speed data could just use the international barring as mentioned earlier in the thread.

 

 

Or they're preparing to sell out to SoftBank.       

 

*ducks*

 

Heh, I'd like to see this, I said before (technology aside) it's about the only merger that makes sense competition wise (to me at least). I'd love to know what their plan is medium term. They need money and they need spectrum, not a good mix. I am very lucky that I get fast enough speeds for my needs in the majority of the places I routinely go. However, I do notice the large areas of no service. Hopefully, somewhere in their future is more spectrum and more coverage although I'm not sure where the money is coming from, even if their sales are up. This is largely why my personal plan is to stay at tmo until Sprints NV upgrades progress here. Even tmo's fauxG speeds are reasonable (I see 8-12mbps down) here whereas with sprint until lte comes along here their 3g is heavily oversubscribed and wimax wasn't an option on the phone I wanted. Things hopefully will be very different in a year or so. 

[Jaggrey]

Thanks. Around two weeks ago I switched one of my Sprint lines (of 5) to test-drive T-Mobile's network and at that time they had 5mhz in Miami. However, a few days ago I checked again and Miami is now 10mhz. Is 20mhz (10x10mhz) the maximum that T-Mobile has in AWS in Miami?

 

 

It seems like that happened in some parts of Boston.

 

Nice watching my speeds double.

How do you guys know that they have 5x5 or 10x10?  I've only had T-Mo for about a month down here in Miami so I'm not sure if I even saw the difference or if the change happened before I switched.

 

Heh, I'd like to see this, I said before (technology aside) it's about the only merger that makes sense competition wise (to me at least). I'd love to know what their plan is medium term. They need money and they need spectrum, not a good mix. I am very lucky that I get fast enough speeds for my needs in the majority of the places I routinely go. However, I do notice the large areas of no service. Hopefully, somewhere in their future is more spectrum and more coverage although I'm not sure where the money is coming from, even if their sales are up. This is largely why my personal plan is to stay at tmo until Sprints NV upgrades progress here. Even tmo's fauxG speeds are reasonable (I see 8-12mbps down) here whereas with sprint until lte comes along here their 3g is heavily oversubscribed and wimax wasn't an option on the phone I wanted. Things hopefully will be very different in a year or so. 

That's my concern and my plan as well.  Hopefully Sprint is in a better position within the next year or two.

[Moropo]

How do you guys know that they have 5x5 or 10x10?  I've only had T-Mo for about a month down here in Miami so I'm not sure if I even saw the difference or if the change happened before I switched.

 

That's my concern and my plan as well.  Hopefully Sprint is in a better position within the next year or two.

 

If iphone go into FieldTest then "serving cell info", if samsung go into engineering screen. I dont know if HTC has an engineering screen?

 

Anyways, the change from 5x5 to 10x10 happened last week here in Miami. I know this because I switched my wife's line over to T-Mobile around 2-3 weeks ago to test T-Mobile's network and every couple of days I would check to see if they had changed from 5x5 to 10x10 and just last week was that I saw the change. The difference is it allows double theoretical speeds, but in reality I just saw the speedtests on my wife's iphone 5s go from 20's mb to 30's mb, so I guess its just that the backhaul is not there for 60's/70's which 10x10 would allow. Also, if I remember correctly, besides the increase in speed, 10x10 allows better performance at weaker signals, although someone more knowledgeable would have to confirm that.

 

As far as T-Mobile's network, my wife is delighted. She has full bars all over Miami Beach (where she works) and excellent signal all around Miami and she now has a usable phone. As she tells me, before on Sprint she couldnt rely on even doing a simple google search as it would timeout etc. On the future I dont know, but right now T-Mobile is the better network *in Miami*. I'm switching the other 4 lines to T-Mobile once the nexus 5 comes out and since I'm buying nexus 5's, that will really cut my bill.

[Jaggrey]

If iphone go into FieldTest then "serving cell info", if samsung go into engineering screen. I dont know if HTC has an engineering screen?

 

Anyways, the change from 5x5 to 10x10 happened last week here in Miami. I know this because I switched my wife's line over to T-Mobile around 2-3 weeks ago to test T-Mobile's network and every couple of days I would check to see if they had changed from 5x5 to 10x10 and just last week was that I saw the change. The difference is it allows double theoretical speeds, but in reality I just saw the speedtests on my wife's iphone 5s go from 20's mb to 30's mb, so I guess its just that the backhaul is not there for 60's/70's which 10x10 would allow. Also, if I remember correctly, besides the increase in speed, 10x10 allows better performance at weaker signals, although someone more knowledgeable would have to confirm that.

 

As far as T-Mobile's network, my wife is delighted. She has full bars all over Miami Beach (where she works) and excellent signal all around Miami and she now has a usable phone. As she tells me, before on Sprint she couldnt rely on even doing a simple google search as it would timeout etc. On the future I dont know, but right now T-Mobile is the better network *in Miami*. I'm switching the other 4 lines to T-Mobile once the nexus 5 comes out and since I'm buying nexus 5's, that will really cut my bill.

The Sprint version of the One has an engineering screen.  I have no idea how to get to it on my T-Mo version.  I tried using the shortcut within Signal Check but it says "Field Trial not available on this device".  I tried dialing ##3282# on my phone and it said "USSD Code running" which freaked me out, but then that error'd out.  Hopefully that didn't actually do anything.