EV-DO Rev. B

[maximus1987/lou99]

Is Sprint going to eventually update to EV-DO Rev. B?

 

http://www.qualcomm....gies/ev-do-revb

 

At the very least, Phase 1 - software update on base stations - would seem to be a no-brainer.

[jefbal99]

Is Sprint going to eventually update to EV-DO Rev. B?

 

http://www.qualcomm....gies/ev-do-revb

 

At the very least, Phase 1 - software update on base stations - would seem to be a no-brainer.

 

Why update to outdated technogoly that very few of the current devices support. LTE is the way of the future

[digiblur]

Why update to outdated technogoly that very few of the current devices support. LTE is the way of the future

 

That pretty much sums it up. Short, sweet, and simple.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Why update to outdated technogoly that very few of the current devices support. LTE is the way of the future

 

Using that logic, why update the current CDMA Rev. A base stations?

Edited May 2, 2013 by maximus1987

[halcyoncmdr]

Using that logic, why update the current CDMA Rev. A base stations?

 

That's actually a side effect. Network Vision is upgrading all of the infrastructure (including new modular cards at the base station). However, EVDO Rev. A cards are cheap compared to Rev. B. Rev. B is outdated (compared to LTE/LTE-Advanced), unused by just about anyone worldwide, and would be a complete waste of time and money to upgrade everything to. Why upgrade the legacy network to a technology there is absolutely no plan to support and require FURTHER individual requirements by manufacturers for devices. The fragmentation in phone versions from one carrier to another is already bbad enough. Don't add another technology to the mix.

[Deval]

Using that logic, why update the current CDMA Rev. A base stations?

 

Because CDMA Rev.A devices are in the marketplace by the billions? Because EVDO Rev. A isn't going away anytime soon.

[jefbal99]

Using that logic, why update the current CDMA Rev. A base stations?

 

Sprint is replacing just about every piece of hardware at every tower. New cabinets, new cabling, new radios, new antennas, new backhaul, etc. Everything but the tower... All of these will support LTE as the new high speed network, and standardize the hardware between 3 OEM vendors. Sprint has a couple of devices that could drag back thru the FCC to support Rev B, but most users will be upgrading in the next 6-18 months and will have an LTE device.

 

The very minor gains from Rev B isn't worth the work to upgrade all the base stations. Get those techs out working on the base station upgrades for the NV project and then the LTE Advanced upgrade in the next year.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Sprint is replacing just about every piece of hardware at every tower. New cabinets, new cabling, new radios, new antennas, new backhaul, etc. Everything but the tower... All of these will support LTE as the new high speed network, and standardize the hardware between 3 OEM vendors. Sprint has a couple of devices that could drag back thru the FCC to support Rev B, but most users will be upgrading in the next 6-18 months and will have an LTE device.

 

The very minor gains from Rev B isn't worth the work to upgrade all the base stations. Get those techs out working on the base station upgrades for the NV project and then the LTE Advanced upgrade in the next year.

 

Ok, that makes sense. (meant to quote everyone's posts but you get the idea: I see the reasoning).

Edited May 2, 2013 by maximus1987

[S4GRU]

Beyond all the good answers given here, additionally Sprint wants to phase out 3G EVDO eventually. If they keep doing things that will encourage people to use the EVDO network even further by upgrading to a new standard, it will only prolong the closure of that network. Also, EVDO-B equipment costs are pretty high because virtually no one is using it. LTE has the economy of scale.

 

As LTE usage increases and EVDO decreases, Sprint will be able to pull an EVDO carrier here and there for an additional LTE carrier. The burden on the EVDO network will be going down every year. Especially when small cells start deploying and filling in the little LTE gaps in urban areas.

 

EVDO-B would only be useful to Sprint for the purposes of bridging to LTE. however, they are already deploying LTE network wide. EVDO-B would be redundant and a waste of money and spectrum at this point.

 

And all of the network side advantages of EVDO-B are included in the DO Advanced network architecture from Qualcomm that Sprint is already deploying in Network Vision eHRPD.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

 

[supert0nes]

Also, the fact that there is no EVDO on 800, means that once this is all done, we should hardly ever fall back to EVDO, causing even less users, whereas phones hold a connection on 1x and LTE all the time.

[Rukin1]

At my apartment I get ehRPD and at a friends like 40 ft away, the 3G is EVDO-B

[supert0nes]

At my apartment I get ehRPD and at a friends like 40 ft away, the 3G is EVDO-B

 

Sprint doesn't have EVDO-B. eHRPD is at the network level, so if this is the case, the towers would have to be currently configured to different network backends. We usually see whole cities/markets get eHRPD get turned on at once. Also, only LTE phones in LTE enabled mode can see eHRPD.

[Rukin1]

Sprint doesn't have EVDO-B. eHRPD is at the network level, so if this is the case, the towers would have to be currently configured to different network backends. We usually see whole cities/markets get eHRPD get turned on at once. Also, only LTE phones in LTE enabled mode can see eHRPD.

i'll take a screenshot next time i go over there

[ryry4ya]

 

Sprint doesn't have EVDO-B. eHRPD is at the network level, so if this is the case, the towers would have to be currently configured to different network backends. We usually see whole cities/markets get eHRPD get turned on at once. Also, only LTE phones in LTE enabled mode can see eHRPD.

crazy fonts no ?

 

Sent from S4GRU Mobile

 

 

[MacinJosh]

i'll take a screenshot next time i go over there

 

I've had that happen on my EVO Shift once where it said EVDO B as the network. I take it to be a fluke and I haven't seen it again.

[ericdabbs]

Is Sprint going to eventually update to EV-DO Rev. B?

 

http://www.qualcomm....gies/ev-do-revb

 

At the very least, Phase 1 - software update on base stations - would seem to be a no-brainer.

 

At this point, I don't think it is worth the high costs for equipment to upgrade EVDO from Rev A to Rev B nor the spectrum wasted to bond multiple EVDO carriers. Like Robert said, since there are not many worldwide carriers that deploy Rev B so there would not be good economies of scale.

 

The best time for Rev B theoretically would have been back in 2008 where Sprint could have deployed Rev B to improve 3G as a fallback to Clearwire Wimax. However without Verizon's backing of Rev B and as we now know the lack of sufficient Ethernet backhaul at legacy Sprint cell towers, it didn't matter if you had Rev A or Rev B since the average user did not achieve speeds even close to the theoretical maximum of Rev A of 3.1 Mbps so the costs of Rev B would have been wasted.

[maximus1987/lou99]

Beyond all the good answers given here, additionally Sprint wants to phase out 3G EVDO eventually. If they keep doing things that will encourage people to use the EVDO network even further by upgrading to a new standard, it will only prolong the closure of that network. Also, EVDO-B equipment costs are pretty high because virtually no one is using it. LTE has the economy of scale.

 

As LTE usage increases and EVDO decreases, Sprint will be able to pull an EVDO carrier here and there for an additional LTE carrier. The burden on the EVDO network will be going down every year. Especially when small cells start deploying and filling in the little LTE gaps in urban areas.

 

EVDO-B would only be useful to Sprint for the purposes of bridging to LTE. however, they are already deploying LTE network wide. EVDO-B would be redundant and a waste of money and spectrum at this point.

 

And all of the network side advantages of EVDO-B are included in the DO Advanced network architecture from Qualcomm that Sprint is already deploying in Network Vision eHRPD.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

What about 1xA on 800 MHz?

Will Sprint eventually stop requiring CDMA for smartphones? I could seem them leaving 1xA-800 alone for M2M and Direct Connect since it's the best usage for the remaining sliver of spectrum.

 

I know VoLTE is fragile but if 1xA is the only reason to require CDMA on phones, it seems they could save money overall - phones + infrastructure - by eventually adding VoLTE 800 and adding towers to take care of higher SNR requirements of VoLTE (tower spacing issue).

 

They're not in the same position as GSM carriers that

a) have at least HSPA+21 per 5MHz carrier capacity.

have international compatibility with only 4 HSPA+ bands (or 5 if you want HSPA+ on AWS like Nexus 4).

Edited May 4, 2013 by maximus1987

[digiblur]

I hope not as if they required volte it would go over like a turd in a punch bowl in my area regardless of 800 or not.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

I hope not as if they required volte it would go over like a turd in a punch bowl in my area regardless of 800 or not.

 

Sent from my little Note2

Why do you care if its VoLTE or CDMA?

[chamb]

I hope not as if they required volte it would go over like a turd in a punch bowl in my area regardless of 800 or not.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

Does a turd float or sink in a punch bowl???????????????????

[digiblur]

Why do you care if its VoLTE or CDMA?

 

Because VoLTE would not have the coverage like CDMA would.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

 

Because VoLTE would not have the coverage like CDMA would.

 

Sent from my little Note2

l

 

Yes but wouldn't the elimination of CDMA - network + handsets - more than offset the costs of adding some towers to fill-in VoLTE coverage gaps?

[WiWavelength]

Yes but wouldn't the elimination of CDMA - network + handsets - more than offset the costs of adding some towers to fill-in VoLTE coverage gaps?

 

What cost savings would come from eliminating the CDMA2000 network? With Network Vision well underway and nearing completion in some markets, the CDMA2000 infrastructure upgrade is already a sunk cost.

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

 

What cost savings would come from eliminating the CDMA2000 network? With Network Vision well underway and nearing completion in some markets, the CDMA2000 infrastructure upgrade is already a sunk cost.

 

AJ

 

I'm talking long-term.

On the handset side, savings are obvious: there are miltiple companies making LTE-only modem like Sequans.

On network side, CDMA is dying, right? So like someone said, Sprint wants to get people off EVDO.

My question was: does Sprint ALSO want to eventually shut down 1xA-800 for smartphones?

[WiWavelength]

My question was: does Sprint ALSO want to eventually shut down 1xA-800 for smartphones?

 

Sure, in about 7-10 years when the Network Vision CDMA2000 infrastructure nears the end of its lifespan.

 

AJ