Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

 

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

 

That doesn't really deal with the lack of options for CDMA chipsets other than VIA or Qualcomm. Is Sprint going to have to keep paying higher costs for handsets in 2017 and beyond? I understand keeping CDMA for legacy equipment and flip phones, but smartphones? 4-5 years down the road LTE R12 will be deployed and a lot of the coverage advantages that CDMA2000 had will be minimized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't really deal with the lack of options for CDMA chipsets other than VIA or Qualcomm. Is Sprint going to have to keep paying higher costs for handsets in 2017 and beyond?

 

If you want to deal with cut rate chipsets from inferior suppliers, then you may have a point on costs. But I do not want to deal with those chipsets and suppliers. Qualcomm all the way. And I have yet to see evidence that Qualcomm charges more for a 3GPP/3GPP2 baseband than it does for a 3GPP baseband. Then, you also have the full SoC with processor and integrated baseband, such as the upcoming Snapdragon 800 MSM8974, and indications are that it will come in a single 3GPP/3GPP2 variant. CDMA2000 capability will be on board, regardless.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If you want to deal with cut rate chipsets from inferior suppliers, then you may have a point on costs. But I do not want to deal with those chipsets and suppliers. Qualcomm all the way. And I have yet to see evidence that Qualcomm charges more for a 3GPP/3GPP2 baseband than it does for a 3GPP baseband. Then, you also have the full SoC with processor and integrated baseband, such as the upcoming Snapdragon 800 MSM8974, and indications are that it will come in a single 3GPP/3GPP2 variant. CDMA2000 capability will be on board, regardless.

 

AJ

 

That's only what's right in front of us. In the future, we really don't know how other baseband makers will step up. I predict some will. In the end, it's a guess from either of our ends, but the only guess I'll make is that 4-5 generations from now Sprint will have at least three good choices for baseband chips with the constant technological advancement we will see. Qualcomm may still be the high end choice but I could see NVidia and Broadcom winning some middle and lower end smartphones eventually.

 

No, I don't think of either NVidia or Broadcom as cutthroat either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So long as Verizon is still on CDMA for voice, Sprint should have no problem obtaining CDMA handsets at reasonable prices. And Verizon's VoLTE-in-2014 BS notwithstanding, they're not going to be positioned to drop CDMA from mainstream handsets for years. Sure, in 7 years everyone will be 3GPP-only, but there's a lot of LTE bugs to be worked out between now and then.

 

(I can see Verizon selling VoLTE-only phones in 2014 as a cheap prepaid option to compete with Virgin/T-Metro/Cricket, but they're not going to sell a VoLTE-only Galaxy S5 on postpaid. Similarly I could see Sprint selling some VoLTE-only prepaid handsets down the road.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

That's only what's right in front of us. In the future, we really don't know how other baseband makers will step up. I predict some will. In the end, it's a guess from either of our ends, but the only guess I'll make is that 4-5 generations from now Sprint will have at least three good choices for baseband chips with the constant technological advancement we will see. Qualcomm may still be the high end choice but I could see NVidia and Broadcom winning some middle and lower end smartphones eventually.

 

No, I don't think of either NVidia or Broadcom as cutthroat either.

 

 

I looked at Broadcom's new baseband chip and it looks like they've concluded that CDMA is "dead" and ditto for nVidia's Icera. They're possibly thinking that since Verizon has stated it will start using VoLTE in 2014, by the time their CDMA would have been ready, it'd be too late (for the highend market).

 

Of course, that leaves them out of the iPhone until the one coming out 2015 or later but they realized that even if they did get decent CDMA capability in 2014, Apple would have no solid reason to switch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So long as Verizon is still on CDMA for voice, Sprint should have no problem obtaining CDMA handsets at reasonable prices. And Verizon's VoLTE-in-2014 BS notwithstanding, they're not going to be positioned to drop CDMA from mainstream handsets for years. Sure, in 7 years everyone will be 3GPP-only, but there's a lot of LTE bugs to be worked out between now and then.

 

(I can see Verizon selling VoLTE-only phones in 2014 as a cheap prepaid option to compete with Virgin/T-Metro/Cricket, but they're not going to sell a VoLTE-only Galaxy S5 on postpaid. Similarly I could see Sprint selling some VoLTE-only prepaid handsets down the road.)

 

A major reason why Verizon will not be selling LTE-only anything anytime soon is that their LTE tower spacing is horrible. I live next to a major freeway in a well-to-do suburb of Detroit and while on T-Mobile I can get 3-6 Mbps on a 14.4 AWS-only phone, I get no Verizon LTE in my house. Even voice quality in parts of my house is a problem.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on how much fiber you have had

 

That brings a whole new definition to FttH -- fiber to the hole.

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i understand a lot, but, how Sprint can compete with CDMA vs ATT or T-Mo HSPA+? for example, the HSPA+ is theoricaly up to 42Mbits/s in 2x2 MIMO, the EV-DO Rev. A up to 3.1Mbits/s. if they upgrade to EV-DO Rev.B theoricaly will be 14.7 Mbit/s, maybe if the can upgrade to 4xEV-DO Enhancements (34.4Mbits/s in 2x2 MIMO) they will compete with the HSPA+ in the areas that LTE will not deploy. and of course, if the antennas will be a 2x2 MIMO, the LTE will take a peak of 173 Mbits/s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about skipping RevB and go to LTE and as users phase off EVDO convert those channels to LTE. Oh wait.. Sprint is already doing that. Case in point as I said from the get go of 800smr usage, 1x and LTE. They will of course need to keep at least one EVDO channel for outer edge users of the site but then again 800smr would catch them.

 

Sent from my little Note2

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about skipping RevB and go to LTE and as users phase off EVDO convert those channels to LTE. Oh wait.. Sprint is already doing that. Case in point as I said from the get go of 800smr usage, 1x and LTE. They will of course need to keep at least one EVDO channel for outer edge users of the site but then again 800smr would catch them.

 

Sent from my little Note2

I know that they're upgrading to LTE and I like that.  But just asking the question...isn't EvDo Rev B better for inside buildings?  The data speeds don't degrade nearly as quick as LTE does over a length of signal.  

 

What I'm trying to say is, if it's anything similar to EvDo RevA at my home, I can have a -95 dBm threshold and still pull 2mbps.

Whereas, on LTE, if I had a -110 (RSRP value), I'd pull roughly up to 40% of the maximum speeds capable.  LTE has a more fragile wavelength and if Sprint were to deploy EvDo RevB on the 800 spectrum, the signal would be usable EVERYWHERE.  That'd be really nice. :)

 

But I still like the LTE 800 idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i understand a lot, but, how Sprint can compete with CDMA vs ATT or T-Mo HSPA+? for example, the HSPA+ is theoricaly up to 42Mbits/s in 2x2 MIMO...

 

Nah, no operator in the US is doing HSPA+ with MIMO.  MIMO does not seem to play well with W-CDMA.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i understand a lot, but, how Sprint can compete with CDMA vs ATT or T-Mo HSPA+? for example, the HSPA+ is theoricaly up to 42Mbits/s in 2x2 MIMO, the EV-DO Rev. A up to 3.1Mbits/s. if they upgrade to EV-DO Rev.B theoricaly will be 14.7 Mbit/s, maybe if the can upgrade to 4xEV-DO Enhancements (34.4Mbits/s in 2x2 MIMO) they will compete with the HSPA+ in the areas that LTE will not deploy. and of course, if the antennas will be a 2x2 MIMO, the LTE will take a peak of 173 Mbits/s.

 

Why upgrade your 3G network to an expensive technology that virtually no one in the world is doing when you can upgrade your whole network to LTE? It would be a huge waste of money to upgrade to a new 3G technology as it's being phased out.

 

If Sprint has additional capex to burn, they need to spend it on a better LTE experience. Every dollar spent on upgrading 3G now is wasted.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that they're upgrading to LTE and I like that.  But just asking the question...isn't EvDo Rev B better for inside buildings?  The data speeds don't degrade nearly as quick as LTE does over a length of signal.

 

You guys need to stop conflating EV-DO Rev B with multi carrier EV-DO.  Rev B adds 64-QAM for faster peak data rates.  But that will not help fringe coverage data rates at all.  So, what you really are asking for is 2xEV-DO or 3xEV-DO, which is optional for Rev B.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why upgrade your 3G network to an expensive technology that virtually no one in the world is doing when you can upgrade your whole network to LTE? It would be a huge waste of money to upgrade to a new 3G technology as it's being phased out.

 

If Sprint has additional capex to burn, they need to spend it on a better LTE experience. Every dollar spent on upgrading 3G now is wasted.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

 

good point. so, they will implement LTE @ the 800 in rural areas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good point. so, they will implement LTE @ the 800 in rural areas?

From what I hear, there will be 80% of all sites with LTE 800 so there wont be redundant sites covering eachother.  No one has this list of 800 sites....yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

good point. so, they will implement LTE @ the 800 in rural areas?

It is believed that Sprint will upgrade all full build sites to include LTE 800 except in places where they do not have the spectrum available.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is believed that Sprint will upgrade all full build sites to include LTE 800 except in places where they do not have the spectrum available.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

Do you mean that they will only put LTE-800 where they have the full 2x7 MHz?

 

I thought they would deploy 2x3 where they can?

 

 

No, Sprint controls plenty of SMR 800 MHz spectrum in the Southeast, but not quite as much as the 7 MHz x 7 MHz that it controls across much of the country. For that reason, Sprint may deploy 3 MHz FDD LTE in Atlanta, Birmingham, etc.

 

However, I am hopeful that SouthernLINC -- despite how omnipotent and omniscient the Southern Company reportedly is -- will see that it faces an iDEN dead end and will strike a spectrum sharing agreement with Sprint to deploy 5 MHz FDD LTE.

 

AJ

 

 

How much spectrum does Southerlinc have in its iDen service area?

 

http://www.southernlinc.com/coverage.aspx

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much spectrum does Southerlinc have in its iDen service area?

 

That varies somewhat from BEA to BEA.  For SouthernLINC, its max contiguous, rebanded spectrum that I am aware of is 9 MHz (4.5 MHz FDD).  But its major market Atlanta is limited to 7.5 MHz (3.75 MHz FDD).

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is believed that Sprint will upgrade all full build sites to include LTE 800 except in places where they do not have the spectrum available.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

 

They'll have to crank up the backhaul on those.  I've always heard 100 meg was the norm for now even on the conference calls which is below what they should really have on a full EVDO/1X/LTE(PCS) site.  That of course is when all LTE sectors are at full capacity. 

 

Rough estimates:  3 * 37 = 111 mbit, will use 100 mbit to be fair usage.  Let's say they have 3 EVDO carriers..will use 2.5mbit there.  3 * 2.5 * 3 sectors = 22.5 .  3 PCS 1X carriers (not sure but will use a T1 per carrier).  3 * 1.5  = 4.5 mbit, another 1.5 for a 800 1X.  Then another  100 mbit for 800 LTE.    Wow...  if the site was maxed on all tech they would need about 225 megabits of bandwidth. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'll have to crank up the backhaul on those.  I've always heard 100 meg was the norm for now even on the conference calls which is below what they should really have on a full EVDO/1X/LTE(PCS) site.  That of course is when all LTE sectors are at full capacity. 

 

I only see the opex as an issue on post-NV sites that have enhanced backhaul.  I am curious how much telcos will charge when they want to go from 100-300mbps of service to 1gbps of service.

 

The telcos that are providing access are probably drooling at the opportunity to charge more since it's essentially pure profit for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only see the opex as an issue on post-NV sites that have enhanced backhaul.  I am curious how much telcos will charge when they want to go from 100-300mbps of service to 1gbps of service.

 

The telcos that are providing access are probably drooling at the opportunity to charge more since it's essentially pure profit for them.

 

If backhaul OPEX starts becoming an issue, Sprint has its own fiber backbone which it could, over time and starting at the sites most expensive to least fiber, connect to their own towers.

 

 

Sprint would do the math:

1) cost of monthly fiber access to ATT, Verizon, Comcast, etc

2) loan to fund direct Sprintlink connection to sites + interest

 

See where the breakeven point is - how many years before Sprintlink option is cheaper -  and make a decision.

 

 

my thing is i'm curious why sprint isn't leveraging their tier 1 sprintlink backbone more instead of buying backhaul from competitors...i know they have microwave so that's theirs i guess..but they have a huge backbone on sprintlink.

 

 

Their backbone is not directly connected to their 38,500 sites. And it would cost billions and take years to try and connect them now.

 

Robert via Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That varies somewhat from BEA to BEA.  For SouthernLINC, its max contiguous, rebanded spectrum that I am aware of is 9 MHz (4.5 MHz FDD).  But its major market Atlanta is limited to 7.5 MHz (3.75 MHz FDD).

 

AJ

 

I think I should've asked: what's Sprint's strategy to get a full 2x7 nationwide?

Do they even care about getting full 2x7 nationwide?

 

 

 

 

According to AJ, our in house Sprint spectrum resource, he said this about 800 licensing in Puerto Rico... "Regarding SMR 800 MHz in PR/VI, this is what I have dug up. It is still in the process of rebanding. Sprint does hold licenses, so Sprint may be able to deploy CDMA1X 800 and/or LTE 800 sometime in the future, but obviously not during initial Network Vision roll out. (Additionally) there is an iDEN 800 carrier in PR/VI: North Sight Communications. And it holds 3 MHz x 3 MHz of contiguous SMR 800 MHz spectrum." http://wireless2.fcc...se.jsp?licKey=6

 

 

 

1) Do they plan to wait out the remaining iDen carriers and have them starve from lack of iDen handsets?

2) Buy them out ?

3) (1) + buy them out?

3) Go after their customers with CDMA Direct Connect + (2)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I should've asked: what's Sprint's strategy to get a full 2x7 nationwide?

Do they even care about getting full 2x7 nationwide?

 

As a suggestion, do not use the "2xY" format.  That runs into problems as asymmetric pairing and carrier aggregation come into play.  Instead, refer to paired spectrum as "A MHz x B MHz," or if it is symmetric, as "A MHz FDD."  You can also use just the total sum of the uplink and downlink, e.g. 14 MHz.

 

As for your questions, Sprint may never have a total of 14 MHz of licensed and usable rebanded SMR 800 MHz spectrum nationwide.  Take the IBEZ along the Canadian and Mexican borders, for example.  Sprint may be licensed all 14 MHz, but Sprint is unable to use any of it for broadband operations because of international channel coordination.  So, nationwide SMR is desirable but not top priority.

 

To paraphrase a well known saying, Sprint cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  And SMR is definitely a sow's ear.  But it will still make a fine prize in most (but not all) markets across the country.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
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.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Was able to install the March 1 Android security patch. Seems slightly more accurate with 5g ca band id, but can not swear by it. Updated google play system update through the software information screen to March 1. *#73# still works. Froze updates waiting on SCP update beta to fix n41 showing as n38.
    • Just installed it. Thanks for the info.  71 mb mar 1st date.
    • There's a permit for a new 47 story building at 205 Montague St in Downtown Brooklyn. The problem is that  T-Mobile eNB 48352 is on the building next door and this new building will block two out of 3 sectors of the site. For reference, the new building will be roughly as tall as 16 Court St which is right across the street. This site is the primary site covering Cadman Plaza so I wonder what the plan is. Will they just try to change sector placement, move to a different building, or will this just speed up the conversion of the Sprint site at 25 Monroe Place?
    • At least not recently.  I think I might have seen this a year ago.  Not Sure.
    • Did they previously hop between n38 and n41 in prior version of SCP, or have you always seen n41 displayed properly?
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...