Conversation about Sprint Moving to UMTS

[jefbal99]

The major problem here is spectrum... A single WCDMA carrier is 5Mhz FDD, the same that Sprint is using for the initial NV LTE roll out. Sprint just doesn't have the bandwidth network wide to even consider this.

 

Focus on the future, not the past

[irev210]

I know that inveterate handset switchers and cheapskates hate Sprint's insular device policy. But, honestly, with the number of largely proprietary bands/classes in which Sprint is operating, the restrictive policy makes sense.

 

If users could bring in outside W-CDMA 1900 handsets, they would lack CDMA1X 800. Or even if Sprint were running W-CDMA 800, outside devices would assuredly lack that band. So, BYOD users would get a lesser Sprint experience, and that would do nothing to improve the perception of Sprint's network.

 

AJ

 

This is a very fair point. I recently had the displeasure of using the T-Mobile PCS network in Boston and was very disappointed with the poor HSPA+ coverage on the PCS band.

 

If I was a newbie to T-Mobile and hadn't used a AWS device, I might have the impression that T-Mobile coverage is horrible.

 

It's going to be very interesting to see what Sprint does when customers start demanding that their phones be completely unlocked once their contract is up (even AT&T is willing to sim unlock devices once they are out of contract). Basically, out of the four major carriers, sprint will be the ONLY carrier selling completely locked down devices.

 

As more phones come with more bands, I only seeing this become a bigger issue. Sprint's anti-consumer practice of simlocking devices will, at some point, backfire (either by new legislation or by consumer pressure).

 

The next complaint will be people upset that X device doesn't work on Y network.

[Rawvega]

Yep, imo Hesse and Son are going to have to address Sprint's rather draconian unlocking policy at some point, hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Deval]

What's Verizon's policy?

[Rawvega]

What's Verizon's policy?

 

It would seem the Verizon's hand was forced by the requirements of the upper 700MHz C-block spectrum that they purchased. Neal Gompa wrote a great piece about it here: http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/129744-verizon-lte-devices-are-going-global-bringing-us-carrier-interoperability-with-them

[maximus1987/lou99]

Ironically, in the networks they rebuilt from scratch, their quality is good, for example the Zodiac markets. They had all new Ericsson gear there. Things actually work pretty well.

 

As far as a complete rebuild...you bet AT&T could do it. They're just too cheap. I'd do the rebuild with Ericsson, NSN, and Samsung, the problem is AT&T's senior management wouldn't approve it. They think of that dividend as the mother of all sacred cows, and anything that could possibly reduce that dividend is bad. They're in prime position to get knocked to 3rd place if there's a SoftBank coming in that owns both New Sprint and TMUS.

 

Do you think FCC/DOJ would allow Softbank to also buy TMUS? That'd be a kickass network. I can see them allowing it just out of spite! lol

http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/att-verizon-may-face-restrictions-600-mhz-auction/2013-04-14

[maximus1987/lou99]

So what would actually be involved in deploying EV-DO Rev. B on NV sites? Is it just a software update or would there be more to it? If its something that wouldn't require significant resources, why not do it? Even on a single channel config you'd get benefits from it on the network side and the end user would get slightly faster speeds.

 

If its a significant cost then of course don't do it, but if its fairly straightforward then what's the harm?

 

See my post and subsequent comments here:

 

http://s4gru.com/ind...00-ev-do-rev-b/

 

Summary: Sprint wants to encourage people to get off EV-DO (for data), not prolong its life by introducing upgrades.

[dnwk]

I think long long time ago, Sprint has deployed some GSM. Anybody know why they ditched it?

[scubajwd]

Indeed. Even back in 1985, Dire Straits knew that VoLTE was still so far away...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w3aVfVyr20

 

AJ

Woe..one of my favorites from DS; not many of the Facebook shepple even remember DS or their lead man Mark Knopfler who IMHO was (still is I guess) one of the best guitarists of all time..maybe top 10; rings back lots of memories of the 80's for this old guy

[WiWavelength]

I think long long time ago, Sprint has deployed some GSM. Anybody know why they ditched it?

 

That was limited to American Personal Communications (APC) dba Sprint Spectrum in Washington-Baltimore about 15-20 years ago.  It is a long story, one that I have written up many times previously...

 

AJ

[dnwk]

That was limited to American Personal Communications (APC) dba Sprint Spectrum in Washington-Baltimore about 15-20 years ago.  It is a long story, one that I have written up many times previously...

 

AJ

I know. I am in those previous GSM area. Could you point me to those old stories with a link?

Thanks

[WiWavelength]

I know. I am in those previous GSM area. Could you point me to those old stories with a link?

Thanks

 

Sure.  The source is me in the Google "time machine" from about seven years ago...

 

Like PacTel & US West, Sprint in the early to mid 1990s also held some varied Cellular 850 MHz licenses & networks (AMPS) but sought a larger footprint in the FCC PCS auctions. To satisfy the FCC, Sprint spun off Sprint Cellular as 360 Communications, which ALLTEL later acquired.

 

In the first FCC PCS auction, FCC Auction 4 (PCS A & in 1994-1995, Sprint Spectrum LP, the new wireless arm of Sprint, formed a coalition w/ three cable companies: TCI, Cox, and Comcast. The coalition created a bidding entity, WirelessCo LP, that acquired most of the PCS A & B licenses that Sprint Spectrum still holds today.

 

However, Cox alone acquired the LA MTA PCS A license and the Omaha MTA PCS B license. Cox selected the LA MTA license before auction as a Pioneer's Preference award for its innovative plan to deploy PCS-over-cable. And Cox bought the Omaha MTA license, as Omaha is its home market. In both cases, though, Cox used the licenses to construct & operate a CDMA 1900 network under the Sprint PCS brand. (Some wireless vets will recall a time when the two Cox markets operated quasi-independently of SPCS.)

 

And another bidding entity, PhillieCo LP, the Sprint Spectrum coalition minus Comcast, acquired the Philadelphia MTA license. Comcast could not participate because it still held the Comcast Metrophone Cellular A-side license in Philly. 

 

Simultaneous to the WirelessCo, Cox, and PhillieCo license acquisitions, Sprint Spectrum & The Washington Post Company formed American Personal Communications (APC) to select the Washington DC MTA PCS A license before Auction 4 as a Pioneer's Preference award, again for innovation (GSM frequency-hopping?). Sprint Spectrum APC constructed & operated a GSM 1900 network in DC/Baltimore. Launched ten years ago last month, Sprint Spectrum APC GSM was the world's first PCS 1900 MHz network.

 

To tie everything together, SPCS & Cox launched CDMA 1900 services in a number of markets a year later in December 1996. In the late 1990s, SPCS subsequently bought out all of its partners (AT&T Broadband nee TCI, Cox, Comcast, and The Washington Post Company) and converted the DC/Baltimore network & subscriber base to CDMA 1900, selling neither spectrum nor subs, only the GSM infrastructure, to Omnipoint, which later merged w/ VoiceStream, which later became T-Mobile USA.

 

Phew!

 

http://www.howardforums.com/printthread.php?t=788064&page=2&pp=15

 

AJ

[dnwk]

Sure.  The source is me in the Google "time machine" from about seven years ago...

 

 

http://www.howardforums.com/printthread.php?t=788064&page=2&pp=15

 

AJ

Did Sprint actually weighted benefits and disadvantage between CDMA & GSM?  And, I am curious how PCS-over-cable works.

[dnwk]

Oh. So Alltel was part of Sprint (as 360 Communications)20 years ago. But now.....

Edited May 20, 2013 by dnwk

[MacinJosh]

My mom's first cell phone was 360 communications. When Alltel took over the rates for calls went astronomical. We subsequently dumped it in early 2000 and it wasn't until 2002 when I became a Cingular customer.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

My mom's first cell phone was 360 communications. When Alltel took over the rates for call went astronomical. We subsequently dumped it in early 2000 and it wasn't until 2002 when I became a Cingular customer.

 

Everyone, meet Josh...

 

 

AJ

[MacinJosh]

 

 

My mom's first cell phone was 360 communications. When Alltel took over the rates for call went astronomical. We subsequently dumped it in early 2000 and it wasn't until 2002 when I became a Cingular customer.

 

 

Everyone, meet Josh...

 

 

 

AJ

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

 

 

I'd do the rebuild with Ericsson, NSN, and Samsung, the problem is AT&T's senior management wouldn't approve it.

What about Alcatel-Lucent?

[Conan Kudo]

What about Alcatel-Lucent?

No guarantee that Alcatel-Lucent would be around for too much longer (it's dangerously close to folding). Plus, ALU equipment isn't that great, either.

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

 

What about Alcatel-Lucent?

 

 

No guarantee that Alcatel-Lucent would be around for too much longer (it's dangerously close to folding). Plus, ALU equipment isn't that great, either.

Wouldn't it be a good strategic move to give it some business to keep it alive and keep competition going?

 

And are you an engineer? How do you know that ALU equipment "isn't that great"?

[Conan Kudo]

Wouldn't it be a good strategic move to give it some business to keep it alive and keep competition going?

 

And are you an engineer? How do you know that ALU equipment "isn't that great"?

 

Sure, it would be a good move to give it business, if it wasn't already so close to folding. It was in better shape when Sprint negotiated the agreement for Network Vision, but that is no longer the case. As for the feature set, Alcatel-Lucent DBSes lag behind Ericsson and Samsung in terms of 3GPP features supported in Release 9 (not even counting Release 10, since only one of the three vendors actually has a substantial amount of Release 10 features implemented).

[bigsnake49]

It would have been a while before Bell or Telus could have used it for voice. That's the point.

 

I meant to say that VoLTE will be a while as an independent network, I needed to clarify that.

 

Also, to be fair, neither the CDMA development group the 3GPP2, nor the 3GPP, the body to move the GSM standard forward after ETSI gave up control of the GSM standards, won in this country. Consumers lost. Look at our mobile rates compared to the rest of the world.

 

I believe having a truly universal system built on a single standard would have been optimal, but protectionism on both sides of the pond meant that couldn't happen.

 

 

It would have been a while before Bell or Telus could have used it for voice. That's the point.

 

I meant to say that VoLTE will be a while as an independent network, I needed to clarify that.

 

Also, to be fair, neither the CDMA development group the 3GPP2, nor the 3GPP, the body to move the GSM standard forward after ETSI gave up control of the GSM standards, won in this country. Consumers lost. Look at our mobile rates compared to the rest of the world.

 

I believe having a truly universal system built on a single standard would have been optimal, but protectionism on both sides of the pond meant that couldn't happen.

Much better than Canad, that's for sure!

[Fraydog]

Big snake,

 

Canada is more or less a mirror of the US in spectrum policy. Add the protectionism of their government and good old-fashioned greed, throw them together, and voila, Robelus. I know one of the entrants there, Moblicity, went into creditor protection (Candadian C11) and sold off to Telus. WIND isn't doing great either.

 

As far as AlLu, they are on the ropes big time. Talk is they could be absorbed by Nokia and NSN and most of the US operations and Lucent legacy tech would be shuttered. If NSN buys Lucent at the fire sale, I'm betting it would be taking over AlLu's Network Vision equipment. It's not a big deal now since Nokia Siemens has CDMA equipment of their own.

[MacinJosh]

Big snake,

 

Canada is more or less a mirror of the US in spectrum policy. Add the protectionism of their government and good old-fashioned greed, throw them together, and voila, Robelus. I know one of the entrants there, Moblicity, went into creditor protection (Candadian C11) and sold off to Telus. WIND isn't doing great either.

 

As far as AlLu, they are on the ropes big time. Talk is they could be absorbed by Nokia and NSN and most of the US operations and Lucent legacy tech would be shuttered. If NSN buys Lucent at the fire sale, I'm betting it would be taking over AlLu's Network Vision equipment. It's not a big deal now since Nokia Siemens has CDMA equipment of their own.

WIND is up for sale by its parent company now. Sad too. They had good plans, but their roaming rates were through the roof.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

[maximus1987/lou99]

 

As far as AlLu, they are on the ropes big time. Talk is they could be absorbed by Nokia and NSN and most of the US operations and Lucent legacy tech would be shuttered. If NSN buys Lucent at the fire sale, I'm betting it would be taking over AlLu's Network Vision equipment. It's not a big deal now since Nokia Siemens has CDMA equipment of their own.

 

Never underestimate the French when it comes to protectionism.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/10033511/France-intervenes-to-block-Yahoo-bid-for-control-of-Dailymotion-as-not-in-French-interests.html

 

If they blocked Yahoo! from acquiring a Youtube site, imagine their stance when hundreds of high-value engineering job are threatened.