Sprint Launches LTE in New York, Philadelphia, Portland and 56 other communities, July 30, 2013

[Dkoellerwx]

Sprint launches 41 new "markets," and 59 new cities July 30, 2013.

• Fremont, CA
• Hayward, CA
• King City, CA
• Oakland, CA
• Salinas, CA
• Daytona Beach, FL
• Deerfield Beach, FL
• Deltona, FL
• Fort Lauderdale, FL
• Homosassa Springs, FL
• Jacksonville, FL
• Ocala, FL
• Ormond Beach, FL
• Palm Coast, FL
• Pompano, FL
• Port Charlotte, FL
• Punta Gorda, FL
• Kokomo, IN
• Morgan City, LA
• Fitchburg, MA
• Leomister, MA
• Springfield, MA
• Worcester, MA
• Big Rapids, MI
• Cadillac, MI
• Flint, MI
• Grand Rapids, MI
• Greenville, MI
• Holland, MI
• Saginaw, MI
• Fairbault, MN
• Northfield, MN
• Columbus, MS
• Greenwood, MS
• Tupelo, MS
• Chapel Hill, NC
• Durham, NC
• Fayettville, NC
• Greenville, NC
• Mooresville, NC
• Rocky Mount, NC
• Wilson, NC
• Bronx, NY
• Brooklyn, NY
• Ponca City, OK
• Tulsa, OK
• Portland, OR
• Lebanon, PA
• Philidelphia, PA
• Dyersburg, TN
• Jackson, TN
• Nashville, TN
• Brownsville, TX
• Harlingen, TX
• Laredo, TX
• Nacogdoches, TX
• Baraboo, WI
• Beaver Dam, WI
• Wausau, WI

[Paynefanbro]

Finally Greenville, NC and NYC is on that list! If they announce each of these cities, then Sprint just got pushed in front of T-Mobile again!

 

You can definitely tell that Sprint felt the heat when those 116 cities were announced as covered. Now Sprint is going to play a numbers game and push itself ahead in terms of cities announced.

[Dkoellerwx]

Finally Greenville, NC and NYC is on that list! If they announce each of these cities, then Sprint just got pushed in front of T-Mobile again!

 

You can definitely tell that Sprint felt the heat when those 116 cities were announced as covered. Now Sprint is going to play a numbers game and push itself ahead in terms of cities announced.

 

Certainly looks that way. A number of those cities (NYC, Jacksonville, Nashville) shouldn't be on there given the number of pretty big holes in coverage, but they're feeling the pinch from T-Mobile. That's the only reason I can come up with that they came out with this list.

[TyrellCorpse]

Yeah, Tmobile is forcing them to announce more markets.  I honestly don't think Sprint will be a viable player across all markets until 800LTE turns on and tri-band phones come out.  There are just too many gaps with 1900.

[deflate7525]

Certainly looks that way. A number of those cities (NYC, Jacksonville, Nashville) shouldn't be on there given the number of pretty big holes in coverage, but they're feeling the pinch from T-Mobile. That's the only reason I can come up with that they came out with this list.

I can confirm Nashville shouldn't be anywhere near launch status from my experience.

[tybo31316]

What's up with the underlined cities? I'm in Jacksonville Florida is the reason I asked. Also I agree that Jacksonville shouldn't be on the list there's a big chunk of the south side that isn't covered at all.

[Keitarou]

I can say the same about NYC. But they are saying select area of NYC(Bronx and Brooklyn) so can't complain. But NYC has Manhattan, Queens, Staten Island and Westchester(?). That's a HUGE hole.

[Dkoellerwx]

What's up with the underlined cities? I'm in Jacksonville Florida is the reason I asked. Also I agree that Jacksonville shouldn't be on the list there's a big chunk of the south side that isn't covered at all.

 

The underlined are the "larger" cities/markets that Sprint has had a noticeable absence, at least according to the other carriers and critics. Just noting that Sprint is trying to make things look better by adding more larger cities, and not just the outskirts this time.

[Dkoellerwx]

I can say the same about NYC. But they are saying select area of NYC(Bronx and Brooklyn) so can't complain. But NYC has Manhattan, Queens, Staten Island and Westchester(?). That's a HUGE hole.

 

The interesting thing is, even though they have only officially talked about Bronx and Brooklyn, the coverage maps are showing LTE in all five boroughs. Not complete coverage, there are holes, but the coverage is showing, which is odd if they aren't actually launching them.

[Geesmill]

http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/24/sprint-subway/

 

[BlueAngel]

So they're going to launch Philly with 23% LTE? makes no sense LTE coverage for the most part is scarce and I have been having issues with them turning off LTE for a few days then turning it back on...

[Dkoellerwx]

So they're going to launch Philly with 23% LTE? makes no sense LTE coverage for the most part is scarce and I have been having issues with them turning off LTE for a few days then turning it back on...

 

23% of sites LTE, yes. But they're looking at POPs coverage, supposedly launched at 40% POPs coverage, which still seems very low for a launch.

[jamesinclair]

So they're going to launch Philly with 23% LTE? makes no sense LTE coverage for the most part is scarce and I have been having issues with them turning off LTE for a few days then turning it back on...

 

I think itll do more harm then good.

 

"LTE LAUNCHED AND IT NEVER EVEN WORKS!!!! Ive been waiting twelve years and now that LTE is here you can barely get it anywhere!!11"

[moosemanmoo]

I think it's pretty ridiculous to launch Portland when there still isn't a single site broadcasting LTE... not in Gresham, Beaverton, or Vancouver, but in downtown Portland. If I'm in a tall enough building I'll pick up a weak signal from a site in SE, over 2 miles away.

 

At least the legacy network is holding up pretty well in most places, with sub-100ms ping times more often than not. I'm hoping the story is very different 6 months or a year from now, with ESMR's building penetration, hopefully a TDD rollout as large as the existing WiMax footprint in town, and 100% sites NV complete. 

[Dkoellerwx]

I think it's pretty ridiculous to launch Portland when there still isn't a single site broadcasting LTE... not in Gresham, Beaverton, or Vancouver, but in downtown Portland. If I'm in a tall enough building I'll pick up a weak signal from a site in SE, over 2 miles away.

 

At least the legacy network is holding up pretty well in most places, with sub-100ms ping times more often than not. I'm hoping the story is very different 6 months or a year from now, with ESMR's building penetration, hopefully a TDD rollout as large as the existing WiMax footprint in town, and 100% sites NV complete. 

 

I was looking at Portland a little bit ago. I do not understand how they came to the decision to launch Portland. I noticed right away a lack of any real coverage in the middle part of the city. Maybe they expect something to change in the next 6 days. We shall see.

[Paynefanbro]

I was looking at Portland a little bit ago. I do not understand how they came to the decision to launch Portland. I noticed right away a lack of any real coverage in the middle part of the city. Maybe they expect something to change in the next 6 days. We shall see.

 

Suddenly, by chance 20 towers go live with LTE...not.

 

I am just praying that the sites that had LTE previously, but got turned off, will turn on again.

[sbolen]

I was looking at Portland a little bit ago. I do not understand how they came to the decision to launch Portland. I noticed right away a lack of any real coverage in the middle part of the city. Maybe they expect something to change in the next 6 days. We shall see.

 

Using that logic, St. Louis is a go for launch.

[Dkoellerwx]

Using that logic, St. Louis is a go for launch.

 

Ha! Portland outlying has a little bit better coverage than the edges of St. Louis. But, pretty much, yeah. Haha.

[lynyrd65]

We've already heard about Sprint launching Bronx and Brooklyn on July 30, but according to the coverage maps, they're also preparing to launch several other cities, including:

 

 

• Tulsa, OK

This is a preliminary list based upon coverage maps. I will update when we get official information.

So, does this mean I can report a botched site install and have them fix it now?

 

[Dkoellerwx]

So, does this mean I can report a botched site install and have them fix it now?

 

 

On the 30th, yep! 

[moosemanmoo]

I was looking at Portland a little bit ago. I do not understand how they came to the decision to launch Portland. I noticed right away a lack of any real coverage in the middle part of the city. Maybe they expect something to change in the next 6 days. We shall see.

I'm sure the reasoning is that the footprint in the suburbs is over 40% POPs. That's great if I pass through for 10 minutes on my way to the mountains or something, but the mind boggles to think it was logistically easier to light up LTE in the middle of nowhere compared to upgrading the very busy downtown, inner SE, and inner NE areas. 

[koiulpoi]

Ugh, looks like Sprint still hasn't bothered to fix the fact that the LTE coverage maps are massively innacurate. There are spots around where I live that are definitely "voice roaming" (both on the map and in reality), but show "fair" LTE. What a complete joke.

 

I even switched to the Note II for coverage, just to make sure they weren't trying to map LTE 800 before there were any sites at all for it.

[vtimmy13]

I figured they would roll out nyc in parts!

[BlueAngel]

Ugh, looks like Sprint still hasn't bothered to fix the fact that the LTE coverage maps are massively innacurate. There are spots around where I live that are definitely "voice roaming" (both on the map and in reality), but show "fair" LTE. What a complete joke.

 

I even switched to the Note II for coverage, just to make sure they weren't trying to map LTE 800 before there were any sites at all for it.

The map for my area is very well off not even close to accurate, this is sad Sprint get your shit together. It shows LTE all around me and that's the furthest thing from the truth.

Edited July 25, 2013 by BlueAngel

[halcyoncmdr]

but the mind boggles to think it was logistically easier to light up LTE in the middle of nowhere compared to upgrading the very busy downtown, inner SE, and inner NE areas. 

 

Not really. The more rural sites probably have better access for techs on site. There is likely less headache with permitting as county permits are usually easier to get acceptance for than city in many areas, less red tape. As long as the backhaul can be installed quickly (possibly already has much of the infrastructure on site if other carriers are in the area with adequate backhaul), then there isn't much else other than getting boots on the ground with the equipment to install it.

 

Cities usually have more permit restrictions and red tape to go through, sites may be installed on buildings with more access restrictions and requiring more precise scheduling to get everything in place to be installed, and backhaul installation may be more difficult if it's not already in place due to their own permit requirements and technicians note directly related to Sprint.