Jump to content

So, ignoring bands...which technology has the best building penetration?


Recommended Posts

From what I've read, it's;

 

1X - Best coverage.

EvDo - Can provide a very usable signal even at lower levels.

HSPA - unsure?

LTE - Signal reaches very far, but is more fragile than the ones listed above.

 

But what about Edge, UMTs, Ground, etc.?  I'm curious to see which technology is the best indoors, regardless of band.  (If you wanted to theorize, pretend all of the technologies are on 800 ESMR.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is "Ground"?  Yeah, that has the best building penetration.  Ground is below every building.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm....  what about this one?

 

I am sure that somewhere beneath that murky bayou there is terra firma.  However, it if is a sinkhole, that ground might be way down below.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would explain why it is taking so long to upgrade those towers in your area. I hope the workers have Gator insurance. Not sure about the reason, if there is one, but I've noticed that both Sprint and Verizon penetrate a lot better than AT&T and T-Mobile. It could be the difference between CDMA vs GSM or just better tower locations, but all the managers here are on T-Mobile and can't get a signal to save their lives indoors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tower location is usually the chief factor in inbuilding coverage. Signal/frequency come into play as well, but it doesn't matter what frequency is used, lack of towers is just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.  Took the kids there last summer when we went to visit family.  I hadn't been in many years, but it's still a great zoo.  And the gators are always fun to watch.   :lol:

 

For the sports fans, you'll find a hidden message in the picture as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because the Gators are the center of the universe.

Damn straight!

 

 

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because the Gators are the center of the universe.

Damn straight!

 

Yes, God made it so when his chosen one, messianic Tim Tebow, decided to play for the Gators.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, God made it so when his chosen one, messianic Tim Tebow, decided to play for the Gators.

 

AJ

Yes! Yes! I knew you were a believer!!!

 

:P

 

Robert via Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes! Yes! I knew you were a believer!!!

 

:P

 

My opinion of Tim Tebow is the same as I expressed about Peyton Manning in Rukin1's Bradley Manning thread.  Give him a 35 year prison sentence.  He, Peyton Manning, and Johnny Manziel can all share a prison cell.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using my basic knowledge of 1X-RTT, EV-DO, GSM, WCDMA, and LTE, my guess would be for WCDMA to have the best building penetration. Because it is wideband, an unloaded carrier should be usable at lower power levels and signal to noise ratios than technologies with more narrow bandwidths.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using my basic knowledge of 1X-RTT, EV-DO, GSM, WCDMA, and LTE, my guess would be for WCDMA to have the best building penetration. Because it is wideband, an unloaded carrier should be usable at lower power levels and signal to noise ratios than technologies with more narrow bandwidths.

 

Agreed, that would be correct in theory, since W-CDMA has a similar per user voice payload but a wider spreading bandwidth than does CDMA1X.  However, HSPA data pumped down the same carrier seems to erode that advantage in real world performance.  Meanwhile, EV-DO has its own carrier, and that is a key difference between W-CDMA and CDMA2000 technologies.  Had EV-DV gained traction, both technologies would be in the same boat.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, that would be correct in theory, since W-CDMA has a similar per user voice payload but a wider spreading bandwidth than does CDMA1X.  However, HSPA data pumped down the same carrier seems to erode that advantage in real world performance.  Meanwhile, EV-DO has its own carrier, and that is a key difference between W-CDMA and CDMA2000 technologies.  Had EV-DV gained traction, both technologies would be in the same boat.

 

AJ

I often ponder how much would be different had EV-DV been used instead of EV-DO for both Sprint and Verizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often ponder how much would be different had EV-DV been used instead of EV-DO for both Sprint and Verizon.

Sprint would have been able to deploy 3xEV-DV in all markets. But VZW sway over economy of scale nipped that in the bud.

 

AJ

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.

×
×
  • Create New...