Sprint had more successful connected calls at the Super Bowl.

[bucdenny]

Could NV have helped?

 

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/att-blows-out-verizon-and-sprint-in-super-bowl-data-speeds/

[JossMan]

[caspar347]

It is at events like this where Spark will shine.

[joshnys8913]

Sometimes I wonder about these "reports"...  

[S4GRU]

I'd say getting speeds of 1.15Mbps DL and 97% successful voice connections is a triumph for Sprint given it was the Super Bowl.  It would have been ZERO before Network Vision.

 

Robert

[joshnys8913]

I'd say getting speeds of 1.15Mbps DL and 97% successful voice connections is a triumph for Sprint given it was the Super Bowl.  It would have been ZERO before Network Vision.

 

Robert

I totally agree!  The NV back haul is much of an improvement!  

[lordsutch]

A 1/30 chance of not completing a call as opposed to a 1/10 (or 1/5!) chance of your call not going through is a "narrow margin" for Sprint? Okaaay...

[mrknowitall526]

Is LTE live in East Rutherford?  Either way, I'd call it a win.  Who uploads 20 MB files while watching a football game?

 

If the 1.15 Mbps is for 3G, then that's awesome!  LTE, not so much ... but then again, VZ wasn't a whole lot better.  Definitely useable, though, which is what I think what matters in a situation like this.  You want to be able to Tweet, update Facebook, upload to Instagram, etc., without problems during a huge event like the Super Bowl.

[WiWavelength]

It is at events like this where Spark will shine.

 

Doubtful.  That horse is already out of the barn for basically all wireless operators at events that attract upwards of 50,000 people.  The smartphone revolution for Joe Blow caught on too heavily, too quickly.

 

Look at it this way.  One Sprint Spark 20 MHz TDD LTE carrier has similar capacity to one bog standard 20 MHz 802.11n Wi-Fi carrier.  A big wireless operator at, say, the Super Bowl might be able to divide loading among roughly 5-10 sectors using stadium DAS, existing macro sites, and temporary COWs.  Meanwhile, stadium Wi-Fi could divide loading across 100 or so access points.

 

No contest.  Wi-Fi is the way of the future at major sporting events.  The powers that be have to improve free and easy connectivity or continue to lose audience to TV.

 

AJ

[Conan Kudo]

Doubtful.  That horse is already out of the barn for basically all wireless operators at events that attract upwards of 50,000 people.  The smartphone revolution for Joe Blow caught on too heavily, too quickly.

 

Look at it this way.  One Sprint Spark 20 MHz TDD LTE carrier has similar capacity to one bog standard 20 MHz 802.11n Wi-Fi carrier.  A big wireless operator at, say, the Super Bowl might be able to divide loading among roughly 5-10 sectors using stadium DAS, existing macro sites, and temporary COWs.  Meanwhile, stadium Wi-Fi could divide loading across 100 or so access points.

 

No contest.  Wi-Fi is the way of the future at major sporting events.  The powers that be have to improve free and easy connectivity or continue to lose audience to TV.

 

AJ

You're discounting small cells. Deploying picocells across the stadium can offer similar (or better) capacity to Wi-Fi APs, and can be co-located with Wi-Fi APs, too.

 

In the case of Sprint Spark, picocells supporting a 20MHz TDD carrier would offer similar capacity to Wi-Fi, perhaps slightly better. And picocells can be sectorized as well (though it is more challenging to do).

[Mobilesolutions]

You're discounting small cells. Deploying picocells across the stadium can offer similar (or better) capacity to Wi-Fi APs, and can be co-located with Wi-Fi APs, too.

 

In the case of Sprint Spark, picocells supporting a 20MHz TDD carrier would offer similar capacity to Wi-Fi, perhaps slightly better. And picocells can be sectorized as well (though it is more challenging to do).

As for " Small Cells" in a ultrasmall highly dense deployment such as a football stadium it would only make sense to use a "nanocell" setup which would offer 40MHz+ to extremly localized sections (i.e 30x30 feet).

-William

[afazel]

I think the article is missing the point: those stats are more than usable across all three carriers tested.

[WiWavelength]

You're discounting small cells. Deploying picocells across the stadium can offer similar (or better) capacity to Wi-Fi APs, and can be co-located with Wi-Fi APs, too.

 

Hmm, not really.  No, not discounting small cells.  But for data and not voice, small cells are little different from Wi-Fi access points.

 

I have to pull rank on you here, Neal.  I am going to guess that you have never been to an NFL game.  Meanwhile, in the past 20 years, I have attended over 150 NFL games in 11 different cities -- including a Super Bowl in New Orleans.  So, as a Kansas City Chiefs season ticket holder, I am quite well in tune with league initiatives.

 

The NFL is requiring teams and stadiums -- that have not yet complied -- to install uber enterprise grade Wi-Fi.  Fans want the ability to see replays on their devices and follow fantasy football.  Otherwise, many will just increasingly skip the $100 ticket, stay home, and watch in full HDTV with home broadband at their fingertips.  Traditional wireless operators cannot catch up quickly enough.  And do we really want them to?  Do we really care?

 

Mark my words, the bulk of wireless data at NFL venues will soon be over Wi-Fi.

 

AJ

[Mobilesolutions]

Hmm, not really.  No, not discounting small cells.  But for data and not voice, small cells are little different from Wi-Fi access points.

 

I have to pull rank on you here, Neal.  I am going to guess that you have never been to an NFL game.  Meanwhile, in the past 20 years, I have attended over 150 NFL games in 11 different cities -- including a Super Bowl in New Orleans.  So, as a Kansas City Chiefs season ticket holder, I am quite well in tune with league initiatives.

 

The NFL is requiring teams and stadiums -- that have not yet complied -- to install uber enterprise grade Wi-Fi.  Fans want the ability to see replays on their devices and follow fantasy football.  Otherwise, many will just increasingly skip the $100 ticket, stay home, and watch in full HDTV with home broadband at their fingertips.  Traditional wireless operators cannot catch up quickly enough.  And do we really want them to?  Do we really care?

 

Mark my words, the bulk of wireless data at NFL venues will soon be over Wi-Fi.

 

AJ

And with the large amounts of TDD spectrum you can yield an "individualized wireless" experience with a hyper dense deployment of "nanocells"  so no more than 10 rows of the stadium share the same access point.  He who has FTTP wins!

-William

[Nickel]

Wow, AJ is an NFL season ticket holder. I Didn't realize he had that kind of cheddar to throw around.

[WiWavelength]

Wow, AJ is an NFL season ticket holder. I Didn't realize he had that kind of cheddar to throw around.

 

Well, I have demonstrated plenty of "cheddar to throw around" at the likes of wireless service plans, handsets, spectrum analyzers, and research trips.  But I also work in lowly academia.  I am certainly not yet the "big cheese" in this family.  That would be my father.  He and I do not see eye to eye on many matters of business, politics, religion -- NFL, though, is our common ground.  So, I have been a stakeholder in our season tickets for about two decades.  And that has been a good relationship.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Well, I have demonstrated plenty of "cheddar to throw around" at the likes of wireless service plans, handsets, spectrum analyzers, and research trips.  But I also work in lowly academia.  I am certainly not yet the "big cheese" in this family.  That would be my father.  He and I do not see eye to eye on many matters of business, politics, religion -- NFL, though, is our common ground.  So, I have been a stakeholder in our season tickets for about two decades.  And that has been a good relationship.

 

AJ

Two decades of Chiefs football? I didn't know you were a masochistic, too!     

[WiWavelength]

Two decades of Chiefs football? I didn't know you were a masochistic, too!     

 

If you think that the 1990s and 2000s were bad for Chiefs football, I might have to be historian and pull rank on you, too.

 

 

AJ

[jamesinclair]

No text message test?

 

When Im at a sorting event, thats really that only one that matters. Who surfs the web during a game? And calls are hard to hear.

[Vince]

Verizon users pulled 2tb and AT&T users pulled 630gb? So much for "97% of cellular users use less than 2gb per month." Imagine the overage charges inside that stadium.

[The Dave]

1.9 TB is a whole lot of selfies.

[afazel]

Well, I have demonstrated plenty of "cheddar to throw around" at the likes of wireless service plans, handsets, spectrum analyzers, and research trips.  But I also work in lowly academia.  I am certainly not yet the "big cheese" in this family.  That would be my father.  He and I do not see eye to eye on many matters of business, politics, religion -- NFL, though, is our common ground.  So, I have been a stakeholder in our season tickets for about two decades.  And that has been a good relationship.

 

AJ

 

That's the best use of NFL season tickets I could imagine.

[koiulpoi]

Verizon users pulled 2tb and AT&T users pulled 630gb? So much for "97% of cellular users use less than 2gb per month." Imagine the overage charges inside that stadium.

Hang on, let's math it. Round up to 3 Terabytes of usage across the whole stadium. That's 3,000,000 Megabytes. 3,000,000 / 50,000 = 60. Yes, that's an average of sixty meg per person.

 

60 MB * 30 days = 1800 MB/Month. 1.8 Gig. Less than the 2GB average quoted, but honestly quite close.

[mc_gusto]

But isn't that 50k including sprint and tmo subs.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Vince]

Hang on, let's math it. Round up to 3 Terabytes of usage across the whole stadium. That's 3,000,000 Megabytes. 3,000,000 / 50,000 = 60. Yes, that's an average of sixty meg per person.

 

60 MB * 30 days = 1800 MB/Month. 1.8 Gig. Less than the 2GB average quoted, but honestly quite close.

Not every person there had AT&T and verizon only. You'd need to figure the average percent of American cell phone users that have verizon and AT&T. Then you can math it.