Jump to content
stuckinohio1

So what's the softbank network like in japan?

Recommended Posts

The only thing i can determine from videos on youtube and some small research is they have alot of 2.5GHz Spectrum

 

They do have 4G LTE (what version i have no idea)

 

They run a 3G Network on EVDO Rev B with what looks like 2 carriers because the speed tests i have seen all get over 6Mbps.

 

uhhh thats it. i cant read Japanese so thats all i got.

 

I would like to know about their plans, pricing, data allowance or if they are unlimited.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing i can determine from videos on youtube and some small research is they have alot of 2.5GHz Spectrum

 

They do have 4G LTE (what version i have no idea)

 

They run a 3G Network on EVDO Rev B with what looks like 2 carriers because the speed tests i have seen all get over 6Mbps.

 

uhhh thats it. i cant read Japanese so thats all i got.

 

I would like to know about their plans, pricing, data allowance or if they are unlimited.

 

Just read it in English  ;)

 

http://www.softbank.jp/en/mobile/

 

Their Band 41 2.5GHz TD-LTE network is no different than what we have here.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SoftBank doesn't use CDMA or EVDO in Japan. Only (au) KDDI does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are CDMA too....

Softbank uses W-CDMA a.k.a. UMTS, not to be confused with our CDMA. Among other significant differences, I believe W-CDMA uses a GSM core.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Softbank uses W-CDMA a.k.a. UMTS, not to be confused with our CDMA. Among other significant differences, I believe W-CDMA uses a GSM core.

Thats right , opps, I forgot that W-CDMA is another technology. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SoftBank doesn't use CDMA or EVDO in Japan. Only (au) KDDI does.

Softbank uses W-CDMA a.k.a. UMTS, not to be confused with our CDMA. Among other significant differences, I believe W-CDMA uses a GSM core.

Thats right , opps, I forgot that W-CDMA is another technology. 

 

Never say "UMTS."  That is a 3GPP euphemism.  Be sure to say "W-CDMA."  Always remind the GSM zealots -- many of whom laughed at or despised Qualcomm -- what they needed for their "3G" standard.

 

AJ

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never say "UMTS."  That is a 3GPP euphemism.  Be sure to say "W-CDMA."  Always remind the GSM zealots -- many of whom laughed at or despised Qualcomm -- what they needed for their "3G" standard.

 

AJ

Isn't it kind of misnomer to say that W-CDMA has a "GSM Core" as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it kind of misnomer to say that W-CDMA has a "GSM Core" as well?

 

No, it is actually accurate.  The "core" refers to the GSM MAP, which is the core telephony network.  It is newer than the IS-41 core telephony network that AMPS, TDMA, CDMA, and CDMA1X have retained.  So, that is the reason GSM supports, for example, exotic three way calling combos that CDMA1X does not.  It puzzles some more recent subs who port from one 3GPP operator to another 3GPP2 operator.  But those subs likely also fail to recognize perspective.  For the same core telephony reason, GSM type providers never had true AMPS nor TDMA roaming in North America.  And that left them with very poor geographic coverage for over a decade.

 

AJ

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it is actually accurate. The "core" refers to the GSM MAP, which is the core telephony network. It is newer than the IS-41 core telephony network that AMPS, TDMA, CDMA, and CDMA1X have retained. So, that is the reason GSM supports, for example, exotic three way calling combos that CDMA1X does not. It puzzles some more recent subs who port from one 3GPP operator to another 3GPP2 operator. But those subs likely also fail to recognize perspective. For the same core telephony reason, GSM type providers never had true AMPS nor TDMA roaming in North America. And that left them with very poor geographic coverage for over a decade.

 

AJ

Now I understand why AT&T had 6-way calling. I never really understood why. Thanks for the lesson AJ!

 

 

Sent from my iPad mini using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it is actually accurate.  The "core" refers to the GSM MAP, which is the core telephony network.  It is newer than the IS-41 core telephony network that AMPS, TDMA, CDMA, and CDMA1X have retained.  So, that is the reason GSM supports, for example, exotic three way calling combos that CDMA1X does not.  It puzzles some more recent subs who port from one 3GPP operator to another 3GPP2 operator.  But those subs likely also fail to recognize perspective.  For the same core telephony reason, GSM type providers never had true AMPS nor TDMA roaming in North America.  And that left them with very poor geographic coverage for over a decade.

 

AJ

We're talking about different things I think, I thinking about how you don't need to deploy a GSM carrier if you've deployed a W-CDMA one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I understand why AT&T had 6-way calling. I never really understood why. Thanks for the lesson AJ!

 

Maybe.  But you must be referring to "AT&T" as AT&TWS GSM or Cingular nee Pac Bell GSM, not AT&TWS TDMA -- all of which were in your area at one time.

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe. But you must be referring to "AT&T" as AT&TWS GSM or Cingular nee Pac Bell GSM, not AT&TWS TDMA -- all of which were in your area at one time.

 

AJ

AT&T Mobility GSM/W-CDMA, not TDMA. I never had a TDMA based cell phone.

 

 

Sent from my iPad mini using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking about different things I think, I thinking about how you don't need to deploy a GSM carrier if you've deployed a W-CDMA one.

 

Yes.  Hutchison Whampoa's 3 network in the UK was, as I recall, the first W-CDMA only network.  It was a new entrant to the market following the "3G" spectrum auctions, circa 2000.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the lesson AJ!

 

Oh, and until Robert gets home tonight, you should respectfully refer to me as "Admin AJ."

 

:P

 

AJ

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and until Robert gets home tonight, you should respectfully refer to me as "Admin AJ."

 

:P

 

AJ

Aye aye Admin AJ!

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye aye Admin AJ!

 

Good, Gilligan.  Now, you go collect coconuts while I "check on" Ginger and Mary Ann.

 

AJ

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never say "UMTS."  That is a 3GPP euphemism.  Be sure to say "W-CDMA."  Always remind the GSM zealots -- many of whom laughed at or despised Qualcomm -- what they needed for their "3G" standard.

 

AJ

Well, strictly speaking, while most people refer to the WCDMA variant when they say "UMTS", the name actually denotes four different systems. The WCDMA version is the one most call UMTS (though DoCoMo originally named it "FOMA", meaning Freedom of Mobile[/Multimedia] Access). It's technically called "UTRA" (Universal Terrestrial Radio Access) or UTRA-FDD. UMTS also encapsulates "E-UTRA" (Evolved UTRA, which we call LTE), UTRA-TDD HCR (TD-WCDMA), and UTRA-TDD LCR (TD-SCDMA). The four air interfaces are incompatible with each other, but they do share common specifications and core network technologies.

 

And A.J., we "GSM zealots" (as you call them) fully recognize Qualcomm's contributions to the development of UMTS. That being said, we still despise CDMA2000 for how Qualcomm handles it compared to how it is forced to handle the UMTS family.

 

Also, it is technically possible to implement CDMA2000/AMPS/D-AMPS with a GSM core. Specifically with CDMA, I think A.J. brought it up once before: GSM1X. The idea is perfectly sound, and it is in use today with China Telecom's CDMA network (China Telecom used to be dual GSM/CDMA before the government forced the reorganization of the mobile network owners). 

 

Finally, A.J., there's enough bad blood on both sides. Don't add to it.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, A.J., there's enough bad blood on both sides. Don't add to it.

On the other hand, if there's already a lot of bad blood, what's a little more? I'm for anything that will cause more message board fights. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mind...just got blown....

 

EDIT: after clicking a few links on the softbank website it seems that only parts are in English.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mind...just got blown....

 

EDIT: after clicking a few links on the softbank website it seems that only parts are in English.

Google Chrome + Chrome Extensions - Google Translate for the win!
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're still debating the whole Qualcomm vs. Ericsson/DoCoMo WCDMA deal? Kind of water under the bridge at this point. Even Sprint is going toward full 3GPP for voice and data when VoLTE is activated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're still debating the whole Qualcomm vs. Ericsson/DoCoMo WCDMA deal? Kind of water under the bridge at this point. Even Sprint is going toward full 3GPP for voice and data when VoLTE is activated.

Meh, I just wanted to explain the term "UMTS" and gently point out that we 3GPP folks love WCDMA and HSPA+ and that bad blood isn't needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had Softbank for two years when I was stationed in Japan. My service was fantastic! LTE wasn't available yet and I only had an iPhone 3GS. But the 3G speeds were pretty fast. I had unlimited data at the time.

 

I was very excited when I read that Softbank had bought Sprint. Softbank will definitely help improve Sprint.

 

Sent from my Note 4 using Tapatalk!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had Softbank for two years when I was stationed in Japan. My service was fantastic! LTE wasn't available yet and I only had an iPhone 3GS. But the 3G speeds were pretty fast. I had unlimited data at the time.

 

I was very excited when I read that Softbank had bought Sprint. Softbank will definitely help improve Sprint.

 

Sent from my Note 4 using Tapatalk!

It good to hear someone who ACTUALLY had personal experience with Softbank cell service in Japan, sounds like there are doing good over there!!  :tu: 

Share this post


Link to post
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...