T-Mobile LTE & Network Discussion V2

[Deval]

Swinging back around to on-topic, was looking at the history of T-Mobile, to better debunk some of those "duoploy low band spectrum hurdur stuff" and it got me thinking about how they came to be.

 

T-Mobile grew from the ashes of Omnipoint and Voicestream, and got more spectrum from Metro PCS. Unfortunately there are no good wiki links anywhere to read up on, but I was curious where their spectrum came from.

[WiWavelength]

Swinging back around to on-topic, was looking at the history of T-Mobile, to better debunk some of those "duoploy low band spectrum hurdur stuff" and it got me thinking about how they came to be.

 

T-Mobile grew from the ashes of Omnipoint and Voicestream, and got more spectrum from Metro PCS. Unfortunately there are no good wiki links anywhere to read up on, but I was curious where their spectrum came from.

 

I miss these days...

 

 

GSM rightfully was a second class citizen in the US.  Huge coverage holes with no GSM in major markets and across entire states.  And this map depicts not just VoiceStream footprint; this map is native plus roaming.  So, for example, California is PacBell Wireless, much of Iowa is Iowa Wireless Services, and the Carolinas are BellSouth Mobility DCS.

 

AJ

[DanielB]

<snip></snip>

 

When is that map from?

[WiWavelength]

When is that map from?

 

I would date it circa 2001-2002.  VoiceStream rebranded to T-Mobile in 2003-2004 and launched GSM in Cleveland, for example, which is still a black hole on this map.

 

AJ

[Deval]

I need to find the history and recap of the first PCS auction, and get an understanding of how Sprint got their PCS, as well as Voicestream, etc.

[WiWavelength]

I need to find the history and recap of the first PCS auction, and get an understanding of how Sprint got their PCS, as well as Voicestream, etc.

 

You are looking at him.  That FCC Auction 4 recap is me.

 

AJ

[Deval]

You are looking at him.  That FCC Auction 4 recap is me.

 

AJ

 

So let's pick your brain

 

Any posted link that I can read up on? 

[Fraydog]

I miss these days...

 

 

GSM rightfully was a second class citizen in the US. Huge coverage holes with no GSM in major markets and across entire states. And this map depicts not just VoiceStream footprint; this map is native plus roaming. So, for example, California is PacBell Wireless, much of Iowa is Iowa Wireless Services, and the Carolinas are BellSouth Mobility DCS.

 

I remember VoiceStream barely started in St. Louis before the T-Mobile takeover. That said, some of the GSM phones they had intrigued me. Where I lived was always a GSM black hole, more or less. First Cellular of Southern Illinois ran both CDMA and GSM networks, but barely anyone had them here. It was mostly Douglas doing business as a Cellular One and then selling to Verizon which was the landline telco through the Bell Atlantic/GTE merger. Douglas ran TDMA though, which meant Verizon rebuilt most of the core network that exists here for CDMA. Cingular eventually overbuilt GSM here for 1900 but not many even had them even through the AT&T days. And now that AT&T has the bones of both Cingular and Alltel here, they still don't have a big number of customers here, even though the people that do have AT&T seem to be happy with the service after the Alltel transition.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WiWavelength]

So let's pick your brain

 

Any posted link that I can read up on? 

 

You can start here:

 

http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/spcs.html

 

With one exception, all full PCS A/B block licenses were won at FCC Auction 4 in 1995.  That includes several partnerships, all of which were wholly absorbed into Sprint PCS by the year 2000.

 

Cox originally held the Los Angeles-San Diego MTA PCS A block and the Omaha MTA PCS B block, operating both as Sprint PCS.  Comcast as PhillieCo originally held the Philadelphia MTA PCS B block, operating it as Sprint PCS.  And The Washington Post Company, et al., as American Personal Communications originally held the Washington-Baltimore PCS A block, operating it as Sprint Spectrum, which started as GSM and rebuilt as CDMA.

 

All partial PCS A/B block licenses are partitions and/or disaggregations acquired in spectrum transactions in the years subsequent to the PCS auctions.  Those were acquired for additional bandwidth, especially in 10 MHz only markets.

 

Most PCS D/E block licenses were won at FCC Auction 11 in 1997.  Those BTA based licenses were used to fill in the remaining few MTAs (Chicago, Houston, Atlanta, etc.) where Sprint had failed to win PCS A/B block licenses in the earlier auction.  A small number of PCS D/E block licenses have been acquired in spectrum transactions, but none of those are reflected in the table, as they happened post 2004.

 

No PCS C block nor PCS F block licenses are listed.  That is because the PCS C block in FCC Auction 5 in 1996 and the PCS F block in FCC Auction 11 in 1997 were reserved for Designated Entities, such as small businesses, minorities, and women.  Unlike VoiceStream and later Cingular and AT&TWS, Sprint did not set up phony looking partnerships with Native American groups to get around those Designated Entity restrictions.

 

So, as of 2004, Sprint held no PCS C block nor PCS F block spectrum.  That has since changed minimally, as the FCC has reauctioned bankrupt licenses and/or Sprint has acquired licenses in spectrum transactions.  But, again, those partial PCS C block and full/partial PCS F block licenses do not appear in the table because they are post 2004.

 

AJ

[Fraydog]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/25/8846485/fcc-600mhz-reserve-recommending-against-tmobile-petition

 

The Verge kind of misses the point here, it isn't just about T-Mobile. 

[EvanA]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/25/8846485/fcc-600mhz-reserve-recommending-against-tmobile-petition

 

The Verge kind of misses the point here, it isn't just about T-Mobile.

Well with the FCC currently not planning to increase the reserve, this bidding war will certainly be interesting.

[caspar347]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/25/8846485/fcc-600mhz-reserve-recommending-against-tmobile-petition

 

The Verge kind of misses the point here

They usually do when it comes to wireless infrastructure and carriers. Of course, I don't think anyone else as mainstream as they are does any better.

 

And it might just be because T-Mobile is the only small carrier they know about/care about.

[EvanA]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/06/25/t-mobiles-big-pr-blitz-is-backfiring-in-washington/

 

The FCC says "We're getting tired of your shit"

[jroepcke51]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/06/25/t-mobiles-big-pr-blitz-is-backfiring-in-washington/

 

The FCC says "We're getting tired of your shit"

This is not surprising in the least.  I seem to think though that this is hurting sprint as well. Now, I still think Sprint and Softbank will step up to the plate at this auction. Have a hard time believing they won't.

[Deval]

You can start here:

 

http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/spcs.html

 

With one exception, all full PCS A/B block licenses were won at FCC Auction 4 in 1995.  That includes several partnerships, all of which were wholly absorbed into Sprint PCS by the year 2000.

 

Cox originally held the Los Angeles-San Diego MTA PCS A block and the Omaha MTA PCS B block, operating both as Sprint PCS.  Comcast as PhillieCo originally held the Philadelphia MTA PCS B block, operating it as Sprint PCS.  And The Washington Post Company, et al., as American Personal Communications originally held the Washington-Baltimore PCS A block, operating it as Sprint Spectrum, which started as GSM and rebuilt as CDMA.

 

All partial PCS A/B block licenses are partitions and/or disaggregations acquired in spectrum transactions in the years subsequent to the PCS auctions.  Those were acquired for additional bandwidth, especially in 10 MHz only markets.

 

Most PCS D/E block licenses were won at FCC Auction 11 in 1997.  Those BTA based licenses were used to fill in the remaining few MTAs (Chicago, Houston, Atlanta, etc.) where Sprint had failed to win PCS A/B block licenses in the earlier auction.  A small number of PCS D/E block licenses have been acquired in spectrum transactions, but none of those are reflected in the table, as they happened post 2004.

 

No PCS C block nor PCS F block licenses are listed.  That is because the PCS C block in FCC Auction 5 in 1996 and the PCS F block in FCC Auction 11 in 1997 were reserved for Designated Entities, such as small businesses, minorities, and women.  Unlike VoiceStream and later Cingular and AT&TWS, Sprint did not set up phony looking partnerships with Native American groups to get around those Designated Entity restrictions.

 

So, as of 2004, Sprint held no PCS C block nor PCS F block spectrum.  That has since changed minimally, as the FCC has reauctioned bankrupt licenses and/or Sprint has acquired licenses in spectrum transactions.  But, again, those partial PCS C block and full/partial PCS F block licenses do not appear in the table because they are post 2004.

 

AJ

 

If you ever make it across the country to NY, I'd love to buy you a beer. Thank you for this information.

[derrph]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/25/8846485/fcc-600mhz-reserve-recommending-against-tmobile-petition

 

The Verge kind of misses the point here, it isn't just about T-Mobile.

I think the reason why it's always about T-Mobile is because people in these tech blogs have been backing and vouching for T-Mobile and not speaking on their flaws. They don't want to look crazy if in the case T-Mobile sinks for whatever reason because of the strong propaganda they've sold everyone on.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fraydog]

I think the reason why it's always about T-Mobile is because people in these tech blogs have been backing and vouching for T-Mobile and not speaking on their flaws. They don't want to look crazy if in the case T-Mobile sinks for whatever reason because of the strong propaganda they've sold everyone on.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It is to note that there have been times the Verge hasn't bought T-Mobile's line all the time and therefore had an adversarial relationship with John Legere and other members of the TMUS C-Suite. I don't always agree with the Verge but I do believe that they do want to stand up for everyday users. I would say large chunks of them are still on duopoly carriers, and some of them probably think they'd just rather the government bludgeon the duopoly to be consumer friendly and stay where they are at. Unfortunately, that doesn't really work in the real world.

[Fraydog]

What difference does signal strength make? Let me count the ways.

 

Outside, at the SW corner of the Fraley property.

 

 

Inside, in the kitchen which is blocked off by a whole bunch of building.

 

 

Pretty dramatic drop. One was like a New York speed test; the other with almost no upload and at best HSPA performance.

 

Low band spectrum matters.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fraydog]

http://networks.nokia.com/news-events/insight-newsletter/articles/early-mover-explores-lte-on-unlicensed-spectrum

 

More information on LTE LAA from an interview with Mark McDiarmid, Vice President of Radio Engineering at T-Mobile. Really surprisingly balanced look where he goes over both benefits and pitfalls.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[S4GRU]

T4GRU Article:

Channel 51 Relocations: The End of Chapter One

 

http://www.t4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-3-channel-51-relocations-the-end-of-chapter-one/

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

[maxsilver]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/25/8846485/fcc-600mhz-reserve-recommending-against-tmobile-petition

 

The Verge kind of misses the point here, it isn't just about T-Mobile. 

 

 

They usually do when it comes to wireless infrastructure and carriers. Of course, I don't think anyone else as mainstream as they are does any better.

 

And it might just be because T-Mobile is the only small carrier they know about/care about.

 

I think it's simpler than that.

 

The Verge is talking about T-Mobile, because T-Mobile is asking people to talk about them  -- they're making ridiculous cartoon/advert/things, sending out Press Releases, along with YouTube "vlogs" and a host of other social media noise about the auction. http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/23/8834307/heres-why-t-mobile-wants-you-to-get-mad-at-the-fcc

 

Since Sprint isn't generating tons of noise about it, they aren't getting nearly as much focus on this issue.

 

Squeaky wheel gets the press.

[S4GRU]

 

 

Squeaky wheel gets the press.

Very true.

 

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

[Arysyn]

Alright, finally an updated Schaumburg-area T-Mobile speed test update from me, which this is my first experience using the upgraded 15x15 in this area.

 

I've complained quite a bit regarding T-Mobile's data speeds around here back when the LTE AWS network was 10x10. Then, the typical data speeds I experienced were around 1-2mbps, rarely going near 3mbps or above. The Schaumburg area seemed much better served by Sprint, which data speeds typically were around 40mbps here, not going below 20mbps, in my experience.

 

Now that T-Mobile has upgraded their spectrum for LTE, one speed test I did about 15 minutes ago, was 70mbps. The one I did 5 minutes ago, was 62mbps. I'll do one more now, as I've done these tests in various areas of Schaumburg, as my mother is driving.

 

We currently are on Roselle and Algonquin roads, just got 20mbps. The data speeds since the upgrade to 15x15 from 10x10 certainly have made quite a big performance improvement for T-Mobile, which now I'm glad to report has also improved data speeds in Schaumburg.

[Fraydog]

Here's an FCC filing from Public Knowledge, LTE-U and LTE-LAA gut WiFi and make it unusable in a lot of test cases.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001105564

 

Everyone should read this filing by Public Knowledge. Lots of innovation comes from the unlicensed bands and WiFi, like the Republic Wireless and Cablevision mobile plans that extensively use WiFi. The only way LTE-LAA should be kosher is to see the 3GPP and IEEE sit down and come up with a neutral approach that doesn't gut free and open WiFi.

 

This is all part of T-Mobile's plan to Recarrier, I'm afraid. And if Sprint continues to shoot itself in the foot, T-Mobile will fall more in line with the Duopoly. Remember what John Legere really wants is the Triopoly. He was going to be the CEO of T-Mobile after they ate Sprint, but Chairman Wheeler fortunately thought better of it.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bretton88]

Here's an FCC filing from Public Knowledge, LTE-U and LTE-LAA gut WiFi and make it unusable in a lot of test cases.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001105564

 

Everyone should read this filing by Public Knowledge. Lots of innovation comes from the unlicensed bands and WiFi, like the Republic Wireless and Cablevision mobile plans that extensively use WiFi. The only way LTE-LAA should be kosher is to see the 3GPP and IEEE sit down and come up with a neutral approach that doesn't gut free and open WiFi.

 

This is all part of T-Mobile's plan to Recarrier, I'm afraid. And if Sprint continues to shoot itself in the foot, T-Mobile will fall more in line with the Duopoly. Remember what John Legere really wants is the Triopoly. He was going to be the CEO of T-Mobile after they ate Sprint, but Chairman Wheeler fortunately thought better of it.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cisco is firmly against LTE-LAA as well. I'd be so upset if it interfered with my home WiFi network. Especially since the 2.4 ghz level is so crowded.