Two Sites supposedly live with CDMA 800 in Rural Chicago Market

[TheForce627]

I would not worry about that -84 dBm RSSI. But look at that -3.0 dB Ec/Io. That is stellar -- no doubt, a completely unloaded carrier. Even with a strong signal, typical Ec/Io in a moderately loaded cell is roughly -7 dB.

 

AJ

would u mind explaining what Ec/Io Is?

[4ringsnbr]

I would not worry about that -84 dBm RSSI. But look at that -3.0 dB Ec/Io. That is stellar -- no doubt, a completely unloaded carrier. Even with a strong signal, typical Ec/Io in a moderately loaded cell is roughly -7 dB.

 

AJ

I know the signal quality is good... but comparing it to Verizon's cellular 850 signal-- I can get -50 to -60 easily in unloaded sectors within a mile of the tower. I would expect a stronger overall signal closer to the tower. But yeah, anything over -7 dB for Ec/Io is good.

[4ringsnbr]

would u mind explaining what Ec/Io Is?

 

It's the ratio of the carrier energy from the total received energy on the channel. The more negative it is, the more carrier pollution or noise you're getting. Typically, when it falls below -11 dB, you start having real issues with calls. You should see -7 dB or higher for good signal quality. If it gets below -14 or so, you'll probably lose the call or switch to another sector, which is no big deal on CDMA, but likely would mean a dropped call on GSM.

[nmbr1scoobs]

My tower in Huntley, IL was down this weekend and I contacted Sprint about it and they said it is a Network Vision tower. Noe today I am getting higher 3G speeds. My peak download speed was 2.0 Mbps and .8 Mbps upload. Average is 1.6 Mbps and .6 Mbps upload.

[Wfmets45]

Ahhhh! I'm dying over here to test a NV tower in NYC. I hope my iPhone 4S is compatible with all the NV upgrades.

[irev210]

Ahhhh! I'm dying over here to test a NV tower in NYC. I hope my iPhone 4S is compatible with all the NV upgrades.

 

Yup, your iPhone is compatible with NV upgrades - you will appreciate the difference!

[S4GRU]

 

Yup' date=' your iPhone is compatible with NV upgrades - you will appreciate the difference![/quote']

 

Yes, except it does not support 800 CDMA.

 

Robert via NOVO7PALADIN Tablet using Forum Runner

[SpenceSouth]

Wish my Epic supported ESMR so I could test out these channels as they pop up! By any chance, has someone compared the signal strength of the 800mhz channel to a phone using just 1900mhz in the same location?

[Wfmets45]

 

 

Yes, except it does not support 800 CDMA.

 

Robert via NOVO7PALADIN Tablet using Forum Runner

 

Robert:

 

I was looking at the iPhone 4S specs on the apple site and it shows the following:

 

 

Cellular and Wireless

 

World phone

UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz);

GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)

CDMA EV-DO Rev. A (800, 1900 MHz)3

802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi (802.11n 2.4GHz only)

Bluetooth 4.0 wireless technology

 

It clearly shows 800 right there on the CDMA section. I really hope the iPhone can support 800 CDMA because I am not eligible for an upgrade until July 2013. By then i'll be buying the new iPhone.

 

Please let me know Robert and thanks

 

Walter

[irev210]

Robert:

 

I was looking at the iPhone 4S specs on the apple site and it shows the following:

 

 

Cellular and Wireless

 

World phone

UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz);

GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)

CDMA EV-DO Rev. A (800, 1900 MHz)3

802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi (802.11n 2.4GHz only)

Bluetooth 4.0 wireless technology

 

It clearly shows 800 right there on the CDMA section. I really hope the iPhone can support 800 CDMA because I am not eligible for an upgrade until July 2013. By then i'll be buying the new iPhone.

 

Please let me know Robert and thanks

 

Walter

 

I am pretty sure Apple is referencing the Cellular band that Verizon uses.

[S4GRU]

 

Robert:

 

I was looking at the iPhone 4S specs on the apple site and it shows the following:

 

Cellular and Wireless

 

World phone

UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA (850' date=' 900, 1900, 2100 MHz);

GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)

CDMA EV-DO Rev. A (800, 1900 MHz)3

802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi (802.11n 2.4GHz only)

Bluetooth 4.0 wireless technology

 

It clearly shows 800 right there on the CDMA section. I really hope the iPhone can support 800 CDMA because I am not eligible for an upgrade until July 2013. By then i'll be buying the new iPhone.

 

Please let me know Robert and thanks

 

Walter[/quote']

 

Walter

 

This is inaccurate. I wish Apple would correct it. The iPhone 4 and 4S do not support 800 SMR, irregardless of what they keep saying. They only support 850 Cellular band, and they incorrectly label it as 800.

 

The FCC testing docs on the iPhones clearly show the frequency sets supported, and they start just outside of 800 SMR and only include 850 Cellular frequencies.

 

Your iPhone will not run on Sprint 800. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

 

Robert via NOVO7PALADIN Tablet using Forum Runner

[WiWavelength]

This is inaccurate. I wish Apple would correct it. The iPhone 4 and 4S do not support 800 SMR, irregardless of what they keep saying. They only support 850 Cellular band, and they incorrectly label it as 800.

 

It is not so much inaccurate as it is ambiguous. For many years, Cellular 800 MHz, CDMA 800, TDMA 800, etc., were all accepted nomenclature. But the ascendance of iDEN 800 and the creation of the GSM 850 standard about a decade ago led to a clarification in terminology from Cellular 800 MHz to Cellular 850 MHz. That said, many do still reference Cellular 800 MHz in some way, shape, or form. While that is not entirely wrong, as there is established precedent to deem it 800 MHz, it certainly does lack absolute clarity.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

It is not so much inaccurate as it is ambiguous. For many years' date=' Cellular 800 MHz, CDMA 800, TDMA 800, etc., were all accepted nomenclature. But the ascendance of iDEN 800 and the creation of the GSM 850 standard about a decade ago led to a clarification in terminology from Cellular 800 MHz to Cellular 850 MHz. That said, many do still reference Cellular 800 MHz in some way, shape, or form. While that is not entirely wrong, as there is established precedent to deem it 800 MHz, it certainly does lack absolute clarity.

 

AJ[/quote']

 

Agreed. But referencing this way in this day and age with Sprint's new use of SMR causes mass confusion and is misleading. And it won't make the iPhone run on Sprint 800, but so many people mistakenly think it will.

 

Robert - Posted from my E4GT with ICS using Forum Runner

 

EDIT: I too was confused back in October when those specs were first posted by Apple. I had to be corrected in another forum. Which definitely hurt my ego.

[Wfmets45]

 

 

Walter

 

This is inaccurate. I wish Apple would correct it. The iPhone 4 and 4S do not support 800 SMR, irregardless of what they keep saying. They only support 850 Cellular band, and they incorrectly label it as 800.

 

The FCC testing docs on the iPhones clearly show the frequency sets supported, and they start just outside of 800 SMR and only include 850 Cellular frequencies.

 

Your iPhone will not run on Sprint 800. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

 

Robert via NOVO7PALADIN Tablet using Forum Runner

 

Robert:

 

Thanks for the clarification and explanation. At least i'll still be able to enjoy NV in some way, especially the data speeds. The signal in NYC from sprint is great so I guess missing out on 800 wont affect me much.

 

Hopefully next year when I upgrade to the new iPhone, it'll be compatible for 800.

 

Thanks again,

 

Walter

Edited April 17, 2012 by Wfmets45

[xenadu]

The bands are close enough that the antenna should work. Why couldn't an upgrade of the baseband enable those frequencies? Would it be that the Qualcomm radio isn't capable of restricting its broadcasts tightly enough without a hardware filter?

 

I so await the days of cheap low-power software radio. It is coming some day and the idea of having a carrier/frequency specific device of any kind will seem laughable. The device will just switch among the various antennas as needed for microwave, 1500-1900, and 700-900. Anyone have a technical objection to this prediction, other than software radio chips currently being too expensive and power hungry?

 

I also wonder if you couldn't have a solid state antenna that could switch segments in and out to change length (and thus frequency response) but I don't know enough about electrical engineering and antenna design to know what the pitfalls are there.

[WiWavelength]

The bands are close enough that the antenna should work. Why couldn't an upgrade of the baseband enable those frequencies? Would it be that the Qualcomm radio isn't capable of restricting its broadcasts tightly enough without a hardware filter?

 

The emissions mask filter is irrelevant if the IPhone 4S does not have a power amp module that covers 817-824 MHz.

 

I so await the days of cheap low-power software radio. It is coming some day and the idea of having a carrier/frequency specific device of any kind will seem laughable. The device will just switch among the various antennas as needed for microwave, 1500-1900, and 700-900. Anyone have a technical objection to this prediction, other than software radio chips currently being too expensive and power hungry?

 

Software defined radio gets way too much play as some sort of panacea. Ubiquitous airlink compatibility requires far more than software modems that can adapt to any number of modulation schemes. As mentioned, it requires compatible power amps and antennas. Not to mention, MIMO requirements make multi band antenna arrays much more impractical.

 

AJ

[TheForce627]

I have screen shots showing service option number 0 3 &6 while connected to an 800mhz site.