Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread


Recommended Posts

Random question, but I see that Sprint is selling the Oneplus 8 5G. Will this phone still be good in the future after the merger ? I saw some of the earlier 5G phones on Sprint are being disconnected as T-Mobile is moving forward. I wouldn't want to get a phone that is obsolete in less than 12 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random question, but I see that Sprint is selling the Oneplus 8 5G. Will this phone still be good in the future after the merger ? I saw some of the earlier 5G phones on Sprint are being disconnected as T-Mobile is moving forward. I wouldn't want to get a phone that is obsolete in less than 12 months.
The 5G phones are disconnected they just became LTE phones, just not 5G.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

The 5G phones are disconnected they just became LTE phones, just not 5G.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk
 

Does this mean that the Oneplus 8 being sold by Sprint will eventually become a LTE phone and lose 5G ? I am interested in the phone, but if it will eventually get cut off from 5G, I'll just wait until all the dust settles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean that the Oneplus 8 being sold by Sprint will eventually become a LTE phone and lose 5G ? I am interested in the phone, but if it will eventually get cut off from 5G, I'll just wait until all the dust settles.
Here's what I found6d461a97792a4e06609de1ab22ac2d32.jpg

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tengen31 said:

Here's what I found6d461a97792a4e06609de1ab22ac2d32.jpg

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk
 

Thanks. I saw this too. Seems like it "should" continue with 5G even post merger but probably still up in the air. I will follow this closely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I saw this too. Seems like it "should" continue with 5G even post merger but probably still up in the air. I will follow this closely.

it will be able to use 5G. N71 and N41 are both sub6 GHz. Just not Mmwave

 

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I saw this too. Seems like it "should" continue with 5G even post merger but probably still up in the air. I will follow this closely.
It can be used. T-mobile sells the same device and it works with N71 and N41 using T-mobile anchor bands.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to be quite frank mmwave is largely useless at this point and will remain as such for quite some time.  It's just too isolated and doesn't scale. The speeds TMO will get out of 2.5 are gonna be extremely impressive as it is.  I think TMobile will find that they don't even need mmwave as much as they were planning when 600 and 2.5 are perfectly capable of blanketing the nation in a very robust and speedy network. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Swordfish said:

Random question, but I see that Sprint is selling the Oneplus 8 5G. Will this phone still be good in the future after the merger ? I saw some of the earlier 5G phones on Sprint are being disconnected as T-Mobile is moving forward. I wouldn't want to get a phone that is obsolete in less than 12 months.

The OnePlus 8 phone is good post-merger.

The first 5G phones such as the Galaxy S10 are obsolete.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had another question. I saw that Sprint was selling the Oneplus on the website. The store told me I need to make changes to my plan and I cannot buy the phone outright. I have the family 1500 which is a very old plan. I don't want to make any changes to my current plan so I may not be able to buy the phone from Sprint. 

 

 

If I buy the phone directly from oneplus I saw it said Verizon, t mobile and AT&T. Will this work for sprint too even though it is not listed on the  site but says T mobile? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to be concerned with TMobile going forward and not Sprint. That brand is obviously being killed so there is nothing to worry about. If rumor pans out, the Sprint brand will be all but retired on August 2nd.  You're a TMobile customer now. We all are. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2020 at 4:47 PM, Trip said:

Okay, now that I said I hadn't seen any activity, I'm wondering if I saw something new this afternoon.

https://imgur.com/a/kD5lUkr

I copied one of the pictures and annotated it in red.  Am I right?

- Trip

Following up on myself, my wife and I ventured to Wegmans for the first time since March this morning.  The T-Mobile rack at Hayfield now has a fourth antenna, that resembles (but is taller than) the Sprint Massive MIMO antenna on the rack below it.  Guessing this is the n41 gear.

Oddly, I checked for permits, and there's only electrical permits, and no antenna replacement/addition permit.  Not sure what to make of that.

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trip said:

Following up on myself, my wife and I ventured to Wegmans for the first time since March this morning.  The T-Mobile rack at Hayfield now has a fourth antenna, that resembles (but is taller than) the Sprint Massive MIMO antenna on the rack below it.  Guessing this is the n41 gear.

Oddly, I checked for permits, and there's only electrical permits, and no antenna replacement/addition permit.  Not sure what to make of that.

- Trip

Columbus permits have lacked antenna detail for a while now, which may be related to anti 5g site violence, competive secrets,  or the FCC leadership wanting licensing sped up / fees reduced.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trip said:

Following up on myself, my wife and I ventured to Wegmans for the first time since March this morning.  The T-Mobile rack at Hayfield now has a fourth antenna, that resembles (but is taller than) the Sprint Massive MIMO antenna on the rack below it.  Guessing this is the n41 gear.

Oddly, I checked for permits, and there's only electrical permits, and no antenna replacement/addition permit.  Not sure what to make of that.

- Trip

i've seen this a lot around here too with permits not being pulled. several years ago i could check permit reports and have an idea of when upgrades might be starting. i don't know if cities have just relaxed on tower permits or they don't record them anymore or if t-mobile just isn't following the "rules" when it comes to permits, but most of the B71 upgrades that have happened around here over the past year i haven't seen permits for.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most sites are just listed as antenna upgrades so as to keep fees down and in most cases no permit is required because they are simply replacing like for like. This not only keeps pricing down, but speeds up processes with less paperwork/hoops to jump through

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When an antenna is added as was the case at the site I saw this morning, that's not "like for like," at least not in the plain meaning of the term.  Perhaps a lawyer could argue otherwise.

- Trip

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most sites are just listed as antenna upgrades so as to keep fees down and in most cases no permit is required because they are simply replacing like for like. This not only keeps pricing down, but speeds up processes with less paperwork/hoops to jump through
This is actually a common reason that Sprint used to leave unconnected antennas at sites. It allowed them to swap in a new antenna without issue.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the press release:  https://www.t-mobile.com/news/press/t-mobile-announces-un-carrier-next-on-july-16/

What:     Now that Sprint is part of T-Mobile (NASDAQ: TMUS), the company will announce what’s next and how a supercharged Un-carrier will continue to change wireless for good.

Who:       T-Mobile CEO Mike Sievert and other T-Mobile executives in a webcast hosted by Golden Globe and six-time Emmy nominee Anthony Anderson.

When:    Thursday, July 16, 2020

  • Webcast at 8:30am PT (11:30am ET)
  • Live Media Q&A with execs immediately following

Where:   Watch the webcast and listen to the QA at http://t-mobile.com/uncarrier.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bmoses said:

potential new "uncarrier" announcement this thursday

https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/hqhhv5/sievert_you_feeling_like_this_industry_needs/

being teased as being network related

It's probably nothing. "Uncarrier" announcements have been worthless PR stunts for a while now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Trip said:

When an antenna is added as was the case at the site I saw this morning, that's not "like for like," at least not in the plain meaning of the term.  Perhaps a lawyer could argue otherwise.

- Trip

 

I think you had a question a while back about if Tmo 600mhz antenna can use AWS and PCS? I have seen two towers here using B71, N71, B2, B66, B4 and 3G all from the 600mhz antenna so I guess the answer is yes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RedSpark said:

Wow. They're really unloading things now. Holy cow.

Money for everything but Sprint. Sad. It's just sad.

It really is b/c Sprint could have been that wireless carrier. Especially in the 5G realm. All SoftBank had to do was build out 2.5 nationally, participated in the 600mhz auction and upgrade the back haul.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, PhillipJames89 said:

It really is b/c Sprint could have been that wireless carrier. Especially in the 5G realm. All SoftBank had to do was build out 2.5 nationally, participated in the 600mhz auction and upgrade the back haul.

Yup. Exactly right, and it would have been very doable.

Sprint issued its statement of non-participation in the 600 MHz Auction on September 26, 2015: https://newsroom.sprint.com/sprint-statement-on-the-incentive-auction.htm

$32 Billion just for ARM... Unreal.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really is b/c Sprint could have been that wireless carrier. Especially in the 5G realm. All SoftBank had to do was build out 2.5 nationally, participated in the 600mhz auction and upgrade the back haul.

I 100% agree. Everything this man had invested in had gone to shit and the. Looks to sell off shares. At this point I believe he doesn’t know what he’s doing. What Sprint really needed was someone who actually cared


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 2
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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
  • Recently Browsing

×
×
  • Create New...