S4GRU

I like this new network strategy. It seems very cost effective too. I just wonder where does Carrier Aggregation (deployment) fall into play and small "spark cells" and will it still take 3 years to deploy band 41 in the top 100 cites/markets.

 

Also is the plan is still to cover 100 million POPs by year ends.

 

Carrier Aggregation can only occur at Sprint B41 8T8R sites.  Existing Huawei and Samsung dual mode WiMax/LTE Clearwire sites cannot do CA. So Sprint will have crews running around the accepted 8T8R adding additional carrier cards and implementing CA sometime around the turn of the year.

 

It is likely that CA will appear here and there as they do it.  We won't know it until we start seeing multiple B41 LTE carriers show up at live 8T8R sites and we have Sprint B41 IntraBand CA compliant devices in hand.  

 

It's even possible that when they start firing up 8T8R sites in the next 30-45 days, they may come out of the gate with multiple carriers and CA right from the get go.  And until we start to get CA devices, we will still have multiple B41 sites that have CA enabled to spread out the loads and keep B41 speeds really high.

 

EDIT:  And yes, they are still planning to cover 100M POP's with B41 Spark LTE by year's end.  That can be achieved just by firing up the remaining Clearwire sites and already completed 8T8R sites.  That's not going to be a problem.

In a city of 600,000 100 miles from an international border. Just some more clarification I won't see b41 for a bit.

 

I disagree.  B41 is not incumbered by the international boundary.  Sprint can deploy right up to the border.  And Marcelo said he wants to focus Band 41 on the highest usage LTE sites first.  So its the complete opposite of what you just said.  He said if there is an overburdened Sprint LTE site in your area, he's making B41 a priority for that site!

 

This is excellent news for you.  And he is also going to be pushing B26 in the IBEZ as hard as it can be pushed.  You can count on that.

Hmmm.  So i do agree with the re prioritizing of B41 roll out to congested areas first, but I will they still place b41 everywhere eventually?  I also gather from this article that b26 is still a go for every site nationwide that doesn't have restrictions for the frequency?

 

 

Yes, it's our understanding that Marcelo is not stopping a nationwide B41 deployment, but reprioritizing.  Instead of doing anything and everything, and just letting the market managers do what they want with deployment, he is challenging the NV Plan of anything and everything a focusing on high demand sites first.

 

I completely agree with this thinking.  Focus on LTE sites that already have backhaul in place but performance is suffering because of high demand.  Start permitting these sites first.  Focus your crews on these sites first.

 

And as these start clearing out, second focus on cities with the highest Sprint customers or where you want to attract customers.  Then third, focus on all remaining sites nationwide that have backhaul upgraded to support Band 41.  And last, catch everything else as they get backhaul upgraded.

 

Band 26 deployment is still going hot and heavy nationwide to almost every site that has LTE capable backhaul (outside the IBEZ).  He is even starting to question and push to make sure anywhere that can receive it does by the end of the year.  And the places that can't...why not?  How can we speed that up?

 

Go Marcelo!  GO!!!

Putting the blame on the OEMs on this one is not cool in my opinion.

 

So I'm uncool in your estimation.  I won't lose any sleep.  The difference is I have cited official Sprint communication.  You have cited your feelings.  Until it's proven otherwise, that's their claim.  I don't claim to have any knowledge about it, personally.

 

I say you take it up with Sprint.  And do so publicly.  Maybe you can expose some massive Sprint lie and cover up.  Get to it!

 

Robert

I just found some interesting information:  

 

See http://www.sprint.com/landings/iPhone

 

It indicates the iPhone6 is Sprint Spark capable.

 

So does the article you're commenting on.  

 

Robert

OK, so here's what I don't get... If A1586 has all the bands that A1549 has, plus the TDD LTE bands, then why make two models and not just go with A1586 for everyone?

It's a good question.  I raised the same question in our forums. It's being discussed there.

 

My personal feeling is that, at least for recent devices, if Sprint really wanted to be able to unlock devices for domestic use they and the OEMs could come up with a solution to do so but they choose not to (at least not until the "magic" date of 2-11-2015). In other words, I don't really think it's an OEM restriction like Sprint claims, but rather Sprint's choice not to pursue it at this point.

Yes, many feel that Sprint is doing it intentionally. But they are publicly proclaiming that they cannot. I think Apple would, or will, argue otherwise if it is not true. But we know this much, Sprint is SIM unlocking iPhones for qualified subscribers who ask for it, and they still will not work with other domestic providers after the SIM slot is unlocked.  So this is a device control.  Sprint cannot add anything to the iPhone.

 

Since Sprint has been open about receiving some devices that are capable of switching networks (like the Nexus 5), wouldn't it make more sense that perhaps the limitation is likely Apple's? Maybe Apple agreed to permanent domestic locking because of pressure from the Duopoly? Perhaps they think that they may be able to sell another iPhone if a domestic subscriber switches providers?  

 

The Feb 2015 date is because that is the joint date that CTIA members agreed to.  Not an arbitrary Sprint machination.  So it may be that the next iPhone will not have this block for CTIA members (which includes AT&T, Verizon, Tmo and Sprint).

 

There are lots of feelings. But Sprint has stuck its neck out on the line by publicly saying it does not have the ability to make a Sprint activated iPhone to be used on another domestic network. And until that point can be proven otherwise, I will give them the benefit of any doubt.

 

Robert

It's a ridiculous amount.

 

I'm sure Apple can get a few free interns and make that happen.  Just to make me happy.  Don't they know who I think I am???    

 

Robert

Is this phone going to be able to unlock?! Better resell value if that happens =D

 

Sprint has said they will unlock iPhones after off contract or subsidies have been paid for.  But they say they are unable to get the iPhone to work on other domestic carriers due to OEM constraints beyond their control.  Currently, Sprint iPhones will only work internationally when SIM unlocked.  Sprint does commit to doing this on all future devices after February 2015, though.  That would not include the iPhone 6/6+, though.

 

Robert

 

For eligible devices, Sprint will unlock the SIM slot, to the extent that a device SIM slot is capable of being unlocked. It is important to note that not all devices are capable of being unlocked, often because of the manufacturers' device designs, and that even for those devices capable of being unlocked, not all device functionality may be capable of being unlocked. Specifically, devices manufactured with a SIM slot within the past three years (including, but not limited to, all Apple iPhone devices), cannot be unlocked to accept a different domestic carrier's SIM for use on another domestic carrier's network. Sprint has no technological process available to do this. In accordance with Sprint's voluntary commitment contained within CTIA's Consumer Code for Wireless Service ("Unlocking Commitment"), Sprint is working to ensure that all devices developed and launched on or after February 11, 2015, are capable of being unlocked domestically.

Apple's announced CA during the Keynote, it's also mentioned on their website. It is also in the FCC filings, but since there is no aggregation on the uplink, they haven't listed the results. The emission is exactly the same as the PCC on any two band combination.

 

What's really going to be useful for Sprint's users is access to iOS FieldTest.app, where we can see the amount of Tx antennas at the cell site. This way we can hunt for 8T8R sites that sites are transmitting in a 4x2 MIMO configuration.

 

To date, most of the FCC OET entries I've seen for Android devices entail the Carrier Aggregation bandwidth/bands supported.  It's too bad Apple did not do that as wel in their filingl.  But I suppose it's to be expected that they would not include data that is not required.

 

Robert

Small correction. iPhone 6 with MDM9625 is capable of aggregating two component carriers of unequal size, for example 10MHz + 5MHz.

 

I've gone through and could not find any CA testing on the Sprint variant at all.  So either Apple never bothered to even enable CA support in Model A1586/A1524 at all (even though the MDM9625 is capable) or they just never bothered to have it tested since none of the Providers using this model planned to offer CA in less than 20MHz total bonded carrier widths.

 

Since the MDM9625 is capable of supporting unequal size carrier bonding, I have edited the article accordingly.  Thanks.

Robert

 

Edit: Are there any other devices that have comparable RF performance for b41. 

 

For the most part, these EiRP results are pretty good, with the B41 being very good.

 

Robert

If sprint were to aggregate 2 PCS carriers...would the iPhone 6/6plus support it?

 

Yes, most likely.  But it will Sprint will have to complete the necessary upgrades to take their current B25 deployment to Release 10 in order to be able to make Carrier Aggregation possible for B25.

 

Currently, that would only be helpful in Chicago.  But more markets will have two B25 carriers into the Fall and Winter.  However, B41 will me available in most of those markets negating some of the benefits of B25 CA.

 

Robert

Small correction. iPhone 6 with MDM9625 is capable of aggregating two component carriers of unequal size, for example 10MHz + 5MHz. There are quite a few commercial AT&T units with the same chipset already aggregating 10+5 in selected markets..

 

Milan, I will go back and double check the OET documents.  I thought I read equal in the results.  In my haste to be quick, I may have misread or assumed.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

 

Robert

Any news on US Cellular and RRPP?

 

Nope.  Nothing yet.

What is sprints data limit on roaming the old 450 everything plan?  Went on a vacation roamed the whole time

 

300MB 1x/EVDO data roaming limit.  This article is just about RRPP LTE roaming, though.

So Marcelo Claure has his BMW in my shop right now having us install a radio... He already calls himself CEO. Thought it was funny.

 

That's what he is, isn't he?

 

Robert

Does Sprint have to pay a break-up fee and if so how much is it?

 

Sprint never formally bid for Tmo. They only had talks with them. So there is no break up fee to be paid.

 

Robert

Websites are claiming Marcelo Claure from brightstar will replace Hesse

 

It sure is looking that way.

 

Robert

Guess im going to pass on this one too. Will they ever make a tri-band SVLTE phone with a great radio? 

 

Sprint will not have any simulataneous voice and data on their devices until VoLTE.  Which, at earliest, would be Mid 2015.  And it would require a device upgrade.

 

Robert

So does this mean that the 2.5Ghz network won't be able to VoLTE with a Euro 2.5Ghz cell phone? Will it be possible to work through that?

 

VoLTE will be possible on B41 LTE.  It will just prioritize B25 or B26, whenever possible.  On a device that is only compatible on B41 while on the Sprint network, it will still do VoLTE on B41.

 

Robert

Are current generation phones that Sprint is selling capable of using its VoLTE when it arrives (eg G3, S5 etc) or will all new handsets be needed?

 

The exact details are not known.  However, some believe that a few of the new flagship devices may be upgradeable to VoLTE with a software update.  Since we don't know which models if any will be able to do that, I would count on needing to upgrade your device to use Sprint's VoLTE when it goes live in the future.

 

Robert

If I didn’t know anything about the RRPP, it would almost seem like requiring phones that connect to bands 2, 4, and 12 (in addition to the current bands) make it sound like Sprint is really banking on a merger with T-Mobile.

 

Killing two birds with one stone.  

Additionally, the cited article says this:

He added that Sprint’s measured approach to VoLTE did not mean that the carrier was not interested in the technology, only that it did not feel any need to rush into the market.“We will be more measured with our plans, working on it more behind the scenes,” Marquardt said.

He said they are being measured and behind the scenes with VoLTE. I think without really even reading between the lines this article still even corroborates that Sprint is moving forward with VoLTE, but they are just not prepared to talk about it yet.

 

The source we talked with kept repeating the same lines over again...'we are not going to rush this' and 'interoperability is the most important aspect, so we have to get this right.'

 

Robert

Then you see this kind of statement from a Sprint executive, and have absolutely no idea what to believe anymore:

 

 

Sprint keeps stressing over and over again publicly that they are not rushing into VoLTE. But the plans that were shared with me are detailed and from a solid internal high level source. The plan is real.

 

I think Sprint doesn't want to acknowledge them until the programming phase is complete and they are ready to announce VoLTE partners. Once they let the cat out of the bag, everybody will be harassing them about when and start getting out the measuring stick to see if they're behind schedule.

 

It looks like their strategy will be to disavow VoLTE and talk up their current HD Voice offerings on CDMA until they are ready to start releasing details and timelines.

 

Robert

Can anyone that has used 800Mhz LTE tell me if the coverage at least overlaps 1900Mhz 3G coverage? because if not, they will really be waiting until after the 600Mhz spectrum auctions to really have the same reliability as 1X in areas outside the cities.  

 

Based on reports we are getting from members, it definitely does not prior to optimization.  In areas that appear to be optimized to our members it is wildly variable.  Some are finding it slightly less than EVDO 1900.  Some about the same.  Some slightly more.

 

Given all the variables to deployments, I guess this is to be expected.  But in general, I think it's safe to summarize that when B26 (LTE 800) is fully optimized, it should provide a coverage area pretty similar to EVDO 1900.  But it probably will have a better signal indoors within that coverage area.  Especially close to the site.

 

I'll let others chime in if they have more to add about their B26 in their areas (after optimization).

 

Robert