S4GRU

It should be. The densest LTE deployment, with half the customers of the big two. And also, Sprint has more options to deploy additional LTE carriers at their sites. Much more options than VZW and AT&T, Robert

1. Metro PCS, has 1/30th the amount of markets Sprint does, and each of their markets has 1/4 the number of sites. Also, Metro PCS LTE runs between 1-4Mbps on average. Verizon and AT&T started their deployments sooner, also they are just doing an overlay of their existing network, and only deployed on half their sites with really low signal density. This is a fast, but inferior way to deploy. Sprint is upgrading it's entire network, nationwide. Every single site will get LTE. This takes more time, but will have a much more dense LTE network that will handle more users and allow for LTE performance to stay high for much longer. Sprint cannot start work in this market yet. They will not for a few more months. If Sprint doesn't meet your needs, then go. But you will have to give something up. Slower LTE speeds or data caps. But whining about it here will not make it faster. It is impossible at this point to move up the start date. 2. This is incorrect. First, Sprint has no Central Valley market. Only an Upper Valley market and Lower Valley market. And neither has started deployment. Sprint has no 4G LTE service in any of the Central Valley market. You are likely confusing with Clearwire's 4G WiMax network that Sprint customers can use. If so, did you know that Clearwire had their 4G WiMax network live in those communities in the Central Valley before Sprint even started selling 4G devices? Clearwire deployed there to serve their customers, but allow Sprint customers to use the network in those locations. You are making faulty assumptions that Sprint is selecting some smaller cities over you. If you are going to makes accusations in this forum, you will need to know what you're talking about. If you don't know something, then you should have a much friendlier attitude and say what you think and state them as opinion instead of trying to spew incorrect assumptions as fact. Additionally, the other markets Sprint that are currently being deployed in are ready now. Should Sprint wait and hold them to start, because you feel more entitled? Get real, and get over yourself. The Upper Valley market is not ready now, but will be soon. 3. Sprint will have active LTE service in Sacramento start to come live in the Spring. It will launch long before 2014. Just more mistaken assumptions on your part that you try to pass off as facts. This is not the Sprint community forums. Real facts reign here. Either get on board with reality, or go somewhere else. We don't tolerate trolls in our forums. Robert

People who unauthorized tether tend to be heavy users. It only takes a couple of these people per sector of a site to absolutely destroy the experience for everyone. If they were tethering and just using Facebook, it wouldn't be a problem. That's why Sprint enacted caps on even authorized tethering. I have a VZW hotspot and if I just use it for casual browsing and S4GRU usage, I use 2-3GB per month. I once let my kids watch Netflix on it and it used almost 3GB in 90 minutes. The problem is abusers. Abusers tend to abuse. Granted, smartphone streaming may end up being a long term problem too. But it is currently allowed. And Sprint will be able to sustain it for awhile if people only use it when actually mobile. Smartphone streaming using LTE in your home is irresponsible in my opinion when you have WiFi available. But that is a whole 'nother subject. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

75% of Chicago market sites have received Network Vision upgrades. 46% have 4G LTE formally accepted as complete from Sprint. 55% of Baltimore market sites have received NV upgrades. 28% have 4G LTE formally accepted as complete. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

We have 10 sites with 4G LTE active in the Norfolk market. You can see them in our Sponsor maps. For more info about becoming a S4GRU Sponsor: http://s4gru.com/ind...come-a-sponsor/ Robert

Someone in the Milwaukee market should start doing permit searches and mapping like our Phoenix members are doing. I bet permitting is already underway. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Yes. Santa Cruz will be in today's update later today. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Not quite. We could call it indirect fiber. I have copper from my box into the house. About a 250' run. Also, Windstream does not offer fiber residential service. All their residential service is maxed at 12Mbps/768kbps around the country, even if it is capable of greater speeds. Supposedly, Windstream is going to increase those caps to 24/2 in places that can support it. Which I assume mine can since I have fiber to the Windstream box out on the highway. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

They look like they could be to me. Center panels looks like it could be NV before RRU install. You can see they are not even complete with cabling, yet. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Sprint only owns backbone now. Their local branch fiber networks went to Embarq and now in the hands of Century Link. Century Link treats Sprint like any other carrier. No preference whatsoever. Sprint's currently owned backhaul is convenient to less than 10% of their sites. So roughly 35,000 of their sites are going to have varyingly difficult connections that would have to be made. From 10 miles to hundreds of miles. Can you imagine installing 10-250 miles fiber cables to 35,000 sites? It would take billions of dollars and 5+ years. Or, a smarter and less expensive plan for Sprint is to have other companies install backhaul to these 35,000 sites that are far away from their backbone and have that backhaul be a Ethernet bridge to your backbone? This is what Sprint is doing. It's cheaper and faster to do. It actually makes a lot of sense. And it offers tremendous operational savings over all the T1's Sprint has been using. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Also unauthorized tetherers do plenty of video streaming as well. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

hanger steak Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Tethering is a problem. People who tend to unauthorized tether on the network tend do some very abusive things. It doesn't take many abusers per sector to ruin the experience for others. Severe streaming is a problem too. Is it worse, or will be worse

Click on the link: http://s4gru.com/index.php?/gallery/image/156-nationwide-sprint-market-map-medium/ When you see the map, click on it to enlarge. Where did you see an official Sprint rollout date of Q1-2013? Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

They really don't know. Network Vision subcontractors work on the very next ready site where infrastructure, backhaul and permitting are complete. The sites in your area are not specifically being skipped. They will be worked on the moment they are ready. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

And those people who support it are wrong. Authorized tethering comes with caps. They can use their data for whatever they want to up to their cap. Unauthorized tethering is not allowed and invites abuse of the network which will reduce performance for everyone. Sprint is counting it can support smartphone unlimited data, but they cannot support unlimited tethering. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

It is highly unlikely that any work will begin in the Honolulu market in the next 3 months. However, there have been a few market surprises by Alcatel Lucent. But I wouldn't hold out hope. Sounds like putting Sprint on seasonal hold and doing something else temporarily may work well in your instance. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

pencil pusher Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

That's part of it. However, most LTE sites are set with downtilt up to ten degrees higher to maximize coverage. When the adjacent sites come online, they can remotely turn down the downtilt to design parameters. This will allow signals to get denser and stronger. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Sounds like your site may have a backhaul choke point. I've never had such low speeds from such a strong signal. I would say I averaged 25-35Mbps with that signal strength in all my testing. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Probably not. The Wesley Chapel/Land o Lakes site is in a more rural area. It has to cover more square mileage between sites, so it is deployed higher with panels pointed with little downtilt. More suburban and urban sites are designed for capacity and this have more downtilt and cover much less area (on average). Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

Grease Lightning Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

It's not everywhere. But it's covering more than any other large city in America, except for possibly Chicago. Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

grease fire Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk

We talk about the signal bars indicator not showing LTE strength in this thread. http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/2040-bars-lie-for-lte-signal-strength-how-to-determine-your-actual-lte-signal-strength/ Robert via Samsung Note II via Tapatalk