mozamcrew

I still can't believe Craig Bohl left for Wyoming. He probably could have gotten a better job if he had waited.

Are you saying the Husker fans still don't like Bo ....

I still can't believe Craig Bohl left for Wyoming. He probably could have gotten a better job if he had waited.

Well, there are rumors that Wyoming wants to move to the Big 12 long term, but first they need a competitive team. Also, I think he likes the area/culture and thinks it's a good fit for him. 

Ah OK, that context gives that post a lot more context

I was posting from my phone, and I was going to try to include a picture, but I couldn't get it resized.

I was at the North Dakota State vs. Costal Carolina Quarter final playoff game yesterday. It was on ESPN, and it turned into a beatdown.

March Is On! Beatdown On ESPN!

You can set your phone to LTE only, and you'll connect to LTE (But you can't make or recieve calls or text). 

Yup, that's because of eCSFB. There is a good article about this on The Wall. This is why the focus has shifted to getting sites 3G completed in Minneapolis. They want to get this fixed. This is only an issue for those with newer triband phones, since they don't do SVLTE.

I've asked this a couple times, but I'm still wondering if anyone has any information about improvements in downtown Minneapolis.  Over the past couple of weeks it seems like things have gotten worse.  I was outside the other day and took a speed test while connected to LTE, and here are my results ( http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/a/672474659 ).  Do you think this is due to congestion?  It is not my intention to complain, i'm just looking for information.

Any sites still with eCSFB issues won't let you connect to them over LTE, as a result of that, and the ongoing NV work in MPLS, you might be seeing some issues.

I hope that they push their way into Grand Forks before winter really sets in.

I think Grand Forks is 3G upgraded. So all the antennas and RRUs are up already. They just need to get backhaul connected so they can turn on LTE.

Check out this awfully camouflaged AT&T tower in Lafayette, LA.

They should put some christmas lights on that thing! I mean they have to run power to it anyhow.

I was able to stream Netflix over Sprint 3G while at work whenever the Comcast business class internet was down. I know that average speeds aren't going to be much over 1-1.5 Mbps steady while streaming. I never had any buffering problems then, so I know 720p video can definitely be fine over 1mbps.

 

And all of you are lucky. My Comcast internet is 25 Mbps down/6 up and it costs about $85/month with taxes and fees if you don't also subscribe to cable service. This doesn't include the $11/month to rent a modem. Kinda ridiculous when I was able to buy a brand new Motorola cable modem on eBay for $46.

 

Back on topic. I still think the always on icon is being over zealous right now. Perhaps when "Spark" is at a 60-80% completion rate, but as of right now it is only a half dozen markets with islands of band 41 and band 26 not online currently. Right now it will just do Sprint more harm than good. They made such a grand claim to the speed and capacity of their new "Spark" network and right now "reporters" are connecting to vanilla PCS and proclaiming Sprint as making yet another empty promise.

I'm paying $75 for DSL that is 25 down/3 up. I will say it doesn't seem to suffer from the peak congestion issues that I used to see with cable. I care more that those advertised speeds are sustainable than the supposed "burst" speed they offer.

AJ, do you think Verizon still releases SVLTE devices since they don't have LTE Release 9 or 10 which contains the eCSFB "handover" method and haven't deployed eCSFB on a nationwide scale yet.  I know Verizon first deployed LTE on LTE Release 8 which only has the eCSFB "redirection" method which wasn't ideal and going forward the "handover" method is preferred. 

 

If Verizon doesn't have eCSFB deployed on its LTE towers at this time that could explain why they still release dual radio LTE phones. Are we sure the reason for Verizon SVLTE phone is as simple as just dual band vs. triband LTE issue?  Like if Verizon deployed LTE on PCS and had 700/AWS/PCS LTE, would that automatically force Verizon to deploy single radio LTE phones? I think we know why Sprint is moving towards single radio LTE phones because they have LTE Release 9 software and are making and paying for the steps now to be more compliant with VoLTE as well as build the S102 tunnel. 

It's not JUST that it's triband, it's that the third band is using TD-LTE.

Since you mentioned the voice enhancement button - I tried it. 

 

I found out that during a crackling call, if I enabled "voice enhancement", the crackling stopped.  It appeared to me that the volume was lower as well.  When I disabled "voice enhancement", the crackling started again.  It doesn't seem logical that the volume would be lower with "voice enhancement" enabled, but I do think it was.  I'd have to check some white noise with a decibel level meter. 

 

At this point it appeared in my test that enabling "voice enhancement", stopped the annoying crackling phenomenon.  Hmmmmm?

Maybe if you have "voice enhancement" off, instead of using the aux microphone pickup for noise cancelation like it would with voice enhancement on, it actually picks up sounds on it instead of shutting it off. Depending on how you are holding the handset, it might produce a "crackling" sound.

so im pretty sure the apple phones dont have SVLTE. but someone correct me if im wrong. anyways just curious, if thats the case why are these phone not having issues with connecting to LTE like the triband phones are?

 

thanks

If you look at post #367 on this thread, AJ explains why. Bascially, the CDMA version of the iPhone drops back to CDMA manually every few seconds to make sure it doesn't have any incoming calls/texts (only for fractions of a second though, so you don't notice), rather than relying on CSFB/eCSFB telling the phone to drop back.

Did I get that right AJ?

Looks to me like the entire Dakotas market is now 3G complete. Now they just need to get LTE and 1x800 completed!

we just recently had 5 new towers go live with 800, i can connect to it just fine, either using the sprint PRL or digi's, but everytime i go to make a phone call it will dial while on 800 but as soon as the call is connected it punts me over to 1xRTT. this is with any kind of signal strength on 800, and usually the 1xRTT that it switches me over to is a worse signal strength. does this mean they are still working on something? testing it? other?

I think Sprint's strategy with 1x800 is to have phones try to "Park" on that frequency (to avoid roaming and save your battery) but shunt you over to 1XRTT/PCS when you are on a call (assuming you have acceptable signal on PCS). Triband phones will park on LTE carriers, instead of CDMA carriers, of course (while SVLTE phones are parked on both simultaneously). 

1x is a digital system, so having 5 bars instead of 2 bars isn't going to make your phone call any better, what IS important is being able to maintain a minimum signal level at all times. With digital you don't have a gradual degredation, you either have "enough", or not enough signal at any given moment in time.

Except that they don't have to worry about it. They are allowed a territory and a power limit. It's not like they afre building a cellular network.

Well they may not have a choice, but it does limit who can recieve their broadcast over the air.

Guess I have the opposite problem in my terrain/area.  VHF stations are PITA to receive correctly, they didn't let them allocate enough power.  Some stations went back and added more power but many did not.  UHF stations just work.  Point the antenna and that's it.  VHF..not so much.   It's the exact reason one station around here was on 8 and temporarily on 29 for DT operations/transition.  They opted to go to 8 for DT.  Tons of customers started complaining in town.  They got a waiver to do 8 and 29 DT for a while and finally opted to go back with 29 since it allowed them to have more power and better signal in town with less interference.  Channel 9 in Baton Rouge wouldn't do a interference agreement with them on 8 to increase more power since WAFB wanted to stay on the "enough" flea power of 5kw.  I've installed many OTA solutions in the area and downright hate dealing with VHF stations.  Those full power 1000kw UHF stations are a breath of fresh air!

Like any other lower frequency spectrum, the advantage of VHF is that it has better range in theory, and the trouble is that it has better range in theory.

Let's just say there's very complex alliances being formed behind the scenes for the 600 mhz spectrum auction. 700 A-B (B12) is of no use to anyone now especially since USCC is moving to Band 5 LTE (CLR850) with over 90% of their network refarmed and broadcasting that spectrum. 

USCC still owns a ton of 700Mhz A spectrum. I don't think that they've given up on it, they just decided to move first on their Cell spectrum because it doesn't have any issues with channel 51 and they don't have to deal with the lack of band 12 equipment. Those two issues will soon be solved though. Sprint and ATT have both committed to support band 12 on devices, and channel 51 will have to be cleared before you have even have a 600Mhz auction.

It will be interesting to see how much they can pack down to in some markets as some already jammed packed like in the northeast due to the density of people.

 

I use OTA daily for TV viewing and hope it doesn't have any negative impact on it. Please, no more VHF stations as DTV should have never allowed those to be used.

 If stations are willing to MOVE from the top of the UHF band down into VHF then that's fine by me. I realize it's not ideal in the northeast since you don't WANT that added range, but those of us living in the boonies appreciate the range of VHF stations.

Band 12 will become usable the moment channel 51 is cleared. and Channel 51 wil be cleared 1st. So if Sprint can buy both A and B then they could have a very usable spectrum band. Sprint/Softbank needs to start thinking strategically for once.

ATT has a pretty solid stranglehold on the B block.

I'm nitpicking here but they don't own ANY E block IIRC (it's locked in Ergen's dungeon) and their B and C blocks, while quite extensive, has some huge holes in it.

According to the spectrum map, ATT has the E block in the NY/Boston area and the LA/SF area. I take your meaning though, the vast majority is Echostar.

 

I think we are getting ahead of ourselves. Even with Verizon, Tmobile, and Att's 700Mhz A, it would not be anywhere close to nationwide.  It would not completely solve the IBEZ problem at either border. 

 

 

 

Here's another map that might be helpful, but I like yours too. http://specmap.sequence-omega.net/

Here's what I think are the advantages of buying up the 700Mhz A block from VZW/ATT/TMUS vs the 600 Mhz auction.

- The 600Mhz is unstandardized for LTE by 3GPP (The IBEZ for 800 will be fixed long before 600Mhz is ready to deploy)

- No guarantee that the broadcasters will move, thus in some markets you might have very little spectrum to bid on and will be in a bidding war with TMUS (who is more desperate for the spectrum than you are). Thus you wind up paying WAY too much or risk not getting any spectrum in some markets. The broadcasters already HAVE to move off of the 700 lower A block. (A bird in hand is worth 2 in the bush)

- You don't have to deploy equipment or buy licenses (lower initial spend) for the areas controlled by USCC and Cspire. You already have LTE and CDMA roaming deals with these carriers that are better than what you have from VZW. 

- VZW wants to get rid of their lower 700 A licenses because of their AWS purchase agreements, TMUS because they only hold a single license and probably could use the cash in the 600 Mhz auction, ATT/LEAP because they only have two licenses and they have so much other spectrum (Cell, 700 Lower BCDE, AWS, PCS, and WCS). Given that these sellers are motivated, you'd hope that Sprint can get these licenses for a lot less that what it was planning to spend in the 600 Mhz auction. Especially if they know that is will help keep Sprint out of the 600 Mhz auction and maybe free up some cap space for the AWS3 1755-1780/2155-2180 auction. 

- Sprint has already committed to devices that allow band 12 roaming in the future. http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20130418/carriers/cca-spring-2013-sprint-nextel-moves-enable-lte-roaming/

If you can avoid 600Mhz, that's one less band to pack into your phones.

Picked up an LTE signal for the first time today. Want very strong, but it was definitely faster than 3g. Must have picked up the tower north of town for a bit, instead of the one closer to me. Back on the closer tower now though, which is still 3g.

With a device like the One (SVLTE) it's possible for your LTE to be coming from one tower while your 3G is coming from another.

Do you guys think Sprint may make a bid on 700 MHz A block spectrum or just hope for a decent amount of 600 MHz spectrum to free up for auction? In the Fiercewireless article the Sprint CFO made it clear that Sprint was focusing on obtaining more low band spectrum so the only options right now are the 600 MHz auction and pieces of the 700 MHz A block from Verizon.

 

Sprint definitely could make use of that 700 MHz A block spectrum licenses from Verizon in the OC/south LA and San Diego areas due to the ongoing Mexico IBEZ issue which will cripple the amount of 800 MHz that can be deployed later on.  Also Detroit could make use of the 700 MHz A block spectrum licenses from Verizon due to the Canada IBEZ restrictions. Verizon also have 700 MHz A block licenses in some other large markets in the US.

I'd be in favor of Sprint skipping the 600 Mhz auction, buying Verizon's 700Mhz A block spectrum, and then signing LTE roaming agreements/deployment agreements with the small regional carriers that own the rest of it. Who knows how much spectrum will actually be available for the 600Mhz auction.

I'm trying to sift through all the pages of this thread to find an answer, but haven't been successful just yet. I have a Nexus 5. LTE is not yet officially live in my area (Fargo, ND) but some towers are up and running. I have the same handoff issues and no LTE unless forced as most others. The sponsor map shows they already completed 3G upgrades in this area (red pins) but most towers also broadcast 800SMR. I believe we have legacy Ericsson and NV Samsung here.

 

Is this information sufficient enough to determine the fate of my N5 LTE experience at this point, or do I need to wait it out longer to see? Can I write this off as potential LTE launch and issues or is it likely something more long term? Too soon to tell?

 

I'd like to know if I should sell my GS4 o hold on to it so I can taste the delicious forthcoming LTE.

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Since the Fargo area is 3G complete, there shouldn't be any legacy issues. You will have LTE issues since they are in the middle of testing and adding LTE to those sites. I don't think this is related to the CSFB issues, though you could verify that by going back and checking it out with a single band LTE device.  Update: There MIGHT be issues with software at the MSC I guess, but again, most likely once you lose LTE your phone might take a while to pick it up again.