mozamcrew

I agree that as long as Sprint keeps up with its network and keeps the value there for its customers, it will remain strong. They don't need to be as big as Verizon, that we just hurt them in the end since they will become that big monster in the cell industry that dominates everyone and has capacity concerns. Sprint has always been known to have good voice and has lead the industry in adopting the latest technology. Once they finish with their Network Vision modernization and keep up with their network from there, their "luster" will be a given.

I have a simlar attitude. Sprint should take an incremental approach to expanding their coverage footprint, and not moving to cover vast new swaths of territory (They have enough expansion to do in MT and SD/ND to cover their PCS G buildout requirements). They should try to fill in gaps in their existing coverage areas and move slowly outward from them based which areas will provide the biggest reductions in roaming costs.

You know they have the tech to deliver internet via power lines, but the telecom put a hush on it because it's more than what they can do with their copper and cable...or it was, I'm not sure how fast it could get, but it was on up there...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_over_power_lines

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4

I thought the amateur radio guys killed it because of interference?

Not sure why Sprint just made an "announcement" now. This information has been available for a few weeks via letters sent to affected customers. The January 31 date is when USCC devices in Chicago will go dead, but USCC has already begun shutting down some of their sites, with nearby Sprint sites then deploying that spectrum. I'm not sure if Sprint is just using it to add voice (1xA) carriers or expanding Ev-DO as well. 

I'd guess another 5x5 of LTE first, then some EVDO or 1x carriers with the leftovers?

The answer is on the sponsor map.

Yeah, I thought of that right after I asked the question.

By the way for those that are interested, Sprint now has 3g service at Stennis Space Center.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4

I'm glad you got some coverage there! Did they add a site there, or is the coverage a result of improved range from NV?

 

Anyone able to identify anything good on this tower?

 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 4

Where is this one at?

I don't know about other markets, but it's actually a rather large problem here in West Michigan, along with other things only corporate stores can do. There are 21 stores in the "Greater Grand Rapids" area. 4 are corporate stores. 81% of stores around here shrug and say "Yeah we can't do that." Most people have no idea the difference, and assume, since there's the Sprint logo on the wall, it's all the same.

 

People will complain about just about anything, especially a 10 minute drive inconvenience.

The frustrating part is being in a market where there just AREN'T any corporate stores unless you want to drive for 2 or more hours.

To my knowledge, Japan is the only country that allows use of channel 14.  Even then, it is limited to 802.11b.  No 802.11g, nor 802.11n.  This is likely because Globalstar is licensed that spectrum for satellite usage worldwide.  So, no, one more non overlapping channel would not make our unlicensed ISM 2.4 GHz band more like that of other countries.

 

AJ

You're right! My bad.

This week FM will be switching on network vision. The next 4 nights there will be some hand-off issues between towers impaired service etc. (I would imagine for a time after that if they are readjusting towers) Tower updates have been happening all month and we are finally starting to see some progress. LTE will soon follow. Then 800 LTE will follow that. - IN THEORY this will be a whole new network. Time will tell - 

Have you been involved in this tower work by chance?

This week FM will be switching on network vision. The next 4 nights there will be some hand-off issues between towers impaired service etc. (I would imagine for a time after that if they are readjusting towers) Tower updates have been happening all month and we are finally starting to see some progress. LTE will soon follow. Then 800 LTE will follow that. - IN THEORY this will be a whole new network. Time will tell - 

I plan on being up the Fargo area on Sept 7th and 8th. Hopefully it will all be working swimmingly by then!

Like I said, one more non overlapping channel (channel 14) would not solve any unlicensed 2.4 GHz congestion problems.  It would be like putting a band aid on a bayonet wound.

 

AJ

I guess the question is how much benefit you get from going from 3 to 4 non overlapping channels. Surely there would be SOME benefit to having an additional channel. Maybe it's not the money (how much would that additional channel help with congestion at the cost of billions of dollars). But it would make our unlicenced band more like other countries, and it has the advantage of being usable by existing devices with a simple software update. Perhaps a spectrum swap is in order?

What good would that accomplish?  Globalstar would want billions of dollars for the spectrum, and three additional unlicensed 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi channels, all of which overlap, would not solve any problems.

 

AJ

I thought channels 1,6, 11, and 14 were not overlapping using 20 Mhz channels (which is what 802.11g uses) N adds the option of doing 40 Mhz channels, but most of those are on the 5Ghz band since most multiband routers use 20Mhz channels on 2.4 for compatibility with older gear. So doing this would give you one more non overlapping channel  (And most gear supports this since in most countries those channels are part of the unlicensed spectrum)

How about the FCC buy back the spectum currently licensed for chanels 12-14 so we can use that spectrum like everyone else?

 

AJ

Naturally, it's the loose customers they have the best chance of picking up .

And they will steal them back.

That's true, but Verizon and ATT have much farther to fall. If Sprint can have a competitive network and competative pricing, they will gain more customers than they loose.

Let's face it. The US market is mature, no more Nextel subscribers to poach. Once Sprint gets its network house in order, that source will dry up as well. The market will reach some sort of equilibrium. So the only way to acquire subscribers is through acquisitions.

Or you can steal customers from other carriers over time....

simplesam, on 20 Aug 2013 - 5:04 PM, said:

 

It is because so many people stream Spotify and Slacker and other music and video programs that the service is overloaded. Along with Sprint's less than optimal licenses in Chicago.

Once Sprint is able to use the spectrum that USCC sold it (after USCC's network in the area gets shut down) its spectrum situation will improve dramatically in Chicago.

I see you throw this around non-stop.

 

Yeah, shame on T-Mobile for doing the backhaul years ago in a timely manner. They should had let their network deteriorate so that when they decided to do LTE and had to deal with a complete network overhaul while their customers suffered then you could applaud them.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4

No, the point is that comparing the speed of Sprint's LTE rollout to T-Mobile's LTE rollout isn't an apples to apples comparison. Sprint is doing it on nearly EVERY site (even their rural ones unlike TMO which is still 2G EDGE in like half of their territory), and they aren't just adding LTE, they are upgrading their 3G equipment as part of the process and running proper backhaul.

I'll throw on another one I may have mentioned before- phone unlocking. Obviously with the GSM carriers this has never really been much of an issue, but now with VZW shipping their LTE phones SIM unlocked (with no remaining block against domestic carriers) because of an FCC mandate, only Sprint and perhaps a couple of the smaller CDMA carriers continue to cling to their phone ESN whitelists. For example, there was no reason they couldn't activate USCC phones for 1x/3G service in Chicago after that sale closed, other than to sell more phones and lock people into contracts. Kind of silly of them, since many device subsidies would have gone unused and made those accounts more profitable.

On one hand I'm with you about the unlocking in general. But I also see why Sprint would want to force them onto Sprint devices. Sprint wants customers to buy devices that support all of its bands both because it's better for Sprint's network, and because it will improve the experience for the customer. There are plenty of cheep/free dumbphones they can get at no cost, and USCC hadn't rolled out LTE in those markets because they didn't have enough spectrum to do so. USCC customers shouldn't have to pay anything for their phones, unless they are upgrading from a dumb phone to something that now will be able to use LTE on Sprint.

Can any phone do a handoff between 800 and 1900 w/o dropping a call?

I think that might be more of an artifact of some sites being legacy 1900 and the 800 sites all being network vision. The problem isn't with the frequencies themselves, but with the coordination between the basestations.

ATT ???probably??? wont even deploy WCS everywhere, not even as widely as VZW is deploying AWS.

I wonder what the buildout requirements for WCS are?

 

It may work that way in the future, but it sure is not working that way now. Right now, you will stay on whichever frequency that you happen to be currently using(either 800 or 1900). You will stay there until something causes your phone to need to scan for a network.  If you happen to visit an area with poor coverage and happen to lose a call because of the poor coverage, your phone will then search and possibly place you on the other frequency if it is available.

But as more 800 coverage rolls out, phones will tend to park on 800 since it's first in on the list and has equal priority to PCS. Once your phone starts parking on 800, it will keep doing it until you hit an area, like the IBEZ, where you don't have any 800 coverage, then it will look for PCS or roaming of some kind.

Doubtful. Depending on the PRL it'll just scan occasionally for an 800 signal but will otherwise stay on 1900.

I don't think 800 is on a higher priority, It's just listed first on the PRL. So it's not going to jump from 1900 to 800 unless the 1900 signal gets too weak or it is forced in some other way to start from the top of the PRL and work down. Once you park on one frequency natively you will tend to stay on it until you are forced to jump back. If you are roaming it will periodically keep looking for a native signal, or at least a nonnative signal with a higher priority than your current one. My guess is eventually most Sprint phones will park on 800 to preserve battery, but will utilize PCS and BRS/EBS when they actually need a channel if the signal is strong enough.

VZW AWS in SOME markets? It has AWS everywhere. They also bought spectrumco licenses.

 

http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99&p=1495

 

What I don't get is why VZW doesn't densify like ATT.

I has it in MOST markets now with that purchase.

You will see a giant hole in West Texas and also in the WY,MT, ND, SD area as well, though admittedly those areas probably don't have many areas where VZW is spectrum constrained to begin with. They could probably use Cell and PCS in those areas for LTE offload. I was trying to point out that the other carriers don't have 3 and 4 bands they can put LTE on yet. They have 1 (TMO) or two (ATT and VZW in most markets).

It's not on the Nextel map

I well then I wonder if the antennas and RRUs are for ATT (I think the bottom rack is VZ) Tmo is all EDGE here so I don't think it's them.