mozamcrew

Frankly, I'd be happy to see HTC make modest camera and reception improvements with the M9 and A9 and get down to a $499 price point. You could make almost all the innards the same between the two models. Really the only difference would be if you want the fingerprint scanner you get the A series, and the M series for great audio (maybe a slightly nicer DAC and the continued front speakers) because you don't have room for the bottom speaker and the fingerprint scanner..

Hence why I mentioned 2020..

I missed the 2020 part apparently... but I think the CDMA sunset will take longer than everyone thinks. We are just now seeing Sprint deploy second carriers in markets where they have 15x15 of A-F PCS spectrum, so they are using about 10x10 still for CDMA. In a couple more years, they will probably get it down to 5x5 for CDMA as the LTE network gets more dense and more traffic moves off of CDMA. They probably won't be able to completely purge CDMA out of PCS until 2021-2023 at the earliest, a good 2-3 years after they get ubiquitous VoLTE support on new devices. But there will be a benefit of doing that, because they will be able to to 4x4 MIMO on PCS LTE once they complete that move. Whereas I don't think there is a similar benefit to removing that last 1x800 carrier, correct me if I'm wrong. So that last 1x800 carrier will certainly linger on even longer, maybe until almost 2030 just because the benefits of dropping that last carrier are so small, whereas the coverage benefits of keeping that one carrier alive are pretty big. 

I also think CDMA will stay in phones longer because there will be little reason to drop it from the phone. You are already seeing the price premium that Qualcomm can charge for CDMA drop. It will eventually disappear almost entirely, and once that is the case there will be little reason to drop CDMA support to save money. Plus I think people that live in rural areas, or other areas with marginal coverage, will appreciate having that support. It will be a value add for Qualcomm, rather than a premium product.

Just back from visiting Billings MT for a week.  Our Sprint iPhone 6 roamed PCS on SID 5230.   Worst cellular service I've ever experienced.  Failure to complete or receive calls.  Data didn't work at all despite the Sprint Extended 3G display.

 

Outbound calls frequently failed after a short beep sound.  Couldn't make SMS or iMessage work.  No data of any kind.

 

Weird and bad is what one sees there at the moment.  This is a far cry from the days we had the old Qwest sites marked as native and much of Alltel marked as native.  Roaming or no for billing sake, the network in Billings is very definitely broken.  

 

The only saving grace is we had WiFi much of the time, and enabled WiFi calling or it would of been even more ridiculous than it was.   Anyway, sad to see things decline to the current level.  

 

-Dan

You should have been able to roam on Verizon 1x CDMA for calls and SMS.... or maybe Sagebrush Cellular.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/5684-sprint-to-join-rural-operators-roaming-hub-cca-and-rrpp-thread/?p=303898

http://www.nemont.net/pdfs/Nemont-local-wireless-coverage.pdf

Do you have Boost/Virgin mobile instead of Postpaid Sprint, or maybe you had roaming disabled on your phone?

Latest versions of LTE standard's allow smaller chunks of Spectrum to be used, so in theory once CDMA is decommissioned they could potentially use this small slither to deliver VoLTE.

I totally get that you could deploy a 1.4Mhz LTE carrier, but when you look at the coverage benefits of that single 1x800 for voice and SMS, versus the tiny amount of capacity it would provide if converted to LTE, you might as well hold onto that last 1x800 until CDMA is pretty much completely gone from the pool of phones. 

600Mhz would bring nothing new to the table. I understand Tmobile's position on needing some more spectrum, but again, 600Mhz for Sprint is a waste of time and money.

 

Unless its a sizable chunk (20Mhz+ acquired nationally) I just dont see the cost+benefit of it for Sprint.

 

Explain to me how this would be better than Sprint's current nationwide 800Mhz, which by the time 600Mhz is deployable (2019-2020) Sprint would be able to refarm 1x to LTE.

I don't see the point of refarming the single 1x carrier in 800 to LTE. It's just not going to provide that much bandwidth. I guess in markets where you have enough 800 Mhz spectrum to do a 5x5 and a 3x3 of LTE 800, then it might be worth it. But if I were Sprint, I would completely eliminate CDMA in PCS and have a very dense network before I thought about removing the single 1x800 carrier. Voice and SMS continuity are important too.

Duck bill

compound fracture

I assume they wanted to get the LTE on the air in ERIE for license protection reasons...

Looks like Marquette is roaming plus to me at least in town.

Quick question so I'm going to Marquette MI to see my lady next month but it's outside Sprint coverage area, voice coverage it says roaming plus and data it says off network. So if I use data and my phone says extended 3G(iPhone 6S plus) will it count against my data plan ? I have unlimited data ? Also I want to add her to my account but her school is there, if she's roaming all the time will they automatically cancel that line ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try setting the data map to "3G & more" and look again.

wet wipe

I was in Fargo and you are right, I looked at my signal check logs, the site by the EastTen Mall is running band 41.

going crazy

Drum Line

I'm guessing that's from the Clearwire protection site..

Frankly. Just updating the M9 with a better front camera and improved base band for 3xCA would be enough to get me on the M10. I really like the M8. The M9 was supposed to be the M8 with better camera and 2xCA, but it sounds like the camera hardware still isn't very good.

Hand Check

Film Strip

Big Fish

That is simply not true. Find an example in the history of the world in which a company achieves and Maintains a monopoly for nearly sixty years without the force of government regulation? There is no evidence Ma bell would have achieved a monopoly on its own. None.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You might want to reread my post. We seem to be in agreement, even though you begin by saying my post is simply not true...

Look you can argue whether or not consumers are better off with regulated monopolies (like many states still have with electricity and landline phones), or with a less heavily regulated system (anti-collusion and other general laws only) where you avoid total monopoly in most markets but still have probably have a handful of competitors at best. But I think either way, providers with that kind of power shouldn't be legally allowed use that power in one market to disadvantage competitors in another area.

The point is that Ma Bell wouldn't have HAD that monopoly without the regulations to begin with. It could be argued that Telco competition would have emerged earlier had it not been for that regulation. Yes the government did eventually get around to splitting up the company, but I don't think that's clear evidence that the regulation resulted in a more competitive market than a less regulated market would.

I guess I'm OK with what TMUS is doing from a legal perspective, even though I also think it's a back-door anti-consumer ploy to drive up what their customers are paying, just like most of their so-called Uncarrier campaign. They don't own any content themselves, and thus they aren't leveraging their position as the ISP to disadvantage competing content. Also, any company that wants to install a CDN server (content distribution node/network) in a TMUS data center can avail themselves of this preferential treatment.

My argument has always been that the solution to this mess isn't so-called net neutrality regulation, it's getting telcos out of the content business. That way, you eliminate the incentive to give their own content special treatment.

This is precisely what I was afraid of, even testing software is no longer accurate because certain servers aren't "whitelisted" by Tmobile. FCC needs to deal with this before it gets out of hand. 

 

People are already complaining about the Tunein app requiring the "Premium" version on BingeOn. So much for "free" stuff.

You notice those of us that paid for the pro version of TuneIn have had previously free streaming content, content that already contained ads, suddenly converted in to "premium" subscription content....

But Sprint hasn't tuned band 26 for coverage yet. It is being used for capacity, at least in Maryland it is. It has barely better range outdoors than band 25, but it does work significantly better indoors in that area. I would expect Sprint to shift band 26 for coverage soon hopefully since 2xCA is live in my area.

I wouldn't say it's being used for capacity, so much as it is being used for in building coverage, hence why you don't see much better range. The network will move users to band 26 if band 25 gets too full, but the idea is if band 26 starts to fill up, it means you need more density.