Mobilesolutions

No, T-Mobile is dead without me.

Ouch if I got a personal title it would probably be "bugsAJalot"

I have combined 68 MHZ spectrum some sub GHz and some above 2ghz.

What do you mean? I have plenty.

A hybrid technology is what comes next. Its better than Wimax for fixed wireless and performance like LTe A for mobile.

That's when it becomes acceptable to me. When its in your backyard whether underground or if engineered properly on large poles.

Are you talking about the last mile of the network being above ground or main transport lines throughout town? Both are still unnaceptable in any case. Fiber should be trenched to termination for any FTTX application. Then you have wireless, which should be coming from a fully underground network, though wireless is not going to give (average customers) consistent speeds in excess of 50mbps...which a fiber fed customer will likely not "tolerate" for a home connection.

If i lived closer I'd let you borrow mine.

You should have mapped it! We would have had a solid line from OKC to Wichita!

Depends who is providing the circuit, I know i have seen price sheets where 100mbps is $1100 month and a gigabit is $1900.

sprint does not need more than 100mbps at each site yet, unless that site is the master for wireless backhauled sites around it.

I say watch what goes on in the NV complete maps since your a sponsor, and switch over to a Tri-band device this fall.

Perhaps i'm staring further down the road. I just mean there is more spectrum deployment on the way, and i see no end to this.

Any idea on their channel configurations for multi antenna sectors? I would assume an A-B setup is still typical.

There is still money to be made. I have a different plan to build places like Africa, without terrestrial antennas

attempting to rob candy from little school children. At least now Sprint will have an increasingly robust network to advertise.

I'd rather push Sprint to the top than save T-Mobile from sinking...Aj.

O MY O MY O MY That sounds like an overstatement of Sprint's resources.

Sorry, i guess that's just what popped into my mind when i thought of adding more coverage. For now Sprint doesn't need to buy anybody, though making some "strategic partnerships" may give them the upper hand ushering in the next era of wireless.

I think not. Sprint will have enough spectrum to play with that it wont be a "need." IF a company like nTelos bars Sprint from entry into that market then i could see Sprint making a play at them. 2.5/6 Ghz will not boost coverage. If you looked at the total coverage area on a heat map for 800,1900,2600 Mhz you would see 800 will provide "stronger" signal within the coverage zone and increase the coverage "bubble" that already exists from 1900. If you look at Sensorly compare Verizon's coverage to Sprints; VZW has a much darker purple. Sprint's 800 will do the same for their maps since at that point we will have signal from Sprint everywhere within the coverage zone, and Sprint has site spacing equally as tight as Verizon where i live. 2.6 is not a coverage booster, it has less reach and significantly lower propagation "power" than 1900mhz even. It is simply for capacity.

Seems like something we could add to the existing NV complete map under the "New adds" section.

I only have one city in PA as of right now on my list. Kempton is well over 100 miles from the nearest switching center i have access to. Looks like you will be missed in round 1. Hope is not lost however, round 2 & 3 could spell relief for you; If i had 10 billion dollars in funding i could certainly speed up the process.

Well it involves 50 mhz wide channels.

I have the wireless home internet solution