halcyoncmdr

Is there any chance of getting a button at the bottom of the mobile theme to jump to the top of the page? I have no idea if this is possible on mobile browsers. In some threads it can take a while to scroll all the way back to the top of the page to access the menu again or go back to the forum view from a thread.

While 800mhz is testing, it uses a network code that is not loaded in any production PRL. There is a custom Premier Sponsor PRL made by our on Digiblur that adds this testing NID entry into the PRL I believe. 800mhz sites tend to come on in clusters, so they will be on this testing frequency for a while until they are ready to go live.

This is actually a violation of the terms and conditions of service now... http://shop2.sprint.com/en/legal/legal_terms_privacy_popup.shtml

Perhaps Ericsson has so much on their plate currently that they didn't bid... or NSN had a better offer... or Sprint isn't happy with how Ericsson handled the network maintenance agreement in addition to NV deployment and has chosen to avoid them this round... At this point we just don't know.

Perhaps the FCC just needs to tell him it needs to be fixed immediately or they will fine him the maximum $112,500 for non-compliance, and arrest him if he still refuses... Of course, agreeing to drop charges and the fine as long as he gets it taken care of, since likely it would take the arrest to make him realize they aren't playing around.

The article states "According to the FCC agent, Bethany said that since the lighting was not causing him any problems, he saw no reason to repair or replace the fixture unless he is paid to do so." It's fairly obvious he probably doesn't have any intention of actually complying unless forced to do so. I'm truly hoping this happens: "However, it appears the light fixture has led to a serious legal predicament for Bethany, who was cited by the FCC for causing radio interference via an "incidental radiator." If the situation remains unresolved, the FCC may fine Bethany up to $16,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing violation, and up to $112,500 for any single act or failure to act. The commission could also seize the offending light fixture, and Bethany could ultimately face jail time."

What responsibility? If the original owner didn't call in to report it lost/stolen, there is no way for Sprint to know that it was lost or stolen at the time of activation. If the person calls in a few days later, it will be flagged. If it was the previous owner of the phone, they are believed instead of the "newer" activation, there is just too much fraud in the industry to have it any other way.

Hehe... that's a nearly identical layout o the new internal employee iConnect homepage... they recently redesigned the entire intranet interface and combined several microsites together into new iConnect homepages aimed at each area of the business (retail/business/etc).

People turning their phones on, automatic on/off, Do not Disturb modes being deactivated, beginning to download software and app updates, etc. Essentially the network going from a minimal use case, to a fully utilized and overloaded tower.

There are a couple towers near the UofA providing 4G... but it is WiMax service, not LTE. They are protection sites installed by ClearWire to maintain their licenses in the Tucson area by covering the minimum number of POPs required by the FCC.

False alarm... he was just messing with me. Short vacation I didn't know about to a place with it launched already on the east coast. :-( evil person

Fun fact... a coworker sent me a screenshot of a speedtest showing LTE live in Tucson. 70 ping, 15.33Mbps/6.31Mbps. He was somewhere in central Tucson, I'll see if he can give me more info when I get to work. He just has access to the built in tools/info.

Because they always do... even when getting paid millions of dollars on contract from a nationwide wireless carrier apparently. I would point out... the same carrier that used to wholly own the company at one point (before mergers and such of course, Embarq was split from Sprint wireline in 2006, then merged with CenturyTel in 2009 to create CenturyLink). Tucson is legacy USWest/Qwest which had a rocky history to begin with.

Having had friends working in Customer Care for all three providers (yes I realize call centers are outsourced, but the goals are dictated by the carrier)... as far as the company viewpoint of customers in regards to Customer Care goes, Century Link is the least evil of the three. That doesn't mean they're good, by no means is that even remotely true, but my personal experience and with friends that have worked for their call centers, they are.

Long delays on outgoing calls are likely the network being overloaded, or having an issue. My semi-educated guess is possibly your phone is in the process of being transitioned from one tower/sector to another when you attempt to make the phone call, so it is waiting for that to complete first, possibly getting stuck and waiting for a timeout before it checks again. When you cancel the call and try again, your phone checks again immediately to see if it is in a transition and lets it go through since it isn't. It also could be something somewhere on the network not making a connection properly when navigating through the labyrinth of the digital world to the endpoint you want. Anything inter-carrier will have a more likely chance of this happening since it transitions to a separate system, obviously. In addition, ringing on modern digital telephones is entirely fabricated, there is nothing real about it. There is absolutely nothing on the network or technology side that requires a phone to ring. It is merely added in to let you know something is happening, as a holdover from previous inferior technology that literally used the telephone wires to "ring" the phone by pulsing the power through the line.

I think it all depended on limiting the expenditures in the long run. If Sprint had chosen to go with Cox/Comcast there would have been separate backhaul providers for the Tucson area, and thus overlapping sections. I realize Cox and Comcast don't really compete for market share here due to an allowed legal monopoly on cable service. However, there are some small areas where they both provide service. I think the combination of having a single provider for the area, and thus a single expenditure for backhaul is a strong motivator. In addition, I can tell you from a consumer perspective (I realize corproate is different) CenturyLink is the lesser of three evils in this case, and that's saying a lot.

Incorrect, we know why Tucson is LTE cursed. CenturyLink isn't installing the backhaul efficiently. More than half of the towers have the equipment up, it just can't be tested or turned on until that backhaul is available.

That is sketchy as hell. No back cover likely means they took it off (or broke it off) since the security sensor attaches to that.

That's your prerogative. You could also argue that Verizon and AT&T have historically charged customers more money for services (Even when Sprint had a superior data network), and they have a higher operating margin. Especially a higher margin compared to a complete network overhaul and attempting to bring the network up to speed and surpassing the competition as Network Vision intends to do. Sprint is not under any sort of obligation to cover the MANUFACTURER warranty on devices. No other carrier is either, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Verizon and AT&T move away from this in the near future as well, as a way to cut costs further and increase profits even more. Also just so you know, the devices that Sprint exchanges through the retail S&R processes often do not go back to the manufacturer for refurbishment. These devices are instead sent to an outside vendor to refurbish. There are some exceptions in certain circumstances and with certain manufacturers, but the large majority are all handled by a single refurb vendor that deals with it all for Sprint. The average refurbishment cost with modern smartphones is ~$150. Honestly, I think the charge should be $75 for feature phones and $150 for smartphones. There are alternatives like going directly through the manufacturer's own warranty processes if you don't want to use Sprint's options, or alternative insurance programs (retailer offerings like RadioShack/Best Buy) and extended warranties like SquareTrade. There is no shortage of options for extended warranty and insurance on phones, and often the carrier option is NOT the cheapest. It isn't meant to be the cheapest or even the best, it is meant to be the most convenient.

On November 8, 2013 the per incident repair fee charged for devices not covered under Total Equipment Protection or Equipment Service and Repair Programs is increasing from $50 to $75. This is a voluntary service, therefore the change is not a valid reason for early termination or waiving an ETF.

##CLEAR# on iOS7 does the same thing as a ##SCRTN# on other Sprint devices. It wipes all of the device programming and forces the phone to go through the HFA process again. Quite often this fixes issues with data/updating/call issues/etc. when something get's messed up. The device contacts the network again because it has no activation info, so the network sends it the default listing of what settings need to be (codec use, data settings for that specific device, etc.) and then prompts the device to do a PRL update after it is activated.

Not yet. I'm not at work currently (vacation) so I can't access the internal tools. Sprint's UICC cards don't have any obvious signs on the cards themselves to determine exactly which card it is (at least not that I've been able to discern).

20989 is not a valid Sprint PRL. It could potentially be a default Apple PRL for HFA (Hands-Free Activation). I have not had a chance to see what the default Apple PRL is in iOS7.

The iPhone 5s/5c do use CSIM cards. The UICC Compatibility Matrix I posted does not show the new CSIM cards being compatible with older devices. It does however show the older UICC cards from the iPhone 5 being compatible with the 5s/5c. The information contained in that matrix comes directly from Sprint documentation for field technicians to determine which replacement cards are compatible with which models. I have recreated a similar matrix using Google Docs and posted it here, as it is information easily obtained from community research, trial, and error. I just took the requirement of us all having to go through the testing and got rid of that step entirely. Nothing contained in that matrix is internal-only and unobtainable by the general public with time and effort.

The Note II was the last LTE device to have an embedded SIM card (I'n 90% sure). It was always intended to have removable SIM cards in the devices. The primary reason it didn't start out that way was due to customers likely getting the SIM cards confused with iDEN, etc. instead of realizing they can't simply be swapped out or aren't compatible. Let's be honest, most users here aren't the average American consumer, they are much more educated on the technology and passionate about it. The average person would just try to make things fit where they don't belong and get angry with Sprint when it didn't work (I see it daily in my S&R store).