WiWavelength

Forget the pocket. What about the zipper? That thing looks like it is just waiting to be unzipped. AJ

Disconnect from Wi-Fi. Then, try to use LTE while on a CDMA1X call. You will answer your own question soon enough... AJ

Roaming is not my native language, but yes, bretton88 interpreted me correctly. And to me, it makes sense. The switch from roaming to pseudo native does not occur until your roaming quota resets with your billing cycle. AJ

I have had to ask this about another graphic today. What is the source of this table? I do not like this trend of bad statistics. The inclusion of USCC is problematic -- to say the least. USCC is a regional operator, not a national operator, so its marketshare, average spectrum, percentage of spectrum, and difference between spectrum and marketshare all get unduly diluted in a national comparison. USCC does not compete against the big four in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, etc. Pitting USCC against the big four in nationally weighted stats is specious. In the markets where it has presence, USCC has greater than "1.4%" marketshare. And in most markets where USCC has presence, it holds a Cellular A/B block 25 MHz license -- four times the "6.5 MHz" figure cited. USCC also controls PCS, AWS-1, and/or Lower 700 MHz spectrum in many of those same markets. In other words, USCC's average spectrum where it has presence is likely in the 35 MHz range. AJ

For those who would like a visual of VZW's Lower 700 MHz and Upper 700 MHz auction winnings, see this map: Most of the two darker shades of red is now gone -- Lower 700 MHz A/B block licenses sold off to AT&T, Grain Management, and T-Mobile. What is left is the pale shade of red that is the Upper 700 MHz C block in which VZW runs its original 10 MHz FDD band 13 carrier. If the hot linked image disappears, visit this site: http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=187&p=230 AJ

Krugerrand. Or, as I like to call it, K ugerrand! AJ

VZW band 13 is 10 MHz FDD -- twice the RF bandwidth. That is definitely not an apples to apples comparison. AJ

So, I was correct -- it is T-Mobile agitprop. The FCC should see right through the manipulation, but unfortunately, not everyone will. Some, even at the FCC, will find the stats convincing. AJ

No. Band 13 is the Upper 700 MHz C block and nothing else. I think you may be confusing Upper 700 MHz with Lower 700 MHz. Those two are wholly separate bands -- both at the FCC and with 3GPP. AJ

I do not understand the question. Band 13 has been tapped out from the very start of VZW's LTE deployment. It is one 10 MHz FDD carrier, so there is your 20 MHz total. The other 2 MHz is useless. AJ

Again, what is the source of the map? I ask because it seems to be "lying with statistics" or outright fudging the numbers. Here is the low band spectrum available to VZW: Cellular A block 25 MHz, Cellular B block 25 MHz, Lower 700 MHz A block 12 MHz, Lower 700 MHz B block 12 MHz, and Upper 700 MHz C block 22 MHz. That is 96 MHz maximum, not 134 MHz maximum. But the map certainly makes it appear that VZW holds 134 MHz of low band spectrum somewhere. Furthermore, VZW holds both Cellular blocks in very few markets. That is rare. And VZW sold off most of its Lower 700 MHz to T-Mobile. The only given is that VZW holds the Upper 700 MHz C block nationwide. And in a typical VZW market, it also holds one Cellular block. Thus, that typical low band total for VZW is 47 MHz -- of which 40 MHz is usable for LTE. Ah, here is what the map is doing -- I just figured it out. It is adding up the aforementioned low band spectrum plus the Lower 700 MHz C block 12 MHz, Lower 700 MHz D block 6 MHz (unpaired), Lower 700 MHz E block 6 MHz (unpaired), and the rebanded SMR X block 14 MHz. There is precisely the 134 MHz maximum. So, the map is including low band spectrum that is not feasibly available to VZW. And it is binning together a huge range of 60-134 MHz as the maximum. That last part is a bit like publishing the honor roll -- but not revealing that the top students had only C+ averages. Yes, the map is "lying with statistics." AJ

Negatory. Randall Stephenson is undead. He has existed for hundreds of years to suck the lifeblood from man. AJ

Highly likely. And I would not have a problem with it. A Dish-T-Mobile combination would mean that the former T-Mobile would be breaking from its several year pattern of riding AT&T band coattails. T-Mobile seemingly has prided itself on near universal compatibility and economy of scale of its network and device selection based only on PCS and AWS-1. Lower 700 MHz has thrown at least a temporary wrench now into those works. But add Dish Lower 700 MHz, AWS-4 (or whatever becomes of AWS-4), PCS/AWS-2 H block, and maybe even some LightSquared L Band into the mix, and Dish-T-Mobile is stuck with one hell of a gumbo. Too many cooks -- or should I say -- too many boutique bands. AJ

Are the maps from a T-Mobile presentation or filing? They do look like T-Mobile agitprop. That said, neither VZW nor AT&T has any significant 700 MHz spectrum in reserve. Maybe VZW still has a little bit of unsold Lower 700 MHz -- I cannot recall. As for why VZW and AT&T are or should be allowed to participate, I offer one word: revenue. Within reason, FCC auctions are mandated to maximize their revenue for the Treasury. Cutting out deep pocket bidders would reduce revenue. AJ

Overall, the best two Nexus devices were both released in 2013. The 2013 Nexus 7 and the Nexus 5. They continue to be competitive with or even top more recent devices. And the Nexus devices of 2014 were, well, just weird. AJ

Actually, it is spelled Uncle Charley. And I doubt that is going to happen, as William Demarest has been dead since 1983. AJ

Well, my thoughts say nothing of what would happen to the PCS/AWS-2 H block, but I am not sure that Sprint would want it. Not worth the difficulty. Getting band 25 to supersede band 2 has been like pulling teeth. Another superset band would start the process all over again. As for the AWS-4 2000-2200 MHz, which is presently uplink, Tim Farrar once said that Dish might be required to give up or shift up 5 MHz. I do not recall the reason, and maybe it was resolved or ignored. Regardless, for the greater good, loss of 5 MHz would be no big deal. Not every Hz of electromagnetic spectrum has to be modulated. AJ

I thought that it was AT&T now. Might want to be careful with that acronym. AJ

In talking about AWS-3/AWS-4 interoperability, Tim seems to be suggesting that Dish wishes to pair its unpaired AWS-3 spectrum with part of its paired AWS-4 spectrum. My supposition is that the AWS-3 1695-1710 MHz would become the uplink, and the AWS-4 2000-2015 MHz or 2005-2020 MHz would become the downlink. That would resolve the conflict AWS-4 conflict with the adjacent PCS/AWS-2 H block, and it would leave the AWS-4 2180-2200 MHz as supplemental downlink. AJ

The last several weeks, the 2015 Nexus rumors are for a Huawei or Xiaomi phablet and an LG handset. I wish that I could consider it news, but it is just widespread hearsay. I also get many of the same "articles" in my Google Now feed. It mystifies me why so many come from religious or ethnic focused sites, not tech sites. AJ

To get blown, or not to get blown, that is the question… Is that what you mean by "literately"? AJ

Uh, I really do not wish to see VZW, AT&T, and T-Mobile all "get blown by" Sprint. AJ

One thing I do want to clarify is that a $5/mo recurring donation is not a limit or some magic number -- unless our core group, which seems to number somewhere around 150 members, is all in. If not all choose to participate, then we need more than $5/mo per core member to achieve our break even funding goals. So, please donate what your wallet and conscience consider appropriate. I hesitate to say this, as I try to keep my financial support of S4GRU a private matter, not a public matter. But I have made hundreds of dollars of donations over the years, and I made another $100 lump donation in our time of need earlier this week. I plan to continue those lump donations as needed or appropriate. That is why I set a $5/mo recurring donation as suitable for me. AJ

Robert is better equipped to speak to this than I am, but I will offer my thoughts on funding. I do think that it will be an ongoing problem. The Sprint network is working smoothly in so many places now that so many of our more casual observers have gotten on with their daily lives. As such, we do not have as many new members, especially sponsors joining the rolls. At some point, we may have to face the inevitable conclusion that S4GRU will not last forever. Its usefulness and/or staff's desire to run it may reach an end. Honestly, we are somewhat surprised and delighted that S4GRU is still rolling along over three years after its humble beginnings and that it has been so generously sponsor funded during that time. Now, if or when S4GRU joins the past history of the Web, that remains to be seen. Do not consider this a doomsday post. I think that the site in some way, shape, or form will continue to exist as long as a significant number of members want S4GRU to exist. To that end, I am changing up the way that I financially sponsor S4GRU. I have made a habit of giving lump donations. I may not stop that habit, but I am going to add to it by setting up just a $5 monthly recurring donation. If most of our core members would do the same, then most of our fixed costs would be covered every month. It is a small price to pay -- a lot less than just one movie ticket these days -- if S4GRU is one of your primary sources of education, socialization, and entertainment every month, every week, even every day. AJ

Guys, we have discussed the IP.Board hosting issue many times, and Robert has offered his rational explanation. IP.Board may not be the least expensive option, but we need a turnkey solution. S4GRU is a labor of love for Robert and staff -- all of whom are unpaid and are professionals in other jobs/fields. We do not have the time, energy, or desire to run and troubleshoot our own hosting server(s). AJ