Jump to content

WiWavelength

S4GRU Staff Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    18,133

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    429

 Content Type 

Everything posted by WiWavelength

  1. WiWavelength
    You win the Internets today. maximus is slayed in The Forums at S4GRU. AJ
  2. WiWavelength
    Joan Lappin is spinning in her not yet grave. AJ
  3. WiWavelength
    Who is this digiblur person? AJ
  4. WiWavelength
    You need not apologize to me. I do not run S4GRU nor do I make the rules, which were largely formulated by consensus. But you are breaking the rules by fishing for Premier level info. And you are essentially asking a Premier sponsor to break the rules by providing that info. I am sorry that it has to be this way, but S4GRU is a non profit site. It has to pay for operational expenses every month. The tiered sponsorship model gives greater informational perks to those who financially help S4GRU more. That is only fair, and that is just the way it is. Finally, please do not bother Sprint with these sorts of questions. Save yourself the trouble. The level of employees you speak to do not have the info you seek. AJ
  5. WiWavelength
    Yes. Separate RF paths are needed for simultaneous transmission, not simultaneous reception. All carrier aggregation thus far is downlink only -- that is presently true for AT&T LTE and goes all the way back to T-Mobile DC-HSPA+. AJ
  6. WiWavelength
    No, it does not. That is what is possible, not what is actually implemented. Plus, maximus is conveniently disregarding the "Up to 4x increase" qualified language. AJ
  7. WiWavelength
    No, Tim, cdk is theoretically correct. The previous posters are incorrect -- or, at least, ambiguous in their description. There will be no carrier aggregation with just the uplink in PCS 1900 MHz and just the downlink in BRS/EBS 2500 MHz. That is not how carrier aggregation works. This theoretical carrier aggregation scenario would place the PCC in band 25 -- so both uplink and downlink in PCS 1900 MHz -- and the SCC in band 41. AJ
  8. WiWavelength
    Kevster1321, do you want to get disciplined or even banned? If not, then stop violating the rules by fishing for Premier level info. AJ
  9. WiWavelength
    John and Neville themselves rubbed the base stations with kosher chicken fat. AJ
  10. WiWavelength
    Well, in a rare occurrence, the University of Phoenix Stadium roof was open for the Super Bowl. So, maybe the aliens beamed band 41 down through the hole in the roof. AJ
  11. WiWavelength
    The difference is that Sprint nee Sprint PCS was involved in all of that buildout -- from establishing a brand name to providing spectrum to extending device procurement. If not for their relationship with Sprint, most of those affiliates never would have been able to enter the wireless business. So, I do not consider those areas "acquired" in the same way that VZW acquired Alltel, for example. And Cingular did not originally construct T-Mobile's California network. Pac Bell did. AJ
  12. WiWavelength
    Yes. New stadium construction is made out of "wet paper bags." AJ
  13. WiWavelength
    AJ
  14. WiWavelength
    Someone who is ditching T-Mobile because of continued coverage shortcomings or Legere's clownish antics should write him a "Dear John letter" and post it on Twitter. Now, that would be funny. AJ
  15. WiWavelength
    No, AT&T stated that it deployed four carrier LTE. AJ
  16. WiWavelength
    "Phoenix Stadium"? Uh, John, it is University of Phoenix Stadium. Is Legere one of those awkward non sports aware guys who refers to places like "Seattle Stadium"? AJ
  17. WiWavelength
    Yes, as Robert noted elsewhere, the T-Mobile demographic does not really line up with the Super Bowl attendee demographic. And if Seattle had not made the Super Bowl, then T-Mobile usage likely would have been even lower. AJ
  18. WiWavelength
    Do not assume that Ergen will get that opportunity. In its lease contracts, Sprint likely holds exclusive negotiation rights. Sprint would have to walk away before any other interested party would get a crack. AJ
  19. WiWavelength
    Dan, Danny, DannyBoy, you neglect the key piece of my point: actually building nearly 100 percent coverage from scratch is the issue. Not just holding or acquiring. Building. Use your New Jersey locale as an example. What if AT&TWS -- a completely separate company -- built the core of your AT&T nee Cingular nee SBC coverage footprint? What if Bell Atlantic/NYNEX Mobile built the core of your VZW coverage footprint? What if Omnipoint built the core your T-Mobile nee VoiceStream footprint? Hmm... AJ
  20. WiWavelength
    Disregard holding nearly 100 percent coverage footprint. Actually building nearly 100 percent coverage footprint from scratch is the issue. Now, who or what has ever done that? danlodish345, care to answer that question? AJ
  21. WiWavelength
    AJ
  22. WiWavelength
    Yeah, that is the only reason. Lower band spectrum will solve everything for T-Mobile. It will paint the entire country magenta. AJ
  23. WiWavelength
    My expectation is that mhammett does not want municipal broadband because he does not want that added competition. That is understandable if his WISP is his livelihood. But some jobs and businesses have to fall by the wayside in the name of progress. Sorry. And broadband progress driven by WISPs is not going to be sufficient. Wireless spectrum is too finite. Only investment in fiber -- to the premises or at least to the node -- is adequate for the future. It must be run everywhere and offered at utility level prices. For profit incumbents/entrepreneurs are generally not willing to make that longterm investment -- except in select locations. Municipal broadband may be the only way to fill that digital divide. See Chattanooga, TN and Lafayette, LA. AJ
  24. WiWavelength
    THEN WHO WAS COMPUTER? I guess this is new meme... AJ
  25. WiWavelength
    Brookstone? Who is next? The Sharper Image? Hammacher Schlemmer? AJ
×
×
  • Create New...