Jump to content

WiWavelength

S4GRU Staff Member
  • Posts

    18,133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    429

Everything posted by WiWavelength

  1. And Tiny Josh says, "Sprint bless us, every one!" AJ
  2. If this is going to devolve into nothing but a discussion of different case options, start a separate Nexus 6 accessories thread. Case talk is boring. AJ
  3. Honestly, this is a head scratcher. Why T-Mobile? Why not Sprint? Per my spreadsheets, both Richmond and Norfolk are PCS A-F block 20 MHz markets, which have little flexibility in spectrum refarming for additional LTE carriers. Only $56 million would have been chump change for Sprint to shore up its spectrum situation in the Tidewater region. AJ
  4. ...or maybe I am just the sly fox in the hunt for others' donations. AJ
  5. Maybe you signed up for the Evelyn Ashford speed running course by mistake. That could explain why you are so out of sync and your grades so bad. AJ
  6. No, per its FCC OET published test results, the "poor/average transmitter" is the Galaxy Note Edge itself. Did you take the "poor/average transmitter" to mean the serving cell site? AJ
  7. Your informal comparison is running into problems again because you are conflating two different things: EIRP and RSRP. The former is transmitted power, the latter received power. For regulation purposes, the FCC is concerned with only transmission, not reception. So, all FCC OET published test results are for transmission. We do not routinely get test results for reception -- other than anecdotal reports, such as twospirits' observations. But the gist of it is this: transmission performance does not necessarily correlate with reception performance -- and vice versa. Compared to a superior transmitter, a poor/average transmitter may exhibit little, if any difference in reception. And the two different devices may perform much the same in strong signal areas. For reference, twospirits had very strong band 25 signal across his tests. However, in weak signal areas, that poor/average transmitter more quickly will run out of power on the uplink. In such cases, downlink reception is irrelevant, and the link will fail, dropping to EV-DO, CDMA1X, roaming service, or no service in more locations. AJ
  8. Your calculations are way off. Decibels are logarithmic -- you cannot calculate percentages as if the figures were linear. For example, any 3 dB decrease is a 50 percent decrease. AJ
  9. No FCC licensee "owns" any spectrum. It belongs to the American people. So, all spectrum is licensed on a renewal basis. The PCS G block is no different in that regard. Your concerns are much ado about nothing. AJ
  10. TangerineAir, stop posting full size speed test screenshots. That is just pointless and a waste of space. AJ
  11. At one time, there were NMT (Nordic Mobile Telephone) 450 networks in Europe. But I have never seen pictures of the antennas nor the handsets. Most likely, they were as I described -- exposed omnidirectional antennas. AJ
  12. I doubt it. Consider that the size of the antenna panels, compared to those for 800 MHz, would be roughly double in all three dimensions. Likely, they would be size and weight prohibitive to mount on existing sites. So, any 400 MHz deployment probably would have to use omnidirectional antennas with no MIMO, and that would sorely limit capacity. AJ
  13. …at the Kentucky Historical Society. AJ
  14. No, the off network LTE situation is not as simple as that. S4GRU has pertinent information on CCA/RRPP partner relationships. But additional clarification is still forthcoming, and S4GRU will publish an article at the appropriate time. AJ
  15. Yeah, we have a picture of you in your $5 shirt. AJ
  16. The price and size obstacles will never go away. But if you want a bellwether -- and I believe that I can speak for Robert in this regard -- he and I are not touching this "bad chicken" unless/until the aforementioned technical issues are resolved. We are not shy about acquiring handsets, just not this one. Honestly, it seems to occupy an undesirable middle ground: too big and expensive for the general user, too gimped and glitchy for the wireless tech/network enthusiast. AJ
  17. No. PRLs affect only idle state behavior. They do not affect traffic state behavior -- that is network directed. If calling is blocked, that is at the network level. The PRL or SID entry is not the cause. AJ
  18. Size, price, engineering screen, SMS, etc. Issues galore. Stay away from the Nexus 6. Bad, bad handset. Mess you up! AJ
  19. Honestly, I do not recall how we came to that determination. It was several months ago, and staff routinely has to wade through MBs or even GBs of info. We are correct about 95 percent of the time, but we may not be correct this time. AJ
  20. S4GRU staff could be incorrect, but that is not the model number we projected. We paired the FCC ID IHDT56QA3 with the model number XT1092. I would not be surprised if Republic is using a regional operator variant, not the originally expected Sprint variant. AJ
  21. No, probably not. As I recall, I dug deeper and ultimately found the Part 90 SMR portion of the band 26 test results. For some strange reason, they were not disclosed right away but buried dozens, if not hundreds of pages into the FCC OET filing. AJ
  22. Judging by your writing skills, I think some of you were nursed by "apeed teat." AJ
  23. Guys, are you not reading carefully? Go back and look at that typically huge screenshot. It is not a 52 Mbps speed test. It reflects data usage: 1.58 GB downloaded, 52.73 MB uploaded. AJ
  24. That is true. I had forgotten that the Google Play specs do make mention of LTE FDD carrier aggregation capabilities. The FCC OET filing, however, does not. And, despite your pipe dream to the contrary, VZW is not currently doing carrier aggregation. Its infrastructure does not support it. Now, fix your quote. Do NOT put your text in my quote box. AJ
  25. Not relevant. Not on the Nexus 6. Remember which thread this is. AJ
×
×
  • Create New...