WiWavelength

No, you are doing something wrong because it is viewable and has been since yesterday. https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=517519&fcc_id=A3LSMN900R4 AJ

By comparison, the iPhone 5S does 18 dBm on band 13 and 26 dBm on band 4. Both of those but especially the latter are huge differences. AJ

Yes, the "V" variant headed to VZW is dual band LTE. But both bands look really weak, and that is no exaggeration. Band 13 LTE 750 max EIRP is only 11 dBm, while band 4 LTE 2100+1700 max EIRP is a piddling 14 dBm. That AWS LTE power output is most damning, as PCS LTE devices typically max out at about ten times that EIRP. AJ

No, the CDMA2000 Walsh codes are orthogonal. AJ

Robert likely sums up the situation succinctly above. I will say, though, that band 4 is not unique, but band 13 is a boutique band. However, VZW is VZW. On a single country basis, it is arguably the most valuable wireless operator on the planet. So, OEMs bend over backward for VZW. And, of course, Neal Gompa will probably chime in and say that this Note 3 difficulty is what Sprint gets for still running CDMA2000, not converting to W-CDMA, and having three boutique LTE bands. AJ

No. You lost hope long before that. AJ

Yes, but most all Samsung handsets headed to VZW and AT&T start with "SCH" and "SGH" prefixes, respectively. Across the board with the Note 3, those prefixes seem to have been tossed out the window. AJ

No, AT&T used its incestuous relationship with Apple to get an iPhone 5 software lockout on band 4 W-CDMA, not band 4 LTE. But a device that supports band 4 LTE also can support band 4 W-CDMA. So, a software update was an easy change. As for iPhone 5S/5C variants headed to Sprint, if they contained the hardware for band 41 TD-LTE, then they would have band 41 TD-LTE. A software update is not a fix. AJ

Tim, go back a few pages and see the post quoted below. Some have assumed that the "S" variant is for Sprint, but that has been largely refuted as being for SK Telecom. AJ

Well, I am sticking to the SVLTE theory that I formulated to explain if the Note 3 turned out not to be tri band. A normal sized person looks like a tiny doofus if he uses one of the Note series as a phone held to the ear. A person is thus more likely to use one of the Note series as a phone held prone in the hand, concomitantly, more likely to notice the absence of SVLTE than a user of a normal sized phone held to the ear where the screen is not even visible. AJ

That assumes there is an "S" variant submitted to the FCC OET. We shall see. But all of this has occurred in the last few hours. I queried the FCC OET earlier today and found nothing new. Josh, our FCC OET reporter, has not chimed in, so I may need to check if he has been asleep at his desk or playing video games again. AJ

C Spire is probably your only hope, but even that does make much sense. AJ

And the "P" variant does support SVLTE. So, my theory on the oversized Note 3 possibly sticking with single band LTE to maintain simultaneous CDMA1X voice and LTE may prove true. AJ

The "R4" has USCC and C Spire written all over it, as it is only CDMA2000/LTE. No GSM/W-CDMA. Like it or not, my guess is that the "P" variant is for Sprint. AJ

Therein lies the problem. Sprint/Clearwire does not have a lease on every EBS license in every market. In plenty of markets, the leased EBS licenses are like swiss cheese. A missing lease or two may not leave enough contiguous spectrum in the band 38 range to allow for a 20 MHz TDD carrier. And if Denver is any indication, we have seen Sprint/Clearwire deploying the 20 MHz TDD carrier in contiguous BRS spectrum. That is far more consistent from market to market, and it may make leased EBS spectrum expendable. Whether the Denver EARFCN will hold up nationwide, though, remains to be seen. Unfortunately, others have not been as diligent as Robert in tracking and reporting their TD-LTE 2600 EARFCNs. AJ

Why? They are not required to sign LTE data roaming agreements. VZW and AT&T can just pull up the ladder and try to starve out the other operators. AJ

Soon enough, we may be able to call the Lower 700 MHz band just "Ma Bell's band of thugs." T-Mobile seemed to be eyeing the potential of the Lower 700 MHz A block after DT channel 51 goes away. This may throw a wrench into those machinations. AJ

Highly unlikely. Sprint and SoftBank both are getting A1453 and A1456 for 5S and 5C, respectively. China Mobile is not officially listed, but it should be getting A1530 and A1529, respectively. The presumed China Mobile variants do support band 38 TD-LTE 2600, but that is not as all encompassing as band 41 TD-LTE 2600. And there is no indication that the Sprint variants even contain the RF front end and antenna arrays for any high frequency bands. AJ

No, that is not an apt parallel. Hundreds of Clearwire sites across the country already have live and accessible TD-LTE 2600. That may not matter to everyone, but it certainly does matter to some. AJ

In order to be compatible with both band 38 and band 41, Sprint would have to hold sufficient spectrum in the 2572-2614 MHz range; the 2570-2572 MHz and 2614-2620 MHz ranges are off limits. Then, Sprint would have to deploy at least one TD-LTE carrier in that 2572-2614 MHz range, and it would need to utilize MFBI to be recognized by both band 38 mobiles and band 41 mobiles. Long story short, such is probably not possible in every market, thus not likely for several years, if ever. AJ

We already did. Become a sponsor, and you can see us in all our glory. How can you resist that? AJ

Yes, "Rumours" is a great, legendary album. But S4GRU needs to be careful about transacting rumors because we value our credibility above all else. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvVznAb9-Ss AJ

I think the San Diegans are still bitter about WiMAX, and that perpetually colors their expectations. Plus, their city is named after a whale's vagina. AJ

iPhone 5, 5S, and 5C should likely all be on the same PRL version, as they share the same capabilities and limitations. AJ

Sprint could have declined to offer the iPhone this year because both models are only dual band on Sprint. But that would have been political and financial suicide. So, by making the 5S and 5C only dual band on Sprint, Apple is implicitly coercing Sprint into something that Sprint would probably prefer not to do -- release a dual band rather than tri band handset. AJ