WiWavelength

AJ

This is going way off topic, and we can move it to another thread if necessary. As Twitter has long since grown beyond an SMS access and delivery system, is it time to increase the 140 character restriction and break some SMS compatibility? Or do emerging markets still rely on SMS for Twitter? AJ

...all in 140 or fewer characters. AJ

Little known fact: this was also the password to every one of Steve Jobs' online accounts. AJ

That is nothing more than coincidence due to site distance. The other operators simply have at least one closer site -- possibly, all three are collocated on the same site. In other locations, the shoe will be on the other foot, as Sprint has the closer site. And that is just one of the vagaries of wireless service. AJ

DAS ist gut. AJ

Depending on what Sprint decides to do with the former USCC PCS B block spectrum, it is possible, albeit unlikely that Chicago could become Sprint's first 10 MHz FDD LTE market. Sorry, Samsung devices, you would have to remain on the PCS G block 5 MHz FDD carrier. AJ

I would not call this a "flame war," just a fierce debate. And I, for one, am enjoying the discourse. AJ

Because EV-DO Rev A caps out at 16-QAM, it is a more robust (albeit less efficient) airlink. And it never carries voice traffic that drags down its max speeds. Thus, the 1.5 Mbps range is overly conservative. That could be accurate for a backhaul starved Sprint EV-DO carrier, but if Bell and Telus have the backhaul to run HSPA+ 21, then they would have had the backhaul to run EV-DO Rev A full bore. At least 2 Mbps is a more reasonable estimate, compared to the cited 6 Mbps for HSPA+. And at that point, especially considering the time period, it would have been an e-penis measuring contest. The advantage of EV-DO is that it would have given Bell and Telus greater flexibility to refarm for LTE within existing spectrum, all the while maintaining voice on CDMA1X, as has worked well for both VZW and Sprint. I would love to see estimates of the roaming revenue that Bell and Telus expected to garner from the Olympics versus what they actually did. I suspect that Rogers (and Fido) still grabbed the lion's share. And I do not think too highly of operators that focus on international roaming. Worry about your subs at home, not the people or the operators overseas. In that regard, I am a bit of a wireless isolationist. And I am sick and tired of the Eurasians trying to dictate wireless standards to the US -- still the largest economy on the planet. But I think that we are overlooking perhaps the biggest factor in Bell and Telus electing to overlay W-CDMA. The iPhone. Both started offering the iPhone 3GS in 2009 -- long before VZW and Sprint got a CDMA2000 iPhone. Damn you, Apple, damn you. Apple did so much damage to the North American mobile industry with its iPhone policies that I am almost ashamed to be typing this post on a MacBook Air. And Apple's asshattery will likely influence my buying decision when I follow my two year laptop upgrade cycle later this year. AJ

Citing max speeds is a bit misleading. No user ever gets 21 Mbps on a single HSPA+ enhanced W-CDMA carrier. And in that same amount of spectrum, an operator could deploy four EV-DO carriers. Had Bell and Telus stuck to their guns, they could have used their Cellular 850 MHz spectrum to deploy LTE. And that would have given them a big leg up on Rogers, which has never been a CDMA2000 operator. AJ

You mean, "Don't set your hopes too high." AJ

The Canadian CDMA2000 carriers -- Bell and Telus -- commenced a W-CDMA overlay for a couple of reasons. They wanted more roaming revenue from the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics. And because wireless consolidation is even worse in Canada than it is in the US, Bell and Telus have spectrum to burn. In the end, the W-CDMA overlay was chickenshit move that looks pretty myopic now, as LTE quickly supplants W-CDMA. AJ

Okay, we need to get a few things straight. First, call a spade a spade. UMTS is W-CDMA and should be referred to as such. GSM fans tend to hate that because it more accurately shows that their 3G airlink is really just another variation on Qualcomm's intellectual property that underlies cdmaOne and CDMA2000. Second, Neal Gompa is a friend, but his W-CDMA advocacy goes a bit too far. His opinions on this matter should be taken with a grain of salt, as his agenda colors his assertions about what is practical or possible. Third, even one W-CDMA carrier requires a total of 10 MHz (5 MHz FDD or 5 MHz x 5 MHz) of available spectrum. This spectrum outlay is one reason why AT&T and T-Mobile have for years lagged so far behind in their W-CDMA overlay compared to VZW and Sprint in their EV-DO overlay. And it is also the reason why T-Mobile has had to aggregate excessive amounts of spectrum to support running W-CDMA in parallel on both AWS 2100+1700 MHz and PCS 1900 MHz while also deploying LTE in AWS 2100+1700 MHz. Fourth, a CDMA2000 carrier -- either CDMA1X or EV-DO -- requires a total of only 2.5 MHz (1.25 MHz FDD or 1.25 MHz x 1.25 MHz) of available spectrum. This much smaller spectrum outlay allows Sprint, for example, to deploy CDMA1X in SMR 800 MHz and to continue to operate in markets where it has historically held 20 MHz or less of PCS 1900 MHz spectrum. Running W-CDMA in those markets would require an impractical overnight flash cut from CDMA2000 to W-CDMA. AJ

That no compromise polemic will just further the animosity and accomplish nothing. Here are the problems with your perspective. Broadcasters received licenses in exchange for providing a public service. To that end, licensees have invested billions in transmission facilities. If licensees are to relinquish those broadcast rights, they need to be compensated, at the very least, for their investment in equipment rendered useless. As for unjust enrichment from their licenses, get used to it. VZW and AT&T hold hundreds of Cellular 850 MHz licenses that were awarded for free to their Baby Bell forebears. And many of those licenses have been sold several times over for billions of dollars. AJ

So, you are taking a Sprint employee discount plan for no deserving reason; not to mention, you have been an S4GRU member for nearly a year and have not contributed anything to the cause. Is that all correct? Well, here is the skinny. Network Vision LTE 1900 deployment is nearly complete on the west side of Wichita. If the results are not up to your standards, then drop your unnecessary SERO discount, go to another carrier, and take your complaints elsewhere. S4GRU is not a Sprint rant board. AJ

Indeed. Even back in 1985, Dire Straits knew that VoLTE was still so far away... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w3aVfVyr20 AJ

If you want to deal with cut rate chipsets from inferior suppliers, then you may have a point on costs. But I do not want to deal with those chipsets and suppliers. Qualcomm all the way. And I have yet to see evidence that Qualcomm charges more for a 3GPP/3GPP2 baseband than it does for a 3GPP baseband. Then, you also have the full SoC with processor and integrated baseband, such as the upcoming Snapdragon 800 MSM8974, and indications are that it will come in a single 3GPP/3GPP2 variant. CDMA2000 capability will be on board, regardless. AJ

Discussion has shifted to the Galaxy S4 user thread: http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3664-samsung-galaxy-s4-user-thread/ Thread closed. AJ

Well, a few comments... The CDMA1X and EV-DO engineering screens are wholly separate because the two airlinks are wholly separate. For example, you can experience native service on band class 1 CDMA1X 1900 with simultaneous roaming service on band class 0 EV-DO 850 (and many other combinations.) So, idling on band class 10 CDMA1X 800 will not tell us anything about EV-DO. But do know that Sprint has no expressed plans for band class 10 EV-DO 800. You are misunderstanding the carrier channel assignments. They are like markings on a ruler, but they do not represent individual CDMA2000 carrier channels, which are 1.25 MHz FDD each. In other words, each CDMA2000 carrier channel is centered at a specific channel assignment -- center frequency -- but it covers 25 contiguous channel assignments. So, even if the entire PCS 1900 MHz band were CDMA2000, the absolute maximum number of carrier channels that could be deployed would be 48. AJ

Sure, in about 7-10 years when the Network Vision CDMA2000 infrastructure nears the end of its lifespan. AJ

What cost savings would come from eliminating the CDMA2000 network? With Network Vision well underway and nearing completion in some markets, the CDMA2000 infrastructure upgrade is already a sunk cost. AJ

To a wireless geek, IP.Board going down on a Friday night is like breaking a high heel on a Friday night to a hot chick. AJ

Oh my, bracing myself for impact. AJ

Nothing plausible on the RF side could explain what happened. Instead, on the wired network side, the proverbial wires "got crossed." AJ

Why should LTE matter in your house? This is mobile broadband, not a home broadband replacement. You should have a separate broadband provider at home with a Wi-Fi access point for your mobile devices. AJ