WiWavelength

Not many/much. There are a few Nextel iDEN sites in and around Bismarck and Minot, ND and one in Kalispell, MT. But off the top of my head, that is it. And elsewhere in the West, Sprint has much greater footprint -- both native and roaming -- than Nextel does. AJ

CDMA2000 began with CDMA1X. AJ

CDMA2000 devices use a quick paging channel that is about 20 times faster than the previous cdmaOne paging channel. So, likely, devices can switch between NIDs/MSCs and register more quickly. AJ

Software on the network side will not fix anything. Idle handsets are not under network control. And the handsets are operating exactly as designed. In deploying a cellular network across hundreds of thousands of square miles, the SID/NID boundary issue is just the nature of the beast. AJ

For those markets where Sprint has no native nor affiliate/partner presence, this is what I found regarding Clearwire "license protection" sites: BEA111 -- Minot, ND BEA112 -- Bismarck, ND -- Clearwire: Bismarck (1) BEA114 -- Aberdeen, SD BEA115 -- Rapid City, SD -- Clearwire: Rapid City (1) BEA121 -- North Platte, NE BEA142 -- Scottsbluff, NE -- Clearwire: Scottsbluff (1) BEA143 -- Casper, WY -- Clearwire: Casper (1), Cheyenne (1), Riverton (1), Thermopolis (1), Rock Springs (1), Green River (1) BEA144 -- Billings, MT -- Clearwire: Billings (2), Sheridan (1) BEA145 -- Great Falls, MT -- Clearwire: Great Falls (1), Helena (1) BEA146 -- Missoula, MT -- Clearwire: Kalispell (1) AJ

Likely, no, Network Vision will not provide any service improvement along NID boundaries, as Network Vision does not change the geography of NIDs and MSCs. About the only improvement you can hope for is that the enhanced signal strength from a CDMA1X 800 site/sector on one side of the NID boundary is sufficient to overcome pilot pollution from other sites/sectors on the other side of the NID boundary. That could be enough to keep your handset registered with one NID, rather than bouncing between two of them. AJ

The problem with FDD operation in the 600 MHz band is that it would require a duplex gap. So, what would occupy the duplex gap? A DTV broadcaster? Nope. A guard band? Maybe, but wasteful. And however large the duplex gap would be, it would add to the size of the band, thus increasing the spectrum that would have to be cleared. Honestly, this UHF TV 600 MHz incentive auction looks like a "big bag of hurt." Broadcasters are resistant, and I am not sure that any meaningful results will emerge. AJ

Well, I think the network issue may be germane to this discussion, and that is why I brought it up. VZW is obviously doing something different from the way that Sprint is integrating CDMA2000 and LTE. And I could be dead wrong, but I leave open the possibility that VZW's adoption of removable SIMs has contributed to its network outage woes, which have been due to authentication problems. AJ

I would not call this much of a "problem," just a regulatory issue. But I think if Sprint is able to absorb Clearwire, then Sprint may leverage the BRS/EBS "license protection" sites that Clearwire has in most/all of these markets as a "solution" to overlay a PCS G block LTE 1900 carrier and satisfy "substantial service." And that is what I am working on now -- cross referencing the listed BEAs with the locations of Clearwire "license protection" sites. AJ

Is it a mobilesolution? AJ

Okay, here is the list of BEAs in which Sprint has little or no native network. Thus, Network Vision rollout will not necessarily satisfy the "substantial service" buildout requirement for the PCS G block. Some of these BEAs, as indicated in parentheses, are or will be covered by affiliates/partners. And, in the case of Shentel, we know that it has already stepped up to the plate with Network Vision deployment. BEA011 -- Harrisburg, PA (Shentel) BEA016 -- Staunton, VA (nTelos) BEA017 -- Roanoke, VA (nTelos) BEA048 -- Charleston, WV (nTelos) BEA111 -- Minot, ND BEA112 -- Bismarck, ND BEA114 -- Aberdeen, SD BEA115 -- Rapid City, SD BEA116 -- Sioux Falls, SD (Swiftel) BEA117 -- Sioux City, IA (Swiftel) BEA121 -- North Platte, NE BEA142 -- Scottsbluff, NE BEA143 -- Casper, WY BEA144 -- Billings, MT BEA145 -- Great Falls, MT BEA146 -- Missoula, MT BEA171 -- Anchorage, AK (GCI/Alaska DigiTel) BEA173 -- Guam BEA175 -- American Samoa Feel free to vet my findings... AJ

I am not going to use VZW as a model of how to integrate CDMA2000 and LTE. Maybe it has nothing to do with SIM authentication, but the VZW network has been beset with outages, and the LTE overlay is a slapdash job. So, even if SIM swapping on Sprint is out of the question, I will gladly take what Sprint has accomplished in CDMA2000 and LTE integration thus far over that of VZW. AJ

A creak is a crack waiting to happen. And, then, well, you are up **** creek... AJ

It opens up the possibility of using a local SIM for those "world travelers" who think that they might go overseas, then do so once every 15 years. AJ

No, I am only teasing. 4GHoward is a longstanding, helpful S4GRU member famous for his many "What if" questions. AJ

You need to ask 4GHoward. "What ifs" are his department. AJ

Hey, in my spectrum analysis activities, I have only been detained and questioned. I have not been arrested -- yet. AJ

Maybe that is your SERO retribution. AJ

And credit issues may have been one of the reasons why USCC's two largest markets underperformed. USCC may have been scraping the bottom of the barrel for a lot of sub prime customers in Chicago and St. Louis. AJ

What a coincidence! I think that is MacinJosh's stock broker. Guido's Blue Chip Securities, Payday Loans, and Cricket Comfortable Wireless. AJ

If you have your Sprint number integrated, Google Voice is pretty seamless. In settings, I can choose to receive SMS via the default SMS app or via the Google Voice app. AJ

Sprint requires USCC's spectrum in Chicago, and that is about it. The USCC network is not coming along for the ride, and any USCC subs retained are a fringe benefit. The rest are collateral damage. No big deal. AJ

See my other post above for some marketing reasons. As for technical reasons, Sprint likely wants to be able to provide support for a limited subset of devices, not every compatible device under the sun. In the end, this is Sprint's longstanding policy. If you do not like, tuff nutz. AJ

Remember, USCC does not have LTE in Chicago, could not easily launch LTE in Chicago because of spectrum constraints. And any USCC LTE devices in general lack band 25 LTE 1900, so they are not compatible with the Sprint LTE network. Sprint does not want a big influx of older, LTE less devices onto its EV-DO network in the affected markets. That would do Sprint no favors, as it tries to shift spectrum from EV-DO to LTE over the next couple of years. Not to mention, any USCC handsets would be absent Sprint customization: branding, skins, apps, etc. Sprint does not want that. AJ

I am not sure if "getting screwed" is the right phrase. Anyone who fails a Sprint credit check has a rather poor credit rating and would probably be better off on prepaid anyway. AJ