WiWavelength

This has little to do with USCC. Sprint does not activate devices that are not listed in Sprint's internal database. And that has been the policy for many, many years. AJ

The free space path loss difference between 600 MHz and 800 MHz is about 2 dB, while the same between 800 MHz and 1900 MHz is about 7 dB. AJ

No problem. Honestly, I think we can take your previous work on the Sprint market-county map, overlay the BEA map, and see in about 15 minutes of examination which BEAs will likely require further PCS G block buildout to meet the "substantial service" requirement. AJ

Doing it by hand should not be all that difficult. There are not many BEAs that have no native Sprint coverage. In rattling off Great Falls, Billings, Missoula, Minot, Rapid City, and Scottsbluff, I already listed a good chunk of them. And I look at it like this -- if Sprint native footprint does not presently include the titular city in the BEA, then Sprint surely will have to construct additional sites to satisfy the "substantial service" buildout requirement. However, if you want to work your GIS magic, I would be much obliged. Here is the list of BEAs associated with the constituent counties: http://transition.fcc.gov/oet/info/maps/bea/cntynames2.txt AJ

gr8nuguy must have flashed the super secret bizzaro world negative PRL. AJ

As a follow up, I am interested in cataloging all of the BEAs where Network Vision will not presently reach. This should not be a tall task, but is anyone interested in helping out and corroborating my data? The BEA map and text file are linked below: http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/data/maps/ea.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/oet/info/maps/bea/bea1995.txt AJ

That is the pending SoftBank-Sprint transaction, and it has no effect on buildout requirements. AJ

A frequent point of contention here at S4GRU is Sprint rural buildout. Some argue that Sprint needs to add more rural coverage to compete with the VZW and AT&T duopoly. Others counter that doing so would not pass the cost benefit analysis test. Well, an impending regulatory issue may partly satisfy both camps. I am not sure why this did not occur to me until just the other day, but as a side effect of its acquisition of Nextel, Sprint will have to deploy, at a bare minimum, some additional "license protection" footprint within the next three years. To explain, Nextel's PCS G block 10 MHz licenses are nationwide but geographically divided by BEA. See the map linked below: http://wireless.fcc....ata/maps/ea.pdf The FCC chose a BEA licensing scheme because that corresponds with the licensing scheme used for Nextel's SMR 800 MHz spectrum, some of which Nextel agreed to relinquish in the Public Safety 800 MHz rebanding arrangement. The PCS G block is, thus, compensatory spectrum designed to align with Nextel's remaining SMR 800 MHz spectrum. Now, Sprint's traditional PCS A-F block licenses are all based on MTA or BTA geographic divisions. The 30 MHz MTA and BTA based licenses require one third POPs coverage within five years and two thirds POPs coverage within 10 years. The 10 MHz and 15 MHz BTA based licenses require one fourth POPs coverage within five years. Sprint satisfied those construction requirements roughly a decade ago. See those maps linked below: http://wireless.fcc....ta/maps/mta.pdf http://wireless.fcc....ta/maps/bta.pdf But here is the regulatory issue that Sprint faces in the next three years. Sprint holds PCS G block licenses in BEAs where it never had to construct a network because Sprint satisfied its PCS A-F block buildout requirements in the more densely populated areas of several very large MTAs. For example, see Sprint's PCS G block license for the Great Falls, MT BEA: http://wireless2.fcc...?licKey=3130353 The first buildout deadline, requiring "substantial service," is just a little bit less than three years from now. And Sprint currently has no native footprint anywhere in Montana. The same deadline and requirement hold for all PCS G block licenses across the country. So, the likes of Great Falls, Billings, and Missoula, MT; Minot, ND; Rapid City, SD; and Scottsbluff, NE, etc., are apt to see, at the very least, a few PCS G block LTE 1900 "license protection" sites in the coming years. And, by that time, SMR 800 MHz should be completely unencumbered outside of the IBEZ. Thus, Sprint may even use the PCS G block construction requirement as a means to deploy CDMA1X 800 and LTE 800, too. This may even help to explain why Sprint has chosen Montana as the location for its LTE 800 FIT area. AJ

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. But the friend of my enemy is my enemy. AJ

Dish AWS-4 spectrum is 2000-2020 MHz x 2180-2200 MHz. Only the uplink is close in frequency to the PCS 1900 MHz band. The downlink is 200 MHz higher, so I doubt that it is even technically possible to run AWS-4 from existing panels. AJ

Yep, this is what I have been saying all along. Overall coverage will remain the same as it always has, but service will change from pseudo native to roaming. Connections will still drop at the coverage boundaries between Sprint and Nex-Tech or United because their MSCs have never been interconnected. And, most importantly, EV-DO access will continue. The end of the pseudo native agreement with Nex-Tech, United, and PTCI is not exactly a good thing for Sprint subs, but it is hardly a catastrophe. And it was always something of an anomaly to have such extensive footprint in western Kansas. Some people who know that Sprint is headquartered in Overland Park have postulated that as the reason for the coverage. But those people ostensibly do not understand Kansas geography. Eastern and western Kansas are almost two different planets. So, the pseudo native coverage in western Kansas has long been more of a curious benefit, less of a calculated move. AJ

Here is the official Sprint release on the change in pseudo native coverage: http://support.sprint.com/support/article/Learn_more_about_network_changes_coming_to_portions_of_Kansas_and_Oklahoma/case-gz982789-20111212-190208/?ECID=vanity:coveragechange AJ

The poetic aspect about the "South Park" clips is that Dish Network has long been headquartered in suburban Denver. As for use of the clips, I think that Matt and Trey would be proud... AJ

Yes, you mean Splint or Sprint-uh-Bank. AJ

Sprint is deploying LTE in the same PCS 1900 MHz band in which it has long operated CDMA1X/EV-DO. So, there is effectively zero difference in that regard. But, as I stated earlier in this thread, LTE is a more fragile airlink. So, the difference is attributable to the LTE airlink and as of yet incomplete deployment. AJ

So, wait, are you saying that I should hold out for a TD-LTE device or a TDe-penis device? I am confused. AJ

If someone mapped that Sensorly coverage with a Galaxy Nexus, it could be highly inaccurate. Regardless, if you are indoors, do not count on LTE -- it is a fragile airlink. Not to mention, if you do not stay in one place for very long, you may need to cycle airplane mode to pick up LTE while deployment is still incomplete. If you are interested in becoming a sponsor for further info on Network Vision roll out, please see this thread: http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/1195-information-about-s4gru-sponsorship-levels-and-how-to-become-a-sponsor/ AJ

AT&T's Jim Cicconi has good things to say: Should we be afraid, very afraid? AJ

Agreed. However, hindsight is always 20/20. Had Sprint Nextel bit the bullet and sunset iDEN a few years ago, the financial state of the company could have been very different today. That said, the FCC did not formally approve broadband operation in SMR 800 MHz until last year, so the the end result may have been little different. AJ

Eh, "bandwidth" and "spectrum," in this case, are interchangeable. "Capacity" or "throughput" is different. AJ

Only one or two LTE sites are currently live in Silverdale/Bremerton. Become an S4GRU sponsor, and you can view the nationwide maps of in progress and completed sites as Network Vision advances toward its end. As for the Galaxy Nexus, it is an old, poor design. Please do not use it with Sensorly, as it is known to "pollute" Sensorly with invalid data. And that may be what you are seeing in your area. AJ

Circa 2004, Nextel hitched its wagon to this kind of "salute." Definitely NSFW: AJ

Fair enough. Question mark added. AJ

That is not likely. VZW has deployed twice the bandwidth, 10 MHz FDD. Not to mention, VZW has 700 MHz reception characteristics. If you want that, you need to go to VZW or AT&T. Sprint is not deploying Network Vision to satisfy your ego. AJ

Oh, and I am going to "adjust" the title of this thread because Sprint has not "adjusted" LTE speeds. You are just experiencing the variable nature of a signal strength dependent, multiple user airlink. AJ