WiWavelength

You guys who keep believing that Sprint can buy another carrier, retain the PCS 1900 MHz spectrum, but then sell off the AWS 2100+1700 MHz spectrum, no problem, are living a dream. For AWS spectrum, really only two buyers remain -- VZW and T-Mobile. That is a duopsony. Basically, everyone else now is selling AWS. So, that puts the advantage in the hands of the buyers. Sprint would not get top value for any AWS that it acquired then sold and might even get stuck with some AWS. No thanks. Instead, stay the course with the three tiered SMR 800 MHz, PCS 1900 MHz, and BRS/EBS 2600 MHz plan. That low, medium, high frequency strategy is ideal, and no other domestic carrier is as consistently positioned to implement it as is Sprint. AJ

Anyone who hogs even close to 100 GB of EV-DO data in a month is abusing the system and showing no regard for the experience of other users. That is just ridiculous, and that user should be terminated with extreme prejudice. For an education on the amount of data that an EV-DO Rev A carrier channel can deliver in a month, read my breakdown: http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m&ff=8856&fi=2949309 AJ

Unfortunately, what you propose would not work as intended. Sprint could push out new PRLs and tag the USCC Chicago and St. Louis SIDs as native instead of roaming, but that does not mean that all of a sudden you would get the best of the Sprint and USCC networks simultaneously. Yes, you would have access to both networks -- but only one network at a time. You would have to be in area of no service for Sprint for your handset to switch to USCC. Weak signal strength or slow data speeds would not cause your handset to switch over to the USCC network. That is not how PRLs work. Furthermore, under your proposal, you could not even force your handset to "roam" on USCC any longer, since the USCC SIDs would be tagged as native. AJ

I would not worry about it. VZW manages hyper band hard handoffs on its CDMA1X 850/1900 mixed network all the time. For Sprint, the separate SID/NID pair will not be an issue, since SID/NID are used for idle state acquisition but not for traffic state handoff. AJ

Oh, there will be handoffs -- inter frequency hard handoffs. Different SIDs usually mean different MSCs, but not in this case. AJ

Not particularly expeditious. AJ

Well, have you made any PayPal donations to S4GRU? AJ

But those who have not donated to S4GRU get only the rural highway two sector sites. AJ

Hey, when are we all moving to Guyana? Oh, and pass me some more of that delicious Kool-aid, please. AJ

This is one the reasons I greatly dislike the generic use of "3G" and "4G." For example, AT&T's so called "3G" and "4G" can be the very same W-CDMA airlink, and its "4G" can be either W-CDMA or LTE. So, I advocate use of the actual name of the technology rather than some generic "G" moniker. In this case, Clear's "3G" is Sprint EV-DO roaming, and its "4G" is WiMAX native coverage. AJ

No, this is wrong on two counts. One, a T-Mobile device will never "get a signal on 1700 MHz," as that is the frequency block used for uplink transmission from the device to the site. Two, if a T-Mobile device has no usable connection from the site on the 2100 MHz downlink, then the device will be out of service -- at least, for W-CDMA 2100+1700. In short, if there is no usable downlink connection, then there is no service. Period. The uplink in that case is irrelevant. AJ

No. Please go back and read over this thread again. Your initial comprehension is lacking. AJ

$528.0 AJ

Maybe, but not likely. Device compatibility would not be a problem. Sprint CDMA2000 devices have supported CDMA1X 850 roaming for better than 10 years. And when they are released next year, Sprint LTE 800 devices will adhere to band 26 standards -- meaning they will support a superset of both the SMR 800 MHz and Cellular 850 MHz bands. But to my knowledge, no Cellular 850 MHz license has ever been disaggregated. So, Sprint would have to acquire entire 25 MHz licenses. And almost all of those that would be valuable to Sprint are in the hands of VZW and AT&T. But the Twin Bells are not going to part with the Cellular 850 MHz spectrum that has given them such anti competitive advantage. In fact, the largest and only top 25 market in which VZW and AT&T do not hold both Cellular 850 MHz licenses is Milwaukee, where US Cellular holds the Cellular A-side license. Moreover, out of all top 100 markets, take a guess at how many Cellular 850 MHz licenses out of 200 total are not in the hands of VZW nor AT&T? AJ

You will have to clarify what you mean by the above. Sprint certainly is deploying LTE initially in a 5 MHz FDD (i.e. 5 MHz x 5 MHz) configuration. As for MIMO, only 2x2 downlink MIMO is supported currently. And that is not likely to change anytime soon, since very few devices will support 4x4 downlink MIMO. Most current devices are challenged enough just to implement two Rx antennas across multiple LTE bands. AJ

Back when I was a film student a dozen years ago, I attended the first showing of "Fantasia 2000" in IMAX at the now defunct Sprint IMAX Theatre at the Kansas City Zoo. I also own "Fantasia 2000" on Blu-ray. AJ

Did having LTE at ORD make you feel rhapsodic? AJ

Do as I often do for articles on The Wall -- build a spreadsheet in Google Docs, make it shared for anyone with the URL, take a screencap of the spreadsheet, then hotlink the screencap image in the article/post back to Google Docs. AJ

Does the EVO LTE get only a lowercase "4g" because of its connectivity issues? AJ

True, but LTE also has RSRQ, which is an LTE specific measure of signal quality. Also, SINR (or CINR) should not have dBm appended, just dB, since SINR is a relationship between two variable quantities, not a relationship between one variable quantity and a fixed 1 mW level. Just FYI, for any of our readers who have frequently seen the dBm unit but wondered what it actually represents, it is "decibels relative to 1 milliwatt." So, a typical -90 dBm signal is 90 dB below 1 mW. And -90 dBm is much easier to parse than is 0.000000001 mW or 0.000000000001 W, though all three figures depict the same signal level. AJ

AJ

By chance, did you recently create a home screen shortcut to S4GRU.com? AJ

I hope to donate so much money to the cause that Robert will have to create a new one for me: S4GRU "Koch brothers level" Sponsor. AJ

What do you mean by that? The only carrier with a completely consistent, unbroken swath of PCS 1900 MHz spectrum is already Sprint with its PCS G block 10 MHz licenses. Even if Sprint were to acquire T-Mobile, it would not gain anymore fully "nationwide" PCS spectrum. AJ

Some of your info is incorrect. USCC is the Cellular 850 MHz B-side carrier in La Crosse, and USCC has no PCS 1900 MHz spectrum in the market. But it does hold the the AWS B block 20 MHz license. So, obviously, USCC wishes to retain La Crosse, especially as it has already deployed LTE there. Furthermore, USCC does provide CDMA1X 1900 service in Rochester. Failing to do so would put it in violation of its PCS F block 10 MHz license terms by this point. See the coverage map excerpt: The Rochester site spacing does not appear to be very dense, and USCC reports no retail locations in the market. So, the network likely exists for roaming mitigation, as USCC subs in northeastern Iowa and southwestern Wisconsin visit Rochester for goods and services not available in their smaller communities. USCC does also hold the Lower 700 MHz A block 12 MHz license in Rochester, which is not a market encumbered by DTV channel 51 interference issues. So, USCC could even deploy LTE 700 in Rochester. But I do agree that it is another challenged market that USCC may be willing to shed in a subsequent transaction. AJ