WiWavelength

https://sprint.starstar.me/ I hate to be the bearer of bad news, Robert, but **S4GRU (**74478) is already taken. On the other hand, **WIWAVE (**949283) is still available. To quote Celebrity Jeopardy! Sean Connery, "The day is mine!" AJ

I can easily turn that one around. How about we all just turn off data completely so that the abusers can add another 5-10 gigabytes per month to their e-penis lengths? AJ

I can appreciate that T-Mobile *feels* PCS 1900 MHz spectrum constrained in some markets. But I can offer a fairly persuasive counterargument. First, in NYC, the big four carriers control all 120 MHz of the traditional PCS A-F block band. Here is the PCS spectrum holdings hierarchy: VZW: 40 MHz AT&T: 30 MHz Sprint: 30 MHz T-Mobile: 20 MHz Sprint has no spare PCS spectrum to swap T-Mobile in NYC. If Sprint did, then Sprint would be the one left with 20 MHz. Most likely, T-Mobile would have to look to VZW. However, the PCS spectrum holdings look reasonably proportional as they stand now. By significant margin, T-Mobile is the little guy among the big four. It should not require as much as spectrum as the larger carriers do. So, the 40:30:30:20 split right now is not out of line. Furthermore, keep in mind that T-Mobile (via NewCo) would control 50 MHz of AWS 2100+1700 MHz spectrum in NYC. That is over half the AWS-1 band. So, T-Mobile would not be spectrum shy overall in NYC. That T-Mobile might desire but lack specifically more PCS spectrum is, in many ways, a problem of its own doing. To go into detail about those many ways is beyond the scope of this short response, but a brief listing of those reasons would include sticking with the Eurasian centric 3GPP ecosystem, transferring PCS spectrum in NYC to Cingular to break up their GSM joint venture, and realigning its network in a desperate attempt to attract unsubsidized iPhones. Lastly, the most compelling point of my counterargument is this parallel. If one person is hungry, overfeeding another person does not counteract the first person's hunger. T-Mobile may wish for more than 20 MHz of PCS spectrum in NYC, etc. But amassing 60 MHz of PCS spectrum in Atlanta, 50 MHz in Miami, 50 MHz in San Francisco, etc., does not help T-Mobile in NYC. Instead, T-Mobile (via NewCo), still the little guy, just ends up with an excess of PCS spectrum in those markets. And that does not benefit anyone. AJ

The conference calling limitation is not handset specific. It is due to the underlying IS-41 core network that kept cdmaOne/CDMA2000 compatible with AMPS (analog cellular). As a result, CDMA has enjoyed a substantial coverage advantage in North America. Most people do not require complex conference calling features. If you do, you need to go GSM ecosystem or VoIP. AJ

Mom and dad from the Samsung commercial wear skinny jeans? AJ

For whatever reason, Sprint marketing does not know that the sites are not accessible. But, trust me, Sprint engineering is aware. So, you are not likely telling Sprint anything that it does not already know. Now, why marketing and engineering are so disconnected on this issue and why that problem has not been corrected are the proverbial $64,000 questions. Sprint would be wise to own up to S4GRU about the LTE coverage mapping issue, but I doubt that we will ever know the reasons why. The good news is that the issue will go away relatively quickly as more and more sites become live and accessible. AJ

Be careful. You do not want to disturb "The Birds" with your camera shutter. AJ

Could the top rack, then, be T-Mobile, the bottom rack, Sprint? AJ

Good grief, those birds might start feeling a bit "warm." AJ

Is that Sprint on the upper rack? Though the photo is not entirely clear, both sets of panels appear to be using RRUs. If so, that would seem to rule out VZW. Possibly AT&T? AJ

I bet that was a fun time. I loved being interested in wireless during those years while the industry was still in its growth phase. Now, I feel less interest, more disillusionment. What VZW and AT&T, in pursuit of the mighty dollar, have done to this industry is just sad. AJ

No. I have posted this numerous times, but we may need to add it to the FAQ or write an article on it. While LTE UEs may improve over time, LTE Advanced will not help with weak signal. If anything, it will make matters worse because LTE Advanced switches the uplink structure to OFDMA, which requires greater peak to average signal power. In other words, the LTE Advanced uplink will have an even tougher task maintaining a connection. And the uplink tends to be the weak link, since small mobile devices tend to be power limited. Now, what I do not know, though, is whether LTE Advanced devices can revert to LTE and its SC-FDMA uplink structure if power is too limited to support uplink OFDMA. AJ

Guys, is opening tickets really worth the "trouble"? The sites will be made accessible, at the very latest, within a few weeks. In the meantime, you are just adding to the bureaucratic backlog. AJ

Correct. The Settings > About > Network fields are populated from the the Field Trial > LTE Engineering fields. And that is good, as it indicates consistency. AJ

Sing along... AJ

Did you watch the entire clip? AJ (not OJ)

Did you watch any TV in 1994-1995? AJ

Since the difference between eHRPD and EV-DO is the connection on the backend, I am not surprised that the PRL would have no effect. As long as the device indicates that it is eHRPD capable, the network does the rest. AJ

What did you just say?! AJ

The wireless element of the VZW-SpectrumCo-Cox deal was less controversial because, unlike the AT&T-T-Mobile merger, it did not remove an actual competitor from the market. The wired side of the deal that basically formed a cabal between VZ and Big Cable got plenty of opposition, rightly so. AJ

Write something? Maybe like this? http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/cold-opening/1356709/ AJ

I agree. You seem to be arguing for greater personal responsibility in reproduction but just the opposite in wireless data usage -- even though both profligate reproduction and wireless data usage can have detrimental effect on the sharing of limited resources within a society. So, yes, I think you need more education or at least more consistency. AJ

I think you fail to understand FCC construction requirements. The carriers have used their spectrum, have satisfied the construction requirements. MTA based PCS 1900 MHz licenses, for example, are huge in area, and licensees were never expected to cover their entire licensed areas. High frequency spectrum just does not lend itself to that type of buildout. So, MTA based PCS license construction requirements are population based: 33 1/3 percent POPs after five years, 66 2/3 percent POPs after 10 years. All the relevant carriers satisfied those requirements years ago. Plenty of other carriers besides Clearwire have been compelled to do likewise because of unsatisfied area or population based construction requirements. I am not sure why you would think otherwise. AJ

Samsung's Exynos is just a processor, not a full SoC with modem. So, it has nothing to do with SVDO. AJ

It sounds like you need to get FTTB -- fiber to the body. Or you can realize that not all of your four devices need to be connected at the same time. AJ