WiWavelength

All LTE devices use SIMs -- micro SIMs, nano SIMs, embedded SIMs, etc. The question is whether the iPhone 5 has a removable SIM, as many other Sprint LTE devices do not. Regardless, it does not need a removable SIM to roam internationally. AJ

You would trade off your Galaxy S3??? Have you cleared this with the curator of the Robert M. Herron Museum of Modern Cellphones? AJ

Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but reportedly black = scratch. AJ

I am a frequent Ars Technica reader, but I had missed this article. Thanks for the link. Many of these politicians would be read the riot act in this little forum for their categorical assertions based on utter absence of engineering expertise, yet they showcase their bravado on an even greater stage. Something tells me that Robert already knows all about this form of political dysfunction. Sigh... AJ

Unless MIMO technology takes a huge leap (16x16 MIMO?), wireless broadband will never be able to keep up with its wired counterpart. AJ

What did we do before cell sites existed? We never really lived. Oh my gosh! AJ

Nah, you should jump to conclusions... AJ

To paraphrase Chairman Mao, wireless streaming (which requires almost all downlink, no uplink bandwidth) is "the opiate of the masses." AJ, the socialist

If nothing else, it is very close to symmetrical. Ha. AJ

I thought the faster uplink in the YouTube video an anomaly or error of the Ookla speed test. But Robert's results tend to corroborate. Thoughts? AJ

Holy cow, Dan The Triangle man is back. Let us kill and feast upon the fatted calf. AJ

You should talk to some AT&T subs before you make those assertions. Many hate the mandated offloading, which reportedly is often inconsistent and overburdened itself. Individual offloading at home, though, does not suffer from such ills. Sure, some of you have less desirable wired broadband choices at home. I understand that. But some of you are just greedy and/or cheap. You try to cut corners by dropping or reducing your wired broadband connections at home, relying on "unlimited" cellular data as a substitute. In this day and age, that is poor form. Such is akin to burning tires in your backyard. If just one person does it, then it has little impact on air quality. But if one person is allowed to do it, then others should be allowed to do it, too. And then the air quality impact grows much, much greater. AJ

In that area, off the top of my head, two affiliates come to mind: Shentel and Horizon PCS. The latter was acquired by iPCS, which had the reputation as one of the most backward, incorrigible Sprint affiliates. If litigation is any indication, iPCS was furious with Sprint over the Nextel acquisition, and iPCS dragged its heels on EV-DO overlay in many of its markets, including larger markets Grand Rapids, etc. AJ

I have long proposed the incentive idea and put it forth in this thread. Admittedly, it does not require that all users buy in for it to succeed. But if enough users reject the idea out of ignorance or principle -- as evidenced by many in this thread -- then, yes, Sprint will likely impose another solution, be it forced Wi-Fi offloading (which AT&T already does with its hotspots) or data caps. So, I ask the naysayers, would you prefer individual offloading or a mandated solution? Those may be two extremes, but the middle ground may not be tenable, not unless slow data speeds are okay. AJ

The wireless data "apocalypse" is already here. Can you not see that? As I suggested in a previous post, you seem to forget where you are. If the status quo were fine and Network Vision were not necessary, then S4GRU would probably not exist. AJ

Sprint did overlay EV-DO across its corporate footprint. Any significant areas missing EV-DO are/were Sprint affiliate markets. AJ

I suspect that either side of the issue could use this to argue its point. Regardless, I want to throw this out there. How quickly we forget that handsets just a few years ago (see my BlackBerry Curve example linked below) conspicuously included Bluetooth but excluded Wi-Fi because EV-DO was fast enough. https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=737972&fcc_id='L6ARBU20CW' At the time (c. 2007-2008), BlackBerry devices were some of the biggest consumers of data, but EV-DO networks still had plenty of available capacity. So, Wi-Fi was not truly necessary, though arguments certainly arose over its omission. Now, Wi-Fi capability is ubiquitous among smartphones. I do not think this just a goodwill gesture from wireless carriers or even a natural step in technological evolution. Rather, it is a necessary measure. Wi-Fi has become a requirement to support the overpopulation of smartphones. Unless we are willing to throw all of our current and future spectrum at duopolists VZW and AT&T -- as they would like us to do -- we will never be able to satisfy fully our growing data demand on macro cellular networks. Offloading has to become a way of life. And as the saying goes, it starts at home. AJ

I think that the new Samsung ad (and I do not really care for Samsung) portrays so many iOS users as they actually are. No, they are not idiots. But they are largely just common people who are not particularly well informed and are caught up in a marketing fad, not so different from that of a blockbuster movie or a pop music singer. That is not exactly admirable, but it is fine, a fact of modern life. However, when the source of the fad becomes like a cult leader and wages holy war against the alternatives, do not be surprised that those who do not share the adherence to "religion" present some resistance. AJ

I am typing this on a MacBook Air. I have an iPod touch, which I never use. I have the frames of reference. I do not want an iPhone because I do not want to have the same phone that countless other mindless people (like you?) have. And while I like Mac OS X hardware/software, I do not want to support the iOS juggernaut that has turned Apple into a corporate bully. My dislike of iOS is based on philosophy; your reliance on iOS is based on, well, addiction. And that is just sad. AJ

None of your existing VoIP examples involves mobility. Deal with your flawed thinking. And the sooner the carriers switch over to VoLTE, the better for them. But are you rooting for the carriers? Or are you pulling for your own self interest in maintaining reliable, high quality cellular voice? AJ

Wow, that is just sad. You really are addicted/brainwashed. xenadu is "The Applechurian Candidate." AJ

Indeed. I meant to reference this but forgot to do so. Thanks for mentioning it. Sprint does use bill inserts to promote Wi-Fi offloading. I think that I may have even received an automated SMS to the same end. AJ

Your thinking is wishful. Reference this conversation three years from now. I will bet you that we are still using CDMA1X for voice. I dare VZW (or any other carrier) to take that leap. CDMA1X -- circuit switched voice with soft handoff between/among PNs -- is simply more reliable. See above. VoLTE makes a single site, packet switched connection. For voice, which is a synchronous stream, VoLTE is not as reliable as is CDMA1X. AJ

The FCC made many of its decisions about the Lower 700 MHz band roughly a decade ago while it was still occupied by UHF TV. So, I will give the FCC a free pass on this one. Planning ahead does not always pay off. Moreover, we are talking about Mexico, which is debatably a third world country. Central planning is not Mexico's strong suit; it may stumble into some advantageous situations simply due to its lack of planning ahead. AJ

Yes, the camping out is ridiculous. The sad part is that some still think of the iPhone as a status symbol. In actuality, almost the opposite is true. As it has expanded to numerous carriers and become financially feasible for most, the iPhone has become the commoners' phone, the lowest common denominator. The RAZR was the THE phone for several years, but it eventually lost its allure. I sincerely hope the same happens to the iPhone, the sooner, the better. That indicates healthy market competition. AJ