WiWavelength

Oh, no, oh, is she in a coma? AJ

Duffman, how many Sprint sites in DFW were knocked offline? AJ

Scott, the bigger question is: did irev have sex with the jerk store employee's wife? AJ

I see quite a few "bad ESN" Conquers listed on eBay. If I can pick one up for <$50, I would be willing to do that for testing purposes (though I would probably need to ship it off to one of you who can run QPST on your Windows OS). AJ

Good news. I have done some more digging, and the Samsung Conquer 4G (SPH-D600), Samsung Trender (SPH-M380), and Huawei Express (M650) explicitly support and have been certified for CDMA1X band class 14 (PCS A-G blocks). https://apps.fcc.gov...html?id=1457558 https://apps.fcc.gov...html?id=1441475 https://apps.fcc.gov...html?id=1506030 AJ

I am afraid that the PCS G block enabled testing PRL is a non starter. In looking over FCC OET filings, I have not found a single Sprint branded handset that has been certified beyond the traditional PCS A-F block range. Maybe some do exist, but I have not found them. So, I surmise that only specially certified or waivered testing devices will be able access CDMA1X/EV-DO Network Vision trials in the PCS G block. AJ

Additionally, as Robert will tell you, if you are hanging out on a WiMAX "license protection site," then electrical/mechanical downtilt (lack thereof) at the antennas will also have a great effect on propagation. AJ

Guys, please be careful with your generalizations. Lately, I have noticed many "WiMAX is this, WiMAX is that" type of assertions. But most of those assertions are regarding ~2600 MHz propagation/attenuation. Signal wise, essentially nothing inherent to the WiMAX downlink makes it inferior to the LTE downlink, as both OFDMA link structures are really quite similar. So, nearly all of you are commenting on BRS/EBS 2600 MHz path loss, not on WiMAX itself, which can be deployed in almost any spectrum band. AJ

A few comments... I do not believe that 3GPP has approved band class 26 quite yet. But that is no matter, as 1) it is slated to be standardized this spring and 2) Sprint already references band class 26 in internal LTE documents. The FCC does not standardize band classes -- 3GPP and 3GPP2 do -- so the FCC will not have a direct say in the matter. Also, some current band classes already have differential power output limitations. An example of that is band class 12, which applies different ERP regulations on the Lower 700 MHz A block because its uplink is directly adjacent to UHF DTV channel 51. But none of that, too, should be an impediment because I find no evidence that Part 90 rules will unduly limit uplink ERP for band class 10 CDMA1X or band class 18/26 LTE. True, many Sprint CDMA1X/EV-DO handsets do seem to be biased toward higher ERP with band class 1 (~25 dBm), lower ERP for band class 0 and/or band class 10 (~20 dBm). But that is highly variable from handset to handset and seems to be a function of antenna optimization. For example, the following is an FCC test report for a Sprint BlackBerry that outputs 27 dBm ERP for band class 10. https://apps.fcc.gov/eas/GetApplicationAttachment.html?id=1521343 So, obviously, band class 10 can allow healthy ERP, and I think that the SMR 800 MHz, Part 90, band class 10 (CDMA1X), band class 26 (LTE) concerns are much ado about nothing. AJ

Agreed, band class 13/14 (Upper 700 MHz) and band class 12/17 (Lower 700 MHz) will remain separate because of the duplex inversion. The perfectly solvable problem is VZW and/or AT&T throwing around their anti competitive clout to get OEMs to build devices that are band class 17 (instead of the original, inclusive band class 12), band class 2 (instead of the superset band class 25), or band class 5 (instead of the superset band class 26). Those are little more than predatory, exclusionary practices designed to squeeze out the competitive carriers by making it more difficult for them to procure compatible devices and nary impossible for subs to churn and take their VZW or AT&T devices to other carriers. AJ

Indeed, see nascent band class 26, two posts above. Careful, you are confusing band class 2 and band class 4. See previous post. AJ

Nope, band class 25 is a superset than contains band class 2. Band class 4 is AWS 2100+1700 MHz. AJ

Keep in mind that this is just some analyst's sketch. I would take everything with a huge grain of salt, as I do not trust analysts to fully understand the technical intricacies. Furthermore, band class 25 as a PCS superset will soon replace band class 2. As the FCC turns its attention to interoperability concerns, VZW and AT&T should not and will not be allowed to continue their parochial, predatory practices to prevent interoperability and stymie competition. Enter band class 26, which is another superset that encompasses both SMR 800 MHz and Cellular 850 MHz. Correct, band class 8 is GSM 900 MHz, but band class 1 is UMTS 2100+1900 MHz, not MSS. The most prominent MSS ATC bands are band class 22 (DISH) and band class 23 (LightSquared). AJ

As I archived all of the supposed before and after merger LTE coverage maps from AT&T's "astroturfing" web site, mobilizeeverything.com, before AT&T unceremoniously pulled the plug, perhaps someone would like to put together a mashup of all the maps so that we could compare AT&T's so called limited LTE coverage absent the merger to Sprint's projected LTE coverage. AJ

For easy comparison, here is a Sprint native/pseudo native (because it also includes Sprint Rural Alliance partners) coverage map that comes directly from the Sprint coverage tool: AJ

Robert, at first glance, the map appears to include accurate Sprint market boundaries. Based on your GIS work with digiblur, is that correct? AJ

Nex-Tech (based in Hays) covers primarily the northern half of western Kansas, while United Wireless (based in Dodge City) covers the southern half of western Kansas. As I recall, both share each other's footprints as pseudo native coverage, as does Sprint. AJ

SMS is delivered generally via CDMA1X paging or traffic channels, not via EV-DO. So, your phone has to drop to CDMA1X to receive SMS. AJ

Phandroid's sources sound of questionable validity. Internal Sprint sources unequivocally indicate that the HTC Jet will have NFC. Now, the Phandroid sources state that the Jet will have an upgraded "full metal casing." Here is the problem: the HTC One X has a solid polycarbonate body in order to support NFC. The HTC One S has a full metal casing but does not support NFC, reportedly because of the full metal casing. So, something seems amiss. AJ

Robert, it sounds like you need Spangles. See the breakfast bowls. http://www.spanglesinc.com/menu.html AJ

While just coincidence, channel 425 happens to be a common CDMA1X carrier assignment for both Cellular 850 MHz and PCS 1900 MHz. To further the possibility for confusion, channel 425 also happens to be in the Cellular B block and the PCS B block. But CEL 0425 and PCS 0425 are two very different channel assignments separated by approximately 1 MHz. In your case, your screenshots indicate band class 1 and that in turn indicates PCS 0425. For CDMA1X, band class 1 is PCS 1900 MHz, while band class 0 is Cellular 850 MHz. Furthermore, you appear to be in Cleveland, where Sprint holds a PCS B3 block 10 MHz disaggregation from the old AT&TWS, and PCS 0425 is the first standard channel assignment in the PCS B3 block. Sprint also holds its original license, the PCS D block 10 MHz, which contains PCS 0325, 0350, and 0375, of which you have noted the first two channel assignments. AJ

For the remaining markets, it is a relatively safe bet to add a band class 10 ACQ index entry with channels 476 and 526 to these SIDs: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArY31Mr219-ydEZublJOa3l2ZGl0Z1B0QmNmMG5nOEE Robert and I have not been able to confirm any CDMA1X 800 SIDs beyond those that we have already announced. But those that we have announced have followed the pattern of PCS G block assigned SIDs (as laid out in the spreadsheet). AJ

Indeed, HTC, not Sprint, controls the EVO trademark, and it is important to make this distinction, as it renders the Droid comparison less relevant. On the other hand, VZW controls (licenses from Lucasfilm) the Droid trademark. So, in the first case, the OEM holds the trademark; in the second case, the carrier holds the trademark. And, like it or not, that makes a big difference in the use of the EVO name vs the use of the Droid name. AJ

Sgt., an upcoming USCC Samsung handset supports CDMA1X/EV-DO 850/1900 + LTE 700/850/1900/2100+1700 (i.e. AWS). AJ

Oh, by the way, the MSM8960 does natively support TD-LTE, not that the HTC Jet will likely take advantage of that capability, however. AJ