WiWavelength

The dual core CPU in the Jet is locked in by this point. The reason for this is that the MSM8960 chipset contains both CPU and wireless modem. And Sprint has already started vetting the Jet -- both in the lab and in the field (Network Vision FIT areas). AJ

If you have not already, be sure to to check out AnandTech's MSM8960 benchmarks (linked in the article). The 1.5 GHz dual core "Krait" CPU leaves in the dust most other dual core hardware on the market. Better yet, the MSM8960's performance is competitive with or superior to that of even the quad core Tegra 3, which is used in the non LTE international version of the HTC One X. http://www.anandtech...nvidias-tegra-3 So, it may be debatable, but Sprint seems to be getting the better CPU with the dual core MSM8960 in the HTC Jet (and another device to be named later). AJ

by Andrew J. Shepherd Sprint 4G Rollout Updates Sunday, March 18, 2012 - 9:15 AM MDT But wait, there's more! Obtained from the same internal Sprint sources that allowed S4GRU to break the news earlier this weekend of the April 15th launches for the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and LG Viper, is intriguing info about a third LTE handset, the HTC codenamed Jet, set to land at a Sprint Store near you on June 10th. This happens to be nearly two years to the date that the HTC EVO launched as Sprint's first 4G WiMAX capable handset. S4GRU has connected the dots and projects the HTC Jet to be the Sprint version of the LTE capable HTC One high end handset introduced at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona last month and a version of which is also soon headed to AT&T. The One X is the only announced HTC handset to utilize the recently debuted and benchmarked Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 chipset and to include Near Field Communication (NFC) capability. The Jet matches both of those specs, suggesting that the Jet will be a CDMA1X/EV-DO/LTE entry in the One X lineup. Below are some of the One X and/or MSM8960 specs likely or known to carry over to the Jet: 1.5 GHz dual core "Krait" (28 nm) CPU 1 GB RAM CDMA1X, EV-DO Rev 0/A/B, LTE (UE category 3) LTE band class 25 (PCS A-G blocks) Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n Bluetooth 4.0 4.7' S-LCD 1280x720 screen Corning Gorilla Glass 2 Solid polycarbonate body What remains to be seen about the Jet, unlike the Galaxy Nexus and Viper, is its actual name. HTC has instituted a plan to simplify its handset lineup both in number and in name. Going forward, HTC intends to brand all of its handsets under some variation of the One name (e.g. One X, One S). However, many have expressed that the EVO name is an important brand associated with Sprint that should carry on. So, could the Jet launch as the HTC One EVO? Will it simply be called the HTC One X for Sprint? Or might HTC Jet actually be more than just a codename? Regardless of the name, the release date and the specs indicate that this high end, very large screen LTE capable handset is the true successor to the WiMAX capable EVOs that came before it. Photo courtesy of Androidandme.com Sources: Sprint, HTC, Phone Arena, AnandTech

Eric, AT&T LTE devices actually do include band class 4 (AWS 2100+1700 MHz), even though AT&T has not to date verifiably launched any LTE outside of band class 17 (Lower 700 MHz B/C blocks). AJ

That may be true. But CenturyLink is a lot more CenturyTel and Qwest than it is Embarq. So, even if Sprint had retained the landline division that became Embarq, the implication that Sprint would be making money from it is questionable. Furthermore, Embarq may have been the largest ILEC after the RBOCs, but that was highly relative. Its incumbent market territory was really quite limited. See the map: Thus, Embarq backhaul could have been a nice asset to have in those few relevant markets; however, it would hardly have been a backhaul panacea across the Sprint national network. AJ

Sgt., all of my info on spectrum licenses originally comes from the FCC ULS database, which is the official online repository for all FCC licenses. Some of that info I have compiled on spreadsheets for various projects. A lot of it, however, I know from memory, simply because I have dealt so extensively with spectrum holdings for about the past decade. If you want to try me, name a major market or two, and I will list as many carriers and licenses as I can off the top of my head. I likely will be very close, if not spot on for Cellular 850 MHz and PCS 1900 MHz, less so for AWS 2100+1700 MHz and Upper/Lower 700 MHz, as those spectrum bands were licensed only in the past few years. AJ

The "empty quarter" in the upper Great Plains and Rocky Mountain states just reinforces what could have been had Sprint somehow made a successful preemptive bid for Alltel. AJ

Actually, Josh, the Sprint network in Visalia "properly" uses Sprint's San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose MTA SID 04183 because the Visalia-Porterville-Hanford BTA is part of that MTA. Ubiquitel -- before Sprint bought it out -- held affiliate market territory spanning both the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose MTA and the Los Angeles-San Diego MTA. Basically, Ubiquitel was the Sprint affiliate for both Fresno and Bakersfield. Ubiquitel wanted to operate its affiliate network under one SID, so it "improperly" used SID 04183 in the Los Angeles-San Diego MTA portion of its market, where it technically should have used SID 04145. AJ

Sprint retains the lower 20 MHz of its PCS A block 30 MHz license in both New Orleans and Baton Rouge. In the New Orleans BTA, Sprint partitioned and disaggregated the uppermost 10 MHz to T-Mobile roughly a decade ago. In the Baton Rouge BTA, Sprint did likewise to AT&T only a little over a year ago. VZW does not control any of the PCS A block in the New Orleans MTA, but it does hold the entire PCS B block 30 MHz license from its PrimeCo heritage in the original VZW merger. Then, when VZW acquired Alltel, it also picked up the Cellular A-side 25 MHz license in New Orleans. That license has quite the checkered past: Radiofone -> SBC -> Alltel -> VZW. AJ

I have culled current data from the FCC ULS and have updated most of the top markets. For example, I have this XLSX file in progress: http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/sprint150.jpg The markets below the top 100, however, are going to be a real task to bring up to date, as PCS licenses have oft been partitioned & disaggregated down to the county level (or even lower). AJ

The PCS A/B block 30 MHz licenses are equivalent. They were the first PCS 1900 MHz licenses in the world and were auctioned in 1994-1995. Sprint won the greatest number of PCS A/B block licenses nationally, followed by AT&TWS (the original AT&T, not the SBC based AT&T that we know today), then PrimeCo (which was part of the original VZW merger), then the carriers that eventually merged to become T-Mobile (Aerial, Omnipoint, Powertel, VoiceStream). AJ

Josh, Sprint holds mostly PCS A/B block 30 MHz licenses (or disaggregated portions thereof) and PCS D/E block 10 MHz licenses. Conversely, Sprint holds very few PCS C block 30 MHz licenses (or disaggregated portions thereof) and PCS F block 10 MHz licenses. PCS C/F block licenses were originally intended for designated entities (new entrants, small businesses, minority groups, etc.), not major wireless carriers. My Sprint spectrum catalog and map are out of date yet still about 90 percent accurate. See here: http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/spcs.html http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/spcs_map.html AJ

Yes. Sprint holds the PCS A block 30 MHz license in both the Los Angeles-San Diego MTA (which extends beyond Las Vegas) and the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose MTA (which extends beyond Visalia). So, some/all of those 11 standard PCS A block channel assignments that 4ringsnbr detailed for you are the only native Sprint channels that you will encounter in California. AJ

Unfortunately, still no luck with 60000 nor 60001. My EVO never scans 1225, 1250, and 1275; it immediately goes off PRL and scans channel assignments (e.g. PCS A block 0050, 0075, 0200; Cellular A-side 0283, etc.) stored in memory, apparently, and on which it has previously located service. Though the EVO should be band class 14 capable, all recent experience seems to indicate that firmware locks out that capability. AJ

Yes, in the Dallas-Fort Worth MTA, Sprint holds the PCS B block 30 MHz license. PCS B block CDMA1X/EV-DO standard channel assignments are 0425, 0450, 0475, 0500, 0525, 0550, 0575, 0600, 0625, 0650, 0675. Absent PCS G block, everyone of your Sprint channels in DFW will be one of those 11. AJ

Yes, a "blank" PCS G block PRL would be ideal. When I do my drive testing in Kansas City, I am more concerned about actively searching channels 1225, 1250, and 1275 than about having phone functionality. Furthermore, I have all sorts of other Sprint, VZW, and Alltel PRLs stored on my SD card, so I can load another PRL that will restore operation at any time. Thanks... AJ

FYI, with both 60683X and 60684X on my EVO, I am not seeing any PCS G (1225, 1250, 1275) search activity in Field Trial. Something seems amiss. AJ

Agreed, this news is not a great revelation; it comes as no surprise. I do not know of anyone nor any entity (not even AT&T) that thought SMR 800 MHz wideband operation would be rejected or could be prevented. More a formality than anything else, approval was always just a matter of time. That said, do not discount that official approval via a proposed rulemaking is finally imminent. As you note, Sprint has been testing band class 10 CDMA1X under FCC waiver and/or STA in the following call signs: WPLM660, WPLM661, WQNX442, WQNX443, WQNX444, WQOQ770, WQOQ771, WQOQ772, and WQOU823. The docket has been dragging out for nearly a year and could have gone on unresolved for much longer. But now the proposed rulemaking is out for public comment, then ready for publication in CFR 47 Part 90. The end is nigh. You frequently bring up the likelihood of band class 10 EV-DO carriers. But Robert has been very forthright; Sprint Network Vision 3G documents indicate no plans to deploy EV-DO 800. So, unless Sprint changes those plans or classifies EV-DO Rev B as "4G" (hence it falls under Network Vision 4G plans), there will be no EV-DO in SMR 800 MHz, just CDMA1X Advanced soon, followed by LTE later. The device certifications for EV-DO 800, honestly, do not indicate very much. Sprint has a precedent of including then ignoring certain capabilities in its branded devices. For example, band class 14 PCS G block CDMA1X/EV-DO support has been incorporated in numerous handsets over the past few years, but that capability will remain dormant, will never be commercially realized now. AJ

by Andrew J. Shepherd Sprint 4G Rollout Updates Friday, March 9, 2012 - 1:15 PM MST Sprint may soon be gaining some clarity regarding its Network Vision plans to deploy CDMA1X Advanced to replace Nextel iDEN in its rebanded SMR 800 MHz spectrum. The FCC today announced a proposed rulemaking that would explicitly allow SMR 800 MHz licensees (e.g. Sprint, SouthernLINC, and a few others) to utilize greater than 25 kHz channel spacing. Currently, Part 90 SMR 800 MHz rules and regulations could be interpreted to prohibit channel spacing exceeding 25 kHz, effectively disallowing any airlink other than iDEN, which is designed to operate in 25 kHz channelization. Meanwhile, Sprint has petitioned that Part 90 does not automatically bar larger channel bandwidths in contiguous channel blocks and that it has enacted improved filtering techniques to satisfy out of band emissions concerns due to wideband operations. To reconcile the current rules and regulations with Sprint's contentions, the proposed rulemaking would amend Part 90 as follows: More simply put, Sprint would be able to use its lower band SMR 800 MHz spectrum below 821 MHz x 866 MHz right away to deploy CDMA1X and/or LTE. Then, after all public safety relocation in a region has been completed, Sprint could utilize its upper band SMR 800 MHz spectrum 821-824 MHz x 866-869 MHz for further wideband operations. The proposed rulemaking aligns with and helps to explain Sprint Network Vision 3G plans that S4GRU has obtained. Those plans indicate that Sprint intends to deploy at least one CDMA1X Advanced band class 10 carrier channel centered at channel 476 (817.9 MHz x 862.9 MHz) and/or channel 526 (819.15 MHz x 864.15 MHz). This would place one or both CDMA1X carrier(s) within the lower band 817-820 MHz x 862-865 MHz spectrum and leave >1 MHz guard bands between it and 821-824 MHz x 866-869 MHz spectrum, in which public safety reconfiguration is still ongoing in some regions. To illustrate how Sprint proposes to roll out CDMA1X 800 at the lower end of its SMR 800 MHz spectrum allotment, see our band plan and channel assignment graphic: Sources: FCC, Sprint, author's graphic

You just blew my mind. BWONG! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXLDv-fUINM AJ

I see the Sprint branded space heater in the photos, but where is the Airave? AJ

I recall from the old S4GRU message board that we had a similar discussion about creating a custom testing PRL. Feel free to send me a testing PRL or post a link to it. My EVO is rooted, MSL'd, and EPST'd, so I can load any PRL from my SD card with little more than a simple reboot. And I am in Kansas City usually once or twice per week. Personally, I would be fine with a testing PRL that contains simply a SID 04139 entry that links to an ACQ index of band class 14 channels 1225, 1250, and 1275 for both CDMA1X and EV-DO. In the absence of any PCS G block signals, that PRL would put the handset into a search loop, rendering it out of service. But that would not be a big problem for me. I would do some drive testing while in the city, then just load one of the half dozen other PRLs I carry around on my SD card to restore full service. Two possible hangups, however, spring to mind. First, 4ringsnbr brought up the SID issue. Sprint could be using a non standard or out of market SID for testing purposes. As I am already in SID 04139, though, that would seem to double the likelihood that Sprint is actually testing under the native SID in my market. Second, Sprint could be using non standard CDMA1X and EV-DO channel assignments to further reduce the likelihood that a handset somehow strays onto the test signals. For example, when my EVO gets "frustrated" under marginal signal conditions, it will randomly search band class 14, channel 0271, which would be a non standard channel assignment in the PCS A block. In other words, might Sprint put the CDMA1X test channel centered at 1235 and the EV-DO test channel centered at 1265 just for a bit more "security through obscurity"? AJ

St. Louis is one of the markets in which T-Mobile has started PCS 1900 MHz spectrum refarming and deploying W-CDMA 1900. So, it makes sense that T-Mobile would be installing RRUs at the same time. AJ

Yes. Note that the "EVDO-Enabled:No" tag in the PRL entry remains the same. The only change is that the new PRL directs your device to scan a third CDMA1X channel assignment: PCS 0725, which is the first channel assignment in the PCS E block 10 MHz license that used to be Alltel in Jacksonville prior to VZW acquisition. http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=9702 Not many people remember that Alltel had a bare bones native network in Jacksonville, one of the very few PCS 1900 MHz only markets that Alltel ever operated. I am not certain that Alltel even sold service or had a local exchange in Jacksonville. Rather, I want to say that Alltel operated the network only for the benefit of its own roamers. AJ

iDEN 900 is what currently occupies Sprint's SMR 900 MHz spectrum. AJ