WiWavelength

You seem hellbent on helping Big Channel (or Big Carrier or Big Operator -- whatever you want to call it) get "some of that Internet money" from Big Content. Too bad. That is not how it is supposed to work. Like it or not, Big Channel exists to be a "dumb pipe." And it gets largely constant revenue, month after month, year after year. Long term returns. If Big Channel does not like that or cannot afford the CAPEX, then it can get out of the business. Go do something else. And maybe that last point just highlights the ridiculousness of the wireless sector of Big Channel with fully four separate national infrastructure operators. Do we have four separate, privately operated Interstate type highway systems crisscrossing the country? No, that would be ludicrous. From an infrastructure standpoint, nationalize the whole damn thing. One public/private network infrastructure building entity. Every current or future wireless "carrier," "operator," "provider," or whatever you want to call it is an MVNO. Selling service over the top of the public/private network infrastructure. VZW, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint could be as neutral or anti neutral as they please -- because there would be hundreds of other MVNO competitors. Duggar Mobile could whitelist all AshleyMadison.com browsing -- but block all porn sites for protection of your soul. Hillary Wireless could entice users with private e-mail servers -- all e-mail data encrypted and whitelisted. Peyton Mobility -- an intentionally ironic branding -- could inject all data traffic with ads for Nationwide Insurance and Omaha tourism, as well as recipes for chicken parmesan sandwiches. The MVNO possibilities abound. They could do whatever they want. They would come and go, as some would succeed, and others would fail. That would be the free market, real competition, not the bullshit competition that you think exists under the current system, telling us to choose another provider if we do not like the anti neutral stance(s) of a current provider. That is hardly real choice in any given market with typically only four, maybe five real providers. Besides, they mostly just ape each other. One makes a move -- the others follow suit. And this has become particularly problematic since John of Bellevue has become the savior, "innovating" and "disrupting" the industry. AJ

As far as I know, we do not have any confirmation of that -- only that all recent Motorola handsets since the original Moto X have used a 4FF nano SIM. USIM or CSIM, that remains unknown, though S4GRU would like to research the issue and publish an article. What we have seen is reference to the HTC One M9. Ostensibly, it was the first specifically Sprint variant handset to use the current CSIM. AJ

If you actually have a 2FF mini SIM, it is practically an antique. That form factor will fit into hardly any devices -- other than similarly antiquated devices. It is like the S-Video cable of SIM cards. AJ

You are wasting your refresh. You are not going to see any significant movement on the Nexus 6P until the Nexus 5X is shipping, maybe even in the hands of buyers. The earliest delivery dates for the Nexus 6P were all 1-2 weeks later than those for the Nexus 5X. Just wait until Nexus 5X buyers start reporting shipping or delivery. Then, you can start checking on the Nexus 6P. AJ

This thread is an odd location for this discussion, but here goes. Assuming the 600 MHz auction does happen in the next few years, it is successful in auctioning a significant amount of spectrum, and VZW participates in the auction, winning substantial spectrum, then VZW might be willing -- though a remote possibility -- to divest some of its Cellular 850 MHz spectrum holdings. VZW already has perfectly nationwide low band with its Upper 700 MHz C block licenses. That means already 10 MHz FDD band 13 across the entire VZW footprint. VZW already has started to refarm some PCS 1900 MHz spectrum as part of its "XLTE" overlay. But it has shown little or no indication, let alone movement on its Cellular 850 MHz spectrum. It probably will get LTE, but it will be the last to get LTE. Meanwhile, AT&T will not dispose of any of its Cellular 850 MHz spectrum. AT&T already has deployed band 5 in many markets. Plus, AT&T does not have usable low band spectrum everywhere nationwide in the same way that VZW does. For low band LTE, AT&T has to use a patchwork of Lower 700 MHz B/C blocks for band 17 and Cellular 850 MHz for band 5. Even that does not get AT&T low band across its whole footprint. In the end, even if it were to make technical and financial sense for VZW to sell off some of its Cellular 850 MHz spectrum, I doubt that VZW would do it. That would benefit a competitor. AJ

AJ

Wait, really? Sprint sent you a 2FF mini SIM, not a 3FF micro SIM? Wow, just wow. AJ

Unfortunately, no new info. We know it requires a 4FF nano SIM, but that is all. It will be either the CSIM that you have acquired or a USIM that you probably do not have. AJ

Huh? It is not a "joke." Do you even know what you are talking about? Wireless charging is inefficient -- that is why it is slow and generates much heat. And I am not kidding about California. The California Energy Commission continues to get serious about prohibiting sale of inefficient appliances and electronics in the state. Power adaptors have already been addressed. Wireless chargers may be a future item on the list. If wireless chargers cannot be made to meet the set efficiency standards, then they will not be sold in California. http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/pdelforge/california_moving_forward_on_1.html AJ

Father/son device incest. Is this an appropriate topic for S4GRU? AJ

If the Google Store were selling a USB Type-C to Micro-USB adapter, I would buy it in a heartbeat. I want one charger at home for all of my (non Apple) mobile devices. Alas... AJ

Guys, both of you are longtime S4GRU sponsors, and we all appreciate that. Not just your sponsorship, but your contributions in creating our community. That said, I hope that you realize you are swimming upstream against the current. In wishing for Sprint directly to sell third party, unlocked handsets -- especially if on subsidy -- you are just helping to extend the status quo for everyone. On the contrary, the smart move is to eliminate all subsidy and have as few handsets as possible directly sold through operator channels. That will help engender the low, mid, high third party, unlocked handset price ranges that we are starting to see. Like it or not, we need that price stratification reality. Not everyone should be able to get a $900 iPhone on subsidy. AJ

I am not sure where you are going with this. The quality of my longstanding work on spectrum licensing, for example, is almost beyond reproach. It is entirely objective -- there is no room for interpretation. But you seem to say that I should not help others learn by providing insight elsewhere. I agree that S4GRU is a remarkable, unique web site and community. My work here alone has been influential and leaves a lasting legacy. However, you suggest that we should be insular. Much of the outside world seeks education, too. Some of the outside world burns Sprint and S4GRU at the stake. Ignoring all of that seems like proscription intended to minimize Sprint, S4GRU, and me. AJ

Your state is in dire straits. It is facing both energy and water crises. It has some of the strongest energy efficiency provisions in the US. Personally, I hope that wireless charging dies a hot death. I know that many of you love its "convenience." But it is inefficient and lazy. Plug it in, plug it in. AJ

Maybe because I am the technical editor of this web site. Part of my job is to be here, research articles, write articles, edit articles, and read as many posts as I can. Make sense? AJ

You act as if we at S4GRU occupy a Moon colony or live in a Hasidic community. Do we not also exist in and interact with the world at large? Can we not also contribute to learning elsewhere? My name and track record in online wireless research are well known for over 12 years. I have written thousands of informative posts, published dozens of scholarly researched articles. In short, I have done almost unthinkable amounts of pro bono work -- while the peanut gallery does nothing but comment. Yet, even when I refrain from opinion, when I post something factual outside of S4GRU, the T-Mobile trolls tend to swarm on it like flies. Anything Sprint or S4GRU related is tainted. AJ

Count your days. I am awaiting California banning wireless charging for its heat generation inefficiency. That would kill the entire wireless charging accessory industry in the US. AJ

The only two Sprint compatible handsets that we know for a fact use a 4FF nano SIM running CSIM are the HTC One M9 and the 2015 Moto X aka Pure Edition aka Style. That is a small sample set. Probably, some/all of the Samsung and LG handsets released over the summer do, too, but we have no confirmation. And even among S4GRU users, most who have acquired new handsets that recently have not also acquired additional handsets. I may be one of the first. I have a 2015 Moto X, but I also have a Nexus 5X that is pending shipment. I do this research for me -- and for all of you. AJ

Why "internalize" it? You are divorced from reality. Vociferous T-Mobile trolls have both internalized and externalized it. Try objectively commenting on an article elsewhere about T-Mobile and/or Sprint. You can provide facts and statistics about Sprint, setting the record straight. No matter, T-Mobile trolls will overrun those comments with their anti Sprint, anti S4GRU agitprop. AJ

Seriously? There was little vitriol until John Legere started publicly shitting on Sprint -- and T-Mobile trolls started occupying online comments/forums. Bar none, T-Mobile ignited the fire. Prior to the current T-Mobile regime's juvenile antics, many Sprint users supported T-Mobile in its continued independent existence. AJ

Cross your fingers and knock on wood that you get the right SIM. AJ

Shorter wallet, shorter pockets, shorter fingers, shorter penis, shorter patience? Just what are you implying? AJ

Guys, if a major device supports both band 41 and band class 10, it is going to be activatable on Sprint. No question -- do not worry about it. OEMs do not include those bands/classes for no reason. The only notable exception has been the 2014 Moto X, which still ended up on Sprint MVNO Republic Wireless. AJ

Pending. Me > many of you AJ

Go to Best Buy Mobile. Pay the $10 for the CSIM. That is even less expensive than what T-Mobile charges now, and it avoids any Sprint induced headaches. AJ