WiWavelength

AJ, I'm I reading this correctly, no voice and data at the same time? Why would sprint or Qualcomm pull away from this?

greenvillesc, as Ian explains, SVDO capability affects only simultaneous CDMA1X voice and EV-DO data. It has no bearing on simultaneous CDMA1X voice and LTE data -- that is called SVLTE.

Also, as I explained in the article, SVDO requires separate RF paths for CDMA1X and EV-DO. In Sprint handsets over the last six months, those separate paths have not been present. CDMA1X and EV-DO have shared a path, LTE on the other path, and that has precluded SVDO.

Now, I am not sure why I did not notice this previously, but the SVDO capable handsets almost exclusively utilized the Qualcomm MSM8960, which is a processor and baseband modem rolled into one. Since the transition to a more powerful, standalone dual core or quad core processor plus a separate Qualcomm MDM9615 baseband modem, SVDO has gone away.

So, not to mistake correlation for causation, but the MDM9615 may not support separate RF paths for CDMA1X and EV-DO. And the correlation is quite strong.

AJ

Is there a map or listing somewhere that identifies the boundaries of the Samsung, Ericson, and Alcatel work, so we know which we're looking for?Great article!

Yes, we have at least a little bit of nearly everything. Here you go:

AJ

ALL of western PA is GMO's!?!?! So Pittsburgh (at least initially) will have no 800mhz service? Wow.

No, Pittsburgh is a separate market. The Western Pennsylvania market does include Erie and State College, but it really extends more into the central part of the state, even into far western Maryland.

See our Sprint market map:

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/page/index.html/_/articles/nationwide-sprint-market-map-is-here-r31

AJ

Good stuff. Wish you had more time to write articles like this. Maybe one about spectrum hint hint..lol

Sure. I warmly welcome ideas. What kind of spectrum article interests you?

AJ

I'm noticing USCC has spectrum they've never deployed in Carbondale/Marion (BTA 067). Anyone want to build a local wireless carrier?

I presume that you are referring to the PCS D block 10 MHz license. It came from AT&T in a quid pro quo roughly four years ago. In that transaction, USCC acquired quite a bit of PCS 1900 MHz spectrum, much of which has been or likely will be divested.

See the public interest statement filed at the FCC:

http://wireless2.fcc...?applID=4933178

AJ

I'd love to see a similar write-up on how GSM works... I've always understood the PRL concept--I know the GSM side of things is more "network/server-based", but not really figured out the specifics.

The simple answer is that GSM/W-CDMA and even LTE use MCCs, MNCs, and LACs. Mobile Country Code, Mobile Network Code, and Location Area Code. The latter two are more or less equivalent to CDMA2000 (or ANSI-41) SIDs and NIDs.

Whenever a GSM/W-CDMA or LTE device detects a new LAC, it tries to register, and the network confirms whether the device is allowed to use certain/all services in that LAC.

By the way, based upon some info that we have gleaned from a new Android signal app, Sprint may be reusing its CDMA2000 NIDs as LACs. But that info is still in the confirmation stages.

I know the MAP system doesn't use PRLs, but isn't there some sort of acquisition table?

That is a great question. Honestly, I do not know what, if any acquisition assistance tables that GSM/W-CDMA or LTE devices store locally.

AJ

Or so they say? Go look at Sensorly... LTE sites are already live in Norfolk.EDIT - just looked again, there is quite a bit of LTE in Norfolk... how can you even say this?

Norfolkin' way, Sprint has LTE in Norfolk?

AJ

(For us San Diegans....) The county is only ~50 miles tall by ~40 wide...

I am not sure why I find this slightly amusing, but in many parts of the country, 2000 square miles would not be thought of as a small area. And it would probably include 3-4 counties.

I guess John has some San Bernardino County envy...

AJ

I think you should make digi a contributing author now for his hard work.

Yep, that is typically part of the deal. I suspect the change in status will happen soon.

And let me throw this out as an advertisement. If you have an article in mind worthy of The Wall, make us a pitch. We accept, you write it, we publish it, and you, too, can become a Contributing Author (with all of the benefits endowed). The Wall has gone a bit spare of late. We could use some new blood, some fresh ideas.

AJ

I see "Emergency Calls Only" frequently on my Nexus 4 when off the T-Mobile network.

In other countries, GSM based carriers commonly seem to have wide ranging reciprocal roaming agreements, but that is not the case in the US. For whatever reason, GSM based carriers here cannot seem to get along, thus they limit roaming on a granular LAC basis simply because they can.

Our CDMA2000 carriers, on the other hand, are practically paragons of roaming openness. And Sprint is the tip top. In many markets, Sprint has roaming agreements with and includes in the PRL all other CDMA2000 carriers. That means at least one, often two (or more) roaming partners.

AJ

A few years ago while in a subway tunnel in Chicago, I noticed that I was roaming with full bars but my phone said "911 only". I think this was the case that US Cellular owned the network...

Was this with a Sprint handset? I have been in Chicago 3-4 times over the last seven years. Even back in 2006, I seem to recall that Sprint roamed on USCC in "L" tunnels.

AJ

Great idea and solid article, digiblur. This was sorely needed. Hopefully, the article will become something of an Internet meme whenever people commonly misconstrue a PRL as a "list of towers."

One clarification I have, though, is "Band Class 25." There is no such thing. Band 25 is on the 3GPP (W-CDMA/LTE) side for the extended PCS A-G block range, while band class 14 is the 3GPP2 (CDMA2000) equivalent. Band class 14 is basically irrelevant now, since we know that Sprint is not going to deploy any CDMA2000 in the PCS G block.

AJ

koiulpoi, if you want to research the provenance of a particular SID, a good starting point is this list:

http://ifast.org/files/NationalSID.htm

AJ

A good question is how many towers are owned by USCC and how many are they renting space on? That may explain the lack of interest in the USCC equipment.

The lack of interest in USCC's network infrastructure in the transacted markets is likely because those sites would be largely redundant to existing Sprint sites.

They have a severe lack of coverage in many of the more rural areas that are involved in the deal.

Hold on, that is a distortion. A "severe lack of coverage in many of the more rural areas that are involved in the deal"? No documentation of USCC coverage nor Sprint coverage that I have seen supports that assertion.

USCC is not exiting any of its Cellular 850 MHz markets in the area. All of the affected USCC markets run CDMA1X/EV-DO 1900. In other words, they are PCS 1900 MHz only markets. And Sprint's CDMA1X/EV-DO 1900 coverage is very comparable. In some markets, Sprint's coverage may not be quite as extensive; in other markets, Sprint's coverage is more extensive. Transferred subs in northern Indiana, for example, will definitely gain much broader native coverage with Sprint.

So, I would like to see some additional proof that USCC CDMA1X/EV-DO 1900 coverage greatly exceeds that of Sprint in multiple transferred markets.

AJ

Sigh, still nothing in the mitten...

Sprint is waiting for Michigan to take off the child's mitten and put on an adult's glove.

AJ

Also, is it possible for some of the 850 that others own to run with the new 800SMR, so that could be an even swap? It's adjacent, but I'm not sure about the rules for co-mingling those different band types.

Maybe, but not likely.

Device compatibility would not be a problem. Sprint CDMA2000 devices have supported CDMA1X 850 roaming for better than 10 years. And when they are released next year, Sprint LTE 800 devices will adhere to band 26 standards -- meaning they will support a superset of both the SMR 800 MHz and Cellular 850 MHz bands.

But to my knowledge, no Cellular 850 MHz license has ever been disaggregated. So, Sprint would have to acquire entire 25 MHz licenses. And almost all of those that would be valuable to Sprint are in the hands of VZW and AT&T. But the Twin Bells are not going to part with the Cellular 850 MHz spectrum that has given them such anti competitive advantage.

In fact, the largest and only top 25 market in which VZW and AT&T do not hold both Cellular 850 MHz licenses is Milwaukee, where US Cellular holds the Cellular A-side license. Moreover, out of all top 100 markets, take a guess at how many Cellular 850 MHz licenses out of 200 total are not in the hands of VZW nor AT&T?

AJ

...as Sprint LTE uses 5*5 MIMO .

You will have to clarify what you mean by the above. Sprint certainly is deploying LTE initially in a 5 MHz FDD (i.e. 5 MHz x 5 MHz) configuration. As for MIMO, only 2x2 downlink MIMO is supported currently. And that is not likely to change anytime soon, since very few devices will support 4x4 downlink MIMO. Most current devices are challenged enough just to implement two Rx antennas across multiple LTE bands.

AJ

Now sprint just needs to keep on the hunt for Nationwide pcs spectrum

What do you mean by that? The only carrier with a completely consistent, unbroken swath of PCS 1900 MHz spectrum is already Sprint with its PCS G block 10 MHz licenses. Even if Sprint were to acquire T-Mobile, it would not gain anymore fully "nationwide" PCS spectrum.

AJ

Another couple of interesting factoids: assuming that this spectrum transfer goes through unimpeded, Chicago will go from being Sprint's most spectrum challenged top 10 market to Sprint's most spectrum rich top 10 market. And Champaign will become Sprint's most spectrum rich market in the entire country.

AJ

I certainly wouldn't mind some more EvDO capacity...

In Chicago, Ft. Wayne, South Bend, Springfield, and Champaign, where Sprint's PCS D block 10 MHz license is directly adjacent to USCC's PCS B block 20 MHz license as I detail in the article, Sprint and USCC may very soon be able to drop the guard bands between their two respective licenses, freeing up a conditional CDMA2000 carrier channel assignment -- PCS 0400 -- which could be used to provide additional EV-DO capacity, for example.

AJ

Hi Andrew...even before the spectrum gets transferred, will USC and Sprint open up their 1xRTT and EvDO networks to all subscribers?

Is there any sort of roaming agrement between USCC and Sprint?

Sprint and USCC already have a reciprocal roaming agreement. I know that Sprint PRLs typically place USCC SIDs higher than VZW SIDs in priority. And I believe that USCC does likewise. So, for at least Sprint subs, they can already roam in most, if not all USCC markets in the country. That roaming behavior is not apt to change at all, since 1) USCC is already at high priority and 2) Sprint is not absorbing the USCC network in the affected markets.

AJ

PCS is PCS. No new radios will be required to use the USCC spectrum.

Yep, this is ordinary, everyday PCS 1900 MHz A-F block spectrum -- the very same kind of spectrum that Sprint has been using for the past 15 years.

AJ

An interesting aside: when USCC bought PrimeCo's Chicago assets from a private equity firm in 2002, USCC paid $610 million. Now, Sprint is buying effectively all of that and more for $480 million. Missing from this deal, of course, is any network infrastructure, but Sprint does not need a redundant network. In the end, entering its home market looks to have been a bad financial proposition for USCC.

AJ

I live in Orange County, CA but no LTE yet, should I go with AT&T or buy the Sprint model and hope to receive LTE soon?

This is a Sprint network focused site, so understand that you are likely to hear the benefits of Sprint. Plus, AT&T is a terrible, rapacious company that you should patronize as little as possible.

In Sprint's favor, its LTE deployment, once complete in Orange County, should be superior in many ways to that of AT&T. In all markets, Sprint is initially deploying 5 MHz FDD bandwidth. AT&T, on the other hand, is deploying 10 MHz FDD bandwidth in some markets, 5 MHz FDD bandwidth in others. Los Angeles is one of those others.

So, in greater Los Angeles, Sprint LTE and AT&T LTE will both be on par for LTE bandwidth, but Sprint likely has fewer subscribers yet greater cell site density. And that could add up to a Sprint advantage in LTE speed/capacity.

AJ

So, for us not so technical people, does this mean that the Note II can't go online while transmitting a phone call? Even when using 4G (if ever available for me)?

While on a regular voice call, data access is possible via Wi-Fi or LTE but not EV-DO.

AJ