MrZorbatron

Well, multipath has yet to be used to any seriously helpful effect, though it has been pretty well mitigated in many cases on modern airlinks. 802.11n is the standard that comes closest to trying. QAM has come a long way from what it was when it was first brought out, and has far more potential than was expected by most traditionalists. I have no issue with cross polarization as used to retain orthogonality, though in my first post here, I said intersecting because I am not even sure the proper word to use. Pretty much it sounds like he is talking about a selectively phased and polarized signal that would be detected correctly only in a specific location, and the components of which would be encoded in such a way that in other locations and combined with other components of other signals, they would carry different data. Kind of like a "beam forming plus" where you are actually using different parts of a signal in different ways. Phased array radar came to mind for a bit while I was half asleep thinking about this last night. I still can't see this working with a conventional LTE radio on the device, which he claims to be using. The device would be extremely sensitive to physical orientation as well as position. How would position be tracked with such granularity? I love finding ways to bend/break the rules. I do not have any problems with others who find ways to do things other than those that come to my mind. I just like technical explanation and not technical-sounding buzzwords and "consumer-grade" high tech terms coming from professionals.

I have a hard time with the fact that the people he is demoing this for are journalists and mostly not particularly technical. In the second link, it is stated that his machine sent a signal directly into a device. How do we know it isn't omnidirectional? How do we know that the signal in that mysterious little bubble around the device is at all dissimilar to the signal a few inches, feet, or yards away? Eight high definition streams to eight iPhones? Any old DWL2100AP could handle that. The 4K video? Do we trust that it's actually 4K and not just UHD? Either way, 450Mbps 802.11n setup could handle that before its morning coffee. Sounds like he's demoing wifi to me. Take the device apart ans post a few pictures. Are there specialized chipsets in there or is it Broadcom or perhaps Atheros? There's too much obfuscation and not enough explanation in all of this. Everything here reads like an attempt to keep us from understanding, perhaps to secure the investments of the idiot. Now, am I a total radio specialist? No. I am an electrical engineer with a hobby in radio, whose business includes high speed radio connections. I would just as soon believe in subspace radio as in this.

This is complete nonsense... bullshit even. First off, backhaul requirements would be insane. Second, it would have to take advantage of some sort of intersecting polarizations or something, which would be insanely delicate to set up and maintain. Third, the processing requirements at both the head end/central office and the phone/device, would be huge. Fourth, it would need a lot more than a new SIM card, it would need an entirely new type of radio. Fifth, the speeds he is suggesting would require such a complicated modulation scheme that interference would become a huge factor, even something as simple as multipath would make it unusable.

Some do observe Ec/IO

If I didn't want the bars... Well, CDMA Field Test is free. Two of my reasons for choosing Signal Check Pro were the simplified geolocation and the signal bars. As far as bigger notification items, that would really suck with the stupid huge 4G thing on the newer Samsung firmwares.

Ok, didn't see your chart there. It pretty well agrees with my findings. Incidentally, any idea what each of Sensorly's 5 color grades means? Seems their breakpoints are: > -75, > -85, > -95, > -110, < -110 but this just "seat of the pants" feeling. Also, I do agree that the numbers are always accurate for everyone. I just feel like the bars show much more usable of signal where there really isn't much. I am divided on which I display more. Sometimes the bars are easier so I don't have to look closely enough to read the tiny status bar sized numbers (please do not make them bigger, this is not what I mean). I think the bar issue is especially true on some relatively LTE-deaf devices, Kyocera Torque, Evo LTE for two.

Well, it shows all bars down to about -90 RSRP or so. I would personally define the scale as more like: 6 @ > -75 5 @ > -82 4 @ > -89 3 @ > -96 2 @ > -103 1 @ > -110 0 @ < -110 Or even: 6 @ > -75 5 @ > -83 4 @ > -91 3 @ > -99 2 @ > -107 1 @ > -115 0 @ < -115 I do understand that these bars are showing signal level on a scale relative to the levels required to get maximum performance, but I would really rather see it on a scale of absolutely how much is there. A simple scenario: I frequently use my phone to do certain types of file downloads. I then plug it into the computer to copy the file over. According to Sprint, this is a perfectly acceptable alternative to tethering. These files are frequently device drivers, etc, and tend to be about 5-20MB. Sometimes I do them in the car on the way somewhere. Showing more signal range graphically would present more of an actual impression of how far I can go in an area with limited LTE coverage before my download will switch over to CDMA and then either stall permanently or continue at a very low rate. If I see 5 bars when I start, I know I have at least a couple of minutes of usable signal before I get out of range, and odds are my download will be complete well before I get out of range. This is just one example. Right now, it shows bars still while the signal is unstable to unusable. Phones do not hold signal reliably when the program is showing 1-2 bars because it is borderline on usability. Presence of signal on the very edge of usability should be indicated by zero bars. It's like with the old phones, they even explained in the manual that while the tower symbol alone did indicate signal presence and communication with the control channel and calls may be possible, they will be subject to increased interference and the odds of disconnection are higher. Now, since I got the Note II, I am not seeing any of this allegedly highly superior RF performance. It seems to me that it is very marginally better than the GS3 that I used to have. It does seem to hold onto weak LTE better before giving up and going back to EVDO, though it does not achieve the same speeds and usability that the GS3 did on a weak signal of -115 or less. For example, right now approximately: >-102 shows 5 bars >-107 shows 4 bars >-111 shows 3 bars >-115 shows 2 <-120 is zero Incidentally, I do know that decibels are logarithmic, but the signal indicators on the vast majority of phones are not calculated with that taken into account, and the rate of falloff is numerically pretty linear with distance, anyway.

That could probably be done with a menu selection for device type. I would like an option to adjust the LTE dbm/bar algorithm because it always shows too many bars for the level of LTE signal present when the status bar indicator is set to bars and not numbers.

Also looks a lot like what Sprint used to use (still does on some GMOs) in a few places near me. Two ports at the bottom of a narrow, shallow unit.

No, though some sites have issues, as does YouTube occasionally.

I've run 480 line video of Nova and Frontline from PBS.org on my MB855 via HDMI to my television over CDMA. Picture actually isn't half bad. It isn't like I do it all the time, though. That day, my internet connection took a dump while I was watching Nova online, and I was really sick. I think I used about 4 hours and hit about 1.5GB on that line all month.

FCC is easy, just paperwork and waiting. Problem is that there are too many people who would "play" with this hardware without knowing (or often without caring about) the potential implications. They might not know what we do, being both in the telecommunications industry, but still know enough to make it work (or at least cause enough trouble attempting to do so). I read some of ARRL's copies of FCC enforcement actions. It's really quite amusing to see the amount of havoc one can cause with a simple MF, HF, or VHF rig at a couple hundred Watts.

It's not a valid anti-trust case. Such an allegation makes no sense, as Sprint's market position places it nowhere near "trust" status. I agree with everyone else, it's much more likely that they are either allowing the use of prohibited hardware on Sprint's network (such as "flashed" Sprint phones in bad standing, Boost, or Virgin phones) or it's for financial reasons such as being substantially behind on payment for services. If it does go to lawsuit, I doubt it will get very far. Some stupid little "cellular dropshipper" has nowhere near the legal capacity or budget that Sprint does. Additionally, this suit, which has yet to be filed, will be filed in a very insignificant court if it ever is at all. A county district court in Nevada is not the venue that would decide a matter of this magnitude. I would expect a Federal district court to be the first step if they were actually serious about going forward with this.

Didn't know that. I did understand that. I was talking about the microwave backhaul hardware.

Some of their backhaul radios may be retained by Sprint. You should also know that most designs they use run in licensed bands. As such, it is not legal to sell them to someone who is not FCC licensed. Additionally, even if you could purchase them, it would be a combination of illegal and irresponsible to attempt to install/operate them without registration and approval with the FCC. Improper installation could cause serious interference issues, and they ARE pretty good at tracking that stuff down, especially when you're interfering with either a telecom's equipment or somebody's high dollar corporate radio WAN links. You might look into a product called Air Fiber from Ubiquiti. Most of those models can operate in unlicensed bands, are designed to be easier to set up, and are moderately inexpensive. A couple of thousand dollars can have you a 2000-5000 meter gigabit link if you have line of sight. Dragonwave makes a few unlicensed products as well, though their hardware tends to be more carrier-centric and more complicated to install. I would consider their hardware to be more robust and reliable, though it is more expensive.

12. Opera Next is the test version of their standard Chromium-based Opera. There are actually 3 versions currently distributed.

Opera. It handles multiple tabs better than any other browser I have used. The only annoyance is that you often have to fake your user agent to identify as Internet Explorer because a lot of stupid web designers check for Opera and either put up a message or redirect you. It has this feature built in, probably because old versions (Before 8) of Opera were a little off compatibility wise.

Consistently the best series on the wall.

be careful with American Express. A lot of the time, there very hard on merchants. Whether or not the merchant was at fault, and insurance claim will likely result in the entire charge amount being reversed on to the company that initially sold the computer. if that's best buy, then whatever. If some little independent shop for this stupid enough to sell asus, it really is unforrtunate to have that happen to them. I would rather have the situation go through Asus warranty.

#1: Stop going to Best Buy. Their techs are as stupid as they come and they sell garbage. Their so called Expert is just looking through a bigger book than their basic tech. Best Buy refuses to acknowledge or employ industry standard certifications and credentials for technicians. #2: Do your own diagnostic work. Find out what causes the latency if you can. Try another connection. #3: Update your wireless drivers. Get the update from the site of the manufacturer of your wireless card. DO NOT download one of those stupid driver update programs that you see all over the Internet, they are virus-ridden scamware. #4: If a different charger doesn't charge your computer, it's likely that you have a mainboard problem. Asus laptops are not known for repairability, so odds are that it can't be fixed. You will get at least a new board out of the deal. #5: Do not EVER go to a chain technical service EVER AGAIN! No Worst Buy, no Office Max, no Staples, no Nerds for Hire, etc. They all work out of playbooks and don't really care about you as a customer. They also don't pay their technicians crap, so they get really crappy technicians because the good ones can make more than a piddly $15 or so per hour anywhere else. PM me if you want more help. I am a technology professional and I will help you as much as I can.

Yes! And this can create noticeable artifact.

Dislike the low resolution and single cellular radio path.

Moo?

No harder than handoff between FDD bands, i.e. bad. I am very displeased with the single radio path Sprint is taking with their new devices. Korea and Japan are showing off 2-3 band LTE-A carrier aggregation and we are cutting radios out of handsets. Sweet life, Sprint.

I have had strange behavior with my S3 too. I had it roaming on 1x on SID 21 (Verizon 850) while on Sprint EVDO or LTE. On the GS3, EVDO and LTE share a transmit/receive path, so you can only be on one at a time. 1x is separate. Legacy was 3 digit all the time around here.