iansltx

Probably a completely different department. I could ping a guy who used to do roaming negotiations for a local carrier, but I guarantee that the rates are 10x lower now. For voice anyway. Even if rates were relatively high (say, 5¢ per minute), having a built-out network means that you don't incur those costs much at all. My guess is that I've used less than 500 roaming minutes over the lift of my account...and that's about six years of service. I'm not certain on this, because there's no easy way to check on my bills...which reinforces the idea that Sprint just doesn't care because rates are low and usage is low as well.

The tone of the message counds about right for John himself. And, honestly, that was about the best thing he could have said. In 2016 T-Mobile will have 20x20 LTE in some places, on AWS, and probably PCS LTE where they've got 15x15 or more of spectrum (remember, they have to put HSPA and GSM somewhere). And Sprint will have NV complete and tri-band LTE-A deployed over their whole footprint, with download speeds on LTE on 2600-enabled sites reaching somewhere between 10x10 and 20x20 FD-LTE numbers. Or maybe they've shut down WiMAX by that point and launch 2x20 TD data sticks and tablets that can hit 90 Mbps in real life, much as 20x20 Band 7 LTE has done in Canada (for the ~140 sites that have it). And Verizon will have completed their AWS overlay, and started refarming PCS for LTE. And AT&T will have started refarming whatever spectrum they can get to LTE, whether that's AWS, WCS, PCS, CLR or 700MHz...yuck. Or maybe WCS won't be online yet. My guess is that 40/10 Mbps will be pretty standard LTE speeds at that point, dropping to 20/5 in less competitive/more rural areas. At which point the question is how much territory/population each carrier covers with the faster variety, rather than the slower one...or no LTE at all. My guess is that Verizon will lead here, and AT&T will bring up the rear. Sprint will have more "slow" LTE than T-Mobile has overall non-roaming coverage, but where they fall on the "fast" LTE side very much depends on how far Sprint goes with BRS/EBS. T-Mobile will probably continue to win here, but if Son goes insane (e.g. 2x20 TD-LTE on every site that has wireline backhaul) then there will be places that are GPRS or EDGE on T-Mobile and can hit 100 Mbps on Sprint.

They're doing exactly that already. Or EvDO. Or 1x. sent via my SIII on Tapatalk 4 beta

So, in the post-iDEN world, there are relatively few Sprint devices that support Direct Connect, nd the list continues to not include higher-end phones. From the reviews on the Play Store, Direct Connect Now is disaster, and it's only available on a couple, non-LTE-enabled, free phones. Any bets on whether this situation will improve? If not, where would you go for PTT? It seems like the two big entrants into the field are Voxer (iOS, Android, Windows Phone 8) and Zello (iOS, Android, BlackBerry, Windows). Voxer seems a little more responsive over 4G, but Zello has a CB radio-like "channel" feature which is kind of fun if you want to waste a...er...meet new people who share your interests. Voxer is definitely going for the Nextel sector with its Pro service, which it'll be charging $10/mo for sooner rather than later. But I haven't yet had two phones in the same room with the client to see how fast call setup and connection times are over LTE-to-LTE. Maybe later this week. What does everyone else have to say about this? PTT over IP is definitely the way things are going at this point, and low latency on LTE means that it's now feasible to do PTT with reasonable performance unaided by the cellular carrier itself. But the carrier *can* do it better if it puts in the tme and effort to do so. Or it could, in theory, support a third-party app by making sure that app was connected directly into the cellular backbone...

Speaking of Telus Mike, looks like they'll be throwing in the towel on their network in a couple years: http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php/1800369-Telus-mike-will-shutdown-in-2015 ...which, according to the Loxcell tower map, consists of 2547 sites. 715 of which are in the Toronto metro area, plus 418 in Montreal, plus 224 in Vancouver. My guess is that Telus isn't in a hurry to kill iDEN because they don't think that HSPA+ is the right way to do a PTT successor to iDEN...and they have a fair number of PTT customers...so they're waiting things out until LTE. Plus, they've got a good shot at 700MHz spectrum in the upcoming (still upcoming?) Canadian wireless auction, as they're effectively Verizon north of the border (until Verizon, say, buys Mobilicity). And they have AWS, PCS and Cellular spectrum set up. Speaking of spectrum, here's what 20x20 LTE can do. Hopefully 2x20 TD-LTE arrives before too long... http://www.howardforums.com/attachment.php?s=ac545a7b5ab2d20ffcd0e6dae81b72be&attachmentid=94464&d=1372868632

Unlike what Verizon attempted to do with the cable companies, Sprint hasn't set out to make itself the exclusive customer of site backhaul, to my knowledge. So yes, T-Mobile could use the backhaul if it sees fit. The catch is that T-Mobile may not feel like upgrading those sites anyway, and in some areas the AWS spacing of T-Mobile, as compared to the PCS spacing of Sprint, or other reasons, means that T-Mobile is using different sites anyway.

The cheapest you'll see the S III up front on a non-contract carrier without going to eBay is $400...which will buy it on Virgin Mobile or Boost Mobile. If you want lower monthly costs for still-unlimited service...and don't want to wait for Boost's shrinking payments to hick in...you can pay $440 for the phone and $45 per month to Straight Talk. At which point you're making back the extra $40 by the end of month 4, end up $50 ahead a year in, break even monthly-fee-wise for six months and then lose $5 per month until, at month 28, you should have bought Boost in the first place. But a fair bit changes in two-and-change years. All that said, you can get a Galaxy S III for $300 off of eBay, and Ting's plans start at a much lower price than Virgin Mobile, Straight Talk or Boost Mobile's. The catch is that there's no such thing as unlimited on Ting; your $35 will buy you, for example, up to 500 minutes, 1000 text messages and 500 MB of data. Minutes and messages are pretty reasonably priced, but data (though, yes, the data to carry VoIP is theoretically slightly cheaper than equivalent minutes, and SMS is definitely cheaper) is rather expensive, at around $20 per GB. If you want to not worry about data usage, Virgin or Boost is a better idea. Though the $10 difference between an eBay S III and a Virgin Mobile S III can pay for a few gigs of data. There are other providers out there, but their plans are generally nothing to write home about. Except maybe Voyager Mobile, which offers Bring Your Own Phone like Ting, but with a $39-per-month unlimited-everything option. Haven't tried using that plan though, so no guarantees as to whether it has, for example, voice + SMS roaming like Ting.

First LTE-A phone in the US? A huge resurgence in Direct Connect? Maybe via a partnership with Voxer (e.g. offering Voxer Pro Business for $5/user/mo ad infinitum)? New market expansions to further distance themselves from T-Mobile? Remember that Sprint is in a number of smaller markets already, and they already have agreements with cable companies that serve these potential markets for backhaul, and their cost structure with NV will be lower than Verizon or AT&T's. Such that they'd be making money, and killing roaming bills, if they even hit 20% market share...which as the third horse in a duoploly race seems reasonable enough. The economics look even better if Sprint decides to "pull a Verizon in Alaska" and deploy only using low-band spectrum in the new areas. Except they'll have to wait a couple years before enough people have LTE-in-SMR phones to allow wide 4G site spacing to work correctly. Though on the other hand islands of 4G in a sea of SMR 1x is preferable to roaming on 1x (which is what happens if you aren't on an ex-Alltel site at this point). I know we'll be seeing both tri-band LTE phones and sites later this year, I figured I'd go a little on the SWAG (not to be confused with swag, short for swagger) side of things to make forward looking predictions. And I know that Son will try to get TD-LTE 2600 onto as many sites as possible...probably to the point of over-investing in the tech...because that's what he uses back at home in Japan. But hey, I'm not complaining. I'll be a direct beneficiary of that deployment strategy.

Or maybe Telus (with their iDEN Mike service...I wonder how long they'll keep that around) has SMR licenses around channel 475, so Sprint just had to coordinate with them. Which probably just involved a favorable CDMA roaming deal, or maybe shipping over a bunch of Nextel phones at no charge Here's what Telus's coverage map looks like; there are areas where IBEZ issues could certainly arise, but for Ohio it doesn't look like a big deal: http://businessmobility.telus.com/en/ON/Canada/mike.shtml?skipRedirect

As for T-Mobile's LTE network, I'll be the first to say that they're doing a good job in overlaying their HSPA+ footprint. They certainly aren't done yet, but I have a couple data points: 1. In Austin, plenty (though not all) of sites have refarmed (PCS) HSPA+ and AWS LTE. Speeds are comparable to or better than Sprint LTE, though both use 5MHz channels for now. T-Mobile's network deployment is tighter due to AWS WCDMA spacing (as opposed to PCS CDMA2000 spacing) and as such LTE coverage is more of a blanket than Sprint's at this point (though SMR LTE will completely fix that). The catch: outside town you drop to EDGE equite quickly, and then GPRS. Sprint drops to 3G a little later, and stays there. 2. I spent the weekend on both sides of the Front Range. In Granby, CO, Sprint had 3G, Verizon had LTE and T-Mobile had...roaming on Union Cellular with no data (or maybe it had data but no one had enabled data roaming on their phones...not completely sure). In nearby Grand Lake, Sprint roamed on Verizon (EvDO native) with no data capability, and T-Mobile was still roaming. In Golden, Verizon had (slowing) LTE and Sprint had 3G. T-Mobile had HSPA+ until you got out on the highway, but picked up LTE pretty soon thereafter. Denver has 10x10 LTE turned on, so I was seeing 30+ Mbps down and 15+ Mbps up in a lot of cases. Not quite the 40/10 that I've seen on Verizon but very respectable. -- Also, T-Mobile has some consistently low pings for its LTE service. We're talking below 30ms in many cases. I've seen around that with Sprint (about a year ago, in Fort Worth, on LTE) but at least for now you could play FPS games on T-Mobile and get away with it, while Sprint would be a little more latent.

So, let's look at Jump for a minute. First off, it's insurance. That alone is pretty valuable, from the customer's perspective. Though my bet is that the deductible will get triggered if they want to upgrade their phone and it's not in good enough condition to be sold as a refurb. Which is compounded by the fact that the maximum claim frequency for insurance is the same as the "upgrade cycle" on Jump. I wouldn't even be surprised if, when you tried to make an insurance claim on Jump, T-Mobile would instead suggest that you pay your deductible, and then upgrade to a new phone at "new customer" pricing (which includes renewing the EIP). So if I had an S III, they'd have me pay the $150 deductible, then offer an S 4 ($175 deductible by the way) for another $100 on top of that...plus renewed EIP payments. Which I guess is fair. Keeping in mind that EIP resets each time you get a new phone, I'm guessing. So you're basically on a six-month contract renewal schedule, and you're probably paying for top-of-the-line phones ($100 + $20/mo EIP). Add $10 per month in for Jump and you're shelling out $280 every six months to for a new phone every six months...and you don't get to keep the old one. In my S III to S 4 example, if I bought the phone outright for $580 and sold your six month old S III for $300, you'd be dead-even with Jump. Of course, selling the phone at that price takes more time and effort than going to a T-Mobile store and swapping out the phone would. So it's a bit of a win for you. But wait, there's more! T-Mobile can now refurbish that S III for $50 or so, then turn around and sell it as a refurb for $400 off-contract, or maybe $0 plus $17 per month on their EIP system. Which is why this new option costs a little less than premium device insurance. So you could say the plan is a win-win, but the closed-loop system may well benefit T-Mobile more than it does the customer.

Also, T-Mobile is not an option for me or my family, for a main line at least. But Ting isn't raising their prices, nor is Sprint EPRP, so unless they chase either of those off I'll be sticking with the only carrier that has 4G most places I go.

As a quick note on T-Mobile's side, remember that they have EIP costs above and beyond their plan lineup. But they also include 500MB of data per line, no matter what. So it's $50 + $30 + $10 + $10 for four lines...plus EIP. Versus $70 + $60 + $50 + $50 for four lines, including 1GB of data. Versus $70 + $60 + $30 + $30 for four lines, plus EIP, for unlimited data on T-Mobile. Versus $80 + $70 + $60 + $60 for four lines, including unlimited data, on Sprint. So if you want unlimited data, want a higher-end phone and are sticking with two lines, Sprint is cheaper. Though if you add insurance to your high-end phone, Jump on T-Mobile is a little less expensive and gives you discounted upgrades twice a year starting six months from when you set it up. Though you have to trade in your phone to get that.

No bars on the "i phones" as of just now. Looks like the network is completely offline. Now the countdown begins for SMR 1x and LTE in that area. sent via my SIII on Tapatalk 4 beta

At midnight-30 last night iDEN was still running in Fredericksburg, TX. As of this morning, the i450 and i425 that my mom dug out of my big boxes o' phones (yes, I have those) registered four bars but no service. Looks like the San Antonio MSC is indeed offline. NEXTEL. DONE. |

Similarly, SMR 1x has been on Sprint phones for a few years now, even though the network as of this moment isn't widely available outside Indy and Chicago. Building for the future is exactly what VZW hasn't done, first with LTE and then with LTE in AWS...and T-Mobile's LTE phone selection is in a similar predicament. Props to Sprint for taking the subsidy hit to get the techs out there. sent via my SIII on Tapatalk 4 beta

Heck, Dish could lose their rebanded fka-S-band spectrum as well. I certainly don't want to see that stuff going to AT&T or Verizon (though of the two AT&T needs it more) but that just might happen.

It's somewhat interesting that Azzi pitched "seeding" SMR capable phones as a new thing; phones supporting CDMA 1x in SMR have been available for a few years now, despite the lack of a network to back them up. Heck, my dad's Samsung m370 flip phone can connect to the network once it's available (which will give Sprint the best-coverage CDMA network in central TX because Verizon is PCS-only there and the local carrier has abandoned CDMA and has fewer towers than Sprint anyway due to spacing for CLR). But hey, the fact that probably 80% of Sprint's customers will get an immediate service boost when SMR 1x goes live in their market (the notable recent exception being iPhones less than the 5) is absolutely great. And LTE following relatively shortly thereafter will be just wonderful.

Looks like Sprint will be able to correctly prioritize their devices' network selection (2500 > 1900 > 800) for LTE after all. I predict that Boost and Virgin Mobile won't be selling WiMAX phones or hotspots by year-end, since now it's in Sprint's interest to kick TD-LTE-ification of Clearwire into high gear. Previously, data on WiMAX was free money since Sprint had a flat-rate deal with CLWR for as much traffic as they could throw at the company.But when that cost center shows up on your own books (or opportunity cost center, as it were) the math changes.

It's been awhile since I've used a Huawei phone. Their data sticks are fine, but generally speaking you only have one or two choices there anyway (so you can't tell if one is needlessly sucking power from your laptop compared to a thriftier model). And the fit and finish of a phone, both on hardware and software, is hard to do well; Samsung and HTC just barely get it. Has Huawei come a long way from the Ascend on CricKet (you couldn't really type without Swype on the screen due to poor digitizer sensitivity and slow speeds)? Sure. But I'm still not sold on them. Unless they make a $400 off contract tri-band phone before Samsung gets a tri-band S4 out the door.

I've used TWC's WiFi in a few of the areas where they've deployed it. Not impressed. Google could do this just as easily with Fiber customers, much as Comcast is doing, except Google will have a more contiguous network because they don't charge monthly for their network box. TWC could try the same thing but $5 plus tax per month for modem rental means that there will be a ton of folks turning in their rented modems in exchange for something TWC can't reach into and enable WiFi on. Also, Grande is great and all, but their upload speeds top out at 5 Mbps, and their service stops multiple miles south of me. If they had service here I'd be on it. But they don't.