iansltx

My guess (could be wrong) on the 3G side is that 3G is indeed connected to the new backhaul, but in many cases there now aren't enough 3G carriers to handle the load being placed on the tower (especially in a market like San Antonio, which may still be 25% Sprint). I believe NV allows additional CDMA carriers to be added quickly, easily and remotely, so as deployments cool down you may start seeing that.

Fat Tuesday

Screen saver

That is indeed interesting. Didn't know that SpectrumCo/Cox predicated the spectrum sale on the noncompete etc. I mean, are they that terrified of Verizon HomeFusion? Personally, VZW being the fourth part of a quadruple play by a cableco isn't a problem, even if it's Comcast in Colorado (where CenturyLink's quad-play also includes...you guessed it...VZW). Cable companies limiting access to what should be shared resources (backhaul, WiFi) on the other hand is a big issue.

I agree that cable shouldn't give Verizon preferential treatment, or vice versa, as a result of this deal...or at all, really. On the other hand, I think that the spectrum sale should go through. Just add as a condition that cable companies must allow any cellular carrier to use their WiFi offloading networks at a non-discriminatory charge per subscriber (or per gigabyte, either way), and that cable companies must offer cell site backhaul on similarly non-discriminatory terms. That's what everyone is whining about, or should be if they aren't.

It's a "you should be green" feature...despite the fact that additional battery wear probably outweighs the environmental benefits of not keeping your phone plugged in after charging. The original Galaxy S phones had the notification as well...until third party ROMs stripped the notification out

I'm using my phone more lightly now...and I'll hit 24 hours with around 40% left in a few minutes. Then again, the phone has been on WiFi 95% of the time, not using GPS but for a few minutes, etc. So this is close to an ideal case...though I did watch an episode of Hak5 via YouTube yesterday at reasonable brightness and near full volume. It almost feels like the battery on the phone just needed a few charges to condition itself, at which point battery life doing normal tasks will be in the 1+ day range, which is enough for me!

Just checked Sprint's coverage map viewer and you can now see both LTE and WiMAX networks on their (tiny) map viewer. LTE coverage areas aren't shown in any sort of modified coloration based on signal strength, but the orange blobs are a bit more detailed than the coverage shapes I've seen from, say, Verizon. which is nice. The coverage maps also show just how comprehensive Sprint's LTE market launches are. We aren't talking about downtown-only here...for example, some areas in San Antonio are still WiMAX-only, but in the majority of situations LTE coverage already completely eclipses what WiMAX could do (as it should). The contrast in Houston is even more stark; places like Magnolia and Cleveland (TX) show up as covered by the brand-new LTE network but not WiMAX. I don't feel like doing the analysis quite yet, but Sprint may actually have more LTE than Verizon in some cases, if not now then maybe a few weeks from now as more sites come online. That's saying something, but it happens when you upgrade (eventually) 100% of your cell sites in an area to 4G, using the term "area" broadly rather than narrowly.

PM me with a location for that tower. It may not have come online yet; I can check the ETA (one of the perks of being a Premier Sponsor).

My 2¢: Sprint will start churning out press releases about their network as soon as cities are officially online, or within a week or so of go-live (like they did with ATL/DFW/HOU/SAT/KC). They'll probably issue another round of press releases once each city is online. The reason you haven't seen much in the news is Sprint doesn't have much online yet, and is trying to under-promise and over-deliver (a good idea; see ChadBroChillz's post). AT&T and Verizon have only posted press releases when they were close to launch on a market, or had launched it already. As of right now, Sprint is following this model, and asking more of it could be a recipe for disaster. Also, I've got a sneaking suspicion that my post, along with the two above it, need to be moved to a new thread. I'll ask a mod to do that now...because I think that this post should stay reasonably on-topic.

Close. The 800 network (where Sprint has at most 14MHz of spectrum available for wideband use) will be deployed *in addition* to 1900, as a coverage boost. Verizon has the luxury of having both low frequency (~750MHz) and wide(ish) bandwidth (a single 10x10 channel), but the single 10x10 channel is all any current VZW device will ever be able to get. Sprint will have 20MHz of LTE active as well in most areas as a baseline (10MHz in PCS, 10MHz in SMR) once Nextel is gone...it'll just be on two different bands. Then again, Sprint might add another 5x5 LTE carrier or two to PCS, outclassing VZW on total capacity per cell until Verizon starts installing AWS LTE (and handing out devices that suport that frequency in addition to upper-C 700, of which there are none now).

Yes, however my bet is that VZW is on a tower farther away, since it has a lower signal and it's on ~750MHz vs. 1900 on Sprint. Also, I like those upload speeds on Sprint. One more thing: you might try switching servers on the Verizon speed test to one of the others in the KC area (or maybe even look at a Dallas or Chicago one). I'm not sure about this but my bet is that Verizon isn't actually hitting the Internet in KC (probably going on their core network to somewhere else), while Sprint has peering relationships right in town (hence the low pings). This varies depending on the city and the month; Denver VZW used to be backhauled to Seattle and then dumped to the Internet via Global Crossing, but now they have a Level3 connection right in DEN, kicking ping times down within the range I see for T-Mobile, who also uses Level3 for connectivity here.

As part of Network Vision, some cell sites will get a CDMA 1x Advanced (voice only, no EvDO) carrier. This is happening now. LTE in SMR will happen once iDEN is gone, so sometime next year. The point of 800MHz will be to give people extra coverage, more than about allowing for more capacity (though it will increase capacity). Better indoor signals and all that. By contrast, 1900MHz is where Sprint has, and will continue to have, capacity-focused 3G/4G, eventually augmented by Clearwire TD-LTE "Hot Zones" which trade coverage for capacity even further down the scale than 800 vs. 1900.

You're confusing WiFi frequencies with cellular frequencies. Since Day One, Sprint has used 1900MHz for its network. Hence "Sprint PCS". Yes, the signal doesn't go as far as Verizon's 700MHz, ut Sprint spaces their towers more closely together, largely making up for this difference. Also, since signals don't travel as far, it's easier to add capacity in a precise manner on the higher frequency (where Sprint has more spectrum...generally 40MHz in a given market, with some notable exceptions). Good rule of thumb: coverage per cell site is inversely related to frequency. Capacity is positively related to frequency...Sprint will have at most a single 5x5 LTE carrier in 800MHz SMR, while they'll eventually have multiple 5x5 carriers in 1900MHz, and they'll use one or more 20MHz carriers in 2600MHz (Clearwire) eventually. Verizon paid dearlly to get enough 700MHz to provide a 10x10MHz channel for LTE nationwide. But that's the extent of their LTE deployment until they turn on AWS. Sprint can match this 20MHz of capacity in 1900MHz as they see the need.

Swipe your palm across the screen, left-to-right or right-to-left. It'll take the screenshot. Or simultaneously hold down Power and Home buttons until the phone shows that a screenshot was taken.

It should work. There are two nationwide CDMA carriers in Canada (Bell and Telus). They've since both migrated to HSPA+ (and maybe LTE?), with a network sharing agreement, but their CDMA networks should stay up and running for awhile yet. Most Canadian cellular providers now have an HSPA/+ network of some sort (Rogers, Bell/Telus, Wind, Mobilicity, Videotron, maybe Sasktel), but I digress.

I don't feel like rooting at this point (maybe a 100% functional JB ROM will push me over the edge there). As for 3G speeds, I tethered yesterday and got 1000/600 (so alls well there). WiFi seems to be just as snappy as ever, though I haven't done a speedtest on WiFi in awhile. EDIT: I just speedtested on WiFi. With a "very strong" signal and 72 Mbps link speed, I hit 30+ Mbps down and 20+ Mbps up (gotta love PowerBoost). These speeds are comparable to what I've gotten pre-update.

I wouldn't say that. I've used Skype plenty on EvDO (Verizon and Sprint) and it works just fine. Though Viber seems to be easier on a phone's CPU so I'll tend to use that instead when the other party has it.

Just checked and looks like CricKet has native coverage in your area...not sure why NetMonitor says it's Sprint. Maybe the PRL telling the phone that it's not roaming gives NetMonitor the wrong idea? At any rate, keep in mind that, if you do switch to CricKet, they'll throttle you beyond 2.5GB per month of data usage, on their $55 per month smartphone plan. It's better than 300MB, sure, but it's not unlimited. Then again, neither is what I think is the best option in that area: VZW. 20 Mbps symmetric speeds on my iPad while I was in Chapel Hill were lovely.

Bay Watch

Good to know. My billing cycle goes from the 8th to the 7th of each month, so I'll end up well within the refund period (will probably kill the addon sometime on the 25th). I'm curious though what wuld happen if I used, say, 1.5GB or so during that less-than-half-a-month that I have tethering...I suppose the system prorates by days rather than by megabytes but I'll find out soon enough. If it does prorate per-day, I may re-add the mobile hotspot feature again in mid-August, just in case Time Warner Cable doesn't arrive as scheduled to install 'net in my new place...though I do have a T-Mobile data stick with 5GB per month that I could also use

Correction: if CricKet has towers in a given area (i.e. they sell unlimited-minute plans) then they're using their own network rather than Sprint's. This can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on the area. Just thought I'd clear that up, since if I recall correctly RDU does have Cricket native service.

I guess I'm on the other end of the speed spectrum here. My connection here is 50 Mbps down, 15 Mbps up. WHen I move, my connection will be 50 down, 5 up (should be 25 soonish). I've used 4G on three networks so far, soon to be four (Clearwire, T-Mobile, Verizon and now Sprint, in order of when I got a device that uses the network). Out of the above, my home connection will be fastest, and I'll use that speed (though the times when I fully utilize the connection are relatively few and far between). Verizon will generally be second-fastest. However not having to worry about streaming Netflix on my phone, or doing video calls, or whatever else I want to do while not on WiFi, if liberating. And as long as I can do what I want on my phone without the network slowing it down, I'm fine with whatever speed I end up getting. What speed allows me to do everything I want on my phone? Unless I'm uploading HD video, 5 Mbps down and 2 Mbps up should be just fine. if I'm uploading HD video, 5 Mbps up would be nice. But usually I'll just be uploading photos...and surfing the web a lot