reedacus25

I'd call it "almost perfect". It's seamless enough that I can't tell it's switched unless I'm watching SignalCheck as it happens. I've never dropped a call when switching between LTE on any band (PCS/AWS/700)

 

VoLTE is pretty nice. If your on a good LTE network with proper coverage / density in the area, I think it offers a phenomenal user experience.

Agreed. With a proper network to handle it, it can perform quite well and quite seamlessly. Having the QCI=1 (QoS Class Identifier) which prioritizes the VoLTE traffic as a number one priority certainly helps. But I have seen VoLTE have quite some issues when you add serious congestion to the eNodeB or put it in some tricky RF acrobatics.

Looks like we need to add an asterisk to all that new coverage

 

"Outside of cities, we see the low-band solution as really the key to end the map wars and get out there and show people we have coverage everywhere," Castle said. "Verizon always puts up maps to show they cover North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, which are beautiful states, of course, but not a lot of people are there. It looks great on TV, but it doesn't make a huge difference to people. That said, we are going to close that gap with 700 MHz and expect to have a competitive map towards the end of the year, because we can with our low-band."

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/t-mobile-counts-7m-customers-using-wi-fi-calling/2015-03-13

If this map is to be believed, then I think that an important note to take is that they show southwest Mississippi as brand new LTE coverage where it currently is roaming. This is C Spire country and they will not be able to get, and/or deploy on 700 there, so it is understood that not 100% of this new coverage expansion comes with an asterisk. I also don't see them going L700 only in these areas. They are going to add a GSM and likely a U1900/L2100 layer too. It only makes sense to do that if they are taking the time to expand coverage as it appears they are.

I'm assuming they will be going back.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They should/will be going back but I doubt that it will be in 2015.

Main efforts will go towards Band 2 (GMO) rollout with main goals of mid-year for substantial completion.

2H of the year will focus on tying up loose ends on the GMO overlay, and deploying in virgin territory with greenfield deployment. I expect greenfield deployments to be full "modernized" (NV-like) builds.

After substantial footprint increase, then we will likely see some focus diverted back to full modernization of the GMO sites.

I'm glad about the expanded coverage (and the map for Michigan looks perfect. Its not Verizon-level coverage by any means, but it's close enough that 98% of people here will have zero problems).

 

 

But Page 23 is concerning. Based on the Dallas example provided, it looks like they're planning to increase "coverage" using low-band, but do so by removing rural sites, and un-densifying the network. (In the photo TMO provided, 35 / 35-W / 35-E from Hillsboro heading north. "Mid-band only" shows 7 cell sites. "LTE + Low band" shows only 4. Similar patterns are visible on all the freeways heading into the city).

 

 

I really hope that's just an artifact of band scoping (all 7 sites will remain, but not all necessarily run low-band) or just mid-network upgrade weirdness in the photo.

 

But if it's not -- if the removal of sites shown in their photo is an accurate reflection of their strategy -- that's a huge mistake.

I too was concerned about this but I also agree that I believe this too be the idea of a quick and dirty overlay. Don't overlap, hit the bare minimum of sites necessary and keep it spread out to keep the gain knob real high.

Big expansion is Louisiana and Mississippi around Natchez and Alexandria, covering up a good amount of roaming from the old Centennial footprint.

Will be very interesting to see how it plays out. T-Mobile doesn't have the 700 in MS like it does in west Louisiana. Just excited to see progress.

Unless it changed since 2013, New Mexico was an Ericsson market for Tmo. I used to run into Ericsson Tmo installs all the time. ABQ has a lot of AIR units.

I'm also pretty sure Florida is a mixed market. Fairly certain the Destin market uses AIR off hand.

I work in a small and what some would consider rural town. (Owego, NY)

 

Sprint LTE has been active since early 2014 on B25 1900mhz. (B26 is on, but non-optimized so it currently provides no gains over B25.)

 

My iPad has both Sprint/Tmo plans on it. T-Mobile JUST turned on their LTE a few weeks ago, and Band 2 (1900Mhz) is active. It is amazing, as far as signal is concerned. Sprint can only hold a -110dBm B25 signal, and is usually on 3G most of the day.

 

Both carriers are co-located on the same site. I work a quarter mile away from it, my building is line-of-sight with the tower.

 

Why is T-Mobile stronger than Sprint? I've been waiting months for Sprint to optimize 800Mhz just so I can use LTE indoors, and T-Mobile barges in with amazing 1900Mhz that never seems to drop indoors. That, and they couldn't possibly have optimized already, right?

 

Main question: Is T-Mobile inherently "stronger" than Sprint on the same frequencies?

Well that is quite frankly surprising.

T-Mobile's 1900 deployment has been almost exclusively GMO.

I am sure someone can chime in with Sprint info here, but it's quite likely that Sprint is using Remote Radio Heads which should afford greater coverage.

The only thing I can think of that may impact this, is if Sprint has more sites in the area and is required to run at lower power to mitigate interference. But even still, the GMO is going to be less sensitive on the return path which makes the indoor situation a bit odd.

Also it could be due to more favorable sector orientation in your scenario. But I'm going to try and assume they are equal.

And how does Mosaik source this coverage info? I truly would like to know, but I do not think that methodology has ever been revealed.

 

No matter. My point is this: I do not buy that T-Mobile has such extensive band 2 rural LTE footprint. TmoNews -- editor and readers -- does not seem to buy it either. The map appears to be a projection, not a current snapshot.

 

I really wish that honest network deployment info were available for all operators. However, S4GRU is basically alone in that regard.

 

AJ

I can only speak to a very small geographic area, but T-Mobile's band 2 deployment has made ridiculous strides in my neck in the last 6 months. In Mississippi, MS-25 from Starkville to Jackson, US-45 from Starkville to Meridian, I-59 from Meridian to Slidell, LA, I-10 from Slidell to Mobile, AL, and I-55 south from Jackson until native coverage ends right before Brookhaven, are all more or less complete, I would estimate north of 95%.

In southeast Louisiana I've seen all of the existing 3G infrastructure go to full modernization finally, as well as some Band 2 (and Band 4) full in along I-12. I-10 is almost solid LTE from Slidell past Defuniak Springs, FL.

To say that the network progress hasn't been extensive is in my eyes, very short sighted. T-Mobile users aren't nearly as Sensorly happy as the Sprint faithful. But it's filling in.

I have full reason to believe that T-Mobile has brought the Mississippi Delta online due to that buildout being relatively recent (circa ~2007 I believe) and they may have had better backhaul in place or readily available from Telepak Networks.

I'll be the first to bemoan the fact that it's a half-__sed band-aid solution, I want RRH, I want UMTS layer(s), I want those old copper feeder cables and antennas replaced, but the simple truth is that for the vast majority of consumers, they see the LTE indicator, and the data actually works now, and that suffices to appease them. And frankly, since I have seen more work done on the network in this area in 6 months than I have in nearly 10 years as a subscriber, I'm beginning to care less, because progress is good, and I'm getting a hell of a lot more use out of my dollars to Bellevue these days.

I too would love to see Mosaik's source for this. I also want to see honest data for all carriers, T-Mobile not withstanding, but the likelihood of that happening, well that's a funny joke I think.

Considering T-Mobile's decades old and neglected Nortel 1900MHz GSM infrastructure .

 

Early user reports are already showing improved GSM coverage and 1900MHz LTE that fully matches old Nortel 2G footprint after the simple act of replacing the rusty and outdated cabinets and equipment with new NSN/Ericsson base stations on the ground.

At least in my areas of travel, I have not noticed any appreciable difference in coverage. Granted the majority of this coverage isn't quite as old as the Nortel gear in OK, some of it was very, very old from the PowerTel days.

That being said, while user experience has improved greatly, consistency has taken a dive. I'm not sure if it is my iPhone 6, or network niggles upstream of me, but I have the worst luck with VoLTE. Can't place outbound calls, calls turn into dead air, etc. And this is with my phone hanging off the dashboard, no hands attenuating it. Very frustrating. And also, in areas that are not properly spaced, I often times fall to no service rather than the GSM network that is there and waiting. I chalk this up to the iPhone, but still. I have found the LTE network to be < the existing GSM footprint and the GSM footprint seeing no appreciable difference in coverage.

I can only wonder what my network performance and coverage would be with RRH and a UMTS layer to handle my voice duty and receive the SIB19 message to handup to the the LTE layer in seconds, not minutes...

With my iPhone 6 (notoriously not a great RF device) on Band 2, I kept close to comparable range with the GSM network in dense enough areas.

Point in case:

Along I-59S in MS today, I kept a WatchESPN stream open from just outside Meridian, MS to Slidell, LA with some slight quality degradation close to the state line where spacing is more sparse. This stretch is pretty good with spacing for 1900, and thus my performance was adequate for this expectation.

Conversely, US45S from Brooksville, MS to Meridian, MS is also completely Band 2ified and the performance is spotty as anything due to site spacing being stretched WAY too thin. Please reference the 2G maps on T-Mobile to compare the spacing.

Moral of the story, when the existing macro infrastructure was already well planned for 1900, the Band 2 stuff pretty much works to the same level as expected by the GSM network when you allow proper overlap and sufficient time for the handset to handover to the adjacent cell.

However when the cell spacing is too far apart, you have a horrible experience. I desperately wish these sites would get the RRH treatment because it would make the experience a great deal more palatable.

But I'm also the fool that wants a UMTS layer for reliable voice with better quality than the GSM network with simultaneous data. Yeah, yeah, VoLTE I know, it's just not rock solid yet....

That's what Verizon says about Tmo's LTE network, not total mobile data coverage. Unless they have said something new recently.

Although one could easily argue that the T-Mobile data coverage was non-existent in the GSM only areas.

Second anecdote, Verizon actually did them a solid and fluffed the map a bit by including legacy MetroPCS LTE that was not integrated into T-Mobile's network yet.

Obviously not up to date with band 2 deployment. But it was pretty accurate at the time...

Also announcing 4 markets with 700 MHz live. (DC, Cleveland, Minneapolis, and Colorado Springs)

What about pcs?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6

I believe Chicago was one of the first markets to launch DC-HSPA in the PCS band.

T-Mobile has walked a very fine line, annoyingly at times, between cannibalizing spectrum from UMTS to LTE. In some markets they go gung-ho and get to 15-20 MHz as quickly as possible. Obviously there they have the spectrum to do so.

But in some markets they lag and the LTE layer becomes very saturated (looking at you New Orleans).

And then in some markets they just do some odd things. My old market of Starkville, MS has had 2 AWS HSPA carriers for a few years now and have never been configured for DC-HSPA, and within the last 6 months launched LTE alongside a PCS HSPA carrier. They also shuffled the GSM spectrum around to something that made even less sense (C block to A block for those wondering). Then they shrunk the PCS HSPA carrier down to less than 5 MHz, and this weekend while hear I noticed that there was a second shrunk PCS HSPA carrier and sure enough DC-HSPA is active on that layer.

So with 3.8 (4 really) HSPA carriers atop GSM and an LTE layer that's 5 MHz wide, there is a ridiculous disproportionate amount of wasted HSPA capacity. So hoping they kill an AWS carrier for widening the LTE channels here as that would make much, much more sense.

Either way, expect to see the network recenter around AWS LTE, PCS UMTS, and PCS GSM over time in the urban core, and PCS LTE and PCS GSM outside of that. And eventually L700 sprinkled in both of those categories where applicable.

t mobile will be rolling out HSPA+ and LTE to all 2g areas

Unfortunately the vast majority of those 2G areas will only be getting LTE, with no UMTS layer.

Where? What locations not indicated on the coverage map?

 

Sent from my XT1096 using Tapatalk

5 MHz Band 2 LTE along I-59 near Picayune, Poplarville, Purvis, just north of Hattiesburg (adjacent to a band 4 site), Laurel, Sandersville, Heidleburg, and Vossburg.

On US-45 north of Meridian, Lauderdale, Shuqualak, Macon, and Brooksville are all 5 MHz Band 2 LTE as well.

According to Sensorly and RootMetrics it looks like some places like Collins, Mendenhall, Moss Point and Gautier as well.

Also worth noting that they deployed some Band 4/UMTS markets in MS within the last 9 months in West Point, Columbus, Oxford, and Vicksburg as well.

They've been busy in Louisiana as well.

Which parts have you seen?

After getting I-10 from Baton Rouge to New Orleans and I-49 from Lafayette to New Orleans, as well as my pushing to get the Causeway modernized from GPRS, I haven't seen anything besides a couple sites towards Opelousas make progress.

I believe I-12 Baton Rouge to Hammond has been modernized to LTE, but you still have gaps on I-12 between Hammond and Covington, Covington and Slidell.

Have seen no PCS deployment in Louisiana yet. Have seen plenty of PCS LTE in Mississippi however.

I just want a cheap router and I don't care about tmobile firmware because I'm a sprint customer. The router is actually $75 with an active promotion code on their Web site.

Source?

Interested in any savings I can have on this router

For what it's worth, they're selling it to anyone outright for $99, at least on the website. So the question you have to ask yourself is whether saving $100+ on a top-end router is worth letting T-Mobile folk leach some of your bandwidth for voice calls on occasion.

There's no universal T-Mobile SSID. Won't happen.

No need to worry about people all up in your WiFiz.

Only thing separating this from a normal router is secret sauce QoS baked into the firmware.

It's a steal of a deal for a great router. Nothing more, nothing less.

Cough Republic Wireless Cough

T-Mobile's WiFi calling dates back to 2006 when the UMA Nokia 6136 and Samsung t709 were beta tested that summer.

T-Mobile has finally started advertising something they've had for 8 years...

People don't seem too happy or excited. http://www.tmonews.com/2014/09/uncarrier-7-0-wi-fi-unleashed-wi-fi-calling-and-texting-for-every-simple-choice-customer-from-anywhere/

Yes I can handoff a volte call to wifi once I get my iPhone 6, but what good does that do me at home when I don't get LTE inside? I must end all calls before leaving home on a wifi call or have them ended for me! Femto solves this.

The exclusive period on jump is a way to get people to sign up for jump. Jump, while being a great service in my eyes, does not benefit me as an AppleCare+ buyer, and would be excess cash thrown at T-Mobile.

Very excited about the GoGo. I've used some airline wifi before and really enjoyed the iMessage possibilities, but it will be neat to have full SMS as well.

Mississippi State fan I assume?

Spot on.

Doozy's on 16th was far and away my favorite eatery there. Great sandwiches and the owner could not have been any more personable or nice.

Since you've been up here Sprint now has LTE on both band 25 and 26 at TD 8T8R Band 41 soon hopefully). I was pulling 4-12 mb/s down during the CWS this year. The site almost directly across the street from Brother Sebastian's has both 25/26 LTE as well. T-Mobile does have a site in close proximity to the stadium that to their credit has been upgraded to LTE, but again they're only running a protection network here that by-and-large solely covers Omaha's interstate system to keep their customers from roaming.

 

If you plug in Omaha zip code into T-Mobile's website it literally tells you "Please enter a valid U.S. ZIP Code." Really glad to know we (almost 1 million of us) in the Omaha metro don't exist Mr. Legere.

Oh I'm well aware of how bad it is. When State was last in Omaha (2007) at Rosenblatt, my dad's Treo 650 was a brick. Granted it was exceptionally poor RF wise, but it baffled me that it would find zero service in a city like Omaha in an open air environment.

T-Mobile doesn't have any exchanges for any Nebraska area codes. Not terribly sure what is involved in making that happen, but they flat out can't service a local number.

Either way, as a tourist, it covered my needs for the time being. Sure there were big black holes, but I knew better than to expect miracles. It really wouldn't take TOO many sites to bring the network to a passable state. Mostly in the western suburbs like I mentioned.

Can't wait to get back to Omaha soon.

Yep they're terrible in Nebraska and Iowa and that is the point. We have several members that continue to extrapolate Carrier X, Y, or Z's performance in City 1,2,3 to make broad generalizations about carriers national networks. That needs to quit. I think it is crazy that T-Mobile didn't build out Omaha, but I don't carry over any assumptions based on that to their network in other places.

Exactly right.

And just like my experience of having usable data on HSPA with T-Mobile at the 2013 College World Series while all of the CSpire customers were stuck roaming on Sprint's 1x at TD Ameritrade Park.

This was before Sprint had Network Vision there. Also before T-Mobile modernized there as well.

But the knife cuts both ways where my phone became a brick when we drove out to Brother Sebastian's outside of 680. And I use my freedompop hotspot for car rides through Mississippi where T-Mobile has GPRS for a good stretch of I-59 from Slidell to Meridian.

I know where it works well and where it doesn't. The EDGE on US-45 from Meridian, MS to US-82 is surprisingly usable.

And on I-12 between Hammond and Covington, LA you have 2 EDGE only sites that are useless for data.

Highly localized. It's completely YMMV.

Everybody, give a round of applause for the comedy duo of maxgentasilver and T-Mobilerrell352. They are so funny and the opening act every night for the John Legere clown show. But, as a reminder, we ask that you please not throw rotten eggs and tomatoes at them for their cherry picking of experience in their piddling little markets.

 

AJ

Not quite sure what name calling and belittling of people's experiences and markets adds to the discussion.

Just because they have had good experiences on GSM platforms/bad experiences on CDMA platforms, doesn't put a magenta T on their chest (Scarlet Letter reference). Peoples' experiences are legitimate.

Broad generalizations also exist for a reason, because GPRS/EDGE on T-Mobile often does suck. Same can be said for 1xRTT/EvDO on Sprint.

Hell, I was at the beach and tethered my T-Mobile iPhone to my computer and pinged 8.8.8.8 and though it truly was a dead data connection. In fact, it was 15-20s latency. Sprint had a weak LTE signal if I needed it.

Other times I will find latency in the order of 300-500ms. I have even completed a functioning FaceTime video call over an EDGE data connection on my iPad before.

Yes, I am a T-Mobile customer. I have used Virgin Mobile in the past. I have a Freedompop LTE hotspot now. I use what works for me, where I am, and within my budget.

I prefer the 3GPP networks for various reasons. It doesn't mean it's always superior, but it's what I prefer.

Yes Sprint has more LTE coverage in the in between. T-Mobile has more/better metro LTE coverage at this point. And it's paying off. The networks cater to two different sets of customers. Hopefully within a year, that disparity will become parity and there will be more competition in the market.

Wish that was the case in Baton Rouge. Verizon 3G doesn't hit 2+ anymore, but it's still at a very respectable 1-2 Mbps here. Sprint EVDO is still abysmal in Baton Rouge, often times resulting in zero throughput on NV accepted sites. I tried Tmo on the 1 week test run, and their speeds are fantastic when you are on LTE or HSPA, but they need more cell sites in the metro area like Sprint. They also don't even have a cell site in the immediate downtown area. So unfortunately, it's either ATT or Verizon here if you want a reliable cell phone experience. Truly a bummer.

I rarely venture downtown, but I've noticed how flaky the T-Mobile signal gets. Definitely need a bit of densification, which is ironic since T-Mobile's network is slightly denser the Sprint's last I checked. South of I-10 it pretty much works great. May fall down to HSPA+ but it's still extremely usable. Still haven't modernized Tiger Stadium as of a couple weeks back. Gonna be embarrassing for T-Mobile come a few weeks from now when the single HSPA carrier is underwater at the 100k+ stadium..

Back on topic, where it's found, Sprint's LTE is pretty robust in Mandeville. Just a Freedompop hotspot, but it works. Helps the drive through Mississippi in GPRS land (except MS-25 where Sprint never built native out..).

It's true. In some places. It's also true that Sprint has greater density than Tmo in some places.

 

In most of the places I go, Sprint and Tmo density is pretty similar.

I can completely corroborate this. In many areas, T-Mobile and Sprint are in parity for density, often colo on the same physical site.

Sometimes T-Mobile has better density. Baton Rouge comes to mind for density in T-Mobile's favor (in the city are, outlying areas fall off quickly). My hometown of Starkville, MS is another good example, where T-Mobile and Sprint are co-located together on 3 sites, but T-Mobile edges out with a fourth site in the city.

But New Orleans is more Sprint dense. Not that I have horrible issues with T-Mobile in New Orleans, I don't, but Sprint definitely edges out on density by a pretty fair margin.

It was a nice surprise to see AT&T added 10x10 of AWS band on my home site while I was gone and it wasn't even needed.

 

I saw some guys hanging antennas on an AT&T site in Mississippi that was HSPA only.

I noticed that ATT had widened their band 4 LTE to 10 MHz wide last I was in Baton Rouge. And I know that they are moving all UMTS to 850 and taking PCS for LTE soon, if not now.

Where in MS are they still overlaying LTE?

Ellie Goulding to team with Sprint to Spark™ interest for her latest hit single "Burn."