Fraydog

Verizon is using 4GV to reduce and in some cases eliminate dropped calls. Here's where it doesn't translate in the real world, it reduces voice quality to mush. Lots of people accepted it for a long time because there weren't other good alternatives for voice quality. Then Sprint went EVRC-NW Service Option 73, T-Mobile went to AMR-WB over UMTS then over LTE, and AT&T went to full rate AMR-NB on UMTS and then AMR-WB over LTE. Yet Verizon wins RootMetrics tests because voice quality is not accounted for. If it was they would get routed by the other carriers. There is so little testing of voice quality that it is crazy, frankly. Even Sprint's non HD Voice seems to be ahead of Verizon. I don't seem to notice call quality drops to Sprint CDMA all that much but I sure do to Verizon CDMA and I'm on the same damn network. AT&T and T-Mobile are even farther ahead of Verizon and T-Mobile is even rolling out EVS which gets even better quality than AMR on a 9.6 Kbps bit rate. I'm not even sure that anyone else in the world has a live EVS network. I expect AT&T would be next on that train. AT&T actually beat T-Mobile on NumberSync and software defined networks and didn't get any credit from it on Reddit. Go figure.

Since I'm using Verizon, I'll answer to the best of my ability. Verizon uses a codec called 4GV which is super compressed to extend coverage and compress data over 1X so they could have, first off, more data on EV-DO when they got the iPhone, and secondly, be able to more quickly transition people to LTE. That codec is extremely noticeably bad. Meanwhile Sprint is using EVRC-NW Service Option 73 which is far closer to VoLTE quality than 4GV is. That's the main reason why Sprint is way ahead of Verizon on voice quality. On VoLTE call quality on Verizon is much better until it hits cross carrier. Then they use G.729 to send the calls out over the POTS telephone system between carriers and landlines. That too is a degradation of voice quality, but Verizon had G.729 for the longest time because that was never their quality degradation. On 4GV to POTS or cross carrier, the bottleneck is 4GV. Now on Verizon VoLTE it is G.729. Compare to AT&T and T-Mobile that use G.711 in their own cross carrier calls. Call quality from AT&T to T-Mobile or vice versa is pretty good. Now my memory is foggy on Sprint's choice but I believe it is also G.711 IIRC. In short, Verizon is the biggest bottleneck to call quality and they never get called out for it because coverage, coverage, coverage. Here's more reading on G.711 vs. G.729. http://www.airespring.com/understanding-sip-trunking-using-g711-g729-codecs/

Is this move part of AT&T's transitioning to software defined networks? I knew AT&T execs like Randall Stephenson talked about that process a lot, but always in very vague terms.

Good Ole Overhead Park. I didn't understand the joke when ex-Nextel people made it to me long ago. I understand it now. I know Marcelo understands this and is trying to change that culture. That culture is still resistant to change.

Well, Vestburg, Ericsson's CEO, just purged a bunch of suits on the network side of his company. Perhaps he finally got tired of losing to Nokia.

I agree and I think Sprint has to take the risk of more capex to pull ahead of competitors in network speeds. I am taking a long term view here. Short term, hold on to your butts. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

I don't really care what others say. I look at the balance sheet and the investor material and make my determination from there. Sprint is making headway on churn and network, but if liquidity becomes an issue, then those positives are a moot point. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

It's still 2016 and Sprint is still talking about permitting. I'd rather they risk everything to move fast. If that means they step on a few toes, so be it. Better to beg for forgiveness rather than ask permission. Sprint people need to be deploying small cells as if their lives depend on it. This time, that may just be the case. Most of them go away if Masa gets his way and has T-Mobile or if there is a C11 in the future. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Speaking of VoLTE, is Sprint still working on a VoLTE implementation with Single Radio Voice Call Continuity? That would be big for Sprint, and an innovation they could bring to the market as part of their value proposition?

I think it is also said that air interfaces in the 5G standards will be able to break through walls more easily. That means more data can be moved on frequencies that were previously paper bag territory. Still, there needs to be a lot of small cell expansion and that is helped by better networks in the ground. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/technology/article75279182.html Here's our old bud Mark Davis chiming in. Now Moffett is also running with the theory of Sprint biding time for a change in administration for a 2017 merger with T-Mobile. Here's a quote of Moffett in the WSJ article (I'm not linking it but you can Google it):

Slew foot

I could see benefits out of it but I just don't see the public support. That said, if you speak of giving Neville Ray an extra 200 MHz of LTE spectrum and double his capex you would see what might compete for the fastest and best LTE network on Planet Earth as well as roll up into the 5G era with a bullet. That said I think the Sprint end of things like KC would pretty much get decimated. I can see both sides of it. Not a pretty picture on that end if there's a merger, because Masa already tipped his hand as to who runs it. That said if it happens I would likely end up welcoming new Magentan overlords. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

I'm looking at the evidence on the board and seeing this auction differently. I'm leaning toward the opinion it can be a moderate success. Maybe not the money printing operation the last AWS auction is, but I don't see where the doom and gloom is on it. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

I see the weakness in the smaller providers is that there's no opportunity for a converged experience between fixed home broadband and mobile for the most part in this country. AT&T has converged opportunity with wireline and DirecTV. Verizon kind of has that with FiOS in the Northeast but they got rid of wireline everywhere else. That said, it's kind of shocking I don't see a truly converged network experience on the horizon in most places in the US. I can see cable operators making the same observation toward mobile. At what point does it make sense for a cable co to buy a mobile operator or vice versa? If I'm Comcast I'm looking at what opportunities could be had in this regard. I just see the business as running wireless only and to be honest the smaller providers still have a large disadvantage in the balance sheet.

I was in that category for quite a while. That said, there's occasions I have used simultaneous voice and data on Verizon since I switched to VoLTE. It was nice to be on the phone and order pizza. I would have had to hang up the phone if I were on Sprint. Not saying this is a big deal but it was a nice feature to have. Also remember OTT VoIP does not have the QoS controls VoLTE has. I have had better luck with VoLTE than FaceTime Audio on Verizon. Verizon has, if anything, a less dense cell grid than Sprint but they have been able to make VoLTE work where I live. In some ways I'm experiencing less dropped calls on VoLTE than I was on the CDMA network here which Verizon was kind of leaving to rot. Maybe Sprint's calculus is different since Sprint has a more advanced CDMA network where they cover over Verizon. The key for Sprint is to get VoLTE right. Launch it when it is ready to launch. The worst thing they could do is throw out a half-baked implementation.

Ars, I sense that if you moved to my town, you'd be on AT&T. Compare one tower on L1900 to two running L2 and L17 with a third running those same frequencies across the river. No B12 here either, USCC has it but will probably sell it at some stage as they left this market. I'm still on Verizon but I have thought of moving to AT&T. Primary reason being Verizon has got too congested here due to everyone here having Verizon. That said no low band in a rural zone like this is no good. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Some of the things I see with the Vivo device are promising. That said, I think any device that is on AT&T and T-Mobile had better support band 12 at this stage. I don't see why Vivo didn't add B12 and B28 for that matter. May not bother you in Chicago but if Laser Leap 700 goes to T-Mobile you might regret not having B12, or if you go to AT&T for that matter.

TMUS took a hit with these earnings because there was a slight drop in T-Mobile's ARPU where it had been increasing in prior quarters. It's in the Investor Facebook they put out.

Here it's just 2 and 17 I've seen in Chester. B4 can be deployed later but there aren't a lot of AT&T customers here so there isn't a real need for it yet.

I think a lot of institutional investors want to see money in the bank. That would be progress by the way I measure it.

I'm not going to rip anyone for having different opinions. But could we shorten things a little? Is that too much to ask? I personally would love having the US Spectrum alignments changed a little, but there's common sense ways to do that without blowing up the system like B28 and things like that. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

"Brevity is the soul of wit." - William Shakespeare Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

My Verizon Note 5 has something similar going on when I have Advanced Calling off. With Advanced Calling on it shows single path like Sprint eCSFB handsets. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

http://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-keep-their-cellphones-longer-1461007321 Funny, people are upgrading less now that they know the actual cost of their devices. Funny how that works...