cdiao

AT&T does not want their iPhone on PCS G Block. Because Sprint is putting LTE on its entire network. AT&T is not doing that. AT&T said repeatedly that it only would provide network wide rural LTE coverage if they received approval of the Tmo deal.When Sprint finishes their build out of LTE toward the end of next year, they will have 4x the rural LTE coverage that AT&T has. And AT&T does not want their devices having the ability to roam on Sprint's LTE network. They would rather just say, 'our phones can't roam on Sprint's LTE network.' And they will be right. Because the AT&T iPhone 5 will not support the PCS G Block.If you look at it, Apple specifically made sure the G Block was ommitted. It would have been just as easy for it to support Band 25, as Band 2. However, someone wanted it to NOT support Band 25. I don't think Apple would care, so that means it must be AT&T that wanted it that way.That's my take on all this. AT&T doesn't want their LTE iPhone to have any ability to roam on Sprint LTE. Sprint's LTE is already starting to appear in places that AT&T has no plans to offer LTE. And that will grow more and more places every quarter for the next year and a half.Robert

At Goldman conference today, RS backed off that "excuse/justification" for TMO merger to instead say that "because of the pending WCS spectrum acquisition [from Nextwave]" it will enable AT&T to broaden LTE's reach to more rural communities.

Does anyone know if WCS spectrum is paired or not, and if it is unpaired, does that make it more likely for AT&T to implement TDD-LTE on its WCS?

Now that NYC made the list, I can go purchase the SG 3S

I got a S3 a few weeks ago to replace my back-up blackberry bold while keeping my WiMax EPIC, but after a few days, swapped it to be my primary smart phone instead. In my case, I found that the processing speed and memory (got 32GB this time), and superior display, etc of teh new S3 was so much better than my earliar Samsung, that the relative disadvantage of running currently on EV-DO network compared with a pretty thin Clearwire WiMax network was not sufficient to hold me back from fully converting to the new device given all its other advantages. So I now simply wait patiently for that 4G icon to light up,...maybe in the next few months I guess. In the meantime, I find that I mostly rely on WiFi anyway since I am either at home or in the office so have not really noticed that I am "missing" very much. But your situation may be different if you are out and about a lot and need alot of bandwidth all the time.

Some of us do understand, the average customer probably doesn't, and honestly the majority of us probably don't care. What we do know is that we have 4G devices but no signal, this is why we get frustrated and why many switch or consider switching carriers. We use the internet (and sites like this) to vent.

That makes no sense. So would you rather that you instead purchased a 3G only device, and preferred that Sprint only sold devices that were not "future proof"? Sprint has always publicly stated that the Network Vision project would be substantially completed by the END of 2013 - so I don't really understand why you believe that you are entitled to an earlier market launch in your particular market than what was promised (end of 2013 to be "substantially complete"). If you were promised that -- go back to the store and swap out to a 3G-only phone instead (probably can get a pretty good deal on the iPhone 4 or 4S now). Alternatively, Verizon has a reasonably robust LTE network now running on 700mhz which should give a decent enough initial coverage -- maybe you should switch over to them if that better solves your personal needs.

As Robert said, this is a website for wireless enthusiasts that is geared towards keeping up with information about the deployment of Sprint's Network Vision, and it is not a customer complaint site. I too wish that all of Sprint's 38k+ cell sites in its network (which took over 15 years to deploy) could be converted instantaneously overnight to LTE, but just as I wish I could be 6' 2" and be able to dunk a basketball, I've resigned myself to one of the facts of life, which is that not all things I wish for will happen as I would like.

Wait, did I see St. Thomas USVI on the list? LOL, yeah right.

I was actually surprised when my cruise ship pulled into St. Thomas a couple of weeks ago that my G3 that was set for "Sprint Only" showed 3G signal. Let me catch up on all my voicemails....so maybe that wasn't a good thing after all. Who knew there was a Sprint signal in the middle of the carribean -- although I suspect that the backhaul is pretty limited.

Yes. The LTE carrier will be 5x5 as well. However, it is assumed that Sprint will start employing Carrier Aggregation with LTE Advanced some time in 2014 that will allow two 5x5 carriers to act more like one 10x10. Sprint also has room to add another 5x5 LTE carrier in PCS spectrum in many markets. Also, starting in the second half of 2013, Clearwire will start rolling out its 20MHz TD-LTE carriers that will be available to Sprint customers.Robert

Robert, to be fair, none of the existing Sprint devices will access CLWR's TD-LTE network if it lights up by mid-2013. I have not seen a product roadmap but I doubt any of the products shipping this year (including the new iPhone) will support either 2.5ghz or TD-LTE, and you probably wont have any new devices until some time in 2013 at earliest that will seed the installed base with TD-LTE capable handsets. Do you have insights otherwise or earlier device launch from your contacts at Overland Park?

Just curious, it seems that a lot of people have EVO LTE and that required some OTA update. Out of the 4 Sprint devices that are LTE capable: LG, HTC EVO, Nexus, and S3, I am curious whether you see any patterns on these connection issues. Reading all the rants, I don't recall anyone having issues with the LG Viper LTE for example (but maybe that's because no good geek here would be caught with the Viper). :-)

I'm trying to understand whether on these connection fails, there are any patterns that are device dependent. Just curious.

Hi Robert, I understand why some of the recent comments drove you to this point... however...does this mean the posts to report the inability to stay connected to the 'active' LTE network are considered whining? I agree they don't need to be dramatic, etc, but I think there may be some valid issues being reported by some of us 'new members'. It sounds like some of us Sprint fanboys in Houston have been hunting down LTE signals like mad, and when we find them and try to use them, we are instantly demoted to 3G. I'm greatful to read the possible explanation you provided that there may be a combination of weak signals and undesireable android logic at play. I would love for us all to work together to understand if that's actually happening, specifically in Houston. I'm a little concerned that my phone may be defective....but I'm not jumping to that conclusion yet. So I've personally been reporting my attempts to connect in hopes that others will confirm a similar experience or counter with a more positive one. I'd love for someone to report a good place in Houston to have a positive LTE experience so I can attempt to duplicate it.....just to figure out if I'm crazy or not (oops...hyperbole...oops...sarcasm ) But seriously. I love the site, and appreciate the info. Maybe the site could have FAQs on things like which apps are good for tower analysis so us newbies could be more productive and report facts that help others. And who knows, maybe there is a serious glitch underneath all the dramatics. I'm pretty sure I can connect to what appears to me to be a healthy LTE signal everytime I update my profile but then get demoted within a minute to 3G on the same tower. (This is where FAQs might help me confirm this experience with harder data.) I used to work for Sprint many years ago as a customer service software consultant...and I will say this: If my Houston LTE experience is typical and there were a significant number of customers anticipating that official LTE anouncement, well... I imagine there will be some unhappy execs running around Overland Park looking for answers. As Archon pointed out....this is more about botched communication than the challenges of new technology. The nerds are forgiving, and who knows how many Sprint customers really even understand what LTE even is, it's the fans you have to worry about. Again, not whining...just observing. And please let me know if I should refrain from posting any more of my 'less than successful' LTE experiences that are sticking to facts such as time, device, location, etc.

I think this is an issue that this site is not intended as a "complaint board" and was intended for forum participants to keep track of the NV deployment. if it was asked in the fashion "hey I have problems staying connected, anybody else have the same problem, and what may be possible solutions?" rather than "hey Sprint get your act together. Sprint salesperson lied to me. I'm leaving now". I for one find the former constructive (and informtive) while the latter is a waste of my time to read.

Many of us not in those initial LTE markets are super jealous that others are already starting to experience Sprint's LTE network and NV on voice, even in its not fully-completed form, while we still have to wait for the deployment to reach our markets. So I agree with Robert that this website (read the mission statement) isn't intended as a whining forum or a general complaint board, but a forum for nerdy folks ("Sprint wireless enthusiasts") to share information and knowledge about Sprint's NV/LTE development.... and to enjoy vicariously from those who are experiencing it first hand.