irev210

wow, hopeless. call him up! Talk to his manager, tell him an employee of his is being an idiot on xda.

Do tell, did u call? Heh

Yeah, he just has no idea. I am sure that he still probably thinks he is right. Give him a call and see if you can educate him A true test of how smart/dumb he is if he will listen and understand after you explain to him, or still stick to his completely wrong and uneducated understanding. Give him a call and let us know!

He probably heard it from some other sprint tech. You should give him a call, be patient with him, and spend the 15 minutes educating him.

Any plan to replace Huawei equipment as well? I know sprint was essentially told by federal gov't not to use Huawei with network vision. Also, if they are replacing BBU, why not just add LTE control board and card to sprint NV cabinet and reroute fiber cables from tower to NV cabinet? Use the new backhaul already provided by sprint?

I wondered the same thing. A while ago, I looked at downtown Boston (a 2010 deployment city) and noticed that all but one of clearwire's sites were located on top of existing Sprint sites (the one that wasn't was across the street). It makes it seem like integrating the two sites would be simple, given all of the basestation equipment is located at the same spot. Granted, this is an extremely small sample size, but I am guessing in a lot of newer markets, the overlay is pretty significant. Dan Hesse said this about number of sites: ...we'll have sites, roughly 38,000 as part of Network Vision. Cleariwre has roughly 15,000 sites. So the - when we're - when the two companies come together and when we optimize the network, the number of sites will be somewhere between those two numbers, if you will, and we're going to choose what we believe are the best sites between what Clearwire currently has and the ones that Sprint currently has. So do not assume that this means that the Clearwire sites are going to be redundant. Some - we're going to figure out what the optimal number of sites are, what's the optimal design for a signal network and a number of the sites that Clearwire is currently using, especially because their frequencies are different than ours, would be maintained. But that is work that we'll - that we will do together over time. So the billion dollar question is, how many clearwire sites will the keep? And even a bigger question is, why?

You will have great coverage there. Neptune oyster in north end and oceanaire at government center are both very good for seafood.

Really depends on where you are in Brookline. If you are at Coolidge Corner, there is a sprint antenna on top of the movie theater. It's been upgraded with network vision gear but no LTE yet. Coverage is great in that area. It's hilarious, it points directly at the only Sprint store in Brookline. I'll grab a picture later. Further away from Boston, coverage gets pretty hit/miss. They really need to follow what AT&T/T-Mobile/Verizon/Clearwire (yes, even clearwire) did and put in a tower to cover Washington Square. I wonder how many subs have ported out over the years because they don't have coverage on the green line. So to answer your question: Yes, in the half of brookline closest to Boston, coverage is good. In the middle of Brookline, there are no towers, so it's a black hole and you get bounced around from one weak connection to the next. Boston coverage is very solid, never had any issues in Boston. if you give me a better idea of where you will be visiting in Brookline, I can give you a better idea of coverage. Also, if you want some restaurant pointers, I can make some good suggestions (zaftigs for brunch, washington sq tavern and the abbey for a nice dinner, the publick house for casual dinner and an ABSOLUTELY AMAZING beer selection, rod dee for good thai food that's cheap and quick (casual).

Brian Klug did a great job digging into the latest qualcomm modems. Definitely take a read, if you haven't already! http://www.anandtech...605-and-mdm9x25 This answers a TON of questions that pop up on this forum all the time.

Any reason why they are ground mounting the RUU vs. just going with cabinet based radios like Verizon? Also, if you are ground mounting RUUs, why not just mount one more and run the cable for ESMR as well? In rural locations, it seems like the benefit of ESMR would be the highest. I mean, the low utilization of the more rural sites must just not justify the large capex associated with deploying ESMR? Anywho, that's my guess. I am sure sprint calculated the usage on the tower and can't justify spending the amount of money on the site relative to its utilization.

I personally would prefer the 5" display. The DROID DNA looks amazing. My biggest compliant with the EVO had been buggy LTE reception and just generally buggy software updates (like maps crashing). As for microSD support, I wish they included it, but I get why they don't. Too many people buy really cheap microSD cards that die, then that requires a trip to the service center and an upset customer that they lost all of their photos. People end up blaming HTC for the fact that their microSD card failed, blah blah blah. Just annoying that the rest of us get punished.

I don't understand the excitement surrounding VoLTE either. Before messing around with some Verizon's LTE devices and Sprint's LTE devices, I don't really see why anyone would want that over 1x advanced. I would much rather take advantage of the extra coverage gained on 1x, which does an amazing job with a very weak signal vs. VoLTE wouldn't. It's sort of sad watching my phone go from 4G LTE to 3G to 1x the further into a building I go.

We can go back and forth on what sprint is implying. As I understand it (and I read a lot of legal stuff), Sprint is implying that you may not tether your device through a personal computer or other such item resulting in data being transmitted through the phone to another device. Since no wireless data is actually being transferred (only displayed, and not stored), it does not violate the T's and C's. My supporting example was the Motorola Lapdock 100 or the HD Dock. Both were sold by sprint at sprint stores and required no plan change. Frankly, lawyers who wrote the T's and C's probably didn't even consider that there would be a smartphone that could mirror the phone's display on a TV. It's a silly argument that two lawyers could argue about all day and not get very far. More likely, we will see sprint revise the T's and C's clearly defining the subject if it becomes a problem. When your phone comes preloaded with DLNA enabled, when your sprint store sells HD media docks and HDMI cables, when you can buy a lapdock from your sprint store, all without changing your plan, a customer is only going to assume that it is allowed by Sprint to use this functionality (and in my opinion, rightly so). Those are all very explicit examples of how sprint supports devices to be used in that manner. Tethering, which the preloaded hotspot app requires separate plan add-on, and is very clearly defined in the terms and conditions, is obviously not allowed with a tethering plan and data usage limit. Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Sprint has never made any enforcement action on data usage related to lapdocks or display devices. Everything sprint has done/does supports the allowed use of docks/lapdocks/hdmi cables/wireless display.

A TV isn't a personal computer. I think a better example is the Motorola Photon's lapdock. Sprint sold that device to customers while allowing them to maintain their unlimited plans. You could imply that, what is essentially a USB keyboard, a charging pack, and a display over HDMI, does not violate the T's and C's set forth. It's up for Sprint to set reasonable terms for network use, and for Sprint to enforce them. If Sprint says the plan is unlimited and the guy is following the terms and conditions of his unlimited plan, he is merely using the service he signed up for. You can't have it both ways. You can't get the sub adds (revenue) based on a promise that you can use unlimited then give arbitrary limits on what is considered fair use. Sprint made a very clear choice. Embrace unlimited and tolerate the small percentage of users who fall out of normal usage patters in an effort to capture new subscribers and limit subscriber losses. It is what it is. Sprint offers unlimited knowing that a small percentage of customers adversely impact the customer experience for the rest of the customers. I am sure it comes down to a cost/benefit analysis on unlimited. When it no longer makes sense (costs them more to offer than what they gain) they will end unlimited. Until then, it's an attractive marketing tactic that is used to differentiate Sprint from AT&T and Verizon. It obviously has made such an impact that T-Mobile brought back "truly unlimited" data plans. If I had a job working as a security guard or something and could watch TV on my phone to kill time at my very boring job, I would probably stream hulu, HBO Go and netflix all day with sprint because they told me I can. It's like telling people that bought a 500HP mustang that they should have bought a 130hp econo box because that's all they really need. Anything more is an arbitrary waste of oil and that they are driving up the price of oil for everyone else. It's really up to the end user to decide what best fits their needs (within the limits of terms/conditions and the law).

I really like sense. I think it's by far the best UI for android. Dare I say, I prefer it to pure google?

Well, they technically do. I don't know why Sprint/Ookla won't add them to the speedtest app. www.sprint.com/speedtest

To prevent a customer who didn't qualify for postpaid to walk out the door.

Great post. Do you think some of the logistical issues caused sprint to move up other markets since existing markets are progressing slower than anticipated? At this point, have most of the hardware shortages been resolved or will this continue to hinder progress? Glad to hear that backhaul is catching up. I am still waiting for one site right outside my work to turn on LTE (site has been upgraded to NV for over six months).

Yeah, it's too bad for Samsung. Japan Display, Sharp, and LG are really stepping up their game. Hopefully samsung will respond and improve the color accuracy, off-axis viewing angles, and brightness of their AMOLED displays. Apple definitely turned the display market upside down.

Apparently, a patch is coming (according to a few posts). I wish samsung would just dump their amoled screens or at least give people a choice at this point. AMOLED was great 2-3 years ago but now LCD displays have really come a long way.

That won't fix it either. I tried the RUU and it didn't fix my maps issue. It's very annoying. I really want a note 2 but they are too expensive on eBay.

Dumb idea. Way to further marginalize the sprint brand. "I am sorry, your credit doesn't qualify you for a Sprint postpaid plan, but check out Sprint pay as you go!" Ugggggg

That's not necessarily true. Investors in Japan are like investors everywhere. They base performance by comparing performance relative to benchmarks (in a nutshell). In the US, you have the well known S&P 500 index or the DJIA. In Japan, you have the Nikkei 225. The total return on the Nikkei 225 index was 25.4556% for 2012. That's a lot better than the S&P's 16.0028%. I will agree (and what I am guessing what you are closer to meaning) is that Softbank isn't trying to pull a private equity play here and quickly profit. Softbank appears to be in it for the long haul by heavily capitalizing sprint to become a competitive player in the US wireless market.

I don't get why you have such distaste for people who pay less than the current advertised rate. The value of a customer isn't what they pay every month. I've mentioned this a bunch of times, but it's the lifetime value of the customer. Take the average length of a customer (based on churn), take the customer revenue over that period, take the customer expenses over that period, and that's your lifetime value to sprint. I am sure that Sprint has calculated what the cumulative value for all SERO customers are and have priced out the value of that customer class. If churn is lower for SERO but yet they charge less, that means that SERO customers would be more profitable than other regular paying customers. Yet, you think they should leave? What is more realistic is that sprint will indirectly increase prices on SERO customers (say no more upgrades, or a 36 month upgrade cycle) or something like that. Think about what Verizon did to "encourage" legacy unlimited customers to move to shared data plans by removing upgrade perks. No doubt Verizon experienced churn as a result, but for them it was worth it. Sprint likely got a good chunk of that with their heavy reminder that they still have unlimited. It's probably one of the reasons why sprint has been having more port-ins than port-outs. I think everyone on here wants Sprint to succeed. Terminating customers is not the way to do it - regardless of how you feel about them. Incrementally increase rates until they are in line with other profitable customer classes. Let the least tolerant churn out, keep the rest. That's the way to do it.