dkyeager

23 hours ago, PythonFanPA said:

 

At least there's still Motorola as an option, for now.  And I suppose OnePlus once we're finally on a unified single network path in a few years.

Rumors but no 888 reality yet. That, plus chip shortages and AT&T difficulties keeping phone prices high at T-Mobile.

14 hours ago, tybo31316 said:

What’s the perks of switching to a T-Mobile sim?

I currently have ROAMAHOME active on my account. 

The salesperson at the store gets a commission.

Make certain it is the strongest signal where you need it.  They don't really want you to change back --  ie get a free line first with a t-mobile sim if you need to test).

10 minutes ago, red_dog007 said:

I think TMobile can easily ignore C-band outside urban areas because their existing portfolio allows it, especially as bidding prices went up. They may have bid but hit a point of it not being worth it. They had loads of 600/PCS/AWS/2.5GHz that equal 200~300MHz. Before Sprint on rural builds they wouldn't even do full deployments, and sometimes only deploy on a single band. Shows that it isn't needed and they can still spend hundreds of millions doing full site builds in rural areas. They can still use 5GHz, in the future likely 6GHz. Plus CBRS is still available for unlicensed use.

I think T-Mobile was keeping their powder dry for the EBS auction for rural and other areas, hopefully later this year.  I don't think the Duo will let them get it super cheap and will rather try to adjust the rules against T-Mobile for more EBS.

19 hours ago, iansltx said:

I also confirmed that mmW, if the panels I saw are really mmW, isn't het active on the site. Though I had to get within 1/3 mi of the site to even get NR...outdoors! No CBRS either. I'll keep checking of course.

I think Verizon is betting on increased power levels for the C-Band, as championed by FCC commissioner Carr.  From his speech at the American Enterprise Institute https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-370781A1.pdf :

"We should seek comment this year on increasing the power levels for CBRS operations in the 3.5 GHz band. Upping the power levels here would help align the U.S. band plan with international standards and create efficiencies for midband 5G builds in the U.S. that could span the 3.45 GHz to C Band spectrum ranges. We should take the real-world experiences we’re gaining with CBRS builds and coordinate with federal users as we look at increasing the power levels here. Getting this done will help extend the reach of 5G services to even more Americans."

Or more expicitly by Verizon: 

'While uplink is the most limiting factor, there are also some considerations when it comes to downlink. That includes stricter power limitations on EBS/BRS under FCC rules than for C-band - a difference which become more marked as beamwidth widens and in rural areas, according to Stone.   

“There’s the puts and takes,” he said. “C-band has advantage in transmit power, 2.5 has the advantage in propagation loss, but when you do the math in rural areas in particular, the downlink for C-band has an advantage and that becomes more pronounced at wider beamwidths for EBS/BRS, and those restrictions don’t apply at wider beamwidths for C-band.”'

https://www.fiercewireless.com/operators/verizon-defends-c-band-plans

6 hours ago, mikejeep said:

Another SignalCheck Pro beta was released this morning! The most visible change is a message displayed at startup explaining the app's use of your location. It will only appear once per app install; you will never see it again unless you uninstall/reinstall. This is to comply with Google Play policies; there are no functional changes to the location features.

Location accuracy will now be displayed in either feet or meters, depending on your app settings.

There are also some bugfixes in this release. Invalid PLMN entries in logs should be reduced, and a frequent cause of crashes when connected to WCDMA/GSM networks should be resolved.

Feedback always appreciated!!

Thanks, mine now says (+-45.05 ft)

13 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

I never anticipated that T-Mobile would cannibalize Sprint's network as fast as they have. This time last year, Sprint's LTE and 5G network consisted of:

Band 26: 5MHz
Band 25: 10MHz + 5MHz
Band 41: 20MHz+20MHz+20MHz
n41: 40MHz

Now it's:

Band 26: 5MHz
Band 25: 5MHz
Band 41: 20MHz + 20MHz
n41: —

With parts of Long Island going to 80MHz, I wouldn't be surprised if in the coming weeks we see Band 41 reduced to a single 20MHz carrier (excluding the separate 10-20MHz that's on small cells) so that T-Mobile can expand to 80MHz here.

I kinda feel bad for people who are still on the legacy Sprint network. 40MHz of Band 41 will still give great speeds and luckily Sprint's Band 41 deployment is good enough in NYC that it completely overlays Sprint's Band 25 network both indoors and outdoors however, if T-Mobile shrinks Band 41 again Sprint customers will definitely feel it. I guess that's why they're trying so hard to get people to switch to T-Mobile SIM cards.

It really depends on how many Sprint network users are left. Have any Sprint only sites been decomissioned yet?

20 hours ago, Trip said:

https://www.fiercewireless.com/operators/verizon-s-ronan-dunne-says-carrier-may-densify-network-for-c-band

Article about Verizon.  Depressing to read:

- Trip

It a doubling of small cells from 15k to 30k. The bigger risk is a possible backlash to small cells in general if they Christmas tree out their small cells with too many antennas.

I expect T-Mobile to reduce small cells given redundancy with their newly defined macro sites unless they use them for n77.

Does the m in location accuracy refer to miles or meters? Clarification in the selection would be useful.

8 hours ago, Paynefanbro said:

I think T-Mobile is either oversubscribed or needs to increase backhaul as speeds were usable but not that great pretty much everywhere I went.

Same around here.  T-Mobile historically upgrades urban areas first.

5 hours ago, jonathanm1978 said:

Sorry for the dumb question, but how do I find out about the sites around me? I know where they are, but I just want to look at them and see if permits are done or what...

If your city, county, or state has a online permit system that allows public access, that is the easiest way.

Otherwise talk to your local T-Mobile store manager. Typically most reps don't care. Technicians in repair centers may also follow this.  The carriers typically make such info available to all of the above.

Worse case you could actually go down to your local building department and ask them.

38 minutes ago, Dkoellerwx said:

Suddenly all the of the Sprint sites around me are showing as Sprint "keep" sites. I'm sure it'll be different market by market, but so far it seems like they are keeping more Sprint sites around here than they are dropping.

The PLMN method appears to me to be often temporary. I am much more inclined to believe permits. T-Mobile also historically completed virtually all of its permits. It should also be noted here that before the merger was approved, T-Mobile moved onto some Sprint sites.

5 hours ago, IrwinshereAgain said:

I just assumed that eventually, Tmobile with expansion and Sprint keep sites, would provide most Sprint users with equal or better service then before the merger.

 

Are you thinking that won't be the case?

The key test will be stand alone Sprint sites in rural areas. Hopefully they understand the superior coverage distance of 1x800 compared to LTE.  Some small cities would benefit from more sites given greater customer density.  Ohio has stopped publicly tracking rural sites so intelligence on this is quite poor.  Historically T-Mobile does rural sites last.

In urban areas it looks like many Sprint standalone sites could be abandoned.  Some of the WISP sites are not recognized as Sprint sites by me, thus it is possible some T-Mobile sites may also be abandoned or these are new WISP sites. It is even possible these are small cell sites or a shared rack arrangement has been reached. Starry has licenses in the 24GHz frequency here (200mhz and another 100Mhz.)

Being marketting driven, it is possible T-Mobile will add more keep sites if they lose too many customers in these areas in their initial conversion markets.

Not certain T-Mobile understands there are some of us who have delayed phone purchases for many years until we have clarity on the keep sites.

For me personally the chip shortage and lack of competion in the Qualcomm 888 space has not helped (my home site now has a permit to be converted).  AT&T has some very attractive offers. T-Mobile will give me a $100 to $200 phone to stick around for a few years, but I normally buy high end and retain them for a while. I bought many more phones when they were wrapped into the plan. My fear is being stuck with poor service while locked into a plan.

On 3/18/2021 at 3:24 PM, mdob07 said:

 

Well I have finally noticed an issue with the double NAT. I run Unifi Voice on my Ubiquiti UDM Pro and when I'm on my T-Mobile connection I can't make or receive calls on my IP phone. As soon as I switch to my Spectrum connection it works fine. Assuming this is because on T-Mobile it shows a 192.168 address for WAN connection. I'm hoping to port my existing Spectrum phone number to Unifi eventually and get rid of Spectrum all together and save about $100 a month, but I guess I'll have to find or build a cellular router that can pass though the public IP to my UDP Pro. If nothing else this proves that this is a viable option with the right equipment. 

I think you would need to go IPv6.  At least T-Mobile is more honest than Starlink about obviously showing you it is double NATed.  VPNing back the router was also an issue.  The key weakness to Starlink is the actual upload speeds.  In many ways IPv6 is still not ready for prime time in terms of the detailed ways people use IPv4, but we must adopt to IPv6, especially in the mobile world.

15 hours ago, jonathanm1978 said:

I know for a fact I can't be the only person who's just not feeling great about the merger and what's happening with the two networks..

Definitely a marketing approach in trying to get people to move over so far.  Some of those who have moved over should have done it years ago.  Starting to see permits for a few standalone Sprint sites to be converted, but only about 10 sites.  About 40 co-location sites will be sold to a WISP in Columbus.  AT&T is my backup plan (based on tested performance my pecking order is Sprint->AT&T->T-Mobile->Verizon.)  Tempted by AT&T S21 Ultra deals, just want 500GB since there is no expansion).

17 hours ago, red_dog007 said:

End of 2023 is a long time from now. 

Will wait and see how coverage really is. In my area, TMobile still has a hell of a lot of work to do to be on par with AT&T/VZW.  Hopefully the extra 20k macro sites are strictly for suburban/rural coverage.  Here where I am, if they end up keeping the Sprint sites that don't have TMobile on them they will do very well. But hopefully sooner than later.

In Columbus OH we have about 10 permits now to convert Sprint only sites. We have about 40 permits to convert Sprint colocated sites to Starry.com, a WISP that plans to come to town. Permits here are good for 12 months. If they start work they get a six month extension.

5 hours ago, iansltx said:

The question here is, are they doing either for this particular site...because 2640 completely overlaps the n41 channel. You might as well either run n41 at 60 MHz or not run the 2640 B41 carrier. Unless there's little enough traffic on both that the towers are silent most of the time, and the TDD pattern is set to avoid self-interference. Which...maybe?

Is there an airport nearby? Certain types of radar have also caused band 41 site frequency shifts.  We have four airports each with a different focus: international/ domestic passenger, primarily cargo, university/executive, and private/hobbyist. The last one has this issue in the SW part of town.

6 hours ago, JDP121 said:

Unfortunately this late in the game I’m sure Shentel wouldn’t waste money on a new rack for Sprint costumers seeing how the deal should be closing between now and the end of Q2 when the deal will be closing. Would be a total waste of money and assets tbh. Just my opinion. 

These last minute upgrades are driven by a different kind of logic. Typically loan covenants, contractual obligations, and professional pride to finish up projects. Also until the deal is closed it does not exist. Not saying it applies in this case, but don't rule it out overall until the deal closes.

38 minutes ago, iansltx said:

This is all 20 MHz channels. Sprint is 2640, 2660, 2680. TMo is 2538, 2558. TMo NR is 80 MHz centered at 2607.75.

The next step would be a spectrum analyzer.   Historically T-Mobile has been very good with using buffer zones etc which are built-in to band 41 but might be able to be adjusted.  I have seen Sprint overlap B26 3x3 and 5x5 along with 1x800 at one location with no ill effects.

19 minutes ago, JDP121 said:

Yeah it’s the one at Fashion Square Mall. Another update they did put up some antennas on the rack while I was at work today. 
 

 Pic 1

Pic 2

Until the deal is closed, Shentel may continue to do work, just as Sprint and nTelos did.

17 hours ago, iansltx said:

Dumb question time: on B41, is the frequency listed the center of the carrier (like it is for FD?) or the bottom of the carrier? I'm convinced I'm seeing TMo overlapping n41 with Sprint B41 here but am not sure by how much.

T-Mobile has move some Sprint b41 in Ohio from 20Mhz to 10Mhz and then using the 20Mhz for n41 meanwhile they left 20Mhz also for b41 untouched. This is being done in small city locations with 50Mhz of contigous b41 spectrum.

On 3/8/2021 at 1:45 PM, Paynefanbro said:

Looks like they're continuing their streak of buying up T-Mobile MVNOs. I wonder how they plan on unifying all of them under one brand down the line, if they plan on doing that at all.

What other ones have they bought?

Anyone have any background info on why the 512GB and now the 256GB ultra models are in sold out status? Chip shortage? Covid-19 related production problems? Lack of LG as a competitor in the US?

On 3/7/2021 at 11:54 PM, JonnygATL said:

Was in San Juan area feb 20 through 23rd for my 41st bday....was amazing and so was tmobile's performance!  Great signal everywhere i went while my ATT toting friend was stuck having to use wifi or my phone as a hotspot!  Interesting.

T-Mobile has signed some new B41 leases during the last year in PR iirc.

Last night I was looking through the ED (EBS) licenses issued since 01/01/2020.  This is clouded by T-Mobile shifting ownership from one Sprint firm to another.  There are a lot of tribes that got licenses but this is by no means universal among tribes.  Most tribes have not leased their spectrum at this time. 

There were a few new ED licenses issued to Clearwire.  T-Mobile has also signed a lot of new ED leases scattered throughout the country.