lordsutch

As far as antennas go, if it covers PCS A-F it almost certainly covers PCS G too unless they have some sort of filter in the cabling. It may not be optimal for G but pushing another 5 MHz on something designed to cover 100MHz isn't much of a difference. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

As far as I can tell, the HTC RIL (and the Qualcomm RILs generally, like the Nexus 4's RIL if you enable LTE in the baseband) only report the E-UTRAN Cell ID and the Tracking Area Code, by pretending they're the same info as similar UTMS concepts. There's no physical cell ID to get that's reported to Android from the radio. That should change in RILs specifically designed for Android 4.2 and later, which shouldn't need any gross hackery and should Just Work as-is, but none seem to be in the wild yet.

The Android 4.2 API defines the return type from getCi as an integer, so it shouldn't change formats from that. I typically format it for display as hex using String.format("%08X"), so it matches what you'd get from the HTC API. Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4 Beta

It's probably the same RIL under the hood (I doubt HTC would start from scratch for a new model), so in theory it should work on all HTC CDMA/LTE devices. Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I've been doing some work with the CM team to get LTE CID reporting into their ROMs. For the adventurous, see http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/45607/ Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Transparent proxy compression, most likely.

In the case of nTelos, I'm not sure they actually "focus on their specific areas tend to have better wireless coverage and customer service" as AJ says. That might be true of some of the better-run regionals like USCC, Cincy Bell, and C-Spire, but nTelos always struck me as being rather half-assed even on the retail side. Their passage into the arms of Sprint or another suitor will be lamented by few, if any, in their region. As for nationalization + MVNOs, not even the Europeans have tried that for wireless; if anyone thought it would work, the French would have jumped at it rather than embracing this bizarre Anglo-Saxon idea of companies competing with each other to provide public services (incidentally, where new entrant Free is disrupting the 3 incumbent providers). And in cases in the US where infrastructure ownership has separated from service ownership (for example, the states that have competitive retail electricity for consumers over a common grid, like Texas - essentially the electricity "retailer" acts an MVNO over the grid) the main effect has been higher prices than under regulated vertical integration or public utilities. Plus under the Nationalization+MVNO model, there'd be no price signal to the network operator to upgrade the underlying network; Sprint is doing NV not as a public service, but because their network sucks and they've lost customers as a result. Politics, not customer demand, would drive upgrades by a nationalized infrastructure provider. That might be great for farmers in Iowa to get rural broadband as part of the quadrennial efforts by presidential candidates to suck up to Iowans, but a lot of folks in places with limited political power will get the shaft (much as many communities, some very large, were shafted when they picked the routings of the Interstates, like the Central Valley of California and the Rio Grande Valley in Texas).

Indeed; at the very least there'd have to be a deal for the sites in the wholesale area (nTelos also owns a network that competes with Sprint in eastern Virginia; they also seem to compete with Shentel according to their coverage map), or otherwise Sprint would be stuck building out I-81 and much of West Virginia again themselves. At that point you've probably taken on so much of nTelos you'd probably be best off buying the whole thing and selling the AWS and WCS off (or voluntarily divesting it as part of the merger).

The only throttling is the QoS provision that allows limiting streaming video to 1 Mbps. Presumably they don't want to offer T-Mobile style throttling to differentiate "truly unlimited" from everyone else's throttled unlimited (plus I'd imagine it makes it easier to upsell unlimited data from a hard cap). On capped data plans, you pay overages (as has always been the case for tethering and tablet plans). Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I got 14 up, 6 down when I tested the MGSC/Eisenhower site at the fringe of coverage last week. Haven't run one on the new site at Hartley Bridge yet. EDIT: Didn't get a chance, since Hartley Bridge is not accepting 4G connections tonight. If I had a sneaky mind I might think Sprint was monitoring Sensorly for sites that are live but shouldn't be "officially" on yet... EDIT AGAIN: Hartley Bridge is back up again. I get 13 Mbps up, 7 down indoors (LTE signal ≈-100 dBm RSRP) using RootMetrics. Ocmulgee East may also be on, since I briefly caught a signal corresponding to its expected Hex ID this evening on Hawkinsville Rd.