ReyBanz

lol Who did that? sneaky sneaky guy

What do you guys think lol?

Oh and lets not forget sprint likes to go green huh? make it solar powered also!

That solution would never work because the Airave only supports 6 calls per device it'd probably cause tons of dropped calls because the Airave doesn't transfer calls from the Macro Network to it or from it to the Macro Network anymore.

These are the speeds that I get almost constantly in East Michigan - Southfield, MI area. But I swear when I go to Detroit its like 0.5Mbps down and .02Mbps up.

Wow congratulations!

Not to be be rude, but why would u post this on a Sprint specific site? This post is full of facetious remarks... Maybe u should join www.tmonews.com

I have the EVO LTE and I like it more than the Galaxy S III. (the Galaxy screen is too oversaturated and not as sharp as the EVO IMO) The EVO also looks more masculine, that's why I picked it.

 

 

What part of Detroit are you in? I'm in Southwest Detroit and still get the normal 3G signal, no eHRPD signal

I'm actually in Southfield, MI and I've had a connection to eHRPD pretty much wherever I've been over the past couple of days.

When I had my airave I used to get 2.5Mbps down and 1.2Mbps Up but it was only if I picked a Chicago server

Just turned on my cdma/lte mode and it connected. I'm only getting 0.5Mbps down and 1Mbps up

I remember when I had a Sprint broadband card for my laptop, when I was in high school. The internet used to fly with that card, it was the best wireless internet you could get. I constantly saw speeds of at least 2.6 I even seen 3.0 a couple of times.

You are missing the point. In unofficial markets, WiMAX network usage is/was irrelevant; BRS/EBS 2600 MHz license protection was paramount.

 

And Robert will have to refresh my memory. But, if I recall correctly, Sprint does not compensate Clearwire on a total usage basis but on a per sub basis.

 

AJ

No I'm not missing the point. That was a response to pyroscott where he mentioned how they'd still want to get paid. I know that they threw up the towers over there just because of the population. But I was thinking that they chose East, because of the population and because of the minimal customers. Like you said, they get paid by subscribers not actual usage. But in the event the tower was being taxed by heavy users wouldn't they have to invest more money in that tower? So I look at it as a win win for Clear. But it could have also been a win win for Sprint if they deployed west rather it be a protection site or not Sprint customers would love to get more than 0.1Mbps.

Could that be because the population is the most dense in the poorer areas of town? Where people live in apartment buildings and park on the street or don't even have a car, instead of having a house, garage and yard?

 

Sometimes perception is not the rule. You say ghetto, I say dense population center. They still want people to use their service so they get paid...

The fact of the matter still remains that most of the East protection sites see minimal usage because Clear doesn't sell services here and never have but Sprint does and based off that alone it probably would have been better for them to deploy West if they really wanted to get paid. Most of the people I know that are West have Sprint and the people that I know or see on the Eastside have T-Mobile or MetroPCS. Even my 3G speeds on the Eastside are much faster and 4G wimax is always connecting and fast over there too.

What appears to be "true" to you is not always logically so.

 

Answer this question: does the covered eastern portion of the metro have a higher population density than does the uncovered western portion of the metro?

 

AJ

I never thought about that, but I would actually have to say yes the East is more dense than the West based on how the two sides are built the West is spread out but the East isn't.

What he said is they put up towers specifically where people wouldn't use it, also, in ghettos? I don't think covering as many POPs possible is quite synonymous with that?

And what I'm saying is that I believe that to be true. Simply because if you take a look at the Detroit Metro Area protection sites most of them are located in areas that most would consider to be "the ghetto" East Detroit is covered with Wimax but the West isn't. As long as a lot of people aren't using it and complaining about it, its a win for Clear. Most people on the East Side of Detroit tend to have MetroPCS or T-Mobile I never see Sprint, Verizon or AT&T stores or people using those services when in that area. But when I'm over there I stay connected to Wimax almost the entire time.

You're out of touch with reality. Why would Clearwire WANT to set up service where no one would use it? That only loses them money? Did you even think before you posted this? Also, the FCC would have a large say in what happens with the spectrum were Clearwire to go under, not to mention Sprint would need to bid on it.

Actually he's kinda on the right track, but it may not have been clear enough. What he was saying is Clear has to have a certain amount of people covered with their network so that they won't lose the license in that particular area. So Clear put up a lot of towers all over the place without formally launching the service. Perfect example would be the tower that's at Wayne State University in Detroit, MI it covers people and the speeds on Wimax are good but it wasn't a formal launch in Detroit. They even have a tower up by my house but it only broadcasts about 3 square miles. And the speeds are terrible but the wimax phones connect to it.

I don't yet have an LTE-capable phone because I am keeping my powder dry for the moment. But I have been watching several forums lately, and notice an unexplained pattern:

 

Some end users of the EVO 4G LTE and Galaxy S III -- and I emphasize some -- report anecdotally what is typically described as "poor signal" when connecting to the legacy Sprint network They generally say that a certain location they used to get good connections and displayed "bars" on their previous handsets, but the LTE-capable models show weak signal and might even kick into roaming mode.

 

Of course, this leads to some angry comments that "this phone radio sucks," etc. But I am not at all convinced that the antennas or radio sensitivity on these new phones are really the root cause, but rather suspect some interaction between the handsets and the network -- which may be running side-by-side with the NV network under construction. I am wondering what might account for this. For example, in certain areas could the phones not be playing well with a developmental NV tower whose signal is being broadcast but blocked, so the phone can't lock onto the legacy tower base station that it should be using? Or even being fooled by eHRPD upgrades as Robert suggests in this case.

 

Sprint surely is aware of these issues, but publicly is not saying much.

 

Note that this is a different case from the EVO 4G LTE anomaly reported here involving faulty connections to a live LTE test site. The case I am talking about is that of LTE-capable phones with bad connections to a legacy site.

 

Ideas? What should such users do to isolate and troubleshoot the problem?

I'm actually experiencing that on my EVO LTE it constantly loses signal then roams all day when I normally would have full signal. I'm missing phone calls and text messages too. I think it has something to do with the radio in the new EVO because everyone that I know that has one is talking about the same problems. I can't even call out all the time, I have to restart my device a lot just to make and receive calls. Its so sad because the phone is awesome and when it does work on 3G its much faster than my old EVO 3D.

It probably would have taken them twice as long to deploy NV if they chose more IDEN sites.

Hi Everyone,

 

I have been monitoring this site for a while for updates about Network Vision. Yesterday I started noticing that I had a stronger 3G signal from my appartment in south Seattle and ran some speed tests to confirm. Up until this week, I was getting an average of 400-800Kbps downloads. Sprint must have pushed some magic 3G button because when I ran the tests earlier today, I was getting upwards of 2 megs =)

 

-Joe

 

It might just be the EVO LTE because in my area I get speeds like that too but I'm the only one experiencing them. All of my friends with other phones still have terrible speeds while my pages are loading as if on WiFi. We've even run a speed test and my EVO gets higher speeds and lower latency.

To Sprint, AAV is any other high speed backhaul not provided by an ILEC or microwave. Sometimes AAV is fiber. Sometimes AAV is from the cable company. Its basically any alternative high speed backhaul other than from an ILEC or microwave.

 

In this situation, for the most part, all backhaul in NV is equal. And here is why...

 

Sprint put out all the NV backhaul to bid. In the bid requirements, it spells the minimum specifications the bidder must achieve at each site. Minimum speed, minimum throughput and capacity, maximum allowable down time...every performance criteria. The bidders then could use any backhaul solution at each site that meets the criteria outlined in the bid documents and subsequent contract.

 

If Sprint limited the type of backhaul that could be used at each site, it would have taken years longer and a lot more money to complete NV. And since all the backhaul has to meet all the same specifications, there is no loss to Sprint for alternative backhaul uses.

 

The reality with 38,000 different locations needing high speed backhaul in a small schedule window means that Sprint needed to be flexible and open minded with the backhaul and do something different. I think this was a brilliant solution, because the site conditions at every site and what is available is very unique. Let private market people local to each market find the best backhaul solution to each site. Most markets have more than one backhaul vendor.

 

And if Sprint ends up having a problem with backhaul at a specific site, because it is not meeting contract specification requirements, all Sprint has to do is make a call. And the vendor has to do something to bring it back up to contract specifications. If they don't within 30 days, Sprint can hire someone else to provide backhaul and backcharge the original vendor.

 

This is a great system that will serve Sprint well, and ultimately their customers. No need to worry about AAV. In fact, we should embrace it. It is going to provide a brilliant backhaul solution to us all and allow us to have NV sooner. Viva la AAV!

 

Robert via Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

I really wish Sprint would have kept Embarq in its stable, simply because it serves 19 states with fiber... But its now known as CenturyLINK and serves no purpose to Sprint unless they're using some of their fiber now. If Sprint had them it'd be soooooo much cheaper to provide fiber to a lot of sites.