Conan Kudo

I guess that's good to know.

Yes, SoftBank did get the Wireless City Planning project from the Willcom acquisition. I mentioned it as "SoftBank+WCP" in an earlier post. SoftBank has plenty of experience to bring to the table for Sprint on LTE TDD. The GTI initiative involves flooding the market with tons of GSM+UMTS+LTE devices that additionally support LTE TDD on bands 38, 40, and 41. Outside of the US, Japan, and China, the spectrum that "band 41" represents will be mostly used for FDD operations, though. That's why the initiative is so critical. For China Mobile, the whole point of the GTI is to get cheap devices made that support this technology. To that end, ST-Ericsson, Renesas, Samsung, Sequans, Marvell, Huawei, ZTE, and nVidia are making chips/phone designs for GTI member operators.

PCS H is already a problematic chunk because there is interference between operations on PCS H and AWS-4. Unless Dish does nothing with AWS-4, PCS H is not going to be very desirable.

Who wants to bet that someone is going to try to use an iPhone 5 on SouthernLINC by cutting down the SIM and using it, now that SouthernLINC's UMTS service through T-Mobile has launched?

There's quite a lot. T-Mobile only started selling phones with AWS+PCS WCDMA in earnest in October 2011 with the Galaxy S II and the Amaze 4G. Most phones released after that date include both bands. That still leaves four years of UMTS devices with mostly only AWS WCDMA. However, the XT626 will be fine. It supports AWS+PCS WCDMA. In fact, I think that's the only WCDMA bands it supports. It may support IMT WCDMA, but I doubt it. Nextel International ordered these devices to work on the various Nextel networks throughout Latin America. While most used AWS WCDMA, a few used PCS WCDMA. Nextel shared devices across its entire portfolio of networks.

You're probably right. It benefits SoftBank for that to happen. Refocusing on LTE TDD on band 41 is something that I think SoftBank definitely wants to encourage Sprint to do.

It'll certainly be capacity. Sprint won't promise a "superfast" network. Instead, it'll promise that it can continue to handle unlimited over that network.

Because LTE will not be the primary choice for roaming or M2M for a very long time. The explosion of LTE bands makes it very difficult to suggest as a cheap M2M or roaming network technology. As GSM is retired globally (along with all the patents for it expire), UMTS will become the new "cheap" network technology. Since it only requires five bands for broad global compatibility, it only makes sense to get into that. Plus, the cost to enable WCDMA is incremental for Sprint. Network Vision technology already supports it. In-bound roaming and M2M for UMTS are both very profitable businesses, especially with international events. Sprint's costs for devices would go down considerably thanks to a larger scale of economies. Sprint, SoftBank+WCP, China Mobile, and Bharti Airtel would be able to use the same devices with minimal software customization (the GTI RFP/spec supports GSM, WCDMA, LTE FDD, and band 38/40/41 LTE TDD). That's a win for Sprint in my book, since Sprint can afford better devices more cheaply this way. However, I am not saying that CDMA should completely go away. CDMA1X will move to ESMR, and one PCS EvDO carrier may remain.

Clearwire doesn't do anything. Sprint, on the other hand, is planning on turning up LTE TDD on band 41 this summer.

You've got your Japanese networks mixed up. au by KDDI has CDMA 850/2100 with LTE 850/2100. SoftBank has UMTS 900/2100 and LTE 1800/2100. NTT docomo has a pretty screwed up configuration with UMTS 850/900/1500/2100 and LTE 1500/2100. Historically, SoftBank has aimed towards global compatibility (as Vodafone K.K., also known as Vodafone Japan, did). Thusly, it uses 3GPP technologies, just as Vodafone Japan did. I have absolutely every reason to believe that SoftBank sees the CDMA2000 network as dead weight, since it is of little use to them.

Obviously Sprint's own MCCMNC numbers would be whitelisted.

Downlink on AWS is on 2.1GHz. Uplink is 1.7GHz. In fact, AWS should have slightly better propagation characteristics than PCS since it allows for higher power levels on downlink and the uplink is lower frequency than PCS. That being said, T-Mobile often gets some crappy cell site locations, which can negate these benefits. If Sprint wants to use AWS, enter into a spectrum+network-sharing deal with T-Mobile or something. There's a ton of options to get into the AWS game. Or don't get into it at all. Sprint's PCS G block, combined with Band 41 and ESMR should be enough for LTE. However, devices will get more expensive because Sprint becomes an island even further than before thanks to CDMA. Either go LTE-only (which is ill-advised), or go PCS WCDMA+PCS G LTE FDD+B41 LTE TDD+tri-band CDMA. SoftBank would boost the economic scale of such a decision because those devices could be made to be compatible with SoftBank Mobile+WCP and Sprint networks. SoftBank could order the same phones for both countries and just turn off non-Sprint CDMA roaming on SoftBank models.

Historically, CDMA operators in the US incorporate a block on the baseband software of so-called "global phones" that prevents them from authenticating to networks that have the MCC (Mobile Country Code) for the US. The MCC makes up one half of a UMTS network's identification. The other half is the MNC (Mobile Network Code). The US uses MCCs 310, 311, and 316. MCC 316 is reserved for Nextel, while MCC 311 is typically used by CDMA operators deploying LTE (though not always). MCC-MNC numbers are unique to the operator globally. For example, AT&T Mobility typically uses 310-410 (which may also be written as 310-41) for the MCC-MNC number. That identifies AT&T. T-Mobile uses 310-260 (which could also be written as 310-26). That identifies T-Mobile as a network. If the MCC value of 310 is blocked, then you can't authenticate to AT&T or T-Mobile.

If Sprint does continue the disgusting practice of incorporating an MCC block on the GSM/UMTS radio, then you probably can't. That being said, I have no idea since I don't have an HTC One.

Hold on. It would be monumentally stupid to shut down GSM/WCDMA. Not only does T-Mobile receive a lot of M2M money on the GSM side, it would be to Sprint and T-Mobile's benefit to switch to PCS WCDMA. It would align them with the rest of the Americas. G block could retain LTE, and AWS LTE should remain as well. ESMR could run CDMA1X and LTE, and EvDO could live on in any spare PCS spectrum. PCS WCDMA and AWS LTE offer substantial benefits to a combined Sprint and T-Mobile. For one, being unified across the Americas allows for a broader range of devices. Two, you'd have the benefit of SIM-only plans that would actually be markedly useful. Three, you still won't lose CDMA 1X for those people who prefer it, since it would live on in ESMR. And four, 600MHz LTE would allow a further extension of LTE service. And there's no way that the regulators would allow AT&T and Verizon to swallow all that AWS spectrum. Not after what's happened in the last two years. What's with the hate for AWS anyway? It has similar characteristics to PCS, and works quite well. Did I forget to mention that PCS WCDMA and AWS LTE aligns well with Hesse's goal to make Sprint a premier roaming partner for the Americas (and the CCA in particular)? Sprint could easily deploy PCS WCDMA throughout most of the country as-is, too. Network Vision equipment technically already supports it. It would require some rejiggering, but it could be done.

Well, good on you. Unfortunately, the coasties I've met up here tend to live up to the stereotypes (which sucks, but oh well). As for NV and C Spire, I could definitely see that. Considering that C Spire and Sprint have been working hand in hand for a few years now, I'm not surprised. I also suspect that C Spire is using the same equipment Sprint uses in ALU markets for the state. I'm surprised that the newly announced roaming is only one-way, though. Sprint customers cannot roam on C Spire's LTE network, despite being a band 25 5MHz FDD network. Well, I'm bleeding maroon here... I wonder how long it will take to stop bleeding maroon once I leave?

Indeed. Unsurprising, given how much revulsion a lot of people I've met have for Sprint here. It used to be that way for T-Mobile too, but that's changing (slowly). I look forward to seeing if Network Vision will improve Sprint's reputation here. But Hattiesburg...? You're very nearly a coastie! Hopefully, you aren't like the coasties! Where I am, the area might as well be splashed in maroon with bulldogs running around everywhere...

I've verified with the Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch and the Motorola Photon. Clearwire is actively blocking Sprint connections to the Clearwire protection site here. I was never sure if that was intentional or not, but I benefited from it quite nicely (I ran a server through a CLEAR Stick Atlas for months, since I was literally the only user who could access the site).

The Kool Aid is soooo tempting! But... I JUST DON'T KNOW! I'll be sure to stay clear of that. The result of me drinking alcohol would probably not be too pretty...

You only live for One, so go for it!

Yeah, yeah, I'm totally late on the "welcome" topic! But better late than never, I say... I've lurked for a couple of years, but I signed up last year because of... things. Anyway, I'm definitely looking forward to finding out more about Sprint's network. Hopefully some of that trickles my way... Too many bulldogs around here, though...

I'm actually lucky, myself. Clearwire has a license protection site deployed no less than 2 miles from where I live. Also, Sprint users are forbidden from accessing it. Using CLEAR 4G service with it (which was a challenge to get, since they wouldn't sell to me normally), I get some decent speeds.

If you have to be explicit about "if you get it", then that still applies to Sprint too. EvDO Rev A where I am tops out at a measly 90Kbps down and 60Kbps up. Even T-Mobile's EDGE beats that at a solid 200Kbps down and 90Kbps up. That being said, I do have access to HSPA+21 here, though I frequently access EDGE-only locations, too.

Ahh, I see. Well, then, I guess Sprint is a slightly better value in terms of pure pricing then. That is, of course, if you ignore unlocked phones and used phones. Then T-Mobile can work out to be a better value. Pairing it with a $350 Nexus 4 makes it a better value than Sprint with the Galaxy Nexus. Regardless of pricing, T-Mobile's data network performance is typically much better than Sprint's, so that may tip the scales in favor of T-Mobile.

It's not fair to compare the price for a smartphone and rate plan without including Sprint's lovely premium data device fee, since that is a predictable fee (unlike all the other taxes and fees). Thusly: Sprint: (24 * $80) + (24 * $10) + $199 = $2359 T-Mobile: (24 * $70) + $579 = $2259 That is a $100 difference in T-Mobile's favor. However, the math for swapping phones every 12 months is accurate, and in terms of pure device cost, works out to be slightly cheaper through Sprint. I feel that it is offset by the cost savings in the rate plan, but that is something to consider, too. T-Mobile is almost certainly going to be acquiring 600MHz spectrum in the next two years, and I wouldn't be surprised if T-Mobile may consider going after 700MHz spectrum in the meantime. In any case, T-Mobile's mid-band spectrum (AWS-1, 1.7/2.1GHz) is a standard LTE band supported on a wide range of devices and forces T-Mobile to deploy a fairly dense network (like PCS does for Sprint).