greenbastard

So, anyone tested out the international roaming feature yet?

My last Dallas drive was the week after Christmas, there was probably a 10 minute stretch where I didn't have LTE (LG G3). My friends on T-Mobile didn't have LTE for about 2.5 hours of the 3.5 hour drive.

 

Haven't been to Austin in a while, so can't comment there, but last time I drove to San Antonio was about 2 years ago and I don't remember dropping LTE.

 

If T-Mobile can cover those stretches at least as good as Sprint it'll be competitve.

I can attest to this. Last time I drove from Houston to San Antonio, I only lost LTE twice, but I can confirm that was due to eCSFB issues instead of coverage since airplane mode brought back LTE at -90 RSRP,(5 seconds later I was back on eHRPD) Considering its a 190 mile stretch, that's pretty damn good.

 

From Austin to Houston (via SH-71 & I-10), I lost LTE 3 times, but that was only on SH-71 and once was lost reception between hills and the other 2 times due to eCSFB issues.

 

From Houston to Dallas (as of October 2014), there is still a small stretch of I-45 with no LTE (closer to Dallas). But other than that, no eCSFB issues along I-45.

 

Overall, still a good LTE experience throughout Texas. Consider the fact that Sprint has LTE covering the small rural road connecting Huntsville, TX to College Station, TX and T-Mobile does not. That speaks volumes of the commitment of bringing LTE everywhere instead of T-Mobile just focusing on cities.

So Vegas has actual 8T8R radios widely deployed? How is indoor coverage when compared to B25?

Data definitely is better than Sprint here. Voice about the same

 

Sent from my SM-N910T

Speeds should go back to respectable speeds once Sprint finally configures a good load balancing between their bands. So far through most of Houston, phones seem to be diverted to Band 26 over Band 25, which is leading to crippling speeds on most triband phones (currently pulling 0.2 Mbps download on -90 RSRP band 26). Single band phones (B25) on the other hand are enjoying an unused band and higher speeds.

 

The real difference maker in Houston will be when Sprint finally installs 8t8r radios. These dual Clearwire radios have a hard time penetrating through Houston's dense landscape.

 

Hopefully, T-Mobile has 700 MHz LTE deployed everywhere in Houston so Project Fi doesn't add more users into Band 26 whenever they are indoors.

Not to turn this into an Android vs iPhone fan boy contest, but with the way Apple has lagged behind android and how they like to offer "Apple Only" services...not going to happen.

 

You're better off praying for Apple to start a similar service instead of them allowing google into their phones. Sorta like how Apple Pay came along way after Google Wallet was around.

Is there any market that tmo has significantly better coverage than sprint?

Maybe Houston? Coverage isn't bad considering they use AWS for LTE. I've been meaning to find a way to test out their new 700 MHz LTE but they are barely releasing phones that support that band.

So today my nexus 5 has had a hard time maintaining any sort of signal. My phone can't even lock onto 3G and when it does it seems to still be scanning for an LTE signal. I've been at home all day today so maybe it has something to do with the nearby tower.

Mmh. I had the exact same thing happen in Houston on Monday as well. My phone kept cycling from EVDO, to just 1x, to no signal all day. No LTE at all to be seen all day.

 

I was assuming this was a Houston problem, but I guess it was more of a regional problem. By night time, the problem was fixed and I was back on LTE. Did your problems go away by Monday night as well?

I don't know what some of you are bickering about, but this is a pretty good offering from Google. I've had months where I use 1 GB and months I use 5 GB. Hopefully every provider adopts crediting unused data to it's customers. Also add the fact that your phone will automatically pick the least congested network, and data experience should be better than being in a single network MVNO.

 

Also, international roaming may not be as good as T-Mobile or Sprint, but its still better than any other MVNO, Verizon, or AT&T. I take comfort in seeing this as a pattern of where the wireless industry is headed as far as international roaming goes.

They definitely need small cells along the piers in Frisco ca data stinks. Voice and text is perfect

Really? I seem to recall that LTE (Band25) was good enough for web browsing and Facebook last time I was walking though the piers.

 

Are you using a triband device?

In DC, with a good receiver, WWMX 106.5 in Baltimore should be receivable. When WJFK turns off the IBOC for a sports game, it can be heard very clearly. As soon as WJFK turns the IBOC back on, WWMX gets crushed under the noise.

 

Similarly, see WWWT on 107.7 and WLZL on 107.9, who in my neck of the woods anyway, have a nice battle over which one is usable on any given day (not that I listen to either one).

 

- Trip

Good old digital sideband bleeeover.

 

 

For many in the DX'ing hobby community, IBOC is their biggest enemy. In the days before IBOC, you could sometimes hear stations from as far as Mexico in Houston and Austin (under the right tropo conditions of course). Unfortunately, IBOC has killed that. Not even the best tuners can get rid of the digit noise heard on the adjacent channels of an HD station.

 

Even in major markets IBOC causes havoc. HD has killed off San Antonio's KXTN 107.5 chances of penetrating into the Austin market. In the days before HD, KXTN-FM used to show up in Austin's ratings in every cycle. But once 107.7 in Georgetown turned on IBOC, KXTN fell out of the ratings and can no longer be heard like it once used to. The funny part is that both 107.7 in Austin and 107.5 in San Antonio are owned by the same parent company.

Ah, 93.5 The Beach.The Worst Show Ever.

 

I am just about out of range where I am at. Haven't been down there recently (and it would probably need to be in a work vehicle). Can't speak for D.C or Baltimore as I don't spend enough time there, but Philly has a few stations that are worth listening too. Again I am just about too far here to pick them up.

 

 

 

Even though the technical side is a bit foreign to me I did pick up on that. Even if that works though it still comes down to programming.

If a well programmed radio station is broadcasted in HD and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

 

HD Radio's real usefulness has come in the form of skipping through FCC loopholes and making FM Translators into full fledged radio stations (weaker, but still listenable in mid size markets). FM translators, by law, cannot produce original content and need a parent station feeding audio into it (different rules for commercials vs noncommercial, but the main point being it cannot have original programming). Since the FCC ruled that an HD subcarrier can be the parent station of an FM Translator, many companies have gotten creative in using this loophole to launch new stations that can be heard without an HD Radio. For example, KTTX 104.9-HD2 can also be heard in analog at 106.5 blaring christian music and KTTX 104.9-HD3 can be heard in analog at 97.1 blasting regional mexican music. Both repeaters are licensed at 250 watts, but since they sit atop a hill in Austin's tallest radio tower, they cover a good chunk of real estate. How too??? So good, that both translators travel farther out than KTTX 104.9's analog signal...ain't that something?!?

 

Both repeaters are pretty successful and show modest ratings on Arbitron's PPM. So in essence, the owner of KTTX took one single license and turned it into 3 radio stations after purchasing 2 translators for a fraction of the price of a licensed radio station.

 

Smart, but slimy.

The delay used to be a problem back in the early days but the newer equipment makes the sync a whole lot easier. All stations that buy in to HD have to provide at least similar quality on the HD stream as their Analog stream by FCC mandate or face fines. The reception is purely based on the quality of the receiver. I bought one of the better (as far a sensitivity goes) in 2010 and I have few issues within 40 miles of the transmitting antenna which is somewhere in DC.

 

The quality is definitely improved when listening to music, definitely higher quality than satellite radio.

The FCC office doesn't have the man power to mandate and enforce all of their rules. In Houston alone, there are 2 pirate radio stations that I know of which have been running for a very long time in the FM dial.

 

If they can't nip 2 little pirates, what makes you think the field officers are going to check into the sound quality of an HD main channel? And sync problems are still there believe it or not. Not every station has the budget to replace 1st generation HD Radio equipment, so the problems will continue since its not a priority.

The power of digital signal is greatly reduced compared to analog.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You also have to factor in that HD Radio uses less power than that of its main analog feed. HD Radio was only allowed to use the ERP equivalent of 1% to the total effective radiated power the analog station was licensed. That meant that full Class C, 100 KW stations only broadcasted HD with 1,000 watts. I don't care how tall their antenna mast was, you're just not going to cover the ~50 miles a full class C station does with a measly little 1 KW.

 

Last I checked into HD Radio (which was a while back), the FCC was allowing testing on the use of 10% of ERP, but interference may have killed that proposal quickly.

I like XM, at least I can listen to stuff I like. They do compress a lot though of there channels, and that is annoying as the audio quality suffers.

Xm/Sirius is a pretty good alternative. The only time I bought subscriptions from them was when I would make a road trip throughout the U.S. or Mexico. Believe it or not, they can be heard all the way deep as Central Mexico (and maybe even farther south...didn't drive down that far to find out).

 

My problem with XM is that, just like traditional AM/FM radio, its only a one-way mean of communication. As customers, we are only receivers and have no say in the music selection.

 

But with internet, all of that changes. Of course, no company has a robust nationwide data network or spectrum to handle a full listener transition from FM/AM/XM radios to internet radios, but one can only hope that with technological advancements, we can get close to it.

In the DC metro area, Clear Channel (err sorry 'iHeartMedia') has a pretty comprehensive HD radio stack and it sounds a lot better than traditional FM. That said, I with Norway aiming for an FM shutdown in 2017, I wonder what our broadcasters will follow in ten years. Would be nice to refarm that spectrum....

 

Sure, streaming and data is the future, but our cellular coverage isn't ubiquitous enough for everyone to ditch traditional radio.

Radio won't get axed anytime soon due to our reliance to it during natural disasters. But what we are seeing is big companies cut loose some of their smaller markets as the old business models no longer work for them. The old "buy and conquer" method of Clear Channel is no longer profitable in today's media market. In all honesty, I can't even recall the last time I used commercial FM/AM or satellite radio on my car. Bluetooth has done away with that for me since I can now stream Pandora/Spotify/podcasts or anything I like. Who says Houston needs an FM Active Rock station? I just pull up my phone and Spotify it. Sorry iHeart Media, you're going the way of the dinosaurs.

If stations starting going off air, what else could that spectrum be used for?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing. HD Radio uses the thin sidebands of a radio station in order to broadcast the digital signal. So for example, if a radio station at 95.7 FM is broadcasting HD Radio, it uses 70 khz of side band at 95.7 to broadcast the digital white noise at (iirc) ~95.725 and ~95.675 FM. This is why you hear digital hash bleed over on 95.5 and 95.9 and why some radios stop on those frequencies when using the seek feature.

 

 

Even if broadcasters could find something to do with this thin spectrum, they wouldn't be able to use another technology since the FCC chose Iniquity's HD Radio as the Digital standard for Digital FM.

 

^And OMG to the post above. It would drive me crazy when stations wouldn't properly sync their analog and HD broadcast, especially in my rural area. The hand offs were very annoying to where I'd have to disable HD radio.

A lot of this has to do with the lack of attention given to the technology by the radio stations. And quite frankly you can't blame them. HD Radio was only starting to take off when the entire industry got hit with the 2008 Recession. Many radio companies slashed their budgets and HD Radio just took a back seat to other priorities. Also, the first generation equipment many companies received are lousy and always go dark. Companies could upgrade the equipment to more efficient equipment, but most of the Radio industry really took the recession hard and til this day are still budget constrained. Replacing a technology that is mostly ignored by the public is not a top priority for many of the GMs of radio outlets.

 

 

And the way the Radio industry is headed, I doubt HD Radio will even take off. Radio, as a whole, is a dying mean of communication and radio companies are running out of unnecessary expenses they can cut. The end is near for traditional radio. Organization giants such as Clear Channel and Univision Radio are seeing the writing on the wall and are now heavily advertising their online media and apps on the radio. Internet mobility is where future is for media advertising.

Remarkably, this HD Radio discussion bears many parallels to that of VoLTE.

 

AJ

Since I'm not very knowledgeable on VoLTE.....how so?

I wanted to know people's experiences, thoughts, etc.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its a hit and miss as far as reception goes. HD Radio actually stands for Hybrid Digital, so don't let the "HD" fool you. Hybrid Digital only has the bandwidth to have one CD quality stream, so when a station multicasts an HD1 and HD2 channel, the quality degrades to slightly better than FM.

 

Most major cities have FM radio stations broadcasting HD but because of the low availability of HD radios, most engineers don't bother to maintain their HD streams properly. For example in Houston, KBXX and KMJQ's HD main channels actually sound worse than their stereo analog counterparts. Also, KROI-FM spent an entire week once with a dead feed coming out of their HD carrier. Another big problem is engineers do not properly sync the audio from their analog feeds to their digital feeds. HD Radio by default delays the digital audio by (I think) 7.5 seconds, so engineers have to purposely delay their analog feed in order to have a radio sync smoothly from analog-to-HD (and vice versa). This leads to many stations suffering from audio lag when a receiver is in the fringe area of HD Radio coverage. Overall, nice concept when inside the -70 dBu contour of an FM radio station, but crap when outside of it.

 

As far as AM HD Radio, not many stations adopted it nationwide, and those that did turned it off soon after due to the main analog channel suffering from interference.

 

In all honesty, the only reason most companies are using HD Radio now is to skip through FCC loop holes. Since most companies have a limit of the # of stations they can own in every market, many of them are buying small translators and using the HD2 channel as the parent station in order to have more stations. One example is the Austin radio market. Most of the local translators rebroadcast a local HD subchannel rather than an actual FM station. This has resulted in Austin gaining 5 extra commercial FM radio stations.

 

 

Its slimy, but legal.

Has this made you reconsidering insurance? With the 200 deductible, doesn't apple care make more sense?

 

I can't believe the deductible they charge on top of the high monthly rate.

Squaretrade FTW.

Optimization is coverage and consistency of the signal.

 

You cannot optimize congestion.

Well, you could if you live near a tower like mine in which every spark phone is seeded to Band 26 automatically for some odd reason. During the midday, download speeds can top at 0.15 Mbps on band 26 while band 25 sits at 8+ Mbps. There's nothing I can do about this since its a network bug. I usually turn off B26 on my phone or force 3G (1+ Mbps) in order to make my data experience tolerable.

I had multiple problems with Asurion replacements, but they are usually good about replacing the phones they send you.

 

If you are super nice to the assurion rep when you call and the rep on the other side of the line is feeling the "Christmas spirit", there is always the chance they can upgrade you to the newer model version of your phone. I went from an HTC Evo 3D, to a GS2, to a GS3 in a span of 1 month thanks to Assurion.

 

 

Sprint Tech on the other hand...screw those guys. They are the sole reason I had to even use the Assurion deductible.

That seems to be the case, even though Mexico is very CDMA friendly.

 

For a 2014 flagship model, this is very dissapointing, and from what I saw, the Sprint branding materials don't really mention the limitation.

 

The Iphone 5s and Galaxy S4 added the feature without any issue, which is good. I look forward to using it.

Iusacell has an OK CDMA network, but not friendly when compared to what Movistar and Telcel have. In my experience, Iusacell severely lacked a lot of rural and small town coverage. Most major highways were not connected with service last time I was down there and it quickly became obvious to me that they fell behind in expansions to their rivals. I know they had set a deadline for their CDMA shut down and were in the process of converting their customers to GSM phones.

 

I think Sprint was smart in negotiating with Movistar. Losing a crucial roaming partner right next door to you would have been catastrophic. I can only imagine the exodus of people who work, visit or live near the border had this deal not gone through?

That's sad...I want to believe that this is just all a stunt but from what I read last night john didn't have too much of a comeback. More so felt embarrassed that a big name person dogged out T-Mobile. But those two shouldn't be fighting over something so silly as a cellular network.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For a guy who has had aspirations of running for president and not understand the issues the wireless industry is facing, this is pretty damn sad. Trump should have just kept his mouth shut. Instead of criticism, he should have tweeted how he would have helped expand the wireless industry to reach more Americans if he was president.

 

After further reading, I haven't found anything that says that the roaming is exclusive to only Telefonica. As far as I can tell from the official Sprint statement, all indications are that ALL 2G roaming and SMS is unlimited. I'm assuming that Sprint will just make Movistar their prefered roaming partner and Telcel/Iusacell will fall in afterwards in areas Movistar isn't available. Only way to find out is for one of us to travel abroad, reach a Telefonica/Softbank dead zone and start texting and using data. T&P to the brave hampster willing to test this out.

 

And there it goes. Thanks for the find!

 

 

But now the question is what happens when you fall outside of Telefonica/Softbank range? Will we even be allowed to roam on other networks in those countries? And if we are, how will we know when we are roaming on Telefonica and not (for example) Telcel?