payturr

In your neck of the woods or nationwide?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 6s+ using Tapatalk

We were speaking specifically for NYC, but he did tell me that depending on the vendor, it might be accomplishable on current equipment through a software upgrade. So they must be looking into other locations. He said several sites have it enabled for trials.

I was just on the phone with Sprint network management. Guys, band 25 carrier aggregation is in the works!

In all of my tracking of Sprint doing coverage expansion I have only seen one cell in the flesh that is an all new cell, in Sparta of all places. Yes, right up the road from me. ????????????

 

Second point: both Verizon and T-Mobile have large chunks of GMO around where I live. Only reason Verizon can get away with it is because they have 750 MHz spectrum that can cover peaks and valleys where I live where T-Mobile does not have that luxury. By now, Verizon should have had their entire LTE network here in Randolph County on AIR32 for both 750 MHz and AWS which is deployed on one tower in Steeleville, and a couple in Sparta along with some small cells. I can't solely call Sprint out on GMO. They aren't the only ones doing this.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

If Verizon is doing LTE Advanced, they would need new equipment. Do you not live in one of those markets? Or are you just seeing a handful of GMOs and some modernized sites?

 

Edit: ignore this, I'm a dumb and am bad at reading.

I have another idea that might help Sprint if they went back to having a $75 monthly Unlimited Data plan with no additional line discounts, yet they could remove the restrictions on it. Then, Sprint could apply a $30 monthly discount on lines that had an active device EIP or device lease, making the rate $45 monthly, instead of $75 monthly, so long as there is an active monthly payment on a device for that line.

 

If Sprint offered this, it might be a great way of not only getting customers onto Sprint, but increase store traffic with people getting devices and upgrades, which accessories would get sold more often to go along with the device purchases/leases. Plus, smartphone manufacturers might be impressed upon Sprint having this arrangement and be more willing to have their devices work on the Sprint network. In turn, business would be up and Sprint would have more money to do the necessary and desired network additions/upgrades.

These plans aren't profitable Arysyn. $45 basically for service is selling product at a loss, they have so much overhead to cover. Paying site leases, energy, and back haul gets EXPENSIVE. And that's not including the millions that go into R&D, maintenance, and the credit they have to return to accounts where their is service issues. You can't even consider capex at $45 a month. You know how often single line people jump around plan to plan? That's why it's easier to sell 4 lines for $160, it's basically a guarantee they won't easily switch. And even if they do, there's a high chance Sprint will get their 2 year's worth of revenue from them. $45 isn't even FEASIBLE, and imagine what Virgin and Boost would have to sell plans at. They need to turn a profit not post bigger losses. They're on the right path, their plans aren't complex, and nobody is losing sleep over the fact the first like is $60 and the second is $40.

Yeah I know its not a tower issue but i feel like with all the new types of cells sites and proper real estate things like this can be fixed. I could only image how bad it was before sprint had 1x800. People probably didn't even have 1RTT signal inside.

I wouldn't count on it to be honest, small cells are a lot lower power than a tower so I wouldn't expect a difference. Plus it only broadcasts LTE, no EVDO. If I were you, hope Sprint releases an LTE range extender.

As I responded to Johnner1999, it isn't the pricing, but the setup that I believe is complicated, in having all the different speed limitations for this and that. Having one flat speed cap is fine, but it gets confusing when customers have to look at their different needs and see if this speed cap for this, and this speed cap for that, is fine for what they want. Plus, not everyone is a gamer and doesn't need the extra speed for that, but may need more than 500mbps speed for music, which if they upgrade, they essentially are paying more than what they need for one thing, versus the other. Having a flat speed cap that meets all needs is preferable, hence my idea to make it similar to Cricket, by having unlimited at 9mbps, a slight bit faster than Cricket for competitions sake.

 

I don't understand how having a flat speed cap and a flat fee is complicated. $45 monthly at 9mbps for all lines is complicated?

It takes away the discounting calculations needed for additional lines by pricing the first line less, but charging more for each additional line at a flat fee. That is as simple as it could get, other than of course my additional idea of having a truly totally unlimited $75 monthly per line, which is the rate Sprint was charging before they replaced it with Unlimited Freedom, with the exception of the discounted additional lines.

1) No salesperson will ever mention speed limits. "You get unlimited data including unlimited standard definition video". Who cares about 500Kbps of streaming music or 2Mbps for gaming? No one is that hardcore, no need to mention it. Want HD video? $20 on top of $60

2) At 9Mbps you can watch HD video, and at $45 that would destroy the quality of the network because everyone would be on it. Bad idea.

Has anyone here been inside stuyvesant town? Coverage outside is fine but once you go into any buidlimg and apartment you drop instantly from B41 LTE to 1x800. According to sponcer maps there are towers all around. I always report it on Sprint Zone.

 

From what Ive noticed its not only sprint that has issues. Att users get 1 bar of 4G (NOT Lte). A friend with tmobile had 2 dots on a non b12 phone but couldn't use any internet. And I'm pretty sure Verizon only had 3G on 850mhz. Seems like a prime spot for more mini micro cells or something else. Everyone was asking for the Wifi password

 

Sorry for all the post. Ive been busy and finally got some time off.

That's definitely not because of tower issues then. Sounds like the entire building is mostly concrete, brick, and sheet metal. That'll keep RF out for sure.

I think Sprint is doing fine. I reached out to the CTO recently about network issues. He redirected me to the regional manager, who redirected me further to a more local manager, who gave me information on what neighborhoods are gonna be affected by incoming upgrades. He said full builds, local tower upgrades, and small cells are incoming, and he gave me his number so he can give a deeper insight into what the plan is. Sprint HAS a plan. I'm guessing they're just spending at a controlled rate to improve the numbers on their quarterly statements. This isn't the same Sprint that was falling behind years ago, they're even planning to address new neighborhoods that have poor service where I live. There's definitely change coming, and for the first time in a long time, I'm more optimistic about Sprint than ever before.

Verizon has done major equipment replacement work on their network. So I'm sure it's not difficult anymore for Verizon.

Just quietly rip and replace LTE equipment, let the CDMA stuff continue to sit and rot.

Nope, this is New York City, home of Verizon and Time Warner Cable, with RCN sprinkled in.

You forgot Optimum

While technically true, I do not believe most people would settle for 12mbs internet vs 300+ offered by FIOS and Cable companies.

Actually U-Verse can be good! The issue is its fiber optic to a node, then copper line to the house. If it was coax, or fiber to the premises/home like FiOS, they could be really competitive. But they're an ISP, so competition wouldn't happen. ????

I wasn't aware about Uverse being available there or not. Seems Verizon has a hold on that market with Fios.

Here's a history lesson for you Arysyn, since I know you'd appreciate it - the New York Telephone Company merged to become Verizon. Verizon controls all the copper lines here, and FiOS is their initiative to replace all copper with fiber optic.

Do you have Uverse available there from AT&T?

 

So long as Uverse is available, it only starts at $20 monthly if you can get someone at AT&T to give U-basic. Plus, with bundling discounts, it doesn't cost much more than Sprint and T-Mobile. Besides the Freelancers Union discount I've mentioned, there is another discount membership called "Founders Card" that gives a discount too.

NYC doesn't have U-Verse.

Deval, depending where you are you can get DirecTV. Maybe not in Manhattan, but I know for a fact in Brooklyn some apartments you can install the dish right by your balcony or by a window.

From my experience the b41 doesn't work well here. Not sure if it can't travel due to poor equipment or the hilly topography of the region.

 

My argument is the other carriers can make it work...

 

Now I know other carriers don't have b41.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

AT&T has WCS, which is 2.3GHz. Close enough.

I'm pretty sure Google Maps allows you to pre-download routes and if you're out of coverage it still continues because it pre-caches part of the route ahead of you. There have been several times where I've gone into a tunnel and maps continued giving me directions by anticipating where I was. While on a call, SMS still comes through 1x.

 

iMessage I can't help you with because that's an iPhone problem.

I'm aware of Google Maps, you're right about that, but he uses Apple's Maps because it's well integrated into iOS. He can't tell Siri to give him directions to a place with Google Maps, and if someone sends him an address it defaults to Apple Maps. So workarounds aren't really easy in this case. And we know about SMS over 1x of course, but again most of the people I speak to (and also he speaks to) use iMessage.

Extremely? In all caps? First world problems to be sure.

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

You know, you can joke all you want about that, but when there's a solution to this problem and you're paying a good chunk of money, you'd kinda hope the problem would be solved.

Anyone who has used Sprint ever knows the limitations in voice and data. 17 years now as a customer and I've never found the need to use voice and data at the same time.

 

That's my personal experience, but is still valid.

The biggest issue is iMessage. Now, I don't know if your close friends or significant other or family also have iPhones like you, or how frequently they message you, but personally, everyone I know has an iPhone. And when I have a phone call, it's never for 5-10 minutes, it's usually an hour or two. And that usually translates to me hanging up, and seeing all the messages pour in late or get double messages (one as SMS, one as iMessage). It's EXTREMELY frustrating, and part of a bigger reason why I want VoLTE so damn bad. Plus, my dad uses his iPhone for calls & navigation in the car. If mom calls him while he's on the road while he's using Maps, there's a reasonable chance he'll miss an appropriate exit or something like that.

There will be no conflicting tech. It will all be LTE and VOLTE. CDMA will be phased out and so will WCDMA. They will have to shed some of their spectrum holdings or not (depending on 5G allocations and or Dish spectrum being sold to Verizon and/or AT&T). But the avoided capex will be tremendous, same with opex. They won't have to get all new panels and cabinets, they will just be moved/merged to either Sprint's or T-Mobile's sites.

As everyone has said, VoLTE is a touchy fragile calling tech. T-Mobile even has issues with it, but they have UMTS to back it up. Plus, there are still costs associated with decommissioning networks, and Sprint just can't shut down CDMA overnight. It's far too important right now.

 

They would need new cabinets and hardware to support both of the networks used LTE bands. You just can't remove a T-Mobile site and expect all T-Mobile phones to just use band 25 and 26. You still need band 4 and 12 at the local site, which Sprint equipment doesn't support. The costs associated with the merger would be high.

I am referring primarily to Sprint. You know that some here and elsewhere who are pining for Sprint to enable VoLTE for simultaneous voice/data immediately will turn into ingrates if they then cannot use VoLTE on certain unlocked handsets.

 

As for VoLTE, it seems like a solution in search of a problem. Who needs it? I have seen no evidence that VoLTE QoS is absolutely necessary. By its own nature, LTE is a fragile airlink. VoLTE QoS is unlikely to save a call from dropping if the LTE airlink becomes unstable. Robustness comes not from QoS but from signal quality and capacity -- both of which are being achieved through densification.

 

Meanwhile, VoIP OTT has been around for years. Maybe the operators should get out of the voice business altogether. Various VoIP OTT dialers have almost ubiquitous compatibility and can figure out interoperability -- even if the latter means a lowest common denominator of dumping the call onto the PTSN most of the time. Google already is doing that with the Hangouts Dialer, while Apple and Microsoft easily are capable of doing likewise.

 

Forget VoLTE. Let the operators be just the "dumb pipes" that consumers by and large want them to be.

 

AJ

I'm gonna have to disagree with you here AJ. VoLTE answers a huge problem other than simultaneous voice and data for Sprint, and that's the use of spectrum. Sure Sprint could just run 1x voice carriers forever on PCS, but it's not efficient. More work today is data intensive, as you know, and LTE makes the most efficient use of spectrum for both voice and data. While I agree that ISPs should be a dumb pipe, VoLTE should be present on all networks once their LTE networks are dense enough. Phone numbers have a purpose, and it's impossible for society to embrace one service as their primary standard for VoIP to replace the traditional dial the number system. I understand your argument regarding its fragile air link, but this is something Verizon has been working hard to solve by throwing as many towers and small cells into the fray as possible without breaking their bank and making subscribers happy.

Just bought a note 7 upgrade today on my 1500 2 year plan. I was told that starting today I could only get it online from a very knowledgeable rep who has worked with me before. The online store did not show the two year options for me, but he was able to get it to work. I will go back and buy my accessories from him, which I believe is the bulk of their commissions. The new plans are great for video watchers, but I use mostly data, including roaming which is 300mb on my plan.

My family is also on ED1500, 4 lines. I got my whole family on 6s, all contracted except my dad who's leasing because his phone broke before his upgrade became available. We're gonna run out his 18 month lease and figure out whether or not we wanna stay on Sprint and switch to Unlimited Freedom or go somewhere else. ED1500 has been a fun ride but looks like its time is running out.

According to the subreddit, the second killing of 2 year contracts for new subs that was supposed to happen on August 26 has been moved up to tomorrow: https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/4yx9b6/psa_2_years_ending_823/?st=is6gsgax&sh=bbbfa462

 

After tomorrow, you gotta go online or go through telesales. I'm hearing mixed things about third party retailers like Best Buy.

I think this is why the merger thing keeps being mentioned with Masa clinging to some hope he can get T-Mobile. With T-Mobile's already well-built network, combined with Sprint's massive spectrum holdings, Sprint would be resolved of its network issues pretty soon after working on the necessary conversions.

A merger would NEVER help Sprint for many reasons, and here's why:

 

1) The cost of adding up debts - if Sprint was to buy T-Mobile, or T-Mobile buy Sprint, they would have to combine their total debts. Think about it. They would have to go further in debt just to buy the other one, and Sprint has large debts to pay for soon.

2) The cost of new equipment - not only would they have to remove redundant cell sites, but they would need to get all new panels and radios and cabinets to support band 4 and 12 at Sprint sites, band 41 25 and 26 at T-Mobile sites.

3) Conflicting tech - this new carrier would have to find a way to bring VoLTE everywhere because of T-Mobile's existing VoLTE plans, but CDMA network subs wouldn't have access to VoLTE because no handoff unlike the UMTS subs.

4) Regulatory hell - you think FCC would let them get 600MHz or 5G frequencies with their total spectrum holdings?

5) This wouldn't fix a damn thing - what Sprint needs is more capex going to an efficiently fast install of new towers and small cells. Why would buying a second, more redundant network with totally different tech help?

 

We have a greater chance of seeing Sprint go bankrupt than a merger happen because a merger of the two would be complete hell.

ROAD TRIP!

Very different. The first combination long has supported simultaneous transmission. The second combination has not.

 

AJ

If that's the case AJ, can Sprint do bonded calling like Republic Wireless offers?

Ok so I've confirmed that there is some form of SRVCC running on Sprint's network as of today. Today, as I left a friends house, a call I was on handed off from a wifi call to the macro network without dropping. It didn't occur to me at the time but I messed with it a bit later and found that the call handed off successfully from wifi to the macro network about 90% of the time. Also btw I have an iPhone 6S. I took a video of this happening with my ipad although I am not entirely sure how I should upload it. If anyone has any suggestions or comments I'm all ears.

This is honestly the best news and I'm very excited to try it out. Is this on iOS 9 or iOS 10 beta?