Rawvega

Since it's T-Mobile, obviously it's going to be the best thing evAr!

Definitely not. Gotta love the dopey looking T-Mobile fanboi basically saying that Sprint should've hit their coverage goals six months before their projections just because.

Awesome! That clears up a lot. Thank you, Neal.

Pretty sure this particular device isn't for Sprint or any American operator for that matter. I couldn't find it during a cursory search of the FCC database. I'd imagine that Sprint will eventually launch some derivative of this device as a successor to the Zing hotspot. It'd be nice if they also included the band numbers. Just saying "700" is pretty ambiguous as is "2600".

Nah, they don't have enough 700A (12Mhz) on it's own to deploy what they term their 'Wideband" LTE. Plus, I believe that they still may have channel 51 issues in New York which currently prevent them from deploying their 700MHz. I believe that this press release is referring to their AWS-1 spectrum.

Yard House

But where is 700Mhz mentioned anywhere in that release?

Mmkay... But yeah sure he has, and he's done the same to CenturyLink, Cox and other ISPs who have issued similar press releases. To my point, he seems to have no problem taking most all companies and agencies to task which makes it all the more glaring that he gives T-Mobile a perpetual pass.

Game Over

Wow, it's like Groundhog Day in here...

Indeed, and I've been a member over there for over 10 of those years. However, his incessant T-Mobile cheerleading has frankly become rather unconscionable IMHO.

First Friday

Good news indeed though Karl Bode is such a joke of a blogger.

I don't know about USCC, but I do know that the BoD shot down his attempt to but MetroPCS in the 11th hour.

Those interested can have their voice heard in regards to the incentive auction. http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db1211/DOC-330994A1.pdf

Cellular towers

Varsity Blues

What is annoying, and IMHO unethical, is the sensationalized headline. Part of it reads that Sprint: will also cut your data speeds. Yet in the article they cite the actual policy which states: Other plans may receive prioritized bandwidth availability. To improve data experience for the majority of users, throughput may be limited, varied or reduced on the network. One need not be much of a word-smith to clearly see that Ars took some liberty there. "Will" and "may" have distinctly different meanings and implications. To continue with the Star Wars theme of the article, I find Brodkin's lack of integrity disturbing. Report the news, don't make it up.

Shark week Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

Encouraging news regarding RRPP courtesy of ggore over at HoFo: http://goo.gl/pkf1lK

Yep the articles are just fine, but I can't get involved with those jokers in the comments because, well...

Interesting... Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

And the bolded is text is where I will continue to disagree with you. A speed test is supposed to show the speeds that you actually did receive, not what you could receive. If it's about whatever speeds you could expect to receive, then why even have speed tests? Just let the carriers publish theoretical maximums and what they expect that users will receive and leave it at that. That's bunk imo. I don't use a speed test to show me what I could get, I use it to show me what I am getting. As for your counterpoint, I believe that at least with Ookla a phone that is suspended from the network would show a "Network communication issues" error message and not upload a 0 or any data whatsoever so I don't really see that as being a valid argument.

I disagree. A speed test is nothing more than a snapshot of user experience at a given time. Regardless of whether the network can provide 10 Gbps, if you're only getting 64 kbps then that's your actual user experience at that place and time. What if T-Mobile decided to de-prioritize all other network traffic in favor of certain speed tests in order to show the full potential of what their network can provide and then used those results to claim America's fastest network? Would that be not entirely unfair as well?

So despite this, they're obviously still going exempt Ookla from showing a customer's true speed at that point in time if they're being throttled. Not surprising though. Ookla is what they hang their hat on when they claim to have America's fastest network. Can't have throttled speed tests bringing down their average and putting that talking point in jeopardy.