utiz4321

Regardless of whether or not sprint merges with tmobile I hope he intends on building a first class network.

Execution is the key. And waiting until the end of 2015 to have 100 markets where they offer competitive speeds/capacity is not, in my mind at least, not a recipe for great execution. In any case the company that should b e really worried is att. They are going to have to work harder and be more credit s give to keep their network competitive.

And this shows the importance of 2.6. It is how their network becomes the standard (at least with in metro areas).

This statement is something I don't understand at all. Hesse has done just about as good a job as CEO as anyone could expect. When he came to the company it was in free fall after one of the worst cooperate mergers in history, the company had an even worst reputation than it does today and the leadership seemed to be completely clueless as to how to reverse the situation. Hesse stopped the free fall, bought some semblance of customer service back to sprint, guided it through the worst economic condition since the 1930's, and tied the company up with SoftBank. Perfect no, but I don't really think anyone could have do better given where sprint was and the economy. I forgot about getting the company the iPhone, which many people predicted would bring death to sprint but turned out to be a home run instead.

Network experience is highly subjective. I don't think there is a way to say a network is better over all. If you live,work and play in dead spots what does it matter that overall in even the city you live in that carrier has the fewest dropped calls? So I don't even know what it means to say a carrier has a better network out side of a better network for me.

Where are you located. So far I have run into zero problems on lte. The lowest speeds I have seen have been north of 1 mbits. But yeah if the lte roll out is incomplete so towers can become overloaded when they would not be had the roll out been complete.

Is 1x advanced backwards compatible?

I have sympathy for any person who tries to do a job or tries anything and fails, failure sucks, losing your job is disruptive to any person. Millionaires are people so yeah I have sympathy for them too. I never understood this culture of blame that exists in American, for a variety of incentive reason people need to be held accountable but they could very well have been excelling at their jobs and a project as complicated as NV could still have fallen behind. This is not as easy thing sprint is trying to do and in fact it maybe one of the most difficult tasks attempted by any wireless company ever. In any case I don't think any one on this forum has enough knowledge about what these two guys did or did not do to say they where doing a good or bad job. It maybe sprint needed some one to take the blame or they where not performing could say with out a lot more information.

Look, I think a good point is losing your job no matter how much you are making is disruptive to your life. Further the since of failure is humiliating. Are these guys going to go bankrupt or live on the streets, not likely. But that is not the same as saying this isn't going to be a disruptive event in their lives and AJ is right we shouldn't celebrate someone else misfortune. None of us are making the decisions they had to make or facing the problems they had to face and though Americans don't like to admit this fact it is true that professional as well as personal success depends a great deal on things we can't directly control. Maybe they could have done things differently maybe not, in either case they did what they did and this is where things ended up. The is no need to celebrate this but we can hope that Saw is more effective.

Totally agree with you on everything but the last paragraph. I think even if tmobile/sprint tie up gave an edge to the new company in terms of speed and capacity it wouldn't be large enough to offset the fact that their customers would be stuck with very limited data connectivity in areas where they vacation or visit. I only get out to those types of areas maybe three to four times a year but it is painful. Further ATT and vzw are not going to let their networks fall apart. Speed isn't that big of a deal to an end user after a point and I can't see either of the big two letting their networks fall below those levels for any longer than a short period. They both have plenty of spectrum to re-farm and in vzw they have there AWS spectrum. It would be better to either buy rual carriers or for the FCC to force cheap data (3G and lte) roaming deals. At least in my opinion for what it is worth.

I think the article is mostly on point. Although it would probably be a quick way for sprint to increase cell site density in many cities. But out side of that I can't see a real boon for the consumer here. And the point about rural coverage is a good one too. When I go out to the sticks it is very hard to be stuck on 1x. That being said the article is wrong about the roll of the DOJ and FCC in mergers. It is my understanding the DOJ is by statute only able to fight a merger on the basis of it violating anti-trust laws and I don't know how anyone can argue that. The FCC has more room to maneuver but it is still hard to see on what grounds they would deny it.

The competition isn't standing still. Sprint needs to stop acting like an incumbent player. The same aggressiveness of the original NV plan should be part of the 2.6 rollout. At least if sprint wants to make their network a differentiator.

I think this confirms that there is some disappointment with the progress on NV. Hopefully the new blood can exceed the expectation set for 2.6 or at the least meet sprint's stated commitments.

I am not trying to be peevish about this but I clicked the link you provided and went through the tread, Robert doesn't even have a post in it and no one states 1x advance will be deployed on 1900. I not saying your wrong but I have never heard anything from sprint saying they where doing this and for the life of me I can't understand why they would do it and be quite about it.

That thread never settled on an answer. In any case no one there provided a statement from sprint saying 1xadvanced was being deployed on 1900 and I have never heard sprint say they where going all the way back to the early days of NV and the webinar they put out have only ever said 1 xadvanced was being deployed on 800. Since hd voice requires 1x advanced hd voice is only on 800. If you have information about sprint's plans saying that they are deploying on 1900 I would love to see as it would be news to me and I like finding out new things.

I don't know why sprint would be quite about the fact that they are deploying 1×advance on 1900. I have not seen a statement from sprint saying 1xadvance on 1900.

Hd voice works only on 1x advanced and that is only being deployed in the 800 spectrum for sprint. It can be deploy in1900 but sprint has decided not to. http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/special-reports/1x-advanced-rev-b-or-ev-do-advanced-cdma-network-migration-path-unclear http://www.anandtech.com/show/5726/sprint-hd-voice-on-htc-evo-4g-lte-is-evrcnw-1x-advanced http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/125235-what-is-hd-voice

Given that hd voice only works on 800 I think eventually phones will default to the 1x carrier in the 800 spectrum in the future. I am pretty sure this has been stated by sprit or has been highly eluded to. This will probably happen when 800 is more ubiquitous.

I don't know but it looks like the tmobile merge is a dead letter. It would be foolish for them to continue give both the DOJ and FCC have indicated that it won't pass muster with them. In my opinion Sprint should focus on increasing their time table for their 2.6 rollout, get aggressive with promotion and go after market share the old fashion way. Maybe look at acquiring a regional carrier.

True, but Canada is roughly the size of the US geographically and only have 20 million. They have 3 major carriers. Brazil is closer to us in size and population and they have four major and about 3 more significant minor carriers. If this merge goes through (in conjunction with the other mergers of the last few years) most major markets are going from 4-6 wireless players down to 3. I don't think that is going to be good for the consumer over all and the FCC and DOJ seem to agree. But will see.

We would be a market of 300 million split among three players. To me this would not be plenty of competition. Most major western nations are markets of 60 million or so and have four players. The good news is that if three are to few and the establish players can't get the government to erect barriers to entry a new player will emerge.

Personally I can't wait until the day comes when there are no more contracts. You want a new device buy one. The only people hurt are the ones still on everything data (ridiculously low priced unlimited which will like see restrictions applied at some point) and the hand set makers. Hand set makers will need to compete more on cost ( although zero present financing will support prices some what). That is a big win for the industry.

Thanks.

Can you post the link. I deleted the email that had the link in it an had some one just recently add my framily ID. Thanks

Glade to see him say there is a since of urgancy in the network build but also supper disappointed to hear him say they'll only be 2/3 complete by middle of the year. If he is talking about NV 1.0 any way.