ericdabbs

LOL. Yeah I guess we should hold off our comments until Google finishes producing these multiple Nexus phones on multiple manufacturers first before discussing what our thoughts are.

It looks like the original June 10th release date is looking pretty good right now. Lets hope it doesn't take more than a week delay to resolve this stupid patent issue complained by crApple. Argh another reason to hate Apple.

This blows!!!!! Was looking forward to checking out the Evo 4g lte this weekend.

Not sure about Leap or USCC but I am pretty sure MetroPCS is LTE release 8 since they were the first carrier to launch LTE.

If this is true, then this is great news. If only a software upgrade is required on Sprint towers to be LTE release 10 compliant then that is great. I would hate to be Verizon or AT&T that has to come in the truck loads and install new equipment to be LTE release 10 compliant. I am not sure what you mean by Sprint LTE at 800 MHz will be out of box LTE advanced. I think what Sprint meant by that is by the time 800 MHz LTE is launched, the towers will be upgraded to LTE release 10 and be LTE-Advanced compatible.

Even for the Federal Government 80 MHz carriers are overkill. Lets not forget that Clearwire does not have unlimited spectrum. 160 MHz on avg may seem like a lot but with 80 MHz carriers, its half the amount of spectrum they have. We also have to remember that the Wimax network is already taking up about 30 MHz of spectrum to support it. There is no way Clearwire will deploy past 40 MHz carriers they already said so. I would much rather have two 40 MHz carriers OR four 20 MHz carriers than a single 80 MHz carriers anyday. Lets not forget that in order to achieve those really high speeds, it not only depends on the amount of spectrum in the carrier but also the MIMO configuration. Even if you put a 100 MHz carrier with a 2x2 MIMO configuration it can only go so fast. You need to have a 4x4 or a 8x8 MIMO to help achieve faster speeds.

Well LTE release 10 is the LTE release version that is considered LTE Advanced. One of the biggest advantages about LTE Advanced is carrier aggregation which means you can group a bunch of smaller carriers together and make it like one big fat LTE pipe. I am sure there will be a ton of changes in LTE Release 10 to make it better than Release 8 and 9. Verizon and AT&T are launching LTE Release 8 and Sprint is releasing LTE Release 9. I don't know the exact specific changes between the two but I have briefly skimmed over LTE Release 9 and it does have some improvements on interference management. Either way LTE Release 8 and 9 are not considered LTE-Advanced and all carriers are eventually moving over to Release 10 to be LTE-Advanced compliant. In terms of 1 Gbps TD-LTE, you can just forget about that with Clearwire. The Clearwire CTO, John Saw has already come out and said that they did those tests as a proof of concept and is not meant for commercial deployment. To get 1 Gbps speeds would be ridiculous and it would take Clearwire something like one huge 80 MHz carrier along with 8x8 MIMO configuration to do so. John Saw also said that Clearwire will be deploying 20 MHz TD-LTE carriers at launch and eventually will be launching a 40 MHz TD-LTE carrier. There is absolutely no need for anything bigger than a 40 MHz carrier ATM and even a 40 MHz carrier is overkill. All 1 Gbps speeds would do currently is for speedtests and for show and not really useful. Also TD-LTE and FD-LTE are different technologies. FD-LTE relies on symmetrical channels for the uplink and downlink hence 10 MHz x 10 MHz while TD-LTE is just one huge 20 MHz channel for the uplink and downlink. The benefits of TD-LTE is that you can dynamically allocate the amount of downlink and uplink bandwidth so you can potentially have higher speeds. I can imagine for a 20 MHz channel, you could allocate 15 MHz for downlink and 5 MHz uplink (15x5) for TD-LTE which is faster than a 10x10 for FD-LTE.

It looks like Google wants to take a different approach this year for Android 5.0 with their Nexus device lineup by having multiple Nexus devices this year with different manufacturers. Specific details haven't been established yet but we can guess that more details will come at Google I/O. We could guess that a Nexus device will be coming from Motorola, Samsung, HTC and LG and potential more manufacturers. The other key thing is that the Nexus phone lineup this year will be sold directly by Google. This is big because the last time Google sold a device directly was with the Nexus One on Tmobile and the carriers cannot put their footprint on it. Part of the motivation behind launching multiple Nexus devices is to increase the adoption rate of the next Android software to lessen fragmentation of which we know is horrendous right now. The adoption rate of ICS is probably still less than 10% of the Android users. Also by launching a Nexus devices for each manufacturer it eliminates the possibility of preferential treatment. This also reduces the huge learning curve by manufacturers to build ROMS of the latest Android software on their existing devices since each manufacturer can use the Nexus device Android software as a baseline to build the necessary drivers and ROMS and reduce the wait time for an upgrade release on existing devices. If this works out this year for Android Jelly Bean, I hope Google continues with this model for future Android versions. http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/15/google-planning-multiple-nexus-devices-android-jelly-bean/

Wow so this means that folks who pre-ordered are actually getting it later than those who go in the store on May 18th? Wow this sucks.

Yes some partners can be crossed off like Simplexity, Leap, Elevate and FreedomPop that joined Clearwire. However that website shows 33 potential LTE partners and Clearwire has only captured 4 out of 33. I would love to see Clearwire capture between 25-30 of those partners.

I think you can cross out Tmobile. I can't see Tmobile teaming up with Clearwire for LTE. I would like to see MetroPCS and US Cellular join the Clearwire LTE bandwagon though. C-spire would be welcomed as well.

Well we all knew this day would eventually come after the FCC denied them the waiver to build a terrestrial LTE network back in February. I am glad Sprint had the cajones to pull out of that deal after the march extension. What is left to be seen is what the Lightsquared wholesale customers are going to do in reaction of this news. I really hope that Clearwire can capture the majority of Lightsquared wholesale customers for LTE. The more Clearwire does not have to rely solely on Sprint the better. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304192704577404341177350280.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

HA!!! there will be no such thing allowed on these forums =). Great info and good to know.

There is no official minimum donation in order to become a sponsor. However let me quote Robert by saying "if you donate just a few bucks, you better have some mean sob story =)". In all seriousness, its whatever you feel comfortable donating. As a sponsor, I can tell you that it is so worth the donation to get access to the Network Vision live tower map as it really shows how much effort Robert has put to bring us the latest and greatest information on Network Vision.

Verizon can't shut down the EVDO network until it can move over 98% of their customers to LTE. Also Verizon as well as all carriers would need to create basic dumbphones with LTE voice because NOT everyone wants data and can't afford to get a smartphone. Until these things can happen for any carrier, no carrier can shut down their 3G network completely.

I am not sure how many markets really need the Nextel towers besides the Baton Rouge/New Orleans area. Its been voiced many times on this forum that the CDMA tower spacing in BR/NO is horrendous for voice/data speeds and that converting some Nextel towers to CDMA with Network Vision would have helped relieve this problem. Are there any other particular markets that have bad CDMA tower spacing that could use the iDEN towers converted to Network Vision? Again Sprint's decision to not convert any iDEN towers to CDMA with NV is purely financial and they are trying to cut out as much operation costs as it can to save money. The lesser the towers the better especially with 800 MHz 1x Advanced being deployed all over the country.

The information on this site S4GRU.com is not official by Sprint. The only official markets that have been announced by Sprint are: Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Atlanta, Baltimore and Kansas City. However Robert does have internal documents by an inside source from Sprint so it should be pretty reliable. We will find out how reliable the internal documents are when Sprint begins to officially announce more markets. If they fall in line with Robert's info especially for the first round markets, then you should be confident that his Network Vision running list is a good barometer of when cities will be deployed with Network Vision. Based on Robert's info, NYC is scheduled for a late Fall 2012 release so it definitely will not be available by summer time frame. NYC is very difficult to cover because of all the high rise buildings and there still has to be a ton of testing to ensure that in building penetration is there as well as being able to cover the folks on the ground.

Check out this article. http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-158-is-sprint-going-to-show-up-sooner-in-the-show-me-state/

No word yet on Salt Lake City but my prediction is that it will be in the third round. I expect to see the mid tier cities get Network Vision love in the third round like Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Denver, Pittsburgh, etc. You can see the current announced markets for the first and second rounds by S4GRU here http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/212-network-visionlte-deployment-running-list/

This is awesome. Much better than the AT&T One X which has a locked bootloader.

There is no need for anything bigger than a 40 MHz channel. Anything bigger than a 40 MHz channel will only be used for speedtests to show off how fast speeds and nothing else. The average user does not need greater than 40 MHz worth of speeds to browse the internet or stream video. I would much rather have Clearwire deploy three 20 MHz LTE carriers for capacity than one 60 MHz LTE carrier.

I really hope that Sprint can launch a high end LG smartphone to compete with Samsung, HTC and Motorola. If this LG flagship phone resembles anything like the LG Optimus LTE2 phone coming out, it should be able to compete with the SGS3 and the Photon 4G LTE. The phone is scheduled for a Q4 release so it has a long way to go but I am glad that Sprint is aggressively trying to add a competitive smartphone lineup to compete with Verizon and AT&T.

I would love that. Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk

I agree IF Sprint can bid on every single PCS H block license that would be very good but I think that is going to be hard since I am sure it will be subdivided like the G block. Honestly the FCC should consider the fact that Sprint owns the PCS G block and that AT&T, Verizon, Tmobile and the smaller regional carriers are focused on obtaining AWS spectrum. They should give Sprint preference for bidding the H block since it would avoid interference issues. The FCC needs to do a better job of not just dicing up the spectrum blocks into 5 and 10 MHz chunks instead of 12 MHz and 7 MHz chunks but also they need to be considering what majority of spectrum bands holdings each carrier has to see what additional spectrum would help them most. Sprint has at least 90% of its spectrum holdings in the PCS band so additional PCS spectrum will help them most.

Im thinking that the LG phone hinted in this thread is a variant of the LG Optimus LTE2 phone recently announced to compete with the SGS3. It is suppose to be released in Korea in mid May. The LG LS970 does fit some of the proposed specs with the LG Optimus LTE2 phone with the 2GB RAM, 2150 maH battery and 4.7in (I know it says 4.67in on phandroid but it could be 4.7in) screen. The press release didn't have details about the processor or camera but im crossing my fingers and hoping this is true. http://www.engadget....gb-ram-true-hd/ http://www.eweek.com...-of-RAM-100511/