Jump to content

jefbal99

S4GRU Premier Sponsor
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,619

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by jefbal99

    Handoff Native to Roaming?

    in General Topics

    Posted

    When making an outgoing call when roaming, I have to check which carrier I'm on first. Then I have to decide if that carrier has continuous coverage along my route, knowing it will not handoff to another roaming carrier or to Sprint. In many instances while roaming, I will cycle airplane mode to get a better carrier. Because Commnet is really bad for me as none of their sites overlap. So I cannot keep a phone call from one site to the next. I try to get Verizon as much as possible so I can keep the conversation as long as I need to.

     

    Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

     

    How can you tell what carrier you are on before cycling airplane mode to another?

    Handoff Native to Roaming?

    in General Topics

    Posted

    I can't say I've ever had that happen, however, my roaming in MI is Verizon 850, so the switch from Sprint 1900 is most likely a hard handoff. Perhaps it is a soft handoff due to US Cellular using 1900 spectrum in your area?

     

    We need AJ to chime in here :)

    Future 600 MHz band & OTHER discussion thread (was "Sprint + 600 MHz?")

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

    That area of Michigan is one where T-Mobile already has fairly extensive geographic coverage. So, no, Cellular 850 MHz licenses would not help T-Mobile a great deal.

     

    Additionally, unlike other Cellular 850 MHz transactions, the one proposed here would be limited to spectrum. It would not come with an existing network because VZW has long since integrated the desired infrastructure from the Alltel network into its own. So, T-Mobile would be responsible for building out its own Cellular 850 MHz network, beholden to FCC geographic coverage requirements, and that really would not fit T-Mobile's strategy.

     

    AJ

     

    You are saying, hypothetically, if Verizon had to divest an 850 license in say Lansing and TMobile picks it up. They go every tower with their current AWS Spectrum/HSPA+ on the urban borders and every 3rd tower in the urban area. Then toss up an antenna that supports 850 (if their new LTE antennas don't), they wouldn't have better coverage on the outer edge of the urban into rural area? Then they go to their rural towers and put up an antenna that supports 850 and even if its just 2G/Edge or WCDMA, that wouldn't increase their native coverage and improve service? Also decrease their roaming bill too...

     

    I know we are into a lot of what ifs here, but how is that not a positive for T-Mobile and their users?

    Samsung Galaxy Note 2

    in Samsung

    Posted

    On my Note 2 it says, "Not supported. Unfortunately, Google Wallet is not yet available for your device or mobile network."

     

    It only gives me the option of OK. When I select OK, it closes the app. In the case of the Note 2, it is more than just the unsupported device message. I've seen that before on rooted devices and just ignore it.

     

    I even uninstalled and reinstalled the latest Google Wallet version from the play store, and it was unsuccessful and still gave me the "Not supported" window.

     

    Robert

     

    That is what I always got before this latest update, but I'm also running CM10.1, not stock TouchWiz. There was a time where it worked on Stock TouchWiz, but not CM

    Future 600 MHz band & OTHER discussion thread (was "Sprint + 600 MHz?")

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

    VZW does, but Grand Rapids, Lansing, and Saginaw are all top 100 CMAs, supporting my point that allowing T-Mobile to acquire one of the two Cellular 850 MHz licenses in the affected CMAs would do relatively little to help its coverage.

     

    AJ

     

    Wouldn't the 850 license help them in the rural areas outside of GR, Lansing, and Saginaw?!?!? There are many areas where T-Mobile either roams or is 2G that would be native coverage with coverage from 850. Plus it would be much easier to upgrade their existing 2G coverage.

     

    I would love Sprint to get an 850 license in Grand Rapids as the network there was built by iPCS and the tower spacing is at the absolute limits, so you get out of the city and coverage is beyond spotty! I know that SMR is coming, but that would take another new device, while all the existing devices support 850 for CDMA/EVDO.

    Samsung Galaxy Note 2

    in Samsung

    Posted

    I used it on my EVO LTE when I had it and they gave you that free 10 or 15 bucks to try it out. The circle K cashier looked so confused and was shocked to see it go through. I told him it was Google wallet. He pulls out his iPhone as I walked away. I assume he was searching for his app.

     

    I saw the update on my phone this morning but it says it isn't supported yet. Maybe because I don't have the latest base yet as I haven't had time to update my custom Rom yet.

     

    Sent from my little Note2

     

    From what I've read at XDA, The Unsupported Device message can be ignored, if you get prompted for your PIN and have a card linked, it will work.

    Samsung Galaxy Note 2

    in Samsung

    Posted

    Using the Update from the Play Market, Wallet now allows me to login on my Note 2 running CM10.1. Previously, I had to make a build prop change. I'm going to test it this week as the build prop change broke my bluetooth, so I never kept it.

    Future 600 MHz band & OTHER discussion thread (was "Sprint + 600 MHz?")

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

    T-Mobile already has a Cellular 850 MHz license for one CMA -- Myrtle Beach, SC -- that it inherited in its acquisition of SunCom properties.

     

    But the further Cellular 850 MHz acquisition proposed here would have very restricted scope. The CMAs where AT&T (e.g. Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio, Miami) or VZW (e.g. Phoenix, Cleveland, Charlotte) holds both Cellular 850 MHz licenses are anomalies, are limited to a handful of urban areas. And T-Mobile already has substantial network coverage in those urban areas. Rural areas where T-Mobile could really benefit from Cellular 850 MHz would be unavailable, as those CMAs have separate license holders.

     

    Not to mention, Cellular 850 MHz deployment might be infeasible for T-Mobile. Most T-Mobile sectors are running three panels: two modernized and one legacy. There is currently little, if any room remaining for a sub 1 GHz panel.

     

    AJ

     

    I thought VZW had both sides of the Cellular licenses in Michigan and many former Alltel territories after that terrible buyout.

    Future 600 MHz band & OTHER discussion thread (was "Sprint + 600 MHz?")

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

     

    Maybe if the FCC made AT&T and Verizon divest the Cellular B band in areas where one of those carriers had both A and B like AT&T through most of Texas' date=' for example. The problem is VZW would do anything to outbid T-Mobile in those areas.[/quote']

     

    then Sprint or T-Mobile could bid on those 850 licenses at a discount...

     

    Sent from my SPH-L900 using Forum Runner

    WiMax decommissioning planned?

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

    Population density can change very rapidly from one site to the next. However, even if the next Sprint site over from the Clearwire site has less density, just put up a second one. It is cheaper to run two EBS/BRS Protection Sites in a given community on the Sprint Network Vision platform, than to keep the one Clearwire site online with all redundant costs.

     

    So I definitely agree with you. Sprint should commute all Clearwire WiMax protection sites over to the Sprint network where Sprint offers coverage and make them TD-LTE protection sites. And then, in non-Sprint coverage areas, Sprint should convert Clearwire Protection Sites to full Network Vision and provide an island of Sprint coverage there, since they have to pay to keep a site active anyway at that location. Just slap up an NV panel and one carrier card for each band/technology.

     

    Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

     

    I wish I could click the like button about 100 times for this post. Can you use the secret S4GRU batphone and call this one into Masa and Dan ASAP?

    • Like 2

    Adding Images to Posts - Imgur Links

    in Important Threads

    Posted

    Me either. If intrigued enough, I will break out my VZW hotspot and switch wireless networks temporarily and hit refresh. Then I will turn off my hotspot and return to regularly scheduled programming.

     

    Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

     

    I have to RDP to a PC at my house. When LTE was on at work, I'd use the mobile browser a bit more

    WiMax decommissioning planned?

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

    Yes, absolutely. But if they move the location of the site, they will have to make sure that the change in number of POP's covered at the new site is still sufficient.

     

    Robert

     

    With the Urban deployment of Protection sites, Sprint should have a tower close by that covers the same number of POPs. Two of the three protection sites in my area are non-Sprint, but there is a Sprint tower near by. I hope Sprint shuts down as many of the non-Sprint towers to save more costs.

    WiMax decommissioning planned?

    in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment

    Posted

    The build out requirement is based on Spectrum, not technology. In theory, could Sprint/Clear install EBS/BRS LTE on a Sprint tower in a town that currently has a WiMax Protection Site, then shutdown the legacy Clear Wimax site to save costs? The same number of POPs would still be covered and an extra lease/backhaul/power/maintenance/etc could be saved without endangering a license.

     

    (I may have asked this in a previous thread, but can't really remember)...

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...