avb

Did Sprint ever officially announce which cities will be the focus cities that will be covered in b41? I still think Sprint can improve on the network optimizations as far as load balancing between bands.

To be fair, I took your comment as sarcasm and a joke - nothing malicious towards Sprint. Talking on the phone while driving is bad. Talking while simultaneously checking email/maps/directions and driving is worse.

Cricket also didn't let you tether (legally at least) with their rate plans. The big 4 carriers allow you to tether and use your data allotment. While your plan would be nice for consumers to have more data, I don't see in any way how it would reduce network congestion. Give people much higher data limits like you're suggesting and people will definitely use more data than what they're currently using, especially if you can tether and use your phone as a hot spot. Plus all the people that are paying extra for hot spot plans wouldn't need to with the extra data allowance you're plan will grant them. Here's my personal anecdotal usage example - I have unlimited data with Sprint, and typically use 1.5-3gb/data month on Sprint's framily plan. Yes you do have unlimited data users that use 20gb or more, but I think they are the exception and not the norm. For $35 if I had 15gb, and I could use it however I want (i.e - hotspot) - I'd definitely use more data than what I'm currently using with my unlimited plan. I think this would be the case for most people and thus cripple the network, not help it.

Uh, if they're closing down the office, which we already know they are, of course they're going to lay off the people that were going to work in that office.

T-Mobile doesn't mention how many POPs their band 12 covers, Verizon doesn't do it either for their XLTE, and AT&T doesn't breakdown their POPs by LTE bands either. Sprint names the markets where they have Spark, Verizon does the same with XLTE, and T-Mobile also lists markets where they are working on Band 12.

When the network is congested speeds will already decrease below what you're proposing. You're asking to put an artificial cap on speeds. What good is a 30mb/s or 9mb/s speedcap if you're in a congested area averaging 1-2 mb/s? Any time the speeds are above whatever you're proposing means the network isn't congested and can handle the traffic, so why put in an artificial limit?

Over the air hd antennas are all that's required for these free channels. If you need an internet connection then it's no longer free. If you need an internet connection, you'll probably need a wired connection, and that means cable. If you expect cable companies to give you free channels instead of requiring a cable subscription that certainly won't happen.

My second line is a Metropcs line, so I want T-mobile and Sprint to both continue to improve their networks. The LTE-laa thing that all the carriers are looking into will help with crowded areas such as stadiums and what not. Looking to add this to supplement the network is not an either or thing in regards to acquiring more spectrum. Are you against T-Mobile looking into this technology too?

Sure, if they decide to sell spectrum they will get some cash out of it. If they deploy more b41 and end up selling some of that spectrum it becomes more of a hassle. If they use LTE-laa it doesn't matter since they're using unlicensed spectrum. On top of that if all the carriers use some form of LTE-laa it will probably drop the cost of the equipment. So again why do you feel the unlicensed spectrum should only be used by your favorite carrier?

Why are you against this? T-Mobile and Verizon is also testing this out as well. Or do you feel the unlicensed spectrum should only be used by T-mobile, making it T-mobile's spectrum?

My last Dallas drive was the week after Christmas, there was probably a 10 minute stretch where I didn't have LTE (LG G3). My friends on T-Mobile didn't have LTE for about 2.5 hours of the 3.5 hour drive. Haven't been to Austin in a while, so can't comment there, but last time I drove to San Antonio was about 2 years ago and I don't remember dropping LTE. If T-Mobile can cover those stretches at least as good as Sprint it'll be competitve.

From my experience, speeds are faster the majority of the time with T-Mobile, but my friends on T-Mobile will lose data or switch to 2g more often when indoors (at restaurants, houses, apartments, etc). None of my friends with T-Mobile have a phone with band 12 though, so if Band 12 can fill in those holes then coverage wouldn't be an issue. One thing in Texas - driving to Dallas, Austin, or San Antonio, basically a triangle in Texas, and people make this drive quite a bit, Sprint has LTE covered the entire way, while T-Mobile isn't quite there.

Even if your Spark phone isn't capable of carrier aggregation you'll still benefit from increased speeds with the increased capacity of a second carrier.

On the surface it's great that Sprint is offering more options, but I'd prefer simpler plans. I don't want to recommend Sprint to someone and have them ask me why is there unlimited for $50 with iphone, another $60 unlimited plan, and this super duper unlimited for $80.

I think we all would like more accurate maps, but at the same time, all the carriers overstate their coverage and having accurate maps will be a negative when potential customers are looking at coverage maps between different carriers.

You can watch The Walking Dead on Netflix or Sling TV.

I think now is a good start time for everyone to start checking for new tower permits on a regular basis for their location.

Nice. What time of time frame are we expecting for these projects? When will they start, and how long do we expect before the project is substantially completed?

They don't mention LTE for data, so it might be 3g only. I think Page Plus is the only Verizon mvno I've seen with LTE, and even then speeds are capped at 3.5mb/s.

Check with your investment advisor, or if you have a brokerage account with someone like Fidelity you might be able to purchase with them. When you purchase from a broker like Fidelity you're buying on the secondary market so there's a price adjustment.

Probably also adding cash just in case the 600mhz auction does happen.

I'm seeing on twitter and reddit that people are complaining about an outage/no service for T-Mobile in the northeast. I guess reliability does matter. https://downdetector.com/status/t-mobile/map

Just picked up the Fire TV box deal. Slingtv works pretty well on my phone so far.

I wonder if this would also help battery life on standby since 1900 should be a stronger signal. Also, if this is the future plan they should start seeding devices with this type of carrier aggregation asap. The new flagships from Samsung and HTC come out in the spring and they it would nice if they have the capability once the network is ready.

Sounds like Sprint will have the least coverage/capacity in the stadium based on the number of sectors they are using *barring other factors such as number of users and coverage from nearby towers. I do have a question about das systems such as what's being used here: the bands that are bring used by the cellular providers - how wide are the channels? (5x5 or 10x10, etc). Is this limited by the spectrum the carriers have in a particular market, or is it limited by the das provider? If its limited by the spectrum owned by the cellular provider I feel Sprint will always be at a disadvantage because their primary G band is only 5x5, while the other carriers have 10x10 and wider channels. That is unless band 41 becomes compatible with these das systems.