milan03
-
Posts
607 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Blogs
Articles
Media Demo
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Forums
Posts posted by milan03
-
-
probably 4x4 mimo
It's actually 2x2 MIMO aggregating two 2x20Mhz FDD component carriers. One in Band 3 and other in Band 7. This will require Category 6 User Equipment which is due next year by the way of Qualcomm and Intel.
Notice how all the baseband chipset vendors decided to skip Cat 5 which mandated 4x4 MIMO. From a business standpoint looks like that isn't happening simply because it's a bitch to cramp 4x4 into small form factor without some breakthrough interference coordination, which doesn't exist. Also, that'd absolutely eat batteries for breakfast.
So they all are opting to go with "more aggregated spectrum" and 2x2 MIMO route for the time being.
-
There is an actual problem with T-mobile handoff from EDGE back to HSPA+ or HSPA
or from LTE to HSPA+/HSPA
speeds are held at round 0.44mbps
once toggling airplane mode on/off you return good speeds again on the same exact tower reporting 'slow' speeds
I've heard about this, but I've never experienced it. Are we talking CSFB as well coming from HSPA+ to LTE?
There is a 15.5Mbps annoying rate limit over HSPA+42 affecting some users, LTE not affected. There is a temporary bypass for that.
-
Here is another site with the mysterious panel (on the right) and what appears to be ClearWire's 2.6Ghz band antenna. I'm guessing WiMax?
-
1
-
-
"So, ignoring bands...which technology has the best building penetration?"
I ignored bands by not listening to the music for a few days, and found that this technology by far has the best in building penetration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_missile
-
-
If you want to know how to sweep, grab a broom. I will show you.
On the other hand, if you want to know how to adjust sweep time, Brian's tweet does not exactly solve the problem. Sweep/sample time and RBW should be independently adjustable. But I suspect this is just a limitation of the inexpensive spectrum analyzer.
AJ
Yeah you can adjust RBW from 2, 5, 10, 18, 48, 80kHz, etc... But sweep time not so much.
-
So if you think about it from a marketing perspective the perception that "lower frequency" equals "superior service" due to better building penetration characteristics. Just look at the marketing from Verizon and ATT, they have said that their LTE is superior than Sprint because they deploy LTE on 700 MHz which is low band frequency and penetrates buildings better.
To wireless operators lower spectrum is much more important for overall coverage footprint than urban building propagation. Verizon launched 39 markets on day one back in 2010, and by 2012 they've covered ~90% of their 3G footprint. With 700Mhz spectrum they didn't have to deploy to every cell site in order to reach millions, so they've done it much quicker than T-Mo or Sprint, and they've ended up saving lots of time and money.
They just love to cater their ad campaign towards highly populated areas, so they've isolated that one aspect that benefits urban users which is in building propagation.
Truth to be told, I have absolutely no AT&T LTE coverage in my brick house in NYC, and I'm around -105dBm RSRP on my Verizon's device.
On the other hand, T-Mobile's LTE is sitting at -80dBm which is in AWS.
-
Although I had heard it before, I never thought how much of spectrum disaster att has. It has to lead to very inconsistent experience for customers from market to market.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 4
You're absolutely right about their spectrum. Their UE requirements have changed to Band 2, 4, 5, 17 after they've divested large chunks of their AWS spectrum to T-Mobile. And since they don't really have nationwide lower 700Mhz paired spectrum either, they have to deploy LTE in other three bands. Perfect example is Bloomington, IL where they're introducing Band 5.
As far as user experience, I don't think it should matter that much as long as your AT&T branded device supports all four LTE bands.
-
1
-
-
Good that you saw the article but why bring it up in the first place if you knew? To me the Fiercewireless article pretty much implies that Verizon will deploy LTE on PCS after AWS.
Verizon pretty much has nationwide AWS holdings. Of course some markets have more than others. But my point still remains that ATT and Verizon still need to refarm their 850 MHz holdings at some point.
Why bringing it up? Because it makes more sense refarming mid band spectrum after you've already blanketed the entire nation with low band LTE, taking care of coverage. Common sense, no? So you're right, according to Verizon AWS is next, and PCS is to follow. Not CLR.
Voice is mostly on 850Mhz which is another reason why it wouldn't make sense to start shutting that down too soon.
Eventually they will use 850Mhz spectrum for LTE, but they're in a completely different position than AT&T and are definitely not in a hurry to refarm 850Mhz spectrum for LTE...
-
Why do you need to bet? OH you must not have heard that Verizon is already planning to refarm PCS for LTE in 2015. I made a topic about this before back in June.
http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/4113-verizon-to-start-refarming-pcs-spectrum-for-lte-in-2015/
Fiercewireless article on Verizon refarming PCS for LTE in 2015.
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizon-start-refarming-pcs-spectrum-lte-2015/2013-06-27
Seen FierceWireless article when it came out. That's not really the point...
The point is that Verizon has low band 700c spectrum for coverage laid out already across the US. In places where they need capacity and don't have AWS holdings, it would make more sense to deploy mid band PCS which has similar propagation characteristics. Especially with the introduction of CA and small cells.
Now as AJ just pointed out, there is another issue, and that is lack of significant PCS in many markets.
-
Makes sense. AT&T should be seeking for opportunities to refarm it current spectrum for LTE instead of trying to hoard spectrum. They have plenty of spectrum when all things are considered. Hopefully Verizon will refarm its 850 MHz spectrum for LTE.
I'm pretty sure it would make more sense for Verizon to refarm their 1900Mhz spectrum since they have nationwide 700c almost fully deployed.
After AWS i'm betting on PCS being refarmed.
-
1
-
-
As an addendum, AT&T holds no paired Lower 700 MHz spectrum in CMA250. USCC holds both Lower 700 MHz B and C block licenses. The only Lower 700 MHz spectrum AT&T holds in Bloomington-Normal is the unpaired Lower 700 MHz D block. So, there is the definitive reason for 5 MHz FDD band 5 LTE 850.
AJ
Ah this sums it all up. Danke!
-
Was browsing a little into howard forums when I found this:
Looks like at&t has already started deploying lte on band 5 with 5 mhz channels.
I'm sorry maybe I'm blind, but I'm seeing reports of Band 17 with 5Mhz channels.
-
Haha Congrats!!!
-
So to the folks that have these...which one do we get if we want to scan the airaves of Sprint NV stuff and of course the Clearwire stuff? Which store?
This is the one you want to get. https://www.gothamsound.com/product/3g-combo
The range is 15Mhz - 2.7Ghz. It's the most "expensive" model.
-
1
-
-
They don't have contractual obligation to use any particular provider, unlike Verizon or AT&T.
-
It sucks that T-Mobile doesn't have a short term plan to cover rural areas with 4G, but they certainly did their fiber backhaul homework on time, years ago. Now luckily, that part of their deployment strategy is a non issue.
-
Looks just like the panels vzw uses in most of michigan(excluding the old alltel areas) for evdo and 1x on 850.
Could possibly be metro. I doubt its clearwire.
The panels I'm trying to ID are these:
I apologize for off topic.
-
I used to use them back in the day when I was designing wireless systems to cover a building. I had a narrow beam width one that would hunt down a rogue access point in minutes.
Take my money
-
Looks like verizon to me.
Not a Verizon they look like this:
Is it Metro PCS CDMA/LTE setup? Or some old school ClearWire? It's puzzling with 6 ports at the bottom and no RRU... Cabinets right next to them. Looks legacy to me.
-
That looks cool... Man.. Time to tempt the wife to let me get one.
I would get the directional stuff as it lets you isolate where the signal is coming from. Definitely not for pulling in a better signal but that is a plus too.
Not sure exactly where would I get the right antenna, definitely worth a look!
-
That makes sense
-
Ah good to know. Then it looks like WiMax is at the end of the range, although that may vary...
On a completely unrelated note, can anyone ID these, they're driving me crazy I can't figure them out:
6 ports at the bottom, no RRU.
-
Here is another 20Mhz sweep, what seems to be Sprint's LTE?
Has anyone looked into Sprint's Market of New York City?
in Network, Network Vision/LTE Deployment
Posted
Just wanted to bring this inconsistency to your attention.
Sprint's New York market launch involves some New York City boroughs, and as far as neighborhood or communities of Queens, extracted and individually wrapped up into completely independent markets!!!
So according to Sprint, in the state of New York they have six independent LTE "markets" deployed out of one single New York City Metro market, for the sake of competition and increasing their market count..
Those six markets are 4 NYC boroughs of Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island. All counted as separate markets in Sprint's data base.
But then, they really chose to "One Up" every other Tier 1 operator, and murder everyone by counting community of Jamaica, Queens, and neighborhood of Flushing, Queens as separate markets.
To me as a New Yorker, this is beyond shameless. Other three Tier 1 operators count all of those NYC areas into a single New York City Market. Period. Sprint? Not so much.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, would love to hear your opinions.