milan03

They were low on the totem pole, plus they were not as cheap as Sprint. So they were probably 3rd in order, behind the big two. Sprint was penny wise, pound foolish.

So Ericsson prioritized the big two, and the 3rd "in order", but not the 4th. Hmm...

If you are Ericsson would you not prioritize satisfying your largest customers first? It makes perfect sense to me.

How does T-Mobile fit into that rationale?

And yet Ericsson still sucks.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Ahhh!! Finally this all makes sense! 

I've been having a great sidebar conversation with Neal on Google Hangouts. He has corroborated that Tmo also suffers with Ericsson significantly. He also noted that Tmo took the entire Southeast US from Ericsson because of issues. So Ericsson is the common denominator here. Not Sprint.

 

Neal speculates that Ericsson keeps AT&T happy at everyone else's expense. And there may be some truth to that.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

There is also a Verizon. They've successfully delivered a massive footprint there in a pretty admirable fashion.

And now T-Mobile re-signing, two years after their initial deal. And we know how rapid they've deployed there.

I contend you're wrong. The fact they have not fired Ericsson is not sufficient evidence that everything is good and it's just Sprint's fault. You can't sell that kind of crap here, Milan. Yet Samsung, Nokia and ALU will be able to overcome how shitty Sprint is. And Sprint has more of a relationship with Ericsson than any of their other vendors. Yes...I'm sure it's Sprint's fault.

 

I talk with folks that work with Ericsson and other providers. And other OEM's. And I even hear often if Ericsson employees bashing Ericsson. They all suffer with Ericsson more often than other vendors. Even Neal will give you a laundry list of Ericsson issues at Tmo. Ericsson sucks. I'm convinced of it.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Robert, I'm not selling anything here. And I never said that it's Sprint's fault. I'm literally presenting what's (at least to me) very obvious, based on my observations of the wireless marketplace. 

Ericsson holds contractual agreements with both Verizon and AT&T. Along with ALU, they've been successfully meeting their deadlines over the past 3 years, helping the duopoly deploy ~50% of their nationwide LTE coverage. The duopoly has only two vendors, and they seem to be sticking with them. That alone speak volumes.

I'm not trying to argue that Ericsson is or isn't the most incredible vendor out there. Most likely isn't, but good enough to be able to satisfy duopoly+T-Mobile, to the point where they're all re-signing their contracts. Also, as I've mentioned earlier, Alcatel-Lucent Verizon/AT&T markets seem to be much less efficient when it comes to overall performance including MIMO utilization among other parameters.

I totally respect your sources and your valuable posts, Robert, I'm just trying to learn more about this Sprint+Ericsson bag of hurt that I simply can't understand, and no one seems to be able to fully explain this to me in any logical way.

Oh, the improved backhaul will be nice. It's not all bad news. And where you get the signal, it will be nice to have LTE.

 

As for Ericsson, I don't know anyone who praises them. They suck. And it's not just a Sprint thing. They are everyone's weakest OEM.

 

Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Considering that Verizon/AT&T/T-Mobile are all sticking with Ericsson by extending their contracts, it's fair to assume that they seem to be satisfied with that vendor. Ericsson is maintaining humongous contracts with the big two, fully completed the initial deployment phase, moving into the next phase. Same with T-Mobile. If anything, I'd think that ALU Verizon/AT&T markets tend to perform worse than their Ericsson markets, based on third party research as well as my own findings.

Do we actually know where does that disconnect come from in their relationship with Sprint? To be completely honest, it's still a mystery to me.

Yep.  And with a GMO antenna setup, it will be weak.  We have seen the GMO LTE mess at Sprint, and that's why very few sites are being run that way.  Especially with Ericsson.  Some will only work a few blocks.

Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see, but it looks like T-Mobile is serious about their backhaul at those rural sites which is already admirable by all means.

Also, Ericsson's been meeting previous contractual obligations and deployment deadlines just fine on other Tier 1 operators as those are already moving into the next stage of advanced deployment with Ericsson, and extending their contracts. There definitely seems to be a disconnect when it comes to their relationship with Sprint though.

I think this is going to work out just fine with GMO, but we shall see. Definitely nice to see LTE-Advanced talk as well.

How did you order it online? I can't seem to find a link for it anywhere.

 

*edit*

 

Out of Stock

 

http://www.t-mobile.com/accessories/t-mobile-wi-fi-cellspot-router.html

I just added it to my cart and checked out Nothing out of the ordinary. I bought it outright.

Got one today. Ordered it online yesterday. Was supposed to arrive next week, surprisingly early delivery. Awesome router, using with FiOS symmetric 150Mbps connection.

Cough Republic Wireless Cough

What about Republic Wireless?

But only VoLTE calls will hand off to Wi-Fi. So LTE dropping seamlessly to HSPA doesn't help you there. Also, even if T-Mobile gets LTE up and running across its entire network in 9 months, LTE doesn't have the same reach as HSPA which will still end up causing issues with handoffs. I agree they've done the best with what they have but it is not an ideal solution.

Yeah their VoLTE is available across the entire LTE footprint, that's 234 Million pops at the moment. So the addition of IMS based VoWiFi to VoLTE handoffs is just a next generation WiFi Calling, and an enhancement to their WiFi Calling service they've been offering over the past 7 years. Then there is also a seamless eSRVCC handoff from VoLTE to 3G/2G Voice.

So if you're currently in non LTE coverage area, nothing is being taken away from you as you can still benefit from the regular WiFi Calling. Oh, and a free high quality 802.11ac router that normally costs $200.

I like their WiFI calling solution.  It is much better than their past iterations.  And the handoff to VoLTE both ways is a great feature.  To be the first to market with that is innovative.  I will give them credit for that.  And I would like for Sprint to have the same feature in their VoLTE network.

 

Perhaps this will be a catalyst to get Sprint to take a more aggressive VoLTE strategy.  I don't get any sense of urgency about VoLTE.  They are working on it.  But I get the feeling everyone is like...whenever.  Maybe this will get Marcelo's attention and they will spend more resources to push VoLTE as fast as it can be successfully implemented.

Now that Marcelo realizes the importance of going dense with 2.5GHz in urban environment, this is something they could absolutely implement. VoLTE launch on per market basis where LTE cell density permits is something they can consider sooner rather than later. And WiFi Calls -> VoLTE handoffs are definitely a win!

Often times? I had never even heard of such an issue. Is it really that widespread of a problem?

There is a thread in this forum discussing pros and cons of WiFi Calls. It mimics the old T-Mobile VoWiFi issues before the IMS update.

Much better than other aging WiFi Calling solutions recently deployed in the US, where often times your calls flat out drop within your WiFi coverage area...

If anyone is interested, there is a video of the event: http://www.media-server.com/m/p/jdkrhz3d

Neville Ray portion is really what's worth watching.

Yeah and on another note, this is also a huge incentive for operators deploying this technology, as they're offloading macro sites to WiFi, essentially handing all those resources back to the network for much better outdoor reuse. Accessing outdoor macro in an indoor environment, most likely with poor SINR/RSRQ will certainly diminish the spectral efficiency of any LTE network, let alone mid/high band one.

Obviously deploying small cells, or DAS for indoor use is one way for tackling this issue. What T-Mobile is trying to do is much more cost effective.

This is a heavy incentive for T-Mobile subscribers to use that WiFi connection (they're paying for anyway) while in the indoor environment, as the user experience gets better for everyone.

Actually, I think that they said they're offering the free upgrade if your phone isn't WiFi Calling capable, not VoLTE. That's only a small percentage of their customers. 

Sure, but your new phone that they'll offer will most likely have VoLTE enabled as well. That's big.

To me this was a major announcement. Being able to seamlessly handoff VoLTE calls to WiFi and vice versa is HUGE! Considering that they have VoLTE covering 234million pops, this is big.

They also offer free phone replacement if your existing device isn't VoLTE/WiFi calling capable. And a FREE 802.11ac ASUS 3x3 MIMO router with proprietary QoS firmware that will prioritize voice packets within the WiFi environment, kind of similar to what LTE scheduler does in VoLTE.

I'm a happy camper

Far right, middle?

Yup, also Sievert far right lol 

Can you spot Marcelo?

I wonder, has anyone ever taken a sprint iphone, before power on and activating, remove the sprint sim and try another domestic carrier sim?

 

I vaguely remember doing a full factory/network reset with either an iphone 4, or 4s, that my att sim worked fine without even 'unlocking', but I don't know if I am mis-remembering or not.

"Unsupported SIM" error.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't new Federal unlock policies prohibit Sprint from domestic locking any longer?  They don't have to sell compliant hardware, but I do believe they can no longer keep a phone domestically locked if there is no subsidy in place and the Owner requests it.

 

Robert

Their existing unlocking policy still prohibits the device use on domestic operators. Verified it on iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c.

Also, all third party unlock services point that unlocking Sprint's iPhone won't get it to work on US operators.

Based on that, it looks like the Sprint model would be usable on Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile, if unlocked. Verizon may decide to block iPhones from other networks. The new laws only prohibit the originating network from blocking it's use on another. It does not require other networks to accept it, though.

 

However, Tmo and AT&T will likely happily accept them and give you a SIM card for it after you pay off your Sprint contract. But I wouldn't be shocked if Apple requires them not to accept iPhones from other providers. It would be a way to get them to buy yet another iPhone at the next provider.

 

So it may turn out an unlocked iPhone from any carrier is not usable on ANY other network, even after unlocked. We will have to see what happens when people try.

 

Robert

Sprint's unlock policy allows foreign SIM cards, but it's always been locked out of domestic non Sprint SIMs. So popping in Verizon/AT&T/T-Mobile SIM into Sprint's iPhone 5s/c for instance will give you "Incompatible SIM" error, and bring you back to the activation screen, even after you've successfully went through the process of unlocking the iOS device.

On the other hand, Verizon's variant when bought outright at the Apple store is unlocked out of the box, and will accept AT&T/T-Mobile SIM just fine. I'm using one right now on T-Mobile and iOS 8, and WiFi Calling and other T-Mobile features have been working all along.

Point is, even though Sprint's variant in theory should be able to work on every single operator known to men, it doesn't due to Sprint's firmware lockdown/database whitelist.

What's the address of that site? I want to take a drive over.

27-11 Astoria blvd

Remember this:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/huawei-probed-for-security-espionage-risk/