how-to block ads
topics flat nest
|Comments on news posted 2012-10-22 16:09:34: Sprint today continued their practice of deploying LTE to smaller markets, launching the faster service in parts of Massachusetts, Kansas, Texas and Illinois. .. |
List of all Sprint LTE locations »news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-575372···1_3-0-20
Atlanta, Ga.; Athens, Ga.; Baltimore, Md.; Barnstable-Hyannis/Mid-Cape, Mass.; Calhoun, Ga.; Carrollton, Ga.; Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, Ill.; Gainesville, Ga.; Dallas; Fort Worth, Texas; Gary, Ind.; Granbury-Hood County, Texas; Houston; Huntsville, Texas; Hutchinson, Kan.; Lawrence, Kan.; Kankakee/Bradley/Bourbonnais, Ill.; Kansas City, Mo.-Kan.; McPherson, Kan.; Manhattan/Junction City, Kan.; New Bedford/Fall River, Mass.; Newnan, Ga.; Rockford, Ill.; Rome, Ga.; San Antonio, Texas; Sedalia, Mo.; St. Joseph, Mo.-Kan.; Topeka, Kan.; Waco, Texas; Waukegan-Lake County, Ill.; Wichita, Kan.; Wichita Falls, Texas.
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
Re: RTP still missing... RTP as in NC?
Take a look at the markets that Sprint is working on, in a broader sense. Specifically, look at the markets that vendor Alcatel-Lucent is building out (they'll be the ones to cover RDU when the time comes).
You'll find that the current list consists of NYC, Baltimore, Washington DC and LA. In many cases it's easier to get the outskirts of such areas covered and then work inward (Samsung has done this in Chicago), so you see a bunch of small markets launched first, but Sprint is going market by market rather than city by city, so it may be a little while before Alcatel-Lucent gets rolling fast enough in its NE markets to start looking seriously at RDU etc.
If you're used to the way Verizon and AT&T rolled out LTE, that doesn't apply here. Where Verizon and AT&T used 700MHz spectrum to blanket a large coverage area with one tower (such that their LTE site density is much less than their PCS 3G site density), allowing them to launch a given metro area quickly, Sprint is using frequencies comparable to their 3G network for 4G, and they are going to every tower in each market to make the upgrades. So it will take them longer, in an absolute time sense, to get a market rolling, but at the end of a rollout (Chicago will very likely be done by year-end, so you can look at that as an example) you'll have a hard time getting Sprint's network to slow way down in congested areas at peak times, and having that slowness extend very far from the congested cell site.
In contrast, Verizon LTE, despite its higher bandwidth (10MHz vs. 5MHz channels), is already slowing down significantly in a number of areas where Verizon is the dominant carrier. How slow? Well, Verizon says that users should expect 5-12 Mbps down on its network...and some places are getting slower than that.
In rural areas, Verizon's 700 spectrum absolutely makes sense. However Sprint's network may end up in some rural areas more quickly than Verizon because of the way their LTE is getting deployed. Go figure.
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
Re: Chicago update ...in ideal conditions, with no one else on the tower. Gee, thanks for setting unrealistic expectations (I've hit 35.6M down, 13.5M up with absolutely no one else on a sector, at maximum modulation in both directions).
Realistic speeds for the time being, when you're within a few miles of an LTE tower (not 3G, not WiMAX) are around 15M down, 5M up. Upload speeds will be lower than on AT&T or Verizon, generally speaking, because upload channels generally aren't congested and you have twice the bandwidth there to start with...well, AT&T doesn't in Chicago but 700MHz also travels farther so you can actually modulate at 16QAM wherever.
| They are NOT doing 40% of those massive markets. In fact, Sprint LTE is spotty in the cities it is launched in. You can go from one block to the next and pick up and lose the LTE. People are having a hard time finding it in some markets, as they have only launched in some parts of the cities, even the cities proper.|
They are pumping the numbers. If they did the same number of sites in bigger cities, they'd have far fewer "markets" done. They wanted to get into Mass, so they did some small cities, and didn't do Boston.
AT&T cheesed out a little by blanketing Manhattan and calling it "NYC", but they have been getting pretty agressive, and when they did Manhattan, it covered Manhattan, not a few blocks here and there like Sprint. Verizon is the most legit, "NYC" for them included north Jersey, parts of LI, CT, etc, which is a more correct definition of a market.