<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Moved from Los Angeles CA to St Louis MO, better 3G! in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21678073</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:44:27 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:44:27 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Moved from Los Angeles CA to St Louis MO, better 3G!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21678073</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/297537"><b>en102</b></A> : 3G 850MHz has 'just' gone live in Los Angeles.  This article is pretty bogus though.<br><br>Technical reason on calling it BS<br><br>1.  850MHz licenses are in 25MHz (paired) blocks.  This negates the possibility of 3G consuming all 850MHz spectrum, as WCDMA carriers are 10MHz wide.<br><br>2.  Most areas have deployed 3G on 1900MHz initially (hint Los Angeles, NYC, San Francisco, etc).  <br><br>3.  850MHz prior to Feb 2008 REQUIRED spectrum (~5MHz min?) to be used for AMPS (analog) services - that spectrum has been reallocated to 3G 850MHz - possibly taking only 5MHz of existing spectrum from GSM for 3G<br><br>4.  With more devices being deployed with 3G, having available spectrum for 3G devices keeps them from using EDGE/GSM services - which will allow your EDGE device to function better, as 3G devices won't be dropping over to GSM/EDGE due to capacity issues.<br><br>5.  Spectrum starved areas (such as Los Angeles) with a TOTAL spectrum capacity of 45MHz, has 10MHz 3G 850 (Cell A block ARFCN 4385), 10MHz 3G 1900 (PCS B3 - ARFCN 512), 15MHz GSM/EDGE 850 (Cell A block) and 10MHz 1900 (PCS D Block).  What would cause 'less' spectrum starved areas to push GSM / EDGE to 1900 MHz? <br><br>Even if/when a 2nd 3G 850MHz carrier channel is deployed, 5MHz of GSM/EDGE spectrum (yeah, not much) will still exist.<br><small>--<br>Canada = Hollywood North</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21678073</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 03:39:02 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Moved from Los Angeles CA to St Louis MO, better 3G!</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21676445</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : In the greater Los Angeles area 3G is everywhere.<br><br>But the iPhone 3G has such a small antenna and placed at bottom when held it would revert to Edge everywhere. <br><br>In St Louis it's the opposite, Egde coverage is worse than 3G. On the the iPhone 3g coverage is now great! Amaizing!<br><br>As the 3G network becomes the main network, edge network will be slowly pushed out.<br><br>Sucks if your on edge, but if your on edge chances are you will only use voice which is not as demanding as data. All data and voice at the same time users will be on the best 850 network. <br><br>Typed this on iPhone 3G w/ AT&T network :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21676445</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:05:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
