Sprint Launches LTE in Chicago Suburbs
As Well as Parts of Texas, Massachusetts, and Kansas
Sprint today continued their practice of deploying LTE to smaller markets, launching the faster service in parts of Massachusetts, Kansas, Texas and Illinois. According to Sprint, today they launched service in Hutchinson and McPherson, Kansas
, New Beford and Fall River Massachusetts
, and Wichita Falls, Texas
. The company today stated they've also launched LTE in portions of the Chicago suburbs
, but not quite yet in Chicago itself. While most of Sprint's markets continue to be smaller launches, the company promises that it has 115 cities they're planing to launch "in coming months" including downtown Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and numerous other significant markets.
List of all Sprint LTE locations
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.
·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.
Re: Chicago update in some portions of CHI suburbs, I saw this noon only .3-.5 mb/download compared to 10mb upload on lte on at&t network.
Re: Chicago update If you're getting .3-.5Mb/s on Sprint LTE than you're almost out of range of the tower. Sprint LTE will yield 37 Megabits down and 18 Megabits up.
·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.
Random... So they're doing half-ass jobs on random little towns to pump the market count, while Verizon and AT&T got the big cities first. Way to not do it right Sprint.
Re: Random... Um... Sprint doesn't launch cities as markets. Sprint has 97 markets IIRC and they're deploying coverage over about 40-65% of the market before they consider it launched. Sprints markets are pretty big too. Each market can contain hundreds of cities. Verizon and AT&T may be launching tons of "markets" but these markets are actually cities not full fledged regions.
Re: Random... What color is the sky in your world? AT&T classifies it as a Market for one and not cities like Sprint and some situations Verizon. As an example look at Chicago. AT&T classifies all of Chicago and its area one Market. While Sprint lists the cities. Sprint lists suburbs of Naperville and Downer Groves to name two. Under AT&T VZW its one Chicago.
Last week I was in St. Louis and stunned how far out my LTE coverage extended into eastern Illinois. My GNote did great while my VZW Jet Pack was SLOW.
Sprint is popping up cities to make it look good. I have friends with SGS3 in KC with joke for coverage and service.
Re: Random... If you look at the map I linked to above( let me link it below again) you would see what Sprint means by Chicago. By Chicago they mean Chicago land. They're listing specific cities in press releases to show that they're making progress throughout the market. I think when people living around the city of Chicago hear that Chicago is getting LTE they expect it to include Chicago land.
Here's Sprint's LTE coverage and AT&T's LTE coverage Sprint covers just as much or more of Chicagoland than Sprint and in every market they're deploying in their LTE coverage goes further out of the city's boarders.
| 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.
Re: Random... Sprint is using PCS 1900 MHz to deploy LTE, it's not going to take one tower to cover 10-30 miles in places like NYC, and NYC metro or even Chicago Proper, and Chicagoland. PCS 1900 MHz doesn't go as far as 700 MHz (used by AT&T and Verizon) and Sprint's cell density is meant for capacity so one cell site may only cover a few hundred feet. This is why you will see coverage drop off if you go from one block to another right now. And if 40% of all cell sites that Sprint owns are completed in a market and most of those sites are in high traffic areas where capacity is their goal then coverage will be spotty until they complete the rest of the network.
Here's Sprint's LTE coverage and AT&T's LTE coverage compare them.
Re: Random... AT&T and Verizon are dense in the cities too. And they are doing a better job rolling out.
Re: Random... AT&T and Verizon DO NOT put LTE on every tower. Sprint puts LTE on every single tower in a market. AT&T and Verizon use 700 MHz which travels much farther than Sprint's PCS 1900 MHz so if Sprint where to deploy LTE like AT&T and Verizon are you would only have little islands of LTE coverage that probably only cover 1-2 miles each. You can put 700 MHz LTE on one tower and have it cover 10-15 miles in every direction with little to no dead spots.
9 cell towers can likely cover the entire city of Cleveland, Ohio using 700 MHz, but that doesn't mean it's going to be fast because they will have 200-350+ devices connected to each sector in the cell instead of 50-100 like Sprint will with the way they're deploying LTE.
As far as I know deploying 700 MHz LTE on every cell tower will cause interference and service degradation with LTE because it only performs to spec in very low noise environments.
AT&T's LTE coverage doesn't really extend past where Sprint's does even in areas where Sprint hasn't completed a market and AT&T has.
Here look at a comparison between AT&T and Sprint in Chicago »imgur.com/a/dDvTM
Re: Random... Except that AT&T and Verizon are deploying 700 over 850, Sprint is doing 1900 over 1900, so it's about the same relatively speaking.
Except AT&T actually has LTE coverage in major cities like NYC and Boston, and a nice fallback to HSPA+ where Sprint falls back to 200kbps of EVDO.
| |linicxCaveat EmptorPremiumReviews:
Yeah right... ". . . the company promises that it has 115 cities they're planing to launch "in coming months" including downtown Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and numerous other significant markets.
One significant market it will never launch or even talk about is rural America. In Illinois that means Chicago's 8M gets it first, but the county with 12,000 residents will never see it, and neither will the majority of the other 6M who live in Illinois.
Mac: No windows, No Gates, Apple inside