| |
Clearwire spectrum?Does this mean they're refarming the Clearwire spectrum to get the 2.5 GHz band? |
|
 IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC |
Sounds great.Sounds like Sprint will have a really fast network in about 3 years. No wonder Apple didn't bother including 2.5 GHz capability on iPhone 5C/5S. It's only a limited deployment in a handful of cities for the time being and the phone would constantly be hunting for 2.5 GHz signal. |
|
| |
to paulcarlucci
Re: Clearwire spectrum?Yes. IIRC they now own 120 MHz of 2.5 GHz spectrum in 90 of the top 100 U.S. markets courtesy of their full acquisition of Clearwire. |
|
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT |
to IPPlanMan
Re: Sounds great.But what will the other carriers have after 3 years. Sprint is having a difficult time keeping up. Their LTE rollout has been _very_ slow. |
|
| |
How about....They just get their current "upgrades" to something actually usable.
St. Louis, as I am sure many other cities are, is just flat out ridiculous when it comes to using data on their network.
My hotspot can't even be set to 4G as it is constantly beeping at me as it looses and tries to get 4G coverage again. It drives me nuts! |
|
| |
who cares?at the high metered rates it won't matter... you just consume faster so a metered bill can be higher. this is only a win for the carrier, not the consumer. Sprint is looking to kill off unlimited data plans as much, if not more than their competition... and I mean ALL of them, Tmobile included. |
|
| |
1mbpsI'd be happy with a quarter mbps. Sprint is slower than edge around here |
|
 mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2013-Oct-30 6:10 pm
50-60 Mbps to the tower...... but only a 1.5 Mbps T1 from the tower to the rest of the world!
/M |
|
|
silbaco
Premium Member
join:2009-08-03
USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2013-Oct-30 6:11 pm
LTESo in markets where they have little to no 2.5 GHz spectrum, do they have a plan? I have a hard time believing they will be able to get by on just 800 and 1.9 GHz, otherwise they wouldn't be bothering to deploy 2.5 GHz. |
|
| |
to mackey
Re: 50-60 Mbps to the tower...Nope. Sprint doesn't turn 4G on until their sites are fed by fiber, or microwave linked to to sites that are red by fiber. |
|
|
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2013-Oct-30 6:22 pm
Who caresIt's coverage that matters. HSPA+ or a single LTE channel is fine in most areas. AT&T and Verizon are still clearly winning this game. |
|
| |
to tcope
Re: Sounds great.Very true. And they're going to be busy rolling this out- what about the rest of the country. They should be focused on one thing at a time instead of 30000 things. |
|
 JmGx
join:2003-04-08
San Diego, CA |
JmGx
Member
2013-Oct-30 6:59 pm
Coverage > Speed?They should prioritize expanding their 4G coverage instead, IMO. I joined Sprint last year because I receive a pretty good discount from work, but I soon after realized that 4G is not available in my area...or any part of San Diego for that matter. I will have to go back to Verizon later next year when my contract ends. |
|
| |
to tmc8080
Re: who cares?Faster internet does NOT mean you will consume more. |
|
| |
to JmGx
Re: Coverage > Speed?They had plenty of 4G in North County when I was out there in September.
Their biggest challenge is coverage though. The 4G signal does not travel far on 1900MHz. |
|
| |
to TBBroadband
Re: Sounds great.Well it's all still Network Vision, just with a marketing name instead of saying "800/1900/2500 FD/TD-LTE". And Spark sounds better than "tri-band". There's really nothing new here except now they are announcing phones that can take advantage of it.
They just need to keep pushing with the network rollout and now that triband/Spark phones are being released, service will improve. 800 will give better coverage and 2500 will mean more capacity and potentially better peak speeds than anyone really needs. |
|
| xenophon |
to BiggA
Re: Who caresThe 800Mhz rollout is part of it, which will significantly boost coverage. 800 is what really matters for Sprint to turn around, 2500 is just extra capacity and _may_ mean more speed for those who can get it. |
|
| xenophon |
to JmGx
Re: Coverage > Speed?800 is already part of the current rollout and will expand coverage. Softbank says they will expand rural coverage over next 2 years. With $16B being invested, sounds plausible. |
|
| xenophon |
to TBBroadband
Re: who cares?Sprint would kill themselves if they got rid of unlimited. They have the spectrum to maintain it, enough backhaul is the challenge. |
|
| |
4G is slower than 3GAround here in South Jersey I'll notice the 4G light up on my phone, and then regret it. The speeds are horrible, and when I complain they claim they are overhauling an entire network, when they are done fine tuning it will be worth it. So now, if I can even run a speed test because of constant dropped connections, I am lucky to score a whopping 0.10 Mbps down. This has been going on for over a month, pretty crappy way to upgrade, make your network totally unusable. |
|
| |
to Karl Bode
Re: Clearwire spectrum?Imagine what they can do with fixed wireless. Just the beginning. That is a ***load of spectrum. I look forward to the challenge to big Orange and big Red... |
|
| elefante72 |
to djoropallo
Re: 4G is slower than 3GIt is arguably easier for the GSM guys to upgrade, but Verizon bit the bullet and did it, but they too had their share of issues...
The problem was Verizon had 700 and sprint did not initially, so they needed to address 2-3x more towers and all that backhaul.
Not trying to make excuses, but they didn't have the cash horde of the baby bells...and the juicy spectrum. |
|
| |
It's unfortunate for Sprint and those who can't take it should leave. They should be in good shape when finished but Sprint will continue to get hard knocks until finished. Don't consider Sprint until they at least get 800LTE widely in your area, then get a 'Spark' phone. |
|
| |
to iansltx
Re: 50-60 Mbps to the tower...That is not accurate. The team that sets up the tower equipment for some odd reason is different and unaware of the the "team" that sets up the connection. I have seen the case where the new tower is setup but not connected. |
|
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
to xenophon
Re: who cares?said by xenophon:Sprint would kill themselves if they got rid of unlimited. They have the spectrum to maintain it, enough backhaul is the challenge. I wouldn't think backhaul would be the main challenge for any carrier. |
|
| 88615298 |
to BiggA
Re: Who caressaid by BiggA:It's coverage that matters. HSPA+ or a single LTE channel is fine in most areas. Not if you're using unlimited data. if you're can only use a single channel and that channel is congested, guess what, you're slower than dial-up if you can connect at all. |
|
| |
to xenophon
Re: 4G is slower than 3G'Spark' phone, that's where they were heading with this branding.
Certain phones work better in certain markets. |
|
nonymous (banned)
join:2003-09-08
Glendale, AZ |
to tcope
Re: Sounds great.said by tcope:But what will the other carriers have after 3 years. Sprint is having a difficult time keeping up. Their LTE rollout has been _very_ slow. Well Verizon just spent money to buy the other half of itself back. May not be rolling in cash right now to keep up. |
|
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
to silbaco
Re: LTESprint has zero 800 MHz coverage in my area. 2.5 GHz only covers 11% of my county. Only a small portion of their 1900 MHz spectrum actually covers my county 100%. The rest only covers a smaller portion or not at all. So in the end this won't get many customer in my area. This is Sprint's bigger issue. Great for the cities but tens of millions live outside the city. Sprint and T-Mobile seem more than happy to let At&t and Verizon have these people. |
|
Madtown
Premium Member
join:2008-04-26
93637-2905 |
to tcope
Re: Sounds great.Cricket has been slow in their LTE rollout too. |
|
