Official Sprint Answer:
Sprint is committed to delivering the highest quality network experience. Our Network Vision plan will improve your network experience, but it does not include any EVDO Rev B launch. Sprint has evaluated EVDO Rev B and chosen to go directly to 4G connections. Since we are not launching EVDO Rev B, none of our handsets supports EVDO Rev B.
It looks like maybe no Rev. B after all. Hopefully they'll push 4G LTE and keep going.
FINALLY! Thank goodness. Let's stick a fork in this horse.
BTW, where is your source? (I know others will ask)
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What good is speed if hardly anybody can get it? Give me more coverage!
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not surprising that a Sprint rep would say that..unfortunately, the truth seems to be just the opposite in the real world, based on everything I have read about Verizons LTE, and my friends who have it say the same thing..makes Sprints non sense look lame compared to it..
and just like i said in the other thread.....you people were freaking out over a baseless rumor
now how many of these idiots actually turned there phones back in
---------- Post added at 04:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
getting your info from a sprint rep is like getting info from sarah palin about the economy....
Neither the LTE that's being rolled out by Verizon and ATT or sprints current Wimax meet the international standard that 4g is supposed to be.
But the LTE technologies being rolled out are a step in the right direction.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
spencer88 said:
What good is speed if hardly anybody can get it? Give me more coverage!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Word! I'll take any form of 4G in San Diego, even if I have to follow a donkey around with a WiMax tower, built by a few guys behind a 7-11 with straws and Big Gulp cups, strapped to its back.
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is simply idiotic. It makes no sense.
Sprint's WiMax implementation sucks. Putting LTE on those same frequencies would also suck. Maybe worse.
It's not the protocol it's the spectrum. Clearwire/Sprint's WiMax is on a handful of razor-thin bands on high frequencies. It's not surprising that it sucks so much and the word "WiMax" has nothing to do with it.
imtjnotu said:
and just like i said in the other thread.....you people were freaking out over a baseless rumor
now how many of these idiots actually turned there phones back in
Haha right. All that bull**** about rev b and the **** ain't even happening. U said it correctly. The people who returned their phones based on that are IDIOTS
sent from my DAMN phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wimax doesn't HAVE to be any worse than LTE or suck -- Clear just did a crap job of deploying the most minimal subset of the standard possible. WiMax CAN do soft hand-offs... Clear just didn't bother buying the software license to enable it to work, and instead chose to deploy them the cheapest way possible, and configured them to act like wifi access points that just happen to have ~1km footprints).
There's nothing magic about Verizon's LTE -- they have more backhaul, and allocated more bandwidth to it than Clear did. Sprint LTE can suck every bit as badly as Sprint/Clear Wimax does, and it won't be any more compatible with AT&T or Verizon's LTE than Sprint phones are with their 3G service.
LTE's standard-ness is wildly over-hyped, and almost completely meaningless in the US. In Europe and Asia, it might matter and mean something. Unfortunately, America's wireless phone market is as messed up as Japan's, and unlikely to ever change. If Sprint bought and merged with T-Mobile, and deployed a nationwide unified network with CDMA2000 voice & 1xRTT, legacy GSM & GPRS/EDGE, EVDO (rev.A, B, and Advanced), WiMax, AND LTE... AT&T and Verizon would still manage to find ways to be incompatible with it and each other, because they don't WANT their networks to be commodity-like wireless pipes to the internet where consumers can switch service providers at will and without repercussions.
IMHO, the best thing Sprint could possibly DO right now is repurpose the Wimax for backhaul, and use it to fully saturate their EVDO spectrum (and, once the furor over rev.B dies down, quietly enable and advertise it with some stupid name like "Ultim8 Vision" since their new tower hardware is almost certainly capable of it). Deploying two separate loosely stapled-together data networks was just about the worst idea in mobile phone history, especially when you consider that the move was 100% marketing and had nothing to do with real-world performance.
In most places, unless you're having a picnic lunch outdoors next to the tower, you'd get better sustained performance from Rev.A with enough backhaul bandwidth to fully saturate it, let alone Rev.B -- and unlike Sprint's disastrous experiment with 4G, your phone wouldn't spend half its time madly thrashing back and forth between 3G and 4G trying to make up its mind which one it wants to use (leaving you without network access for 10-30 seconds or more each time). For proof, just look at T-Mobile in places like Chicago. Same un-sexy UMTS as before, but in places where they've put it to full use and squeezed every bit of performance out of it they can, it blows Sprint's 4G away in real-world usability.
Concise and all encompassing. I couldn't have said it better my self. Meaning I actually do not have it in my own capacity to say it better, or even as well, myself.
Your presence in our forum is an asset. You truly know what's up.
That said, I couldn't agree more...lol
I talked to a sprint from corp in lisa angeles he told me lte and wimax have almost the same speeds and lte can go further
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
Verizon's current LTE and Sprint's WIMAX are not true 4G. LTE Advanced and WIMAX 2 (802.16m) are the true 4G standards.
F that true 4g stuff. They are the 4th major data network type for their respectable providers
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
bitbang3r said:
Wimax doesn't HAVE to be any worse than LTE or suck -- Clear just did a crap job of deploying the most minimal subset of the standard possible. WiMax CAN do soft hand-offs... Clear just didn't bother buying the software license to enable it to work, and instead chose to deploy them the cheapest way possible, and configured them to act like wifi access points that just happen to have ~1km footprints).
There's nothing magic about Verizon's LTE -- they have more backhaul, and allocated more bandwidth to it than Clear did. Sprint LTE can suck every bit as badly as Sprint/Clear Wimax does, and it won't be any more compatible with AT&T or Verizon's LTE than Sprint phones are with their 3G service.
LTE's standard-ness is wildly over-hyped, and almost completely meaningless in the US. In Europe and Asia, it might matter and mean something. Unfortunately, America's wireless phone market is as messed up as Japan's, and unlikely to ever change. If Sprint bought and merged with T-Mobile, and deployed a nationwide unified network with CDMA2000 voice & 1xRTT, legacy GSM & GPRS/EDGE, EVDO (rev.A, B, and Advanced), WiMax, AND LTE... AT&T and Verizon would still manage to find ways to be incompatible with it and each other, because they don't WANT their networks to be commodity-like wireless pipes to the internet where consumers can switch service providers at will and without repercussions.
IMHO, the best thing Sprint could possibly DO right now is repurpose the Wimax for backhaul, and use it to fully saturate their EVDO spectrum (and, once the furor over rev.B dies down, quietly enable and advertise it with some stupid name like "Ultim8 Vision" since their new tower hardware is almost certainly capable of it). Deploying two separate loosely stapled-together data networks was just about the worst idea in mobile phone history, especially when you consider that the move was 100% marketing and had nothing to do with real-world performance.
In most places, unless you're having a picnic lunch outdoors next to the tower, you'd get better sustained performance from Rev.A with enough backhaul bandwidth to fully saturate it, let alone Rev.B -- and unlike Sprint's disastrous experiment with 4G, your phone wouldn't spend half its time madly thrashing back and forth between 3G and 4G trying to make up its mind which one it wants to use (leaving you without network access for 10-30 seconds or more each time). For proof, just look at T-Mobile in places like Chicago. Same un-sexy UMTS as before, but in places where they've put it to full use and squeezed every bit of performance out of it they can, it blows Sprint's 4G away in real-world usability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Clears coverage could be the exact same as Verizon's LTE and it would still be garbage due to the frequency its on.
---------- Post added at 05:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:22 AM ----------
Tuffgong4 said:
Verizon's current LTE and Sprint's WIMAX are not true 4G. LTE Advanced and WIMAX 2 (802.16m) are the true 4G standards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think consumers give a damn about this? Honestly...
bitbang3r said:
Wimax doesn't HAVE to be any worse than LTE or suck -- Clear just did a crap job of deploying the most minimal subset of the standard possible. WiMax CAN do soft hand-offs... Clear just didn't bother buying the software license to enable it to work, and instead chose to deploy them the cheapest way possible, and configured them to act like wifi access points that just happen to have ~1km footprints).
There's nothing magic about Verizon's LTE -- they have more backhaul, and allocated more bandwidth to it than Clear did. Sprint LTE can suck every bit as badly as Sprint/Clear Wimax does, and it won't be any more compatible with AT&T or Verizon's LTE than Sprint phones are with their 3G service.
LTE's standard-ness is wildly over-hyped, and almost completely meaningless in the US. In Europe and Asia, it might matter and mean something. Unfortunately, America's wireless phone market is as messed up as Japan's, and unlikely to ever change. If Sprint bought and merged with T-Mobile, and deployed a nationwide unified network with CDMA2000 voice & 1xRTT, legacy GSM & GPRS/EDGE, EVDO (rev.A, B, and Advanced), WiMax, AND LTE... AT&T and Verizon would still manage to find ways to be incompatible with it and each other, because they don't WANT their networks to be commodity-like wireless pipes to the internet where consumers can switch service providers at will and without repercussions.
IMHO, the best thing Sprint could possibly DO right now is repurpose the Wimax for backhaul, and use it to fully saturate their EVDO spectrum (and, once the furor over rev.B dies down, quietly enable and advertise it with some stupid name like "Ultim8 Vision" since their new tower hardware is almost certainly capable of it). Deploying two separate loosely stapled-together data networks was just about the worst idea in mobile phone history, especially when you consider that the move was 100% marketing and had nothing to do with real-world performance.
In most places, unless you're having a picnic lunch outdoors next to the tower, you'd get better sustained performance from Rev.A with enough backhaul bandwidth to fully saturate it, let alone Rev.B -- and unlike Sprint's disastrous experiment with 4G, your phone wouldn't spend half its time madly thrashing back and forth between 3G and 4G trying to make up its mind which one it wants to use (leaving you without network access for 10-30 seconds or more each time). For proof, just look at T-Mobile in places like Chicago. Same un-sexy UMTS as before, but in places where they've put it to full use and squeezed every bit of performance out of it they can, it blows Sprint's 4G away in real-world usability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nicely put even though I am quite sad about no rev b which I think would be a good idea to help with speed and capacity they are applying 1x advanced which will help capacity issues and enable simultaneous voice and data which will be nice. But the combined tower spectrums once phones come out with chips that will take advantage of it it should increase data speeds and coverage greatly the problem now is the wait they need to hurry up and get every one off Nextel, and start the conversion.
Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk
I would be more than happy if they just fixed Rev A to work at a reasonable speed like 1.5-2M (which is what Verizon is providing in my area).
As to "true" 4G, I don't think anybody really cares, they just want something that works, not some experiment where you turn it on to run speed tests and brag to your friends, then turn it off because your battery will die or because you don't get signals indoors.
Gotta love how in all the discussion about frequency strength, frequency distance, speed, technology etc; people tend to forget the meaning of G in 2g, 3g and 4g is GENERATION.
To arbitrarily define how fast something should be to be considered a new "generation" should be insulting and stupid to pretty much everyone. It'd be like saying Generation X were just Baby Boomers 2g because they weren't good enough to be their own generation.
Put a sock in it. 4th generation of mobile networks = 4g. Nuff said.
AbsolutZeroGI said:
Gotta love how in all the discussion about frequency strength, frequency distance, speed, technology etc; people tend to forget the meaning of G in 2g, 3g and 4g is GENERATION.
To arbitrarily define how fast something should be to be considered a new "generation" should be insulting and stupid to pretty much everyone. It'd be like saying Generation X were just Baby Boomers 2g because they weren't good enough to be their own generation.
Put a sock in it. 4th generation of mobile networks = 4g. Nuff said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Quoted for the truth"
LOVE the "Baby Boomers 2G analogy"!
I guess all the BS marketing hype by the phone carriers has actually worked on the mindless lemmings that walk among us..
Related
I just noticed yesterday that T-mobile has a 4G network in my area and I was wondering if there was a way to force roam 4G on tmobiles network? So that I could pick up 4G.
If its possible how?
Oh and sprint needs to hurry up and put 4g everywhere
You said it yourself. T-Mobile is HSPA+, Sprint 4G is WiMax. So, no.
Naa dude. HSPA+ is not compatible with cdma(sprint). Matter of fact t-mobile is using 4G now because its "trendy" and everybody else is using it. Their network is closer to 3G in infrastructure. But thats up for debate.
That sucks like hell. There's 4G here I just can't have it. AHHHHHHH!!!
Well if its like 3G I guess I'm not missing much.
david279 said:
Naa dude. HSPA+ is not compatible with cdma(sprint). Matter of fact t-mobile is using 4G now because its "trendy" and everybody else is using it. Their network is closer to 3G in infrastructure. But thats up for debate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are on the money. HSPA+ is no more than an upgrade to existing 3G technology. If I remember right, it only has a theoretical max of 54 Mbps down. It is not, nor will it ever be, 4G.
Granted, the current 802.16e standard of WiMax is not 4G either...just waiting for that 802.16m standard to be finalized =). Which once that is complete, infrastructure can be updated and we should be able to utilize it with a simple firmware update.
Stalte said:
That sucks like hell. There's 4G here I just can't have it. AHHHHHHH!!!
Well if its like 3G I guess I'm not missing much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No its way faster than your normal 3G. Faster than WIMAX too. Its nothing to pull down 7 or 8 Mb.
I bet it's better on battery than wimax is on ours.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
overthinkingme said:
I bet it's better on battery than wimax is on ours.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It uses the same radio for voice. The EVO has a separate 4G radio thats has to be activated and scan then connect. So 2 radios running at the same time would use more battery than 1 GSM radio running. Also CDMA has a tendency to use more battery when searching for signal in low signal areas.
Having installed T-mobiles 3g upgrade here in Chicago market back in 2008, I can say definitively that HSPA is just a radio cabinet addition to the existing cellular framework. Depending on the layout of the tower/site, "Flex radios" handle the data on 1, or sometimes more antennae, while the voice travels over GSM through remaining antennae. Very similar to ATT infrastructure, but tiny radios handling big bandwidth.
Having said all that, 4G is a silly buzzword that Sprint started, and T-mobile is now exploiting.
In a way, Sprint is just using extra radios on top of their existing 3G cellular, and just integrating the enhanced data speeds of Clearwire's network into their own.
T-mobile's speeds are indeed fast both HSPA and HSPA+, but to call them 4g may be overstating it, as it is just an upgrade to their existing technology, and not a new technology.
As another poster stated, nobody officially has 4g yet, not even Sprint, and until the 802.16 commission finalizes and LTE is launched we still won't.
To re-emphasize to the OP, not a chance, and don't believe the hype.
I can see sprint(or clear) and T-mobile going to bed for some real 4G'ness.
david279 said:
I can see sprint(or clear) and T-mobile going to bed for some real 4G'ness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I heard a rumor that Sprint may eventually adopt LTE.... It makes sense.
Wimax will make a great backhaul, and could stay in place, not to mention supporting cities and rural areas. But LTE will be the big daddy, and similar to WiMax, works on it's own and should be seamlessly integrated on top of cellular.
I'm not sure but I think it can work with CDMA or GSM, hooray for global WiFi!
Mitch Matrixx said:
Yeah, I heard a rumor that Sprint may eventually adopt LTE.... It makes sense.
Wimax will make a great backhaul, and could stay in place, not to mention supporting cities and rural areas. But LTE will be the big daddy, and similar to WiMax, works on it's own and should be seamlessly integrated on top of cellular.
I'm not sure but I think it can work with CDMA or GSM, hooray for global WiFi!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't count on LTE on Sprint just yet. Hesse denounced it last week; however, Sprint, Clearwire, Google, Time-Warner, and a couple others purchased Spectrum not only in the 2.5 GHz, but the 2.3 GHz band also. So the bandwidth is there and, in the past, Hesse has been quoted saying they can easily switch to LTE if need be.
Edit: http://gigaom.com/2010/10/29/sprint-ceo-dan-hesse-on-clearwire-lte-wimax/
topdawgn8 said:
I wouldn't count on LTE on Sprint just yet. Hesse denounced it last week; however, Sprint, Clearwire, Google, Time-Warner, and a couple others purchased Spectrum not only in the 2.5 GHz, but the 2.3 GHz band also. So the bandwidth is there and, in the past, Hesse has been quoted saying they can easily switch to LTE if need be.
Edit: http://gigaom.com/2010/10/29/sprint-ceo-dan-hesse-on-clearwire-lte-wimax/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info.
I think the most important thing in the article is that LTE can happen if necessary.
Sorry for getting off topic.
So, recently I saw a post that clear/sprint wimax/4g coverage suddenly appeared in toledo ohio. a couple days later I saw the coverage (although still minimal) had almost doubled. I lived in seattle and now chicago, and not too far from downtown in either place, yet I happened to have an apartment within 4g coverage that was "best outside" meaning that short of setting my phone on a window sill with the window open, I couldn't get a signal. I suppose that's beside the point, but what I'm wondering is... What is sprint thinking? I know sprint owns a significant portion of clear, but do they actually intend to switch to lte eventually? Are they currently deploying their new unified towers and don't mind adding wimax with them? Are they throwing money at clear, who I thought was nearly bankrupt? Can these wimax towers quickly and easily be converted to lte, or have lte added? What does clearwire do besides sell modems and annoy me at the mall? How long does it take and how much money does it cost to put a wimax tower somewhere? Will holes in chicago and seattle ever get patched or is indoor signal lower priority than new markets? Why does there not seem to be any information or leaked roadmap about their plans?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Well For 1
I would be pissed if they discontinued clear/wimax expansion, it's the reason I bought my evo, with that being said I've seen articles that state they will be working out a way to carry lte and wimax, via tower conversions, which some people say isn't possible, others say anything is possible. There are many opinons, but just like any new technolog, money must be invested, and pushed forward. Plus maybe clear/sprint plan on selling the wimax off at a later date, or subcontracting the towers or something like that. If they fail to continue pushing wimax or fail to develop it then that outcome would be much harsher then pushing a technology that may be adpapted or replaced all together. But to push 4g so hard then discontinue wimax development would be suicidal for both companies
Yeah, I can see how they would need to stick with it now, it just seems to be very secretive. I know you want an upper hand on the competition, but if I were a stockholder id want to know the plan. If sprint wants to go hard with 4g, why not just throw several million at clear, give people some jobs, and put a ton more towers up. I guess I don't understand why, if theyre pushing wimax, they don't have a lot more towers popping up a lot more quickly then they are. Even with a recent appearance of a lot of new markets, you'd think they could tell us the next dozen cities, or light it up more quickly.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
wrb123 said:
Yeah, I can see how they would need to stick with it now, it just seems to be very secretive. I know you want an upper hand on the competition, but if I were a stockholder id want to know the plan. If sprint wants to go hard with 4g, why not just throw several million at clear, give people some jobs, and put a ton more towers up. I guess I don't understand why, if theyre pushing wimax, they don't have a lot more towers popping up a lot more quickly then they are. Even with a recent appearance of a lot of new markets, you'd think they could tell us the next dozen cities, or light it up more quickly.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess is that this is the reason why all plans are getting the extra $10 charge for data. The added income will allow Sprint to throw more money at Clear and get more 4g towers up more quickly. More money means more workers which means more towers more quickly. Plus that'll give more money to the research and development team to get us quicker 4g.
It all makes sense to me. I think stockholders need to decipher current events and figure it out instead of making the company hold their hands through everything.
If they go LTE I'm going back to T-Mobile. I do not want LTE ever.
What's wrong with lte? I know lte in itself isn't dependent upon a certain spectrum, but i also heard sprint could possibly decommission its iden/nextel frequency and use that for something, and if lte and wimax are approximately the same speed, and there is adequate coverage, who cares what technology is behind it? using the lower frequency for lte and phasing out wimax (or having them coexist) would be fine with me if it meant a lower frequency for better indoor reception. I think google and intel should throw some of their extra money at clear... or are they regretting having invested?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
If you haven't read before, ltd gives carriers the ability to control data 100%. If they want they can make you pay to gain access to things like YouTube.
Sent from my evo 4g
Is there a page somewhere that states what areas are on the waitlist for 4g?
Sprint is planning on using new white space to penetrate into buildings. But I'm sure we will see the wimax / lte combo soon. Especially since Verizon wants to stop sprint from roaming on their census towers.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
There is a new technology that condensed 2G, 3G, and LTE into one base station and antenna ......and it's the size of a rubrics cube. Perhaps they would use those to add LTE.
more Info on phonescoop
Sent from my Evo using XDA App
WiMax can be fairly easily switched to LTE, with a "software update and push of a button" from what I've heard. So putting out new WiMax means they're putting out the infrastructure for LTE later.
wrb123 said:
What's wrong with lte? I know lte in itself isn't dependent upon a certain spectrum, but i also heard sprint could possibly decommission its iden/nextel frequency and use that for something, and if lte and wimax are approximately the same speed, and there is adequate coverage, who cares what technology is behind it? using the lower frequency for lte and phasing out wimax (or having them coexist) would be fine with me if it meant a lower frequency for better indoor reception. I think google and intel should throw some of their extra money at clear... or are they regretting having invested?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Outside of carrier controlled data (one of my greatest fears, as I use my wireless tether rather sporadically and for various reasons) I would have to go with that my Sprint phone doesn't have a LTE chip in it. If sprint switched to LTE exclusively then our Evos would drop back to 3g and we'd still have to pay for 4g. Or, if they switched to LTE/wimax combo, it would give them almost no incentive to upgrade wimax anymore and our speeds would be stuck where they are now.
Also, I've always been a huge fan of company competition. Sprint/Clear vs Verizon/LTE vs Tmobile, ATT/HSPA+ (if it did stay that way) would mean a plethora of options for us, the consumer. This would keep things like data rates low. What would stop all 4 carriers from charging $50 for data if they all ran off the same network?
I'm also curious if they're working at all on expanding coverage in markets that have some here and there but not all over. For instance Austin has it in a lot of the metro area but it is nowhere near as covered in residential areas.
http://nexus404.com/Blog/2011/02/10...s-to-give-up-retail-without-giving-up-retail/
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
From what a sprint rep told me was that they plan on having 4g to all their markets sometime early 2011. At first I thought she meant major markets but Ive noticed up here in Indiana even some of the smaller cities like Kokomo etc have weak 4g in some spots.
neopolotin75 said:
up here in Indiana even some of the smaller cities like Kokomo etc have weak 4g in some spots.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kokomo, Indiana has 4g? fml
a lot of subscribers would be very upset if they dropped wimax.
the lawsuits would be destructive to sprint.
my bbb complaints would get me free service for life.
tgrgrd00 said:
Kokomo, Indiana has 4g? fml
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea believe it or not......you can get a test signal....its not full blown but its there....
I'm in a best indoor/outdoor coverage area near Tampa, FL and can't even get 4G outside in the wide open.
Was quiet the letdown getting my Evo and smashing the 4G button excited that Sprint finally had 4G in my area and getting 'Poor' signal and then disconnecting shortly after.
Verizon shows solid LTE around here, that's next on my list to try. Even if I have to pay out the ass for it.
cutthroatamft said:
There is a new technology that condensed 2G, 3G, and LTE into one base station and antenna ......and it's the size of a rubrics cube. Perhaps they would use those to add LTE.
more Info on phonescoop
Sent from my Evo using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i heard about those, and they seem cool, but i only want wimax. i just want to get it where i live (LA county) so i can use it on my evo. i don't care what they do anywhere else. also how much does it cost to upgrade a tower to 4g? if the richer ppl (myself somewhat included) using sprint donate some $$$ can we get 4g faster? then they get more people joining sprint because they got more 4g, and we got some of our $$$ back? i just wanna get 4g out here ASAP. rumors going around that it's coming out here in march, anyone know where i can check? about to call sprint later and ask.
I tried a T-Mobile hspa+ phone inside my apartment where 4g is mysteriously absent (bad frequency and bad building penetration) and on T-Mobile 3g it got 3000kbps+ consistently! really considering going to tmobile before the end of the day and getting a free g2, just paying the sprint etf and selling the evo.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I always thought WiMax = 4G but I read somewhere today it's not.
Can someone explain please?
I tried reading the article and those complicated words didn't make any sense.
Same here idk what day hell is wimax so I don't use it lol
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
arozer said:
I always thought WiMax = 4G but I read somewhere today it's not.
Can someone explain please?
I tried reading the article and those complicated words didn't make any sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wimax is the method that Sprint/Clear delivers us 4G. Verizon delivers 4g using LTE.
So yes, Wimax=4G
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX
Sent from my PC36100
WiMAX is one of the three competing "4G" (which I now call FauxG) technologies being used in the United States. The other two being LTE (Long Term Evolution) and HSPA+/HSPA Advanced
All three are capable of effectively managing spectrum allocations, capacity, and delivering voice over internet protocol dependent on set up, but the main use for these technologies is for mobile internet/data.
WiMAX started first, and Sprint/Clearwire wanted a head start and went with this. LTE the more world standard technology came later, AT&T and Verizon both use this and many other companies are switching to LTE soon. LTE trial tests are being conducted on Sprint and Clearwire should either company decide to change over. HSPA+/HSPA Advanced started a little late in the game and is essentially a 3G technology that behaves like and gives application usage like a 4G network such as WiMAX or LTE. T-Mobile is the main company to use HSPA+ however AT&T is overlaying much of their network, albeit much slower than T-Mobile, with HSPA+ and calling it "4G" prior to their LTE roll out.
WiMAX unfortunately is only on 2.3, 2.5 and 3.5Ghz frequencies for the time being, meaning the signal while capable of fast speeds, does not penetrate buildings or walls easily or effectively enough for indoor use, even with closely spaced tower placement.
Sprint and Clearwire hope to change this with a network upgrade plan which would essentially recycle unused 800/850, 1900 spectrum for use with WiMAX and CDMA, as well as using the current 2.5Ghz spectrum for WiMAX and CDMA.
LTE on the other hand, was deployed at 700Mhz. While the signal travels though buildings and walls easily, the lower frequency will result in slower maximum data speeds over all and lower battery life.
HSPA+ is a 3G technology, so if you are familiar with T-Mobile or AT&T or any GSM type network you know it is the same as before, only new hardware handsets and a software upgrade at the cell site have enabled faster speeds. The only hardware from the tower that needs replacing is backhaul.
To elaborate on Williefdiaz's "FauxG" comment, there has been some controversy (among tech geeks at least) as to what's "really" 4G. ITU had defined it as a network supporting 100 Mbit/s for mobile installations and 1Gbit/s for fixed or nearly fixed installations (phones would of course be mobile). Neither WiMax nor LTE meet that yet, but they're sufficiently fast enough compared to 3G that the industry has chosen to market it as such. Even T-Mo's HSPA+ technology, which is even further from the 4G requirements in that it's not an all-IP packet switched network, is being marketed as 4G because it can provide similar speeds.
In the end, it looks like anything capable of delivering speeds of 5-10Mbit/s (or more) is going to be called 4G, regardless of the ITU's definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
Try This: http://tinyurl.com/5tyebn7
bkrodgers said:
To elaborate on Williefdiaz's "FauxG" comment, there has been some controversy (among tech geeks at least) as to what's "really" 4G. ITU had defined it as a network supporting 100 Mbit/s for mobile installations and 1Gbit/s for fixed or nearly fixed installations (phones would of course be mobile). Neither WiMax nor LTE meet that yet, but they're sufficiently fast enough compared to 3G that the industry has chosen to market it as such. Even T-Mo's HSPA+ technology, which is even further from the 4G requirements in that it's not an all-IP packet switched network, is being marketed as 4G because it can provide similar speeds.
In the end, it looks like anything capable of delivering speeds of 5-10Mbit/s (or more) is going to be called 4G, regardless of the ITU's definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you both very much for elaborating. Igot a clear understanding now.
For the many of you that don't understand/don't "believe" in network vision...
Android police posted this article which is actually pretty informative.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...ce-but-the-800mhz-rollout-will-drop-your-jaw/
mattykinsx said:
Android police posted this article which is actually pretty informative.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...ce-but-the-800mhz-rollout-will-drop-your-jaw/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...I understand the underlying concepts and already knew that's what the 800mHz band was capable of....but...to see it laid out like that--even as overly optimistic as internal corporate presentation slides likely are--holy ****.
Thanks for the post...I gotta admit, my jaw dropped as well.
daneurysm said:
...I understand the underlying concepts and already knew that's what the 800mHz band was capable of....but...to see it laid out like that--even as overly optimistic as internal corporate presentation slides likely are--holy ****.
Thanks for the post...I gotta admit, my jaw dropped as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've talked to Sprint technicians that are working on the project and they truly believe this will bring them inline with, or better than, the big two.
And that seems very likely.
Lets just hope they keep unlimited data and don't turn into At&t and Verizon.
I've had Sprint for able 6 years, my family has had it for I wanna say 15+, they've had their ups and downs but I believe it's a stable cell phone provider. I can't ever picture myself without it loving my speeds, loving my service (I currently live in the country AND getting 4G) I'll always be a loyal sprint customer and this link you posted makes me happy haha
Anyone have the link to check and see if you have tower updates in your area in the past 6 months or scheduled?
Oh wow...I knew Network Vision was supposed to give them a boost but I didn't think it'd be this much of a boost.
cds0699 said:
Anyone have the link to check and see if you have tower updates in your area in the past 6 months or scheduled?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
network.sprint.com
It burns when I tapatalk...
Still impresses me every time I see it, thanks for the reminder of what's to come.
It burns when I tapatalk...
I've learned over the years to believe it when it is done rather than believe the powerpoint.
There are always caveats like, coverage is factoring in 800MHz, but some phones aren't FCC certified to work at 800MHz even though they might be otherwise capable (Photon comes to mind)
Are they running both the 1xAdvanced voice and EVDO carrier at 800 in every market on just the voice carrier or only augmented 800 in select markets? If some markets only get LTE on 800, then that won't help our phones out.
Conceptually Network Vision is the right thing to do, but there can be a significant difference between the design and implementation. The latter is where they usually see the unanticipated issues.
So yeah, it looks good on paper, let's see it in action.
Beejis said:
network.sprint.com
It burns when I tapatalk...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very much.
Hopefully Sprint does not have too much trouble raising the additional $3 billion needed to complete Network Vision.
I just went on an ADD fueled wikipedia/internet spree because I realized as I was reading that article that I knew nothing about sprints actual network or network at all. I had to keep looking up each term, staring further down Sprint's rabbit hole. I found a lot of interesting information but what really stunned me was that WiMax 4G network runs at 2.5Ghz. By comparison, Verizon's LTE network, which technically by definition is not a true 4G network, runs at 700Mhz.
I cannot wait for this upgrade to come to my area soon enough.
My area:
Past 6 months: 3 data speed upgrades
Planned: 4 data capacity upgrades
Nice!
doesn't Verizon use a 700mhz wavelength for lte which would make better
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Well i just speed tested both a sprint EvDo revA and roamed on versizons EvDo rev0.... Guess what. I got 1.2mb/sec on sprint ( its 3am here so ones on the towers) on verizon i got 1.9mb/sec.... Wtf!?!? I though EvDo revA was way faster than Rev0!? Yet rev0 its litterally 80% faster! Please, some one explain this to me. Please, this is actually a serious queztion
Sent From My Epic Touch 3g
bluefire808 said:
Well i just speed tested both a sprint EvDo revA and roamed on versizons EvDo rev0.... Guess what. I got 1.2mb/sec on sprint ( its 3am here so ones on the towers) on verizon i got 1.9mb/sec.... Wtf!?!? I though EvDo revA was way faster than Rev0!? Yet rev0 its litterally 80% faster! Please, some one explain this to me. Please, this is actually a serious queztion
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rev0 vs RevA is just the air interface. If you connect a fast air connection to a slow backhaul then the lowest common denominator is the backhaul and that will limit your speeds. If there are too many people on the tower sharing the limited bandwidth, that will limit your speeds too.
If you connect a 802.11n wireless router to a 56k modem, what would you expect your Internet speeds to be? That is analogous to what is happening with Sprint, though the backhauls are more capable (and also shared amongst more people)
Assuming you are sure the Verizon connection was Rev 0, it is theoretically capable of 2.45Mbps while Rev A is theoretically capable of 3.1Mbps. Drop around 18-20% for actual use and you get the real-world #s.
So a fast Rev0 could easily beat a rate limited RevA on the download side.
Now the upload side, RevA beats Rev0 by more than an order of magnitude. .15M vs 1.8M theoretical. I'd be surprised if a Rev0 uplink beat a RevA uplink, but if the towers are overloaded enough, anything can happen.
sfhub said:
Rev0 vs RevA is just the air interface. If you connect a fast air connection to a slow backhaul then the lowest common denominator is the backhaul and that will limit your speeds. If there are too many people on the tower sharing the limited bandwidth, that will limit your speeds too.
If you connect a 802.11n wireless router to a 56k modem, what would you expect your Internet speeds to be? That is analogous to what is happening with Sprint, though the backhauls are more capable (and also shared amongst more people)
Assuming you are sure the Verizon connection was Rev 0, it is theoretically capable of 2.45Mbps while Rev A is theoretically capable of 3.1Mbps. Drop around 18-20% for actual use and you get the real-world #s.
So a fast Rev0 could easily beat a rate limited RevA on the download side.
Now the upload side, RevA beats Rev0 by more than an order of magnitude. .15M vs 1.8M theoretical. I'd be surprised if a Rev0 uplink beat a RevA uplink, but if the towers are overloaded enough, anything can happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was just the info i needes. I had also wiki'd it and saw that too. But i like your real world explanation. Yup 2Mb/sec on verizon rev0 and 1.2Mbsec on sprinta revA. Eh o well. Thanks again for getting back to me. Big props to you brother!
Sent From My Epic Touch 3g
iSkylla said:
I found a lot of interesting information but what really stunned me was that WiMax 4G network runs at 2.5Ghz. By comparison, Verizon's LTE network, which technically by definition is not a true 4G network, runs at 700Mhz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They have a wider bit of spectrum down there at 700mhz at a much lower wavelength. WiMax and LTE are pretty much just protocols. Verizon's LTE would suck on that thin slice of 2.5gHz and Sprint's WiMax would kick ass at 700mHz....roughly....and that's not taking into considering signal propagation and obstruction penetration.
My 3G speeds suck... but who cares, 4G has gone through the roof down here.
3mb/s -> 9mb/s in my living room
5mb/s -> 18mb/s in my friend's house
I'm gonna go drive all over and run speed tests now.
Orrr... they are showing the map like that because there won't be any buildings in 2013 to penetrate.
Food for thought gentleman.
PS. Jk
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Simple question..
I'm a bit confused about WiMax and whether or not it is (strictly) a cellular communications technology embedded in the Evo 4G, such as 3G and 4G Mobile Data Speeds, and how this relates to the Evo's normal wifi connection.
Is there any crossover between WiMax and WiFi?
Or is WiMax simply a mobile data technology not related to the onboard wifi network card?
Thanks
I think the wimax is part of the 4g service...
Sent from my PC36100 using xda app-developers app
WiMax is a type of 4G, with LTE being another type (of 4G)
And yes, neither of those have anything to do with the wifi and there is no crossover involved
Sent from my PG06100
CNexus said:
WiMax is a type of 4G, with LTE being another type (of 4G)
And yes, neither of those have anything to do with the wifi and there is no crossover involved
Sent from my PG06100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^This. Older Sprint phones like the EVO 4G, EVO 3D and Samsung Galaxy S2 E4GT (among others) use Wimax, which was Sprint's original offering for 4G service. Sprint has since gone to LTE (Long Term Evolution) for their 4G service, although Wimax still works in areas where it's already active. Phones on Sprint utilizing LTE include the EVO 4G LTE and Samsung Galaxy S3. Wifi has nothing to do with either Wimax or LTE, as previously stated. A Wimax-enabled phone cannot utilize LTE, and vice-versa, as they are two completely different 4G standards and operate on different frequencies.
The advice is free....the bandwidth, not so much
It really grinds my gears that there aren't new phones available supporting either Wimax or LTE or Wimax AND LTE. I am stuck in Ohio where the Wimax roll out was thorough, and now there is no info on if/when LTE will come here. Eventually people in ohio will all have upgraded to LTE phones due to attrition and we are paying for data plans that we can't take advantage of. I really want a new phone, maybe the new One that is coming out soon, but the drawback is no 4G in Ohio. Sprint really dropped the ball on this one. I'd take a phone that was a little thicker so they could fit both chipsets in there no questions asked.
thebbbrain said:
It really grinds my gears that there aren't new phones available supporting either Wimax or LTE or Wimax AND LTE. I am stuck in Ohio where the Wimax roll out was thorough, and now there is no info on if/when LTE will come here. Eventually people in ohio will all have upgraded to LTE phones due to attrition and we are paying for data plans that we can't take advantage of. I really want a new phone, maybe the new One that is coming out soon, but the drawback is no 4G in Ohio. Sprint really dropped the ball on this one. I'd take a phone that was a little thicker so they could fit both chipsets in there no questions asked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats very true. I think it proabably has to do with the extra work of getting the two to play nice while both being available in one phone, and the extra drivers and hardware required to have both
Definitely what you said though, I'd have no problem with a bit thicker phone that features both but since other competitors are moving towards slimmer and sleeker phones, while at the same time having monstrously powerful processors, it probably wouldnt be a smart move on Sprint part
I was trolling the new HTC One forum yesterday, and did notice that the One might be coming with an LTE radio supporting 800mhz and 1900mhz. This is promising as I believe the 800mhz is what sprint rus the Direct Connect system on. That system is avail in my area so maybe they will use it for LTE? #wantLTE
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2158662
thebbbrain said:
I was trolling the new HTC One forum yesterday, and did notice that the One might be coming with an LTE radio supporting 800mhz and 1900mhz. This is promising as I believe the 800mhz is what sprint rus the Direct Connect system on. That system is avail in my area so maybe they will use it for LTE? #wantLTE
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2158662
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I remember hearing or reading something sometime back from sprint that eventually they were going to convert the old Nextel iden network over to 4g lte because of the bandwidth it runs on. I also remember that person telling me that this new lte on this frequency would penatrate 2-3x better meaning better 4g lte signals indoors. It may have been a sprint tech who told me on one of the many phone calls I have made to them over the years.
Sent from my ever-changing OG Evo...
Everything you say is true, just replace the word "bandwidth" with "spectrum". iDen was using lower frequencies which penetrate better. You get slightly lower theoretical max speeds, but the connection is more reliable, and people generally agree that's what's important.
Sent from my PC36100 using xda app-developers app