Related
I know the 4G is unlimited but I thought the extra $10 was not for 4G, according to Sprint. They said that it was for the data that will be used. So then I ask, is the 3G unlimited if you have the EVO phone?
the $10 premium fee includes Unlimited 4g and 3g
Already multiple threads concerning this issue....
Mod please close or delete
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
kris54241 said:
Already multiple threads concerning this issue....
Mod please close or delete
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my search didn't bring up any. can you please post links to a few so that I can read through them? Thank you
What's ur question....yeah its truly unlimited...and umlimted roamimg data...as long as non roaming data exceeds data roam
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I consistently use 12GB of 3G data a month and I do not get charged extra.
It's truly unlimited data...end of story...
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
limited
yes, it is limited. of course they dont monitor everyone, and some people have been able to download way more than 5gb, but go to this link and read, it is limited, especially if you are using the phone to tether.
http://shop.sprint.com/en/legal/legal_terms_privacy_popup.shtml
kris54241 said:
It's truly unlimited data...end of story...
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jtc442 said:
yes, it is limited. of course they dont monitor everyone, and some people have been able to download way more than 5gb, but go to this link and read, it is limited, especially if you are using the phone to tether.
http://shop.sprint.com/en/legal/legal_terms_privacy_popup.shtml
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He was correct - the $10 does get you unlimited data. You posted the wrong link.
From your link (which are Sprint's standard T&C's)
Data Usage Limitation (Mobile Broadband Cards, USB Modems, Embedded Modems and Phone-As-Modem):The amount of data transmitted over our network is measured in kilobytes (KB), megabytes (MB) or gigabytes (GB). Sprint reserves the right to limit throughput speeds or amount of data transferred; and to deny, terminate, modify, disconnect or suspend service if usage either exceeds (a.) 5GB/month in total, unless specified otherwise or (b.) 300MB/month while off-network roaming. 1024KB equal 1MB. 1024MB equal 1GB.
See how it calls out specific devices, and services? If you go to any of the plan information for those devices and services, they take special care to call out that you'll be limited to 5GB - even on the 3G/4G data cards, they specifically note that the only 3G service is capped, and the 4G service is unlimited.
The T&C's for the $10 fee can be found here;
http://shop.sprint.com/en/shop/why_sprint/4g/evo_plan_details.html
And they explain at that url that the data services are really unlimited for the Evo (as long as you're on Sprint's network, that is). They specifically define unlimited for both the 4G and 3G networks as;
"All you can stream, browse, email, chat, watch and game while on our network."
Also, using the Evo as a hotspot is not the same as the "Phone-As-Modem" mentioned in the regular T&C's that you linked to. "Phone-As_Modem" refers to specific Sprint product called "Phone-As-Modem" (which is why it's capitalized). It's a service which is now limited to only a few business plans that have it grandfathered in, where you could pay an extra $15 on your 3G smartphone (something like the intrepid, touch pro2, or one of the older instincts - it may have also been available for dumbphones, but I'm not sure) and you would be able to legally tether your it to a computer to up to 5GB.
finally, if you check out Sprint's printed marketing material for the Evo, I'm pretty sure it specifies that the data is unlimited in the fine print there too.
limited
fachadick said:
He was correct - the $10 does get you unlimited data. You posted the wrong link.
From your link (which are the Sprint's standard T&C's)
Data Usage Limitation (Mobile Broadband Cards, USB Modems, Embedded Modems and Phone-As-Modem):The amount of data transmitted over our network is measured in kilobytes (KB), megabytes (MB) or gigabytes (GB). Sprint reserves the right to limit throughput speeds or amount of data transferred; and to deny, terminate, modify, disconnect or suspend service if usage either exceeds (a.) 5GB/month in total, unless specified otherwise or (b.) 300MB/month while off-network roaming. 1024KB equal 1MB. 1024MB equal 1GB.
Se how it calls out specific devices, and services? If you go to any of the plan information for those devices and services, they take special care to call out that you'll be limited to 5GB - even on the 3G/4G data cards, they specifically note that the only 3G service is capped, and the 4G service is unlimited.
The T&C's for the $10 fee can be found here;
http://shop.sprint.com/en/shop/why_sprint/4g/evo_plan_details.html
And they explain at that url that the data services are really unlimited for the Evo (as long as you're on Sprint's network, that is). They specifically define unlimited for both the 4G and 3G networks as;
"All you can stream, browse, email, chat, watch and game while on our network."
Also, if you check out Sprint's printed marketing material for the Evo, I'm pretty sure it specifies that the data is unlimited in the fine print there too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what i linked was correct, and if you read it in its entirety, you will see this quote:
Unlimited Use Plans. If you subscribe to rate plans, services or features that are described as unlimited, you should be aware that such "unlimited" plans are subject to these Sprint Prohibited Network Uses.
there is a lot of grey with this, so im not saying yes or no, but by reading what i linked, there is a limit.
in the link you added, it also refers back to the sprints prohibited network uses, which takes you back to my original link.
kris54241 said:
and umlimted roamimg data...as long as non roaming data exceeds data roam
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is actually incorrect. According to the T&C's "Sprint reserves the right, without notice, to limit throughput speeds, and to deny, terminate, modify, disconnect or suspend service if off-network usage in a month exceeds: (1) voice: 800 min. or a majority of minutes; or (2) data: 300 megabytes or a majority of kilobytes.
That "or" is a pretty big deal. I'm hearing that Sprint has either started, or will soon start, cracking down on those that use 300MB+ off network, even if a majority of the usage is on network. Some people have already received a note in their latest bill to that effect.
/I'm not a Sprint employee, but I work very closely with their marketing and branding teams.
fachadick said:
This is actually incorrect. According to the T&C's "Sprint reserves the right, without notice, to limit throughput speeds, and to deny, terminate, modify, disconnect or suspend service if off-network usage in a month exceeds: (1) voice: 800 min. or a majority of minutes; or (2) data: 300 megabytes or a majority of kilobytes.
That "or" is a pretty big deal. I'm hearing that Sprint has either started, or will soon start, cracking down on those that use 300MB+ off network, even if a majority of the usage is on network.
/I'm not a Sprint employee, but I work very closely with their marketing and branding teams.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually u r incorrect ...before u come in here and tell me I'm wrong read the tos for yourself
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
kris54241 said:
Actually u r incorrect ...before u come in here and tell me I'm wrong read the tos for yourself
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude, chill - I've not only read them, I quoted them in my post. It's the "or" that's important - it means they can cut you off if you hit 300MB off usage OR they can cut you off its just majority.
Believe me or not, that's up to you, but I work with this everyday, and you're going to see Sprint coming down more on that 300MB crowd going forward.
I'm just hoping to save people some greif
jtc442 said:
what i linked was correct, and if you read it in its entirety, you will see this quote:
Unlimited Use Plans. If you subscribe to rate plans, services or features that are described as unlimited, you should be aware that such "unlimited" plans are subject to these Sprint Prohibited Network Uses.
there is a lot of grey with this, so im not saying yes or no, but by reading what i linked, there is a limit.
in the link you added, it also refers back to the sprints prohibited network uses, which takes you back to my original link.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes - the prohibited uses clause is what it refers to, and that is still in effect on the evo, but has nothing to do with data caps. This clause states
Our data services may not be used: (i) to generate excessive amounts of Internet traffic through the continuous, unattended streaming, downloading or uploading of videos or other files or to operate hosting services including, but not limited to, web or gaming hosting; (ii) to maintain continuous active network connections to the Internet such as through a web camera or machine-to-machine connections that do not involve active participation by a person; (iii) to disrupt email use by others using automated or manual routines, including, but not limited to "auto-responders" or cancel bots or other similar routines; (iv) to transmit or facilitate any unsolicited or unauthorized advertising, telemarketing, promotional materials, "junk mail", unsolicited commercial or bulk email, or fax; (v) for activities adversely affecting the ability of other people or systems to use either Sprint's wireless services or other parties' Internet-based resources, including, but not limited to, "denial of service" (DoS) attacks against another network host or individual user; (vi) for an activity that connects any device to Personal Computers (including without limitation, laptops), or other equipment for the purpose of transmitting wireless data over the network (unless customer is using a plan designated for such usage); or (vi) for any other reason that, in our sole discretion violates our policy of providing service for individual use.
kris54241 said:
Already multiple threads concerning this issue....
Mod please close or delete
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, does that ever work?
Sent from my blah blah blah blah
It is unlimited for both 3G and 4G as long as you are not roaming. There was a typo on Sprint's website that said it was limited at 5Gig but they have corrected it already.
Here's Sprint PR saying the same thing:
http://twitter.com/svinge/status/13988950723
www.explainthefee.com
honestly i can't believe people are still *****ing about this
Sporkman said:
honestly i can't believe people are still *****ing about this
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will never stop. Funny thing is, after jumping from T-Mobile and AT&T...Sprint is way cheaper. People can easily find discounts online to help offset the $10 fee
i currently have tmobile with an HTC G2 phone and i love it. i want to switch to StraightTalk (way lower monthly bill) and i seen that they now offer cdma and gsm phones. what would i need to do to be able to use my g2 on the strighttalk network. i know it violates their terms but its my phone. any help would be appreciated.
nothing.... surely someone has wanted to do something similar like this before.
G2 is GSM. Straitetalk is CDMA.
Not going to happen. Close thread.
Kthx
rhcp0112345 said:
G2 is GSM. Straitetalk is CDMA.
Not going to happen. Close thread.
Kthx
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NO NOT CORRECT. Straight talk has CDMA AND GSM phones. look...
The NOKIA E71 is a GSM Phone as well as others
Nokia 6790 is too.
"Straight Talk is one of TracFone's newest brands. The Straight Talk brand offers five different value-based 30-day rate plans: a $30 limited plan, and a $45 Unlimited text, web and minutes plan, a $135 three-month Unlimited plan, a $270 six-month Unlimited plan, and a $540 one year Unlimited plan. Straight Talk is a Mobile Virtual Network operator (MVNO) offering both CDMA and GSM support. The CDMA side of the network uses Verizon's CDMA 1xRTT wireless network, which was introduced in 2001 and is said to deliver between 40 and 60 kb/s to customers,[8] while the GSM side makes use of either T-Mobile's or AT&T's GSM networks.
Fourteen phones are available for use with Straight Talk: the LG 100C, LG 200C, LG 220C, LG 290C, LG 420G, LG 620G, Motorola W385, Motorola RAZR V3A, Samsung R451C, Samsung T401G, Samsung R355C, Samsung Finesse R810C, Nokia E71, and Nokia Surge (6790). There are exceptions to 1xRTT-only service. The Finesse R810C, an EV-DO-capable handset, performs at higher speeds where such coverage is available. The Nokia E71 and Nokia Surge (6790) are the first smartphones to be offered by Straight Talk. They offer 3G coverage through AT&T. Users of these phones are required to purchase the $45/30 day Unlimited plan. All other phones can be use with either the $45 Unlimited plan or the $30 "All You Need" plan which provides 1000 minutes, 1000 texts and 30MB. All plans provide service for a period of 30 days.
Straight Talk is currently exclusive to Wal-Mart stores because of a joint-venture program between the two companies.[9]"
quoted from wiki
so is it possible to unlock another gsm phone to work on their netowrk.
Yes but only if it uses the right frequencies.
I keep hearing that gps conflict is messing up the lte deployment for Sprint. Does this mean all of Sprint's lte plans are delayed or do they have Clearwire also backing them up? I don't fully understand Sprints situation.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
No. SPrint has their own LTE. They wanted Lightsquared spectrum so they could expand the network wider and faster.
Didn't mean to hit thanks on your post.
Sprint is building out its own network and was gonna lease from third parties like light squared. Sprint already gave them till like June to figure it out or they are gonna lease from another or build out its own network in the places it was gonna use it
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
newalker91 said:
Here is the entire story in a nutshell:
Lightsquared has been working for a long time on a very promising Satellite based LTE technology that can blanket the entire US in LTE with the flip of a switch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You made a great summary. Just curious do you have a source for this information I'd like to read more on the ability to cover the whole US.
So sprints own LTE wont be just 'outdoor' (like wimax... ****.)... Hope they build something with reasonable wall penetration...
newalker91 said:
Here is the entire story in a nutshell:
Lightsquared has been working for a long time on a very promising Satellite based LTE technology that can blanket the entire US in LTE with the flip of a switch. Sprint liked the sound of this as it would be a great financial opportunity and offered a partnership with the company. At Lightsquared, they were allocated a very small range of spectrum by the FCC, and their technology has been finely tuned to operate within the limits of said spectrum. Unfortunately, their spectrum is directly neighboring the spectrum for common GPS frequencies. Back in the day, since no one was using what is now Lightsquared's spectrum, GPS providers were sacrificing precision for reliability and allowed their spectrum use to get sloppy in order to avoid service interruptions. This frequency fluctuation caused some older devices to commonly operate outside of the legally allocated GPS spectrum, and with Lightsquared now testing their network those older GPS units would begin to malfunction. As a few of the FCC board members have large financial interests in the GPS industry, they are taking sides with those manufacturers and demanding Lightsquared fix their technology to not interfere with the devices squatting outside of the legal limits.
As of current, Lightsquared is still contesting the rulings stating that their service is not safe for use. Should Lightsquared not succeed, Sprint will still continue to build out their LTE network by using the Network Vision goal of re-purposing iDEN towers. It will just end up being more costly and a slower roll-out than using a satellite based service to cover almost the entire US population with outdoor LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seeing as how most gps "devices" are simply receivers and the "transmitters" are Dept. of Defense satellites, please explain to me how "GPS providers were sacrificing precision for reliability and allowed their spectrum use to get sloppy in order to avoid service interruptions"....Please provide us some names of these gps providers that are at fault for Lightsquared's bad business decisions....
GPS manufacturers already have filters engineered for the quiet neighborhood of the satellite spectrum. They cannot be expected to use filters that would either greatly increase cost, size and reduce accuracy to filter out signals that would be, and currently are illegal. Nor could they be expected to see the future and design a filter for a network whose actual broadcast strength and frequencies would not even be known until 2011. And finally, as the testing from the first half of 2011, no filter would have worked against LightSquared's first network configuration.
newalker91 said:
Here is the entire story in a nutshell:
Lightsquared has been working for a long time on a very promising Satellite based LTE technology that can blanket the entire US in LTE with the flip of a switch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lightsquared is NOT putting up Satellite-based LTE available with the "flip of a switch"
Lightsquared bought and consolidated frequencies meant for satellite use and are repurposing for land-based use. They got the approvals for land-based use and were contracting Sprint to include support for their frequencies on Sprint *towers* as part of Sprint's NV plans. There may be some minor satellite-based component, but the bulk of the network was supposed to be tower-based, specifically on Sprint's towers.
They ran into the GPS issues which they are currently fighting. It has become a snafu with all sides politicizing it.
To Sprint it would have been just supporting extra frequencies on top of their own 800ESMR and 1900PCS and would have meant additional revenue from Lightsquared for the build out and also opportunites to have extra LTE capacity for Sprint users.
What friggin good is "outdoor" lte. I want to be able to use LTE inside my home, work, etc. I'll be damned if I'm gonna step outside every time I wanna use LTE on my cell phone.
sfhub said:
Lightsquared is NOT putting up Satellite-based LTE available with the "flip of a switch"
Lightsquared bought and consolidated frequencies meant for satellite use and are repurposing for land-based use. They got the approvals for land-based use and were contracting Sprint to include support for their frequencies on Sprint *towers* as part of Sprint's NV plans. There may be some minor satellite-based component, but the bulk of the network was supposed to be tower-based, specifically on Sprint's towers.
They ran into the GPS issues which they are currently fighting. It has become a snafu with all sides politicizing it.
To Sprint it would have been just supporting extra frequencies on top of their own 800ESMR and 1900PCS and would have meant additional revenue from Lightsquared for the build out and also opportunites to have extra LTE capacity for Sprint users.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're way off base on this. The plan is a hybrid of both satellite and terrestrial (tower) coverage, and sprint was contracted to build towers for light squared (not light squared piggy backing off of sprint towers).
The upside for sprint is 1. They get paid to do it, and 2. They get first dibs on some wholesale chunks of lightsquareds LTE (since lightsquared isn't planning on being an ISP, but a network wholeselling to ISPs)
postq said:
Seeing as how most gps "devices" are simply receivers and the "transmitters" are Dept. of Defense satellites, please explain to me how "GPS providers were sacrificing precision for reliability and allowed their spectrum use to get sloppy in order to avoid service interruptions"....Please provide us some names of these gps providers that are at fault for Lightsquared's bad business decisions....
GPS manufacturers already have filters engineered for the quiet neighborhood of the satellite spectrum. They cannot be expected to use filters that would either greatly increase cost, size and reduce accuracy to filter out signals that would be, and currently are illegal. Nor could they be expected to see the future and design a filter for a network whose actual broadcast strength and frequencies would not even be known until 2011. And finally, as the testing from the first half of 2011, no filter would have worked against LightSquared's first network configuration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're pretty off base as well. The GPS manufacturers actually did "know the future", as it were, considering they endorsed the FCC deal when lightsquared bought the spectrum a decade ago. Also, it's a known truth that affected devices are older, legacy devices that were designed to "look into" the spectrum that light squared now owns...however that degree of effect is lost in the media.
Some informative reading on just how much these receivers are "hindered" and other bureaucratic nonsense:
http://www.amerisurv.com/content/view/9565/2/
http://m.androidcentral.com/lightsquared-claims-government-testing-rigged-gps-industry-insiders
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
squshy 7 said:
sprint was contracted to build towers for light squared (not light squared piggy backing off of sprint towers).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It takes a lot of work to get new towers approved through local government. Why would you think Sprint would be building new towers for Lightsquared vs using their existing ones?
sfhub said:
It takes a lot of work to get new towers approved through local government. Why would you think Sprint would be building new towers for Lightsquared vs using their existing ones?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, because that's what my uppers told me we were doing? Lol, go back to the network vision announcement, it's spelled out pretty clearly. Sprint is more or less the contractor for building the physical towers...I don't know who deals with all the government nonsense involved, considering Lightsquared will own the towers.
The main selling point behind it, and why it makes sense, is that it greatly helps offset the cost of the iPhone, considering sprint is getting paid somewhere between 2-7 billion for it (i don't remember the figure off the top of my head) over the course of the construction.
Now, will sprint convert some existing infrastructure? Sure, if it's cost and network effective, that only makes sense.
The only issue is that lightsquared's frequency isn't part of sprint's multi-modal tower design, so lightsquared towers will likely be stand alone. So, in this case, i view converting and constructing as effectively the same. Though without the whole construction part. But yes, for sure, lightsquared will own the towers.
I do apologize though, as i slightly misinterpreted your comment
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
newalker91 said:
It was an exaggeration, simply meant to mean that it would be a hell of a lot faster in its roll-out than what Sprint could do. According to their website, though, a lot of it actually would be satellite based. Not just satellite frequencies switched for ground purposes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lightsquared got their L-band spectrum from Immarsat and SkyTerra. It was originally for satellite, then FCC allowed SkyTerra "ancillary" terrestrial transmitters, now the terrestrial component is becoming the dominant component and the satellite component much smaller part of the picture.
This is a good history for Lightsquared
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielf...ones-lightsquared-faces-enemies-on-all-sides/
The FCC allowed “ancillary” ground-based transmitters in 2003 to help L-band carriers get better coverage, and in 2004 the GPS industry’s main lobbying group endorsed SkyTerra’s plan to build a combined satellite/terrestrial communications network.
...
The FCC also licensed him to increase the power of his ground stations to 15 kilowatts, the same as conventional cell towers.
...
Then in November LightSquared asked the FCC to allow its wholesale customers to sell “terrestrial only” cellular plans.
...
As you’d expect, Verizon and AT&T filed objections to LightSquared’s plans, saying it represented a “major” modification of the original satellite communications license. AT&T, which sells a competing dual-mode phone for $799, declined to comment on the filing. Verizon said it is concerned about the GPS systems in most of its phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The rest of the industry didn't really pay attention to what Falcone put together because they assumed it would cost Lightsquared more to provide the dual satellite/terrestrial network.
They started paying real close attention when Lightsquared applied to sell terrestrial-only cellular plans (effectively taking their L-band spectrum and competing directly with traditional cell companies) Sprint was contracted to build the terrestrial network using Lightsquared spectrum. Sprint was only too happy to do this since it fit in very nicely with their NV plans.
It would be minimum effort to add LTE support for Lightsquared spectrum during NV expansion. It would be more effort to go back and do it afterwards. This is why Sprint is putting time limits on Lightsquared to get their ducks lined up.
---------- Post added at 06:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:45 AM ----------
squshy 7 said:
Sprint is more or less the contractor for building the physical towers...I don't know who deals with all the government nonsense involved, considering Lightsquared will own the towers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well Sprint would be more like the General Contractor, because Sprint is contracting out to others to do the work, even for NV.
sfhub said:
]
Well Sprint would be more like the General Contractor, because Sprint is contracting out to others to do the work, even for NV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, exactly. That's what really gets me. But, it does make sense, Sprint already has a long relationship with Ericsson and others.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
squshy 7 said:
Haha, exactly. That's what really gets me. But, it does make sense, Sprint already has a long relationship with Ericsson and others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You would know better than me, but I was under the impression Sprint "outsourced" all the tower maintenance to Ericsson, and Ericsson basically just hired the Sprint people that used to be in charge of that stuff to kick start everything.
According to this article the Sprint deal with Lightsquared was to have Sprint host Lightsquared's terrestrial LTE network:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2389312,00.asp
On Thursday morning, Sprint announced a lucrative agreement to host LightSquared's proposed, and extremely controversial, independent LTE network for 15 years—provided LightSquared gets Federal Communications Commission approval to operate despite known GPS interferences..
You may be forgiven if, at this point, you've never heard of LightSquared. The Virginia-based company has been providing satellite services for over a decade, but was acquired last year by NYC-based hedge fund Harbinger Capital Partners. This group proposed using LightSquared's spectrum to operate a much more lucrative terrestrial LTE cell phone network for local consumers.
But instead of selling directly to consumers, LightSquared's customers would be small retail carriers that can't afford to build LTE networks to compete against current behemoths Verizon and soon, AT&T. LightSquared's multi-billion dollar proposal received conditional FCC approval in January, but after reports surfaced that its proposed architecture might cripple nearby GPS bands, its future is in question.
With today's deal, LightSquared will pay Sprint $9 billion in cash—$290 million upfront—over the course of 11 years, and offer Sprint $4.5 billion in LTE and satellite purchase credits. Sprint will also have the option to buy up to 50 percent of LightSquared's expected 4G capacity.
The agreement is two-fold for LightSquared. As a result, the network provider will be able to borrow from Sprint's 3G spectrum and offer its customers both 4G and 3G data services. LightSquared will also join Clearwire in renting shelf space from Sprint's multi-mode base stations (what? see point #4 below), called the Network Vision initiative, for its potential 4G network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe the article got it wrong, but it sure seems like Sprint towers are what were being proposed to host Lightsquared's LTE network.
If Sprint (via their contractors) was really building brand new towers for Lightsquared, I can't see the uproar from Verizon and ATT as it would take forever for them to get coverage going through local governments for new tower approvals. Piggybacking on Sprint's network, they would be a nationwide competitor in the same timespan as Sprint's LTE network.
Anyone know where I can find the list of cities that are getting first dibs on Sprint's LTE?
Overstew said:
Anyone know where I can find the list of cities that are getting first dibs on Sprint's LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://s4gru.spruz.com/pt/Sprints-N...eployment-details-emerge-for-Chicago/blog.htm
dtm_stretch said:
You made a great summary. Just curious do you have a source for this information I'd like to read more on the ability to cover the whole US.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Phonearena.com and phonescoop should have the news if you look for it
Sent from my E4GT with MiUi!
And the gps issue and the fcc is correct .. It's only been in the news for a while now. Surprised so many didn't know this already.. Sprint was relying on lightsquared.. Fcc is giving them issues.. Sprint doesn't even have 4g in phoenix, so lame. Who cares if people outside the limits of gps can't use it. lightsquared should be able to use a spectrum not previously used if you asked me :-(
Sent from my E4GT with MiUi!
squshy 7 said:
You're pretty off base as well. The GPS manufacturers actually did "know the future", as it were, considering they endorsed the FCC deal when lightsquared bought the spectrum a decade ago. Also, it's a known truth that affected devices are older, legacy devices that were designed to "look into" the spectrum that light squared now owns...however that degree of effect is lost in the media.
Some informative reading on just how much these receivers are "hindered" and other bureaucratic nonsense:
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With all due respect, are you suggesting that GPS manufacturers should have put in filters in 2003 to filter Lightsquared transmissions consistent with Lightsquared's operating proposal initially ? There is overwhelming consensus that this is not that easy nor inexpensive. Testing done in 1Q 2010, consistent with the initial Lightsquared proposal and in which they participated fully, indicated great difficulty with an filter based solution. The evidence was so clear, and the difficulty so great, that Lightsquared gave up there initial proposal almost immediately and revised their operating plan, abandoning any current plans to use the upper frequency band, and reducing transmitted power on the lower frequency band.
Suggesting that it would have been simple and inexpensive for GPS manufacturers to put filters into their equipment in 2003 to filter out both of Lightsquared's bands at the initial higher radiated power when in 2011 it was considered too difficult a problem to solve in a timely manner would seem to be ridiculous, don't you think?
So, if you're not suggesting THAT, then are you suggesting that GPS receiver manufacturers should have known in 2003 that Lightsquared would adjust their operating plan by forfeiting use of the upper band and reducing power in the lower band in 2011. Lightsquared didn't even know about this plan of theirs until last summer! How in the world could GPS manufacturers designed filters around the current Lightsquared proposal when it was not even known until less than a year ago? Should they have a had a crystal ball?
postq said:
With all due respect, are you suggesting that GPS manufacturers should have put in filters in 2003 to filter Lightsquared transmissions consistent with Lightsquared's operating proposal initially ? There is overwhelming consensus that this is not that easy nor inexpensive. Testing done in 1Q 2010, consistent with the initial Lightsquared proposal and in which they participated fully, indicated great difficulty with an filter based solution. The evidence was so clear, and the difficulty so great, that Lightsquared gave up there initial proposal almost immediately and revised their operating plan, abandoning any current plans to use the upper frequency band, and reducing transmitted power on the lower frequency band.
Suggesting that it would have been simple and inexpensive for GPS manufacturers to put filters into their equipment in 2003 to filter out both of Lightsquared's bands at the initial higher radiated power when in 2011 it was considered too difficult a problem to solve in a timely manner would seem to be ridiculous, don't you think?
So, if you're not suggesting THAT, then are you suggesting that GPS receiver manufacturers should have known in 2003 that Lightsquared would adjust their operating plan by forfeiting use of the upper band and reducing power in the lower band in 2011. Lightsquared didn't even know about this plan of theirs until last summer! How in the world could GPS manufacturers designed filters around the current Lightsquared proposal when it was not even known until less than a year ago? Should they have a had a crystal ball?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you are saying that I can buy a radio station at say 98.7 and broadcast all the way up to 100.6 and down to 96.9 ..... well of course not the GPS manufacturer should have used what frequency they could and not infringe on others who bought their frequency too
The ones in the wrong were the GPS manufacturer and the regulatory FCC for not making sure it was right
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Don't know if already was posted
DG News Service - Sprint Nextel will drop its planned 15-year 4G network partnership with would-be hybrid network operator LightSquared, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
The end of the Sprint partnership, which was due to expire on Thursday, would be nearly as big a blow to the foundering LightSquared as the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's proposal last month to revoke the carrier's authorization to build a land-based network.
Since the deal was announced last July, Sprint had been planning to host LightSquared's radio spectrum on its Network Vision infrastructure. LightSquared was to pay Sprint US$9 billion in cash for that hosting and said the plan would save it $13 billion over eight years.
For its part, Sprint had looked to the partnership for extra spectrum on which to run its own planned LTE network. It would get $4.5 billion worth of credits to use some of LightSquared's spectrum in addition to its own and that of longtime partner Clearwire. Sprint extended the deal twice to give LightSquared more time to win FCC approval for its network.
Sprint will terminate the LightSquared deal on Friday and return $65 million in prepayments by LightSquared, according to the Journal.
In moving to kill LightSquared's plan, the FCC cited tests it said showed harmful interference between the proposed network and GPS. Since the public notice of its proposal, which was followed by a public comment period that ends this week, two other carrier partners -- FreedomPop and Cricket -- have signed up with Clearwire for wholesale LTE capacity.
Meanwhile, LightSquared has been positioning itself for a possible legal battle that may be its only hope to resurrect its network plans. On Wednesday, the company said it had hired two prominent Washington lawyers. On Friday, the company is expected to file its own comments on the FCC's plan.
Link http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...rtedly_plans_to_dump_LightSquared_partnership
Expected this, it doesn't affect Network Vision and Sprint's rollout of their LTE so I don't really care.
tommydaniel said:
Expected this, it doesn't affect Network Vision and Sprint's rollout of their LTE so I don't really care.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I beg to differ. It may not affect their initial LTE rollout, but Sprint is in a bit of trouble. They desperately need extra spectrum for their LTE network, which is why LightSquared, Failed MetroPCS purchase, and T-Mobile partnership. That was sprint's plan A, B, and C and they all failed.
LightSquared had (never really had) the 1600 Mhz spectrum, but Sprint has the 1900Mhz one and the 800Mhz one (which will be awesome )
bbedward said:
I beg to differ. It may not affect their initial LTE rollout, but Sprint is in a bit of trouble. They desperately need extra spectrum for their LTE network, which is why LightSquared, Failed MetroPCS purchase, and T-Mobile partnership. That was sprint's plan A, B, and C and they all failed.
LightSquared had (never really had) the 1600 Mhz spectrum, but Sprint has the 1900Mhz one and the 800Mhz one (which will be awesome )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From my understanding they still have Clearwire for their LTE so they should be fine. Right?
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA
RayTrue04 said:
From my understanding they still have Clearwire for their LTE so they should be fine. Right?
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Clearwire is not a very reliable partner. Verizon will soon have around 50 MHz of quality spectrum devoted to LTE nationwide, while Sprint only has its own 10 MHz in the 1.9GHz spectrum.
Clearwire will not get their LTE up until June 2013, and it will only be available in "small pockets" of big cities to supplement Sprint coverage. Further, phones capable of using LTE on both networks may not be available until 2013.
why won't clear go wimax-advance? which is faster then lte?
Jayavarman said:
Clearwire is not a very reliable partner. Verizon will soon have around 50 MHz of quality spectrum devoted to LTE nationwide, while Sprint only has its own 10 MHz in the 1.9GHz spectrum.
Clearwire will not get their LTE up until June 2013, and it will only be available in "small pockets" of big cities to supplement Sprint coverage. Further, phones capable of using LTE on both networks may not be available until 2013.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where have you read that? Also Clearwire has about 120mhz of Spectrum on 2.5GHz and Sprint has a ton on 800MHz (IDK the exact figure)
If I purchase an unlocked Note 8 and use it on Verizon, is Verizon able to limit my hotspot after 15 GB? I am on their new unlimited plan. Or does the unlocked phones native hotspot avoid reporting the amount of Hotspot usage to Verizon.
Marko5400 said:
If I purchase an unlocked Note 8 and use it on Verizon, is Verizon able to limit my hotspot after 15 GB? I am on their new unlimited plan. Or does the unlocked phones native hotspot avoid reporting the amount of Hotspot usage to Verizon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Locked or unlocked there is no data caps internal to the device. Limiting is done by the provider by terms of service and contract. Things can change between sign up and whenever. The only limits that can happen without hitting the data cap are from pay as you go service balance, and breach of contract. Some plans rate data per day or peak hours. Not sure with Verizon.
Check with Verizon on your data usage online. Verify what you have used over what Android reports in settings connections / data usage. If it adds up between the two, then your good.
You should be asking on Verizon's forum about their plans and features.