Verizon to Deploy LTE 'As Close to All-At-Once As Possible'
Running under a race brings risky moves.
WiMAX is progressing very well and Verizon is trying not allow LTE to fall too far behind. I wonder about if taking such a chance on an advancement like this is really a good idea. If LTE rolls out with a good share of bugs without trials, multiplied with all the markets deployed could be detrimental all the way around. This only proves that wiMAX is a huge threat no matter what every nay sayer says.
...
Verizon is pretty smart on this matter. They know if they lack behind on network innovation they'll be left in the dust. After all Verizon was the first carrier in the US to deploy the first 3G network, if I'm not mistaken. In this age you have to be willing to upgrade or customers will leave. This is a good argument, and I'm not here to chastise you about WiMax or anything. But the thing about WiMax being a mistake is Sprint is the only one using it. Everyone else is going to use LTE. Yes LTE will have bugs at the start but I'm sure Verizon will work all that out before it goes nationwide.
Sprint better keep themselves on alert about the 4G technology they chose to use. Remember the format war that Sony and Toshiba went through? ...
(continues)
Sprint better keep themselves on alert about the 4G technology they chose to use. Remember the format war that Sony and Toshiba went through? ...
(continues)
...
Do not underestimate Sprint and their decision. Verizon did not.
LTE maybe the choice of standard, But Sprint did not choose WiMAX out of spite. Unlike Sprint's current native voice and data network, Sprint/Clearwire have more spectrum allocated for 4G than Verizon by a small margin. Caoverage is no longer an issue for Sprint once deployed. It will cover 92 percent of the country as opposed to Verizon's 89 percent.
The other thing to keep in mind is that Sprint is first to market which is always a great advantage in mainstreaming common use. But if WiMAX does not work for them, The transition to LTE can easily be done. The Technologies are far more closely related than GSM and CDMA. I agree Verizon is not stupid in trying to catch up...
(continues)
LTE maybe the choice of standard, But Sprint did not choose WiMAX out of spite. Unlike Sprint's current native voice and data network, Sprint/Clearwire have more spectrum allocated for 4G than Verizon by a small margin. Caoverage is no longer an issue for Sprint once deployed. It will cover 92 percent of the country as opposed to Verizon's 89 percent.
The other thing to keep in mind is that Sprint is first to market which is always a great advantage in mainstreaming common use. But if WiMAX does not work for them, The transition to LTE can easily be done. The Technologies are far more closely related than GSM and CDMA. I agree Verizon is not stupid in trying to catch up...
(continues)
...
Sprint's always been innovative when came to data but it never really mattered now did it? The other carriers always caught up and Sprint always kept losing customers to them. Sprint run out of money by the time they realize WiMax was a mistake. My dream is for Verizon to get a 4g iPhone and see Sprint destroyed for good.
...
cellfoneluva said:
My dream is for Verizon to get a 4g iPhone and see Sprint destroyed for good.
Why do you have such a vendetta against Sprint? Your irrational animosity towards one wireless carrier undermines the authority of everything else you write in this forum. You come across as a sniveling, petulant child.
AJ
...
Your comment is a classic oxymoron. You proved it in your first sentence. "Sprint has always been innovative but it did not matter".
Innovation does matter regardless of who institutes it. It initiates progression to something different or in this case, Another level up. If you don't like Sprint(obviously you don't, you choose to go to a different carrier.
I have been around cellphones half of my 50 years, and I can honestly say that I do not remember anything Verizon has done to implement an innovation on their own. They just wait to see what everyone else does and then go forward with no other form of innovation other than using their size to project a sense of being a revolutionary carrier.
On the note of the iphone: I do agree ...
(continues)
Innovation does matter regardless of who institutes it. It initiates progression to something different or in this case, Another level up. If you don't like Sprint(obviously you don't, you choose to go to a different carrier.
I have been around cellphones half of my 50 years, and I can honestly say that I do not remember anything Verizon has done to implement an innovation on their own. They just wait to see what everyone else does and then go forward with no other form of innovation other than using their size to project a sense of being a revolutionary carrier.
On the note of the iphone: I do agree ...
(continues)
...
Slammer said:
I have been around cellphones half of my 50 years, and I can honestly say that I do not remember anything Verizon has done to implement an innovation on their own. They just wait to see what everyone else does and then go forward with no other form of innovation other than using their size to project a sense of being a revolutionary carrier.
VZW does not innovate. Like the blob, VZW merges & acquires.
AJ
...
Verizon launched EV-DO in Washington D.C. and San Diego...first. How's that? Sure Sprint was going to launch EV-DV and it was going to be so much better that no one would care about EV-DO... How did that work out?
...
I would consider the covering of such a large swath of the US with evdo(even Pre Alltel merger) to be rather innovative. The other "huge company" (ATT) focused on speed, Verizon focused on consistency in coverage. last year they put up 94 cell towers just in Pennsylvania. "new and flashy" is only one way a company can push innovation.
They launched the first touch screen blackberry.. yes, it didn't go over as well as they had hoped, but they were the first to try it. The storm 2 looks to be an amazing device.
They will be the second company in the us to start a large 4g rollout, and the first one using LTE.
No, they are not known for taking really risky moves, but they have a lot of customers that are thankful for this.
They launched the first touch screen blackberry.. yes, it didn't go over as well as they had hoped, but they were the first to try it. The storm 2 looks to be an amazing device.
They will be the second company in the us to start a large 4g rollout, and the first one using LTE.
No, they are not known for taking really risky moves, but they have a lot of customers that are thankful for this.
...
Actually, it was RIM who created the first touch screen blackberry, not Verizon.
...
Verizon was the one that launched and underwrote the cost.
Just like ATT did with the iphone, sprint with the pre, and tmobile with android.
Just like ATT did with the iphone, sprint with the pre, and tmobile with android.
...
Vodafone launched the Storm first.....
The first Touchscreen Blackberry used as an example of innovation is a lark...
That device is junk...
The first Touchscreen Blackberry used as an example of innovation is a lark...
That device is junk...
...
Vodaphone is a parent company of Verizon.
As far as your opinion on the storm, I know of quite a few owners who would beg to differ. People expected it to be "like an Iphone." but it's a blackberry.
They're still really popular up here (with very few, if any, returns)
And even if it were "junk" not every innovation is going to be a smashing success. Innovation implies Risk. I would argue that the original iphone was a bigger piece of "junk" than the storm was, simply because it could do less and suffered sever network connection issues. The storm did everything it was supposed to, it just released with slow software. Properly maintained, "freezing screens," if they occur, are few and far between.
But the iphone was still ...
(continues)
As far as your opinion on the storm, I know of quite a few owners who would beg to differ. People expected it to be "like an Iphone." but it's a blackberry.
They're still really popular up here (with very few, if any, returns)
And even if it were "junk" not every innovation is going to be a smashing success. Innovation implies Risk. I would argue that the original iphone was a bigger piece of "junk" than the storm was, simply because it could do less and suffered sever network connection issues. The storm did everything it was supposed to, it just released with slow software. Properly maintained, "freezing screens," if they occur, are few and far between.
But the iphone was still ...
(continues)
...
There is a lot more to getting customers than innovation. Sprint has a big problem, it is the problem of loosing customers and all the innovation in the world has not helped. They have a bad name and they will continue to loose customers to carriers with less innovation than them. They need to learn how to market their image. If innovation alone determined success Apple would be number one in computers not Microsoft. Apple has started to make inroads but not until they started selling user experience instead of innovation. Nuts and bolts do not sell to the masses, user experience sells. Sprint hasn't got much of that to sell.
...
You can be a VZW fan without wishing for Sprint to fall. We NEED Sprint in the marketplace. If Verizon and AT&T are the oonly carriers left standing consumers will be the losers.
...
Slammer said:
Unlike Sprint's current native voice and data network, Sprint/Clearwire have more spectrum allocated for 4G than Verizon by a small margin. Caoverage is no longer an issue for Sprint once deployed. It will cover 92 percent of the country as opposed to Verizon's 89 percent.
Slammer, I, too, have high hopes for Clear WiMAX as a foil to VZW, AT&T, and LTE. However, this licensed spectrum footprint margin that you have posted several times is not at all the advantage you purport it to be.
If the numbers you cite are accurate, Clear may control BRS 2500/2600 MHz spectrum covering 92 percent of the country, while VZW may control Lower/Upper 700 MHz spectrum covering 89 percent of the country...
(continues)
...
Very true AJ. However, It is my belief(only by rumor,but not far fetched) that Sprint/Clearwire intend to use their WiMAX(or LTE if they choose to switch) for the basis foundation of their next move in the next couple of years. I will leave it up to you to administer a guess of what this would be. A disclaimer by me at this juncture would not prove an accurate statement and only open me up to speculative assumptions.
😉
😉
...
From what it sounds like, He is saying that sprint had 100% spectrum but only used 25% of it.
But my take on it is now with clearwire backing them up they will use way more then 25% of the spectrum this time. I mean they have comacast, google, and a lot of other power houses behind them.
Sprint will be alright 😉
I think these next few years will be interesting.
But my take on it is now with clearwire backing them up they will use way more then 25% of the spectrum this time. I mean they have comacast, google, and a lot of other power houses behind them.
Sprint will be alright 😉
I think these next few years will be interesting.
...
Where is your evidence? AJ says Sprint has the licenses but not the WILL to cover broad areas of the U.S. Guess what? I don't blame them and I doubt this will be any different. Alltel had a weird strategy: They chose to cover rural areas where they did not have to compete with other carriers. Meanwhile VZW was covering metropolitan areas. Their merger was perfect because of this. When Sprint has to decide whether to build a site in NYC or Bumble____ Idaho, what do YOU think they will do?
...
But they don't have to choose. Remember sprint sold its tower maintenance to a outsource. If I'm not mistaken those towers was the 3g towers. Clearwire, and its sponsors like comacast and google are all helping fund the wi-max and the building of its towers and its existence. So with all these power houses backing them, of course the will select the major city's first then the rural areas second because you aim for the majority first to gain you money that you spent back, its called profit. first get your profit then aim to get those less profitable people. And also Wi-max will cover more area per tower then 3g, 2g, LTE, GSM, or anybody. That info can be found under the glossary under wimax on phonescoop. 😉
...
Disrespect said:
And also Wi-max will cover more area per tower then 3g, 2g, LTE, GSM, or anybody. That info can be found under the glossary under wimax on phonescoop. 😉
No, that is wrong. WiMAX propagation, like that of every other airlink technology, is partially dependent upon the path loss of its deployed spectrum. Clear is deploying WiMAX in BRS 2500/2600 MHz spectrum, which experiences even greater path loss than PCS 1900 MHz spectrum, let alone Cellular 850 MHz or Lower/Upper 700 MHz spectrum.
So, WiMAX 2500/2600 will have a rather limited coverage area per cell site, but that high site density (roughly corresponding to that of Sprint's current CDMA1x 1900 network) and extensive BRS 2500/2...
(continues)
...
Are you referring to this?
"WiMax has the potential for very long range (5 - 30 miles) and high speeds."
Rich & Eric are online journalists, not wireless airlink engineers. And their description of WiMAX is a highly simplified one aimed at the layperson. Not to mention, the above excerpt contains a factual error.
WiMAX has the potential for long range *or* high speeds, but not both. Additionally, the WiMAX that has the potential for long range is "fixed" WiMAX (802.16d), but Clear is deploying "mobile" WiMAX (802.16e), which requires much greater cell site density to support the low gain antennas in mobile devices -- especially w/ high path loss BRS 2500/2600 MHz spectrum.
AJ
"WiMax has the potential for very long range (5 - 30 miles) and high speeds."
Rich & Eric are online journalists, not wireless airlink engineers. And their description of WiMAX is a highly simplified one aimed at the layperson. Not to mention, the above excerpt contains a factual error.
WiMAX has the potential for long range *or* high speeds, but not both. Additionally, the WiMAX that has the potential for long range is "fixed" WiMAX (802.16d), but Clear is deploying "mobile" WiMAX (802.16e), which requires much greater cell site density to support the low gain antennas in mobile devices -- especially w/ high path loss BRS 2500/2600 MHz spectrum.
AJ
...
they announced from the start of the year that they were going to do widespread rollout in 2010. Wimax was only in under a handful of markets before then.
...
Wi-Max's mere existence is pressure (which is much needed) to force the other carriers to step up their games. Verizon's deployment of EV-DO had a similar effect. I do not care who does what as long as they do something.
...
I do not believe that carriers will allow one another to roam on their LTE networks so the other three having LTE will not be that big a deal. Verizon will laugh at AT&T and T-Mobile if they suggest roaming agreements for LTE pretty much as they did with Sprint about EV-DO. "Get your own, Johnny Come Lately."
...
Sorry but Sprint had the first nationwide 3g network. Check your facts.
http://developer.sprint.com/show_thread.do?ps=10&thr ... »
http://developer.sprint.com/show_thread.do?ps=10&thr ... »
...
I suppose it depends upon what one defines as "Nationwide." With their coverage (and T-Mobile fo that matter) one has to wonder. So they are speaking of the 1xrtt it seems. It's a silly thing to argue so...whatever. Here is your cookie. Happy now?
...
have to keep people honest. if a big claim is made back it up!
I am sick of seeing bad info given here. 🙄
I am sick of seeing bad info given here. 🙄
...
This forum is closed.
