AT&T Says It Needs T-Mobile to Fix Network Problems
"Spectrum shortage"? You ain't got no "spectrum shortage"!
Following the AWS 2100+1700 MHz auction in 2006 and the Upper/Lower 700 MHz auction in 2008, Phonescoop published a "Visual Guide" to the results of each auction. Take a look at the breadth of the spectrum that AT&T acquired.
AT&T AWS 2100+1700 MHz spectrum licensed footprint:
http://img.phonescoop.com/img/a/m/17532.gif »
AT&T Lower 700 MHz spectrum licensed footprint:
http://img.phonescoop.com/img/a/m/8661.gif »
AT&T has put none of that spectrum into commercial use. To repeat, none. No W-CDMA 2100+1700, as ...
(continues)
I have filed a complaint as of March 19th with the FCC on my thoughts and oppositional rendering of what the real issue is here.
Curious to know whether you have done the same?
On a side note:
Most individuals on these forums have expressed major concern, but I wonder how many have gone past the rant of forum posts, and actually performed a consumer's right to pass their legitimate points onto the FCC.
John B.
- Disabling the option to allow "side-loading" of applications. All applications must come from the market. Really? There are plenty of places that valid apps come from that are not in the market.
- Replacing Google with Yahoo because of "the lack of a calendar widget", which was AT&T's official response which proved to be a lie
- Restricting the Atrix from using the higher speed network to keep the iPhone image up that it is more powerful, when it's really not.
- Not carrying any Android phone with a "vanilla" OS
All of these points to that AT&T cannot be trusted to handle Android without a strong competitor like T-Mobile.
jt82 said:
Well lets run down the laundry list shall we?
- Disabling the option to allow "side-loading" of applications. All applications must come from the market. Really? There are plenty of places that valid apps come from that are not in the market.
- Replacing Google with Yahoo because of "the lack of a calendar widget", which was AT&T's official response which proved to be a lie
- Restricting the Atrix from using the higher speed network to keep the iPhone image up that it is more powerful, when it's really not.
- Not carrying any Android phone with a "vanilla" OS
All of these points to that AT&T cannot be trusted to handle Android without a strong competitor like T-Mobile.
Has nothing...
(continues)
Slammer said:
I have filed a complaint as of March 19th with the FCC on my thoughts and oppositional rendering of what the real issue is here.
Curious to know whether you have done the same?
Slammer, your initial complaint will have no official effect. As jt82 points out, you must wait for T-Mobile & AT&T to file assignment applications w/ the FCC. Once they do, the FCC will open a public comment period. Then, you can file a comment letter or petition to deny. If you do so, you will become a party to the proceedings and will receive in the mail pounds upon pounds of documents detailing the spectrum holdings of T-Mobile, AT&T, and its competitors. If you make cogent points in your letter/petitio...
(continues)
And yes, many loyal associates of T-Mobile will loose their livelihood.
John B.
The map shows an a great amount of spectrum. Why was ATT not given a time frame to use this? What is the difference in their situation as opposed to Sprint's timeline with their holdings?
John B.
Slammer said:
The map shows an a great amount of spectrum. Why was ATT not given a time frame to use this? What is the difference in their situation as opposed to Sprint's timeline with their holdings?
AWS 2100+1700 MHz licenses have a renewal period of 15 years. So, AT&T has until fully 2021 to show "substantial service." This longer than usual license period is due in part to necessary relocation of incumbent users from the 1700 MHz uplink. But that is little excuse for AT&T. T-Mobile has overcome that obstacle and deployed truly "substantial service" in less than five years.
In comparison, most Upper/Lower 700 MHz licenses have a renewal period of 10 years but an initial construction requirement ...
(continues)
Versed said:
AJ, I agree, then Sprint, should have 18 months to deploy all its holdings or lose it, same with the Clear. Oh wait, they're not AT&T so the rules should be different.
Sprint & Clear are using their spectrum holdings, are withholding very little spectrum. In fact, Clear faces a May 1 buildout deadline for its BRS 2500/2600 MHz spectrum. And this in part is why WiMAX deployments have been popping up around the country in places such as Altoona, PA; Great Bend, KS; Casper, WY, etc.
Additionally, Sprint & Clear are not calling upon the FCC to allow them to acquire another national carrier to stockpile even more spectrum, as AT&T will soon be doing. So, that is not even remotely parallel.
...
(continues)
Children separated at birth, only to be reunited years later as tag team partners.
John B.
This forum is closed.