 |
 | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Re: ALL I want to know is 1 (ok a few) things..... T-Mobile has been, is and may continue to be an urban-focused carrier. It's not just east of the Mississippi where they don't have coverage (at least on 3G) in rural areas. This spectrum swap won't change that.
That said, AT&T has to let T-Mobile roam on their network as a condition of the failed merger. So there's that. | |
|
| | |
| | |
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Re: ALL I want to know is 1 (ok a few) things..... ...uh, Straight Talk uses AT&T or T-Mobile networks as if you're a postpaid AT&T or T-Mobile subscriber. So of course they have, on the AT&T side, better AT&T compatibility than T-Mobile.
I still think T-Mo will get more roaming on AT&T as time goes on. Prove me wrong if you'd like...I just don't think that the roaming agreement has been put into full effect yet.
But again, if you want rural coverage, pick a different carrier. T-Mobile isn't there yet, and won't be for awhile, if ever. Heck, Sprint is even a lot better than T-Mobile for rural coverage (they'll even roam on Verizon in-market if needed). | |
|
| | | |  djdanskaRudie32Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
San Diego, CA
kudos:4
·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon Broadban..
·Clear Wireless
·Time Warner Cable
| Re: ALL I want to know is 1 (ok a few) things..... I agree. If you want rural coverage, t-mobile is not the right carrier mostly, but they are up front with their coverage page. It's not a map of usa in magenta. lol (re verizon's gigantic coverage map i see in the mail i get from them, you know. all red. lol!)
In the areas they do have great rural coverage (and they do have em!), it's usually gprs, maybe edge if your lucky.
--
The day the child realizes that all adults are imperfect, he becomes an adolescent; the day he forgives them, he becomes an adult. The day he forgives himself, he becomes wise.
Alden Nowlan | |
|
| | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: ALL I want to know is 1 (ok a few) things..... Central TX is one of those GPRS areas. Forget about using a data card there. Though if you've got an old GPRS-only phone, the network does provide the full 43 kbps  | |
|
| | | | | | djdanskaRudie32Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
San Diego, CA
kudos:4 | Re: ALL I want to know is 1 (ok a few) things..... My data card actually connects at 86kbps in gprs areas with t-mobile. Not entirely sure how or why. (still, sucks!) Different gprs standard?
My amaze won't. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | said by iansltx:I still think T-Mo will get more roaming on AT&T as time goes on. Prove me wrong if you'd like...I just don't think that the roaming agreement has been put into full effect yet.
That may be true, but T has a 100 Mb hard cap on data roaming. I burned through that in just 3 days on a 100% EDGE rural network. On 3G, I can go through 100Mb in less than a day. | |
|
| |
| BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | Yeah right. They aren't going nationwide. They already have the spectrum for that, and haven't built out on it. | |
|
| | |
| | | BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | Re: ALL I want to know is 1 (ok a few) things..... We have CITIES here that don't have 3G/4G from T-Mobile, so I'm not expecting much from them. | |
|
| | why not t-mobile buy the cable spectrum why does t-mobile not bid directly for the cable spectrum | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Re: why not t-mobile buy the cable spectrum Because it's expensive (billions of dollars) and the cable companies want to partner with whatever provider is buying their spectrum to offer quadruple play services. Maybe T-Mobile could do the whole quad-play thing, but Deutsche Telecom doesn't want to sink even more money into TMo to get all of SpectrumCo's spectrum. | |
|
 King PDon't blame me. I voted for Ron PaulPremium
join:2004-11-17
Franklin, TN | is this LTE on AWS band? Because that is where T-Mobile is deploying LTE...right? Is that the frequency spectrum Verizon has to sell to T-Mobile, in this scenario?
--
My Music blog:
»www.zunetracks.net | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: is this LTE on AWS band? Yes it is. | |
|
| | They need more then Spectrum to compete Their phone offerings are lacking even Spyre and Virgin have the Iphone whats taking then so long. They have millions of Iphone users on their sim only plans but why won't they get it simple. Because they think they are like VZ old attitude "who needs the iphone..until they got it and now they are selling well" so T-mobile Spectrum and more phones and the Iphone and mayyyyybe you will compete | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Re: They need more then Spectrum to compete Let's flip that argument a bit. The iPhone is the most heavily subsidized handset out there, bar none (to my knowledge). Apple charges a lot for their handsets and makes sure that providers charge a maximum of $200 for the standard iPhone 4S on-contract.
So iPhone users are quite a bit less profitable, from a subsidy standpoint anyway, than Android etc. users.
That, and until recently T-Mobile had too many GSM users on PCS to refarm that spectrum and allow iPhones to get 3G on their network. | |
|
| | | They don't have the subsidized iPhone because they weren't willing to pay $15.5 billion to Apple (like Sprint did). They're working around this by converting their 1900Mhz spectrum from 2g edge to both 2g and HSPA+ to support the iPhone. Once this transition is complete, they can offer customers a discount for bringing their own device (in this case an unlocked iPhone) resulting in a lower cost over 2 years to the consumer versus any of the other carriers, and without having to put up $15.5 billion. | |
|
| | | | Re: They need more then Spectrum to compete Exactly... ether bring your old Iphone 1/2/3/3gs/4/4s etc... and use our service for less than the other big 3. Or just purchase one full price from Apple and well hook it up.. saving us and you $$$$ in the long run!
| |
|
|  Bahamut XPremium
join:2000-12-09
Fort Worth, TX | I see this comment and sometimes it does tend to boggle my mind...
I can understand intimatly the iPhone bit. It would be nice to have.
"More Phones" though... what exactly do you mean by this?
More High End phones?
So... current phones:
HTC One S - not to shabby, even if it has a smaller screen than it's One X bretheren at at&t)
Galaxy S3 - No... not LTE based... but still plenty decent phone, even with the non-quad core chipset.
Galaxy S2 (My phone) - Still plenty sharp for those not wanting to pay for the S3
Galaxy S Blaze - Hey, it's S2 Jr! Same chipset, smaller screen, smaller camera... even getting ICS here "soon".
"Launching Soon"
Galaxy Note: retooled with a 42 mb/s chippy and released when the at&t exclusive timeframe was over
Revamped MyTouch line - yes, it's by Huawei (discussion for a later day), but having played extensively with this mytouch (non-keyboard), it's a really solid midrange phone. Would have preferred it better with ICS, but such is life.
*rumored lineup*
So the rumor lineup... of on phone (unless you really wanna find that blackberry...
HTC ERA 42 - AKA HTC One X+ - The HTC that (from the looks) people would want... the one that actually INCLUDES a quad core proccy etc etc etc...
Now if you wanted to put forth the arguement that they could stand to release some of these phones FASTER (not counting the Galaxy S3, but even the price on that one nose dived after competition hit... guess the early bump was for early adopters?) But realistically, what other phones could be brought to market within a reasonable timeframe and reasonable expectation of price (superphone/iphone @ 200-300, midtier from 100-200, low end from 20-100) that isn't already out in some way/shape/form (iPhone already being mentioned).
--
"He's on that Jazz, man"... | |
|
| | | | Re: They need more then Spectrum to compete Hence why i said bring more and the Iphone. Since any local carrier can do it so why can't you? even your European counterpart knew this all to well. Get what the people want or suffer. T-mob america in the other hand wasn't smart enough and their arrogance is their downfall. I just hope they wise up or they will die. Also if you notice they are loosing a lot of customers. The two key issues: The service or the lack of phones people want. | |
|
| | | Bahamut XPremium
join:2000-12-09
Fort Worth, TX | Re: They need more then Spectrum to compete But you did say, again "more phones".
Aside from the iPhone (and considering how much the outlay is just to get it... that's a lot of cheddar)... what other phones would qualify under that statement? THAT is what I've been curious about.
When it comes to the iPhone, no one knows what Bellevue is doing... except Bellevue (and/or Cupertino)
--
"He's on that Jazz, man"... | |
|
 recoil0Premium
join:2005-02-22
Exton, PA | Consumers lose? Either way, consumers lose? | |
|
| iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Consumers lose? Wouldn't quite say that. It's not as if a new wireless provider would arise out of the 20MHz of AWS owned by SpectrumCo. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | And by letting cable squat on this spectrum consumers win how? | |
|
Chaldo
join:2008-03-18
West Bloomfield, MI | t-mobile and metro are in this T-Mobile wants the spectrum and MetroPCS wants t-mobile to buy them out after, or roam, but most likely buy them out. Thats the deal. | |
|
| Beans
join:2005-07-16
united state Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: t-mobile and metro are in this said by Chaldo:T-Mobile wants the spectrum and MetroPCS wants t-mobile to buy them out after, or roam, but most likely buy them out. Thats the deal.
2 different techs. TMo is gsm and metro is cdma, like Sprint and Nextel. I don't think that TMo wants to have the same exodus as Sprint did. They can't afford it. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
| Re: t-mobile and metro are in this said by Beans:said by Chaldo:T-Mobile wants the spectrum and MetroPCS wants t-mobile to buy them out after, or roam, but most likely buy them out. Thats the deal.
2 different techs. TMo is gsm and metro is cdma, like Sprint and Nextel. I don't think that TMo wants to have the same exodus as Sprint did. They can't afford it. Very true at best TMO and Metro pcs may come to some agreement to use/share the same towers ( TMO antenna equipment on top and Metro pcs underneath or vice versa) this may actually avoid the need to "build" a new tower in many locations where its cost or municipality prohibitive , but there transmission technologies are worlds apart. these 2 companies will stay separate. | |
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | Monopoly property swap This reminds me of a Monopoly property swap. Verizon has 2 of the 3 green properties and T-Mobile has one. Verizon wants that green property. Verizon is offering Baltic Avenue to T-Mobile and making a big deal about it. It may be temporarily good for T-Mobile, but it is a GREAT deal for Verizon and friends.
The reality is that if this deal is approved, Verizon will destroy their competitors (or bankrupt them, keeping with the Monopoly) within the next few turns around the board. | |
|
| | | Re: Monopoly property swap Very well said sir. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·ooma
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| delusional Tmobile is delusional.. even if they had the spectrum.. their network is total crap.. the way they offer voice & data services are weak at best.. their commitment to LTE deployment is barely ahead of Metro PCS which has a bottom of the pack record.. This is why DT wanted to sell out to AT&T-- they dont' want to spend 15-25 Billion dollars to upgrade the network to LTE/4g and still be in 3rd or 4th place. Maybe they should have talked with Google instead of AT&T...
Voice networks generally interop because they deal with a 2g/3g data model.. enhanced broadband data at speeds of 5+ megabits per customer (enabled by 4g/LTE) are simply not there in all their towers & colocation cell sites. Tmobile doesn't have the money or resources to build or buy a network comparable to AT&T, let alone Verizon. Rest assured, if AT&T didn't get their greedy little hands on Tmobile, Neither will Verizon-- or approve any spectrum/network swaps. If they want LTE interop.. be assured it will be under a microscope of scrutiny.. because of the nasty anti-consumer path they've(Verizon) taken for some cable wirless spectrum & it's effects of anti-compete with Comcast wireline.. the results of which haven't been fully felt by the consumer yet... READ: the internet, phone & cable-tv bills of a majority of consumers will rise in 2013... like it or not.. and you'll be lucky to see any faster speeds or better quality service for your trouble.. | |
|
| | | Re: delusional They money they got from the breakup will pay for LTE rollout. The problem is licenses.
If the FCC were smart, it makes VZW sell T mobile the licenses, and then forces the cablecos to divest the rest to a lesser competitor, or they sell it and put nasty restriction on it.
There is no reason they need to be reasonable nor does verizon need the spectrum.
This is pure bs, and now they want another 1000mhz in whitespace to be freed up.
How bout put those in the quasi-public domain, and let competition drive the cost of the service to $10, not $100. | |
|
| | They are getting there. Don't count them out yet. The spectrum deal will allow T-Mobile to push LTE to 60 million more Americans then they previously intended. If that's true it should cover most of T-Mobile's current voice network footprint (roughly 262 million POPS). Without the deal T-Mobile has no real plans to expand LTE beyond 200 million POPS which is about the same footprint size of their HSPA+ 42 Mbps network.
This should be good news for the GPRS only areas that likely will never see an upgrade to HSPA+.
T-Mobile USA doesn't need to spend as much as Verizon or AT&T on network gear. They have more than 2/3 less customers. Plus they are installing smart antennas which will compensate for RF degredation usually associated with higher frequency networks for in-building coverage. This is good news too.
T-Mobile has also applied for funding to work with rural partners to help build out some remote areas of the country with LTE eventually. This is similar to what Verizon is doing now.
For now the LTE gear that T-Mobile USA is putting up will support LTE advanced. My local sales engineer claims that when they launch the new network next year in Los Angeles it will be the fastest LTE network out of the top four out the gate. They are quietly working behind the scenes particularly with backhaul vendors to make sure this happens.
Finally there has been additional chatter in the past week about Dish and how they may soon become T-Mobile's new sugar daddy if they get their way creating a much more formidable competitor to VZ and T. | |
|
|
|
