T-Mobile's CTO says a Sprint-MetroPCS hook up would have network problems
0. phoneArena posted on 09 Oct 2012, 12:48
One of T-Mobile's top executives, CTO Neville Ray, says that a Sprint-MetroPCS deal would create network problems for Sprint; T-Mobile and MetroPCS have agreed to as merger and there is speculation that Sprint is going to step in with a bid of its own for the fifth largest U.S. carrier...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. ak101 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 13:11 5 17
if sprint is dying technology then tmobile is already dead technology
7. -box- posted on 09 Oct 2012, 15:15 9 3
Yeah, because a global standard HSPA+ is dead while WiMax and CDMA are full of life and getting strong adoption rates... /s
16. richardyarrell2011 (banned) posted on 09 Oct 2012, 17:03 6 4
That's a comical statement to say the least. Tmobile and it's HSPA PLUS 42MPS network simply s**ts all over Sprint Cdma poor reception network. Comparing GSM which is Tmobile and CDMA which is Sprint and Verizon is useless at best. Sprint and Verizon is useless and so is it's Lte networks.
20. lsutigers posted on 09 Oct 2012, 18:15 1 0
And T-Mobile is the best there is, isn't it? CDMA and GSM are different and competing technologies. Most carriers adopting LTE are moving away from both CDMA and HSPA+ is favor of LTE for data AND voice. I know LTE is based on GSM tech but HSPA will also be going away as EVDO, so I guess you could say they are both dying technologies as they will eventually be replaced by LTE. BTW, Sprint's network doesn't have bad reception, their coverage is better that T-Mobile's in most of the country and while their data is slower right now, they are adding LTE which will make their network much faster than WiMAX ever was. Just clearing up the facts.
23. ahhxd717 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 18:55 2 0
While you can say that both HSPA+ and CDMA are dying networks, at least HSPA is still heavily used in many countries. A lot of other countries do not have widespread LTE or any at all. While LTE will become a widely adopted standard, it's not right now. On the other hand, CDMA is pretty much proprietary, and no upgrades have been given to the technology in forever. That's why Verizon made the move to LTE so quick. CDMA is truly a dying technology.
24. N.Reynolds posted on 09 Oct 2012, 18:58 1 1
If you say Sprint and Verizon are useless and so are their LTE networks you are an idiot. Yeah as Isutigers stated Sprint's 3G is slow but they are expanding their LTE white TMobile doesn't even have one yet. As for Verizon, you are a complete moron. Both Verizon and Sprint s**t on TMobile in covereage and Verizon 4G will beat TMobile's all day. Stop fudge packing for TMobile and get a different picture you look like an idiot.
29. Ruckus posted on 09 Oct 2012, 21:33 0 0
Not to mention how awful T-Mobile's 3G coverage is. You can complain about Sprint 3G but at least they have a lot of it. T-Mobile lacks coverage period! Sprint 3G>T-Mobile 2G.
Now I will say this, Tmobile's data infrastructure is strong where they have signal. It seems as tho T-Mobile abandoned rural markets to enhance quality of those in cities where Sprint has reached out to more consumers.
37. archangel9 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 01:08 0 1
Agreed. GSM and CDMA are two different technologies no doubt but Sprint's CDMA has been abysmal the past several months even with WiMax and now the switch to LTE. Tmo's coverage is vastly superior to Sprint's and just as fast as ATT via Rootmetrics.
So I suggest you guys stop being trolls and act like rational men and discuss this intelligently w/o the name calling because this deal will be approved.
38. meowcenary posted on 10 Oct 2012, 01:44 0 0
Have you ever used Sprint? I use to be a Sprint user and I can tell off the bat their network works offshore, all parts of my city, and in the subway. Presently offshore, certain parts of my city, and in the subway T-mobile is blacked out.
40. Ruckus posted on 10 Oct 2012, 08:14 0 0
Yo archangel let's look at 3G coverage via Verizon ad. Sprint is in the Green, T-Mobile is in the purple.
Its 2 year old data but T-Mobile isn't exactly going out to add many 3G towers. On a side note T-Mobile may work better in your area but Sprint has more coverage nationwide, has bigger roaming partners, has FAR LESS dropped calls than T-Mobile and have already an established LTE network.
Your the Troll Archangel :)
41. archangel9 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 09:12 0 2
You need to grow up and re read my statement. Normally I'll ignore comments like yours but your ego gets the best of you.I'm entitled to my facts as anyone else on here .okay "Yo".
43. EclipseGSX posted on 10 Oct 2012, 10:30 1 1
He did read your statement and told you that you're wrong, which you are. Maybe you need to grow up and face the facts.
44. archangel9 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 12:00 0 1
and you are?....SYPAU little boy and stay out of grown folks business keyboard thug
42. archangel9 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 09:20 0 2
Had them for a year .Even here in S.Fl 4g is still sporadic and the 3g cant barely put a dent in big structures.Verizon is waaay better than them in terms of this as well as Tmobile.If I didnt know what i was talking about I wouldn't be on here my man.
45. Ruckus posted on 10 Oct 2012, 12:23 0 0
Bahaha :'-) Archangel, you make me laugh. I love how you quickly move your statement partially away from T-Mobile and compare Sprint to Verizon.
By the way, I totally read what you had to say and laid the smackdown on your candy ***.
T-Mobile has a lot of 4G, I'm not denying that. What they lack, is overall coverage and many area's still dampened with 2G data. Sprints 3G may be slower than at&ts and only as fast as Verizons 3G, but Sprint blankets their network with 3G where T-Mobile still relies on an old outdated 2G network. Sure T-mobile can put a lot into their 4G network, but at the expense of millions of subscribers stuck way back in the past.
Now listen, I happen to deal with all 4 networks and know strengths and weaknesses. I'll even go as far to defend you in saying maybe in your area where you "live" T-Mobile may be superior there. Unfrotunately for your, thats not true with most americans. Sprint has by far better coverage friend.
2. wreh3 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 13:28 3 3
lol. true; cuz T-mobile can't reach most parts of Mississippi and some of the deep South States towns and cities
14. cptbeatstix posted on 09 Oct 2012, 17:00 2 2
Yeah, because putting a tower out where the population is less than 1,000 people is great spending of money....
31. Ruckus posted on 09 Oct 2012, 21:36 0 0
Sprint does it.. It can be great spending it. There are millions of Americans in small rural markets. If T-Mobile ever wants to be serious they will need to expand in small rural areas. Sprint has 5x the coverage of T-Mobile in my area and sales show it!
Not to mention you have to look at who's traveling through there. Of its a heavy traffic area, it'd be embarrassing not having coverage where your competitors do!
34. Moneyman12 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 00:23 0 0
I'm pretty sure some of Metro PCS towers will help with that and all companies have dead spots in some part of the countries so all competitors should be embarrassed.
3. JKING_25 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 13:28 8 3
In my own opinion Sprint is horrible. It is without a doubt the worse service I have ever had in my entire life. The customer service is very polite but very misleading. They have told me numberous times that whenever I do not have service in an area that no one has service in that area, but all of my co-workers and assocites have great signal with other carriers, even T-Mobile.
Sprints internet speed is ridiculously slow. I am thankful that they still have unlimited data but my lord how slow can you be!!
12. e.wvu (unregistered) posted on 09 Oct 2012, 16:31 3 1
Yea, I'm a Sprint customer as well, but I'm leaving them at the end of the month. I don't know the area that you're in, but I get horrible service in my area that unlimited data isn't even worth it. I think I'll whether pay for capped data and get descent speeds from AT&T or Verizon. I rarely use 2GB anyway (on wifi a lot) so it doesn't really matter.
13. tuminatr posted on 09 Oct 2012, 16:57 2 0
depends where you live, here in West saint paul,MN my Sprint works great however my verizon sucks!! I am a traveling salesman and I have a work provided Verizon Iphone and my personal phone is a Sprint Galaxy Nexus coverage in minnesota is on par with verizon, in North Dakota verizon is a little better and in central and western wisconsin my sprint works a little better
21. lsutigers posted on 09 Oct 2012, 18:22 0 3
This sounds like all of the AT&T network bashing a few years back when AT&T first got the iPhone and their service took a big hit, Sprint is going through this now. And yes, it really depends where you are, Sprint service is great in many areas, in others they are doing upgrades which is affecting network speeds and the rest are over capacity and have not been upgraded yet. The bottom line is they are re-building their entire network to bring them back where they were, I remember the days where Sprint had the fastest data network. I understand the frustrations but they are working on fixing the problem, they just need to hurry up. At least I still have my personal Verizon phone until my area gets upgraded then I'm switching to Sprint.
25. Non_Sequitur posted on 09 Oct 2012, 19:39 1 0
I hate Sprint too. I'm totally going to either Tmo or AT&T when my contract is done.
32. Ruckus posted on 09 Oct 2012, 21:45 1 0
Id recommend at&t. T-Mobile lacks so much signal. Sure their 4G is fast, but they lack 3G and have so many areas stuck in 2G. Sprint has superior coverage and their network is covered in 3G. We have such high churn on T-Mobile its not even funny.
35. Moneyman12 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 00:23 1 0
Can't give someone advice on coverage if you don't know where they live....
36. Ruckus posted on 10 Oct 2012, 00:45 0 0
Valid point. Dooley noted :-D
39. Non_Sequitur posted on 10 Oct 2012, 04:16 0 0
Alright. Thanks, that's what I was thinking. AT&T's network coverage is comparable to Verizon's. In other words, great. Most of the coverage is HSPA+, too! :o
4. Slammer posted on 09 Oct 2012, 13:36 6 0
CDMA maybe a dying technology, however, it will still be around for at least several years. This would allow MetroPCS customers an immediate seemless transition without costly handset offers. This would also allow both carriers to build out the LTE networks.
8. -box- posted on 09 Oct 2012, 15:17 0 0
It will last only as long as the carriers support it. verizon is going to VoLTE, as is sprint, which will lead to their current 3G networks being refarmed for VoLTE and LTE-Advanced. That would leave only a few holdouts, as most CDMA carriers are MVNOs or smaller localized carriers (nTelus, cspire)
5. ibap posted on 09 Oct 2012, 14:14 3 0
CDMA is not a dying technology yet - have that conversation with Verizon. If we were a small country in Europe, it would be dead, but we have a big enough population in the US to support it here.
T-Mobile uses that 1700 MHz band which no one else does, which cripples T-Mobile phones when unlocked and attempting to use them on other networks. It also limits what phones you can use for full functionality on their network. T-Mobile wants to expand the number of 1700 MHz users, since they're stuck with it.
9. -box- posted on 09 Oct 2012, 15:26 1 1
See my above comment. CDMA, while not dead, is being phased out. I'm guessing it'll be gone from major carriers by 2016, and regional carriers by 2020
26. gwuhua1984 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 19:40 1 0
Actually... you got it the other way around, T-Mo is trying to expand number of all users. T-Mo is starting to support 1900 MHz users, 1700 MHz will be upgraded to support LTE. I guess T-Mo must be pretty happy to be stuck with 1700 MHz bands eh? Not to mention a lot of current T-Mo phones also support 1900 MHz.
6. Jphones posted on 09 Oct 2012, 14:39 3 1
Why's everybody getting down on T-Mobile they at least use HSPA+ network. Which is the closest non lte network available in terms of speed. Sprint's wimax is nothin compared to it and their LTE network is far from coverage needed to be called a real network.
15. tuminatr posted on 09 Oct 2012, 17:02 0 3
its all about implamentation if sprint did WImax correctley it would be better than HSPA+ like many things they blew the exicution
11. lubba posted on 09 Oct 2012, 16:18 3 2
sprint is the brat child that likes to be in the center of attention. It tries to ruin things for others. It didn't want metropcs. Now tmo wants, sprint wants. Its a sick company.
17. andygallo posted on 09 Oct 2012, 17:06 0 0
The CEO has been trying to aquire MetroPCS for a while now, he's just couldn't get buy off from the board...
18. snowgator posted on 09 Oct 2012, 17:12 1 0
My money is on T-Mobile closing this deal. I believe the transition period may be easier under Sprint than T-Mo, but T-Mo has the yes in place from both boards and a very solid point about the turn over in handsets. I really was thinking Sprint would swoop in and snap it up, but at some point the law of averages has to break T-Mo's way. They have had a bad enough year and a half.
22. letgomyeggroll posted on 09 Oct 2012, 18:37 0 0
So the big question is, are they paying for replacement phone for Metro PCS customers when they shut it down? Are they gonna piss them off and loose more subscribers?
GSM maybe the new technology but the coverage service sucks, even with ATT. That is why Verizon and Sprint kept the CDMA. Verizon did at one point considered GSM, but it will cost more to put more towers up to get the same amount of coverage as CDMA. And the difference in the technology was not enough for the cost difference.
27. gwuhua1984 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 19:44 0 0
They did say that the LTE technology on T-Mo will be okay to use for Metro customer before the merger finishes. So I'm guessing anyone else without a LTE device is screwed.
30. Tips_y posted on 09 Oct 2012, 21:35 0 0
The article said "MetroPCS' customers [will be] moved by 2015". That probably means, if the merger happens, MetroPCS CDMA will start winding down that year. And 2015 is 3 years from now so most MetroPCS users would probably have upgraded to a different handset by then.
33. letgomyeggroll posted on 09 Oct 2012, 23:29 0 0
They will start taking it down when they merge, and completely out by 2015. And people that is on Metro PCS, don't upgrade phones like us on contract. They have to pay the full retail of the phone and most of the smart phones are $500 plus.
And Tmobile will not use the current LTE of Metro PCS. The will rebuild to be fully functionable with their current LTE system.
28. Nadr1212 posted on 09 Oct 2012, 19:59 0 0
I hope that one of the areas where tmobile have metroPCS' 4g LTE will be in Las Vegas.
46. archangel9 posted on 10 Oct 2012, 16:00 0 0
Lol....you trolls make me laugh.We have no love for y'all.Ruckus at least we agree to disagree and on somethings but leave the American diss out of it. Im very proud to be one as far as my ancestry is here