Go Back   Android Forums > Android Carriers > Sprint

Get excited for the Samsung Galaxy S5! Find everything you need and discuss it in our Galaxy S5 Forum!

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:02 AM   #1 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 283
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Default anyone worried about Sprint abandoning WiMax?

Clearwire May Dump WiMAX

tranceFusion is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:04 AM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,071
 
Device(s): Current: Nexus 5 Old: Moto Droid MAXX, Verizon SGS4, EVO LTE 4g, EVO 4g (OG)
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 732
Thanked 666 Times in 338 Posts
Default

even if they do by the time that decision is made nobody will have the EVO anymore so don't worry

and FYI WiMax is going NO WHERE, it is a backhaul... LTE is NOT a backhaul, WiMax is replacing copper backhaul's as the standard and you can't just take away / shutdown a backhaul, so you will still have wimax, don't worry
Covert_Death is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:20 AM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 175
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 57
Thanked 70 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Nah, not really. If Sprint switches over to LTE I'm sure there will be a reasonably long enough transition period where both WiMax and LTE are operating. I doubt Sprint will shut down WiMax completely in favor of an LTE network during the EVO's lifetime.
Clock is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:22 AM   #4 (permalink)
SoFLO
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Not worried.
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:26 AM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
momoceio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 1,235
 
Device(s): EVO 3d
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 106
Thanked 151 Times in 95 Posts
Default

Even if they do switch to LTE, which is done via a software update to their equipment...it's always possible that the radio in the EVO can also run on LTE. I'm not sure of the exact radio they used in the phone though.
__________________
"Come to the dark side, we have androids"

My Online Business Card
My Blog
My Twitter
momoceio is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:41 AM   #6 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 200
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 45
Thanked 32 Times in 24 Posts
Default

People have (had?) been worried about the big V and Sprint abandoning the inferior CDMA tech for years. People worried about Beta vs. VHS. Adoption = survival. If WiMax gets users, it will stay alive and grow. If Sprint continues to hemorrage users, nothing will save WIMAX or Sprint.

My bet is that it will do OK.
katmandoo122 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 08:56 AM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
neodorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,113
 
Device(s): HTC Evo
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 115
Thanked 277 Times in 168 Posts
Default

Nope. The Wimax/LTE thing is a false dichotomy. Wimax will be all over the place for years to come. Just because lots of folks seem to be spinning this as GSM/CDMA or BR/HDDVD or Betamax/VHS doesn't make it the case.
neodorian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 09:11 AM   #8 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 283
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neodorian View Post
Nope. The Wimax/LTE thing is a false dichotomy. Wimax will be all over the place for years to come. Just because lots of folks seem to be spinning this as GSM/CDMA or BR/HDDVD or Betamax/VHS doesn't make it the case.
Thanks for the supporting evidence..
tranceFusion is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 09:14 AM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
neodorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,113
 
Device(s): HTC Evo
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 115
Thanked 277 Times in 168 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tranceFusion View Post
Thanks for the supporting evidence..
Read the main Wimax/4G thread. This has been discussed thoroughly over the past month and I didn't feel like creating yet another redundant thread or post. If I wanted to do that I would have made another thread about the $10 premium data fee.

Edit: sorry to come off snarky, but it really has been discussed a lot. Check out posts by eieio, RiverOfIce and others in the main 4g thread for more info than I can give at the moment.
neodorian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 09:48 AM   #10 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 224
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 45 Times in 24 Posts
Default

Even if they switch, any such change will be past the evo's life cycle for most of us. Regardless most of what I have read says switching is a matter of software not hardware so that implies new firmware could get the evo up and running again. one good thing as sprint premiere you don't have to worry about waiting two years to upgrade handsets
Aridon is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old May 14th, 2010, 10:03 AM   #11 (permalink)
Member
 
adseguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 164
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 18
Thanked 50 Times in 24 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neodorian View Post
Read the main Wimax/4G thread. This has been discussed thoroughly over the past month and I didn't feel like creating yet another redundant thread or post. If I wanted to do that I would have made another thread about the $10 premium data fee.

Edit: sorry to come off snarky, but it really has been discussed a lot. Check out posts by eieio, RiverOfIce and others in the main 4g thread for more info than I can give at the moment.
You ASSume everyone reads these forums as much as you. 700+ posts means you know ur stuff around here. Its easier to post the link that can help everyone who doesn't know
adseguy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 10:10 AM   #12 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 50
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 27
Thanked 38 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adseguy View Post
You ASSume everyone reads these forums as much as you. 700+ posts means you know ur stuff around here. Its easier to post the link that can help everyone who doesn't know
It just as easy for you to search as it is for him to post a link
tkrechel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 10:37 AM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
neodorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,113
 
Device(s): HTC Evo
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 115
Thanked 277 Times in 168 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adseguy View Post
You ASSume everyone reads these forums as much as you. 700+ posts means you know ur stuff around here. Its easier to post the link that can help everyone who doesn't know
It's a sticky at the top of this forum called " Official 4G/WiMax: what is it, why do we want it "

How much more obvious can we get? Anyway I said sorry about the snark and I know that "use the search" is a dick response. If it weren't a prominent sticky I would have dug up the link for you.


...also my post count is entirely due to having too much spare time and BS-ing in the forums a lot. Doesn't make me any more knowledgeable than any lurker who has read all of the main threads.
neodorian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 10:45 AM   #14 (permalink)
Member
 
misterzeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 178
 
Device(s): EVO
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 266
Thanked 31 Times in 23 Posts
Default

Nope not worried one single bit
misterzeno is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 11:41 AM   #15 (permalink)
Bek
Senior Member
 
Bek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 908
 
Device(s): Photon 4G; HTC Evo
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 99
Thanked 488 Times in 218 Posts
Default

This is about as probable as AT&T dropping all iPhones.
__________________
--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Bek is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2010, 04:36 PM   #16 (permalink)
Mr. Logic Pants
 
IOWA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,824
 
Device(s): GS4 ASUS Transformer TF101 GS3
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 1,897
Thanked 2,341 Times in 1,207 Posts
Ask and ye shall receive!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by katmandoo122 View Post
People have (had?) been worried about the big V and Sprint abandoning the inferior CDMA tech for years. People worried about Beta vs. VHS. Adoption = survival. If WiMax gets users, it will stay alive and grow. If Sprint continues to hemorrage users, nothing will save WIMAX or Sprint.

My bet is that it will do OK.
CDMA is actually superior to GSM lol.. How convienent, as I just made a post on just this.

Quote:
I said WCDMA is a variant of CDMA, which it is. Look it up.

CDMA also has an RUIM option, (not implented in the states, don't know why)

RUIM is the SIM equivalent for CDMA, so your argument is moot. Also, I can esn swap without any fees in 2 minutes pretty easily.

Just because something is more widely adopted, doesn't mean it's better. Asian countries use CDMA, and they are the best of the best when it comes to all things cellular/mobile. Also, want to know the real reason GSM became the world standard? In Europe, various governments decided that they (the Europeans) had designed the ultimate digital cellular system, and they passed laws making it illegal to deploy anything except GSM, whose primary supporters/suppliers were Nokia, Ericsson, Siemens and Alcatel.


Let's expand upon this.

The original cell phones were analog, using fairly straightforward FM for voice communication. When your phone was in a call, it was granted a frequency by the cell and used it exclusively for the entire duration of the call. FM encoding is extremely inefficient in use of bandwidth, and spectrum was scarce and expensive, and it rapidly became clear that FM wasn't able to handle the traffic which was expected and which was really needed to make cellular telephony a profitable business. One obvious approach was to use digital communications, and to take advantage of advances in microprocessor and digital IC technology to compress the voice traffic going both directions, and thus you saw deployment of the first Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) digital systems. What they do is to take a single channel and timeshare it among several phones, who digitize and compress their voice traffic and transceive it during their timeslice. With IS-136, a 30 KHz channel which had carried only one voice call with AMPS could now carry three digitized calls.

GSM went further than that, and abandoned the old channel size entirely. It allocated 200 KHz channels and divided them into 8 slices, giving each phone somewhat less than 25 KHz effective bandwidth. (There are some losses due to time guardbands and protocol overhead.)

GSM also included a very powerful set of features above that, and included some interesting features not directly associated with the RF link, such as a personality module which contained a customer's phone number and billing information that could be moved to another phone any time the customer wished to. (That particular featured turned out to be a decidedly mixed blessing. While that ability was very convenient for legitimate customers, it was also a magnet for thieves and frauds.)

GSM was clearly superior to IS-136 or such abortions as IDEN (a Motorola design which never became an industry standard because Moto was never willing to license it, which meant that systems which adopted it could only get infrastructure and handsets from Motorola).

In the computer industry we talk about the "ISO seven layer model", where the process of communication is modularized and each layer uses the one below it without worrying how the lower layer actually works. TCP works whether the physical layer is 802.11b or ethernet or something else entirely, and TCP itself doesn't change based on that. TCP uses IP, and IP uses the datalink layer, and the problems of the physical layer are dealt with by the datalink layer. But if the physical layer is a 56 KBaud modem, then there are things which won't be possible, which might be possible with 100 megabit ethernet. No amount of work at higher levels can compensate for the fundamental superiority of ethernet over a telephone modem.

Cell phone protocols do the same kind of thing. There's an RF layer and protocols above that, some of which can be very high level and quite abstract, such as the one which controls sending of text messages. However, the change from analog to TDMA was a change at the RF layer. CDMA was yet another approach to the RF layer, which was radically different again. (IS-95 is a specification for a complete protocol stack which includes CDMA as its RF layer.)

In fact, CDMA was so revolutionary that when it was first discussed, many thought it couldn't be made to work. Indeed, at least one European company deeply involved with GSM, Ericsson, went through the three classic stages of Not Invented Here syndrome:

1. It's impossible.
2. It's infeasible.
3. Actually, we thought of it first.

In IS-95 CDMA, a single carrier frequency has a bandwidth of 1.2288 MHz, and up to 40 cell phones in a given sector can all be transmitting chips at that rate on the same carrier frequency, which seemed on first examination to assume that it was possible to send fifty million bits through a one-and-a-quarter MHz band, which would indeed violate Shannon. The mistake they made was that chips aren't "information" based on Shannon's definition, and though those phones were sending chips that fast, they were actually sending bits (real data) at no more than 14,400 bits per second each. (I'll try not to get too bogged down in technical details here, but to some extent it's unavoidable.)

Unfortunately, Qualcomm did a field test in New York City where several prototype phones mounted in vans were able to operate at once on the same frequency talking to multiple cells all of which also operated on the same frequency.

The next argument was that though it seemed technically possible, it would be too expensive. Everyone knew that the electronics required to make CDMA work was a lot more complicated than what TDMA used, and Ericsson's loud voices claimed that it could never be reduced in price enough to make it competitive. And shortly thereafter Qualcomm proved that wrong, too, by beginning to produce both infrastructure and phones at very competitive prices. (Qualcomm did this to bootstrap the industry. It's no longer in either business.)

After which Ericsson suddenly decided that it had applicable patents and took Qualcomm to court. Over the long drawn out process of litigation, every single preliminary court judgment went in favor of Qualcomm, and it became obvious that Ericsson didn't have a case and that Qualcomm wasn't going to be intimidated. Ultimately, the entire case was settled in a massive omnibus agreement where Ericsson became the last of the large companies in the industry to license Qualcomm's patents (on the same royalty terms as everyone else) while taking a large money-losing division off Qualcomm's hands and assuming all the liabilities associated with it, and granting Qualcomm a full license for GSM technology. The industry consensus was that this represented a full scale surrender by Ericsson.

Nokia wasn't anything like as foolish and had licensed several years before. (Just in passing, the fools at Ericsson are in the front office. Their engineers are as good as anyone else's.)

Still, in the years of apparent chaos in the US, when loud voices in Europe proclaimed the clear advantage of a single continental standard, order began to appear out of the chaos here. Small companies using the same standards set up roaming agreements, and then started merging into larger companies, which merged into yet larger ones. One company (Sprint) started from scratch to build nationwide coverage. Bell Atlantic Mobile acquired GTE Mobile (who had been a joint partner in PrimeCo), and eventually merged with Airtouch to form Verizon, all of which was based on IS-95 CDMA, mostly on 800 MHz. Sprint eventually implemented a reasonable nationwide system also based on CDMA. The last major nationwide system to form was Cingular, after the various GSM carriers in the US realized they were in big trouble competing against Verizon and Sprint and AT&T (which uses IS-136).

Once the existence and commercial feasibility of CDMA were established beyond doubt, other aspects of it began to become clear. At the RF layer, CDMA was obviously drastically superior to any kind of TDMA. For one thing, in any cellular system which had three or more cells, CDMA could carry far more traffic within a given allocation of spectrum than any form of TDMA. (Depending on the physical circumstances, it's usually three times as much but it can be as much as five times.) For another, CDMA was designed from the very beginning to dynamically allocate spectrum.

In TDMA, a given phone in a given voice call is allocated a certain fixed amount of bandwidth whether it needs it or not. In IS-136 that's a bit less than 10 KHz, in GSM it's somewhat less than 25 KHz. (Going each direction; the total is twice that.) But humans don't use bandwidth that way; when you're talking, I'm mostly listening. So your 25 KHz channel to me is carrying your voice, and my 25 KHz channel to you is carrying the sound of me listening to you silently.

In CDMA, the amount of bandwidth that a given phone uses changes 50 times per second, and can vary over a scale of 8:1. When I'm silent, I'm only use 1/8th of the peak bandwidth I use when I'm talking. (But I don't actually send full rate most of the time even when I'm speaking.) That's very useful for voice but it's essential for data which tends to be extremely bursty, and CDMA was born able to do this. It's always had that capability. It's also always had the ability for different phones to be given different overall allocations of bandwidth, because the initial standard included both 8K and 13K codecs (which respectively use 9600 baud and 14,400 baud). So when higher data rates were desired, it was possible to augment the cell and create new cell phones which could transmit 56 kilobits per second using the same frequency as existing handsets.

When GSM wanted to do that (send data at a rate faster than the existing voice channel supported), they ended up having to allocate an entirely new carrier just for that job, which handled nothing except data, and to deploy entirely new infrastructure for it. The resulting system is called GPRS, and in many ways it turned out to be very unsatisfactory for the operating companies because it's really expensive to deploy and because it cuts down on the bandwidth they have available for voice. A given chunk of spectrum must be permanently assigned to one or the other; it can't be reallocated dynamically. Data and voice in CDMA, on the other hand, both use the same carrier and bandwidth is reallocated between the two 50 times per second automatically, and you can implement high speed data without having to install new transmitters in all the cells.

With the push to greater and greater data rates, everyone recognized that a new generation of cellular equipment would be needed, the legendary 3G.

And for the reasons given above, and several others, it was equally clear that it had to use a CDMA air interface. GSM was the very best propeller-driven fighter money could buy, but CDMA was a jet engine, and ultimately TDMA could not compete. The fundamental weakness of TDMA at the RF layer could not be compensated for at any layer higher than that, no matter how well designed it was. GSM/TDMA was a dead end, and to create 3G, Europe's electronics companies were going to have to swallow their pride and admit that Qualcomm had been right all along.

This article in the Economist (old, but relevant) says that it's not going well. When Qualcomm and its partners designed a new 3G system with new capabilities, they were able to make it backward compatible with IS-95. The new standard is called CDMA 2000, and a CDMA2K handset can work with IS-95 infrastructure, and an IS-95 handset can work with CDMA2K infrastructure, and CDMA2K cells can sit next to IS-95 cells and use the same frequencies. Thus existing operating companies using IS-95 can upgrade incrementally replacing individual cells as budget allows and selling new handsets without having to wholesale replace all existing ones at once. Most important of all, it means that you can take an existing system using an existing spectrum license, and phase it over without acquiring any new spectrum.

None of that is true for GSM. CDMA and TDMA are fundamentally incompatible and there's no way to create a new system (which they're calling WCDMA) which can support existing TDMA handsets. It's technically impossible for the new standard to be backward compatible. Worse is that there's no easy way to phase existing spectrum over. In practice, when WCDMA appears, existing GSM systems will have to install it all, issue new handsets to all customers, and then one day throw a switch -- or else they'll have to license new spectrum for WCDMA while continuing to run GSM on the existing spectrum for legacy customers. It's all going to be very ugly when it happens. (Note: It is possible to design new WCDMA handsets so that they are capable of working with old GSM/TDMA infrastructure, but it adds substantially to the cost of the unit. It is not possible at all to make WCDMA infrastructure work with GSM/TDMA handsets.)
It is in this thread:

10 bucks is the deal breaker samsung galaxy s

No, I am not worried.
__________________
Useful links: The Rules | The Team | FAQ | Unanswered Threads |
IOWA is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 08:37 AM   #17 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Default Sprint Pulls Out of Clearwire

Just got this in an email newsfeed. All the Sprint board members have resigned from Clearwire. If the story is accurate, it certainly seems to bode ill for the future of the current 4G infrastructure.

It doesn't matter to me which 4G I use, other than I really want to keep my Evo for a few years. I would guess a switch to LTE would take at least a couple of years though.

WiMax is now likely to die -- thank goodness! | Mobilize - InfoWorld
BenW is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 08:53 AM   #18 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 72
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S4
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 37
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Default

So what does this do to the HTC Evo?
calvinrw is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 09:14 AM   #19 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 575
 
Device(s): HTC Evo
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 104
Thanked 21 Times in 17 Posts
Send a message via AIM to t1jordan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvinrw View Post
So what does this do to the HTC Evo?
Good Question!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
t1jordan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 09:16 AM   #20 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvinrw View Post
So what does this do to the HTC Evo?
I would think we'd be okay for a while. It wouldn't make business sense for Sprint to simply shut off WiMax and move directly to LTE. They'll probably run both for a while and then do a slow phase out.
BenW is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old October 8th, 2010, 09:21 AM   #21 (permalink)
HTC User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,104
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 20,775
Thanked 3,003 Times in 1,761 Posts
Default

remember sprint still is running the boat anchor iDEN. the evo is now a legacy device--and a pioneer--kind of like the IBM Simon phone (in my opinion the first true mobile PDA) i had back in 1992.

yes wimax will be here for a good while.. you will have moved onto another device well before wimax is shut off.
marctronixx is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 09:31 AM   #22 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
daddyd302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: West Allis, WI
Gender: Male
Posts: 519
 
Device(s): Galaxy Note 3, Sony Z1S
Carrier: T-Mobile

Thanks: 63
Thanked 88 Times in 50 Posts
Default

Sprint still has alot of stocks in Clearwire. Something about this isn't making sense. I'm guessing either Clearwire is in trouble or the government is investigating and seeing this as a monopoly.
daddyd302 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 10:42 AM   #23 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bat Cave
Posts: 1,065
 
Device(s): Motorola StarTac
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 154
Thanked 826 Times in 287 Posts
Default

They are simply removing themselves from the picture so that Clear will have the ability to source new investors.

This will also allow Clear to decide how they want to resell their services and to whom..

If you where Tmobile would you invest in clear with your competitor have a vote on what happens to the company?

It is a matter of anti-trust issues as well
eieio is offline  
Last edited by eieio; October 8th, 2010 at 10:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2010, 09:30 PM   #24 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
RoboMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,194
 
Device(s): Htc Vivid, LG Nitro HD, Epic 4g, HTC Evo 4G, LG Optimus V
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 138
Thanked 115 Times in 89 Posts
Default

No that's not it. Sprint has already stated that they're not willing to give Clear anymore cash. They could care less if Tmob wants to pay to jump on the band wagon.

I think Sprint is trying to crash Clears stock so they can buy them out (have you seen the price action on the stock this week).
__________________
I'm sooo over rooting.
RoboMonkey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2010, 06:51 PM   #25 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
CRAZYISH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: upstate ny
Posts: 94
 
Device(s): HTC EVO
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 26
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default

i wish i was a smart cookie
CRAZYISH is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2010, 12:05 AM   #26 (permalink)
Member
 
barnacles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Dekalb, Illinois
Posts: 406
 
Device(s): HERO, EVO 4G
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 16
Thanked 32 Times in 20 Posts
Default

Worried? No. Pretty salty? Yes.. this means my town, a town withour wimax, will never see wimax. So sprint has jacked 240 dollars from me over the life of my evo.. that my friends is stupid.

Just realized this thread is a bit old, but some news has recently surfaced on the topic
__________________
Supersonic: Build: Frost 3.1 | Netarchy 4.1.9CFS/custom

Like my work? Donate
barnacles is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2010, 04:16 AM   #27 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
daddyd302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: West Allis, WI
Gender: Male
Posts: 519
 
Device(s): Galaxy Note 3, Sony Z1S
Carrier: T-Mobile

Thanks: 63
Thanked 88 Times in 50 Posts
Default

If Sprint goes LTE, it won't matter. By that time the Evo will be replaced by something else much faster anyways. Honestly how many people are gonna stick to the Evo next year when the new phones come out? I'm assuming most will get the new device.
daddyd302 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2010, 07:44 AM   #28 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 432
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 7
Thanked 68 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daddyd302 View Post
If Sprint goes LTE, it won't matter. By that time the Evo will be replaced by something else much faster anyways. Honestly how many people are gonna stick to the Evo next year when the new phones come out? I'm assuming most will get the new device.
Ill probably ride the Evo until they make a long-term commitment though, no point in buying the next 4g device if they appear to be planning a switch.
archercc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2010, 09:02 AM   #29 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,584
 
Device(s): HTC Evo, Rev0002
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 43
Thanked 220 Times in 172 Posts
Default

Wimax will be around even with the adoption of LTE because Wimax is so much cheaper to deploy that it will be used to fill in LTE gaps and become part of the backhaul structure for LTE data transmission because Wimax is cheaper than normal fiber-cable backhaul.
Rigmaster is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Go Back   Android Forums > Android Carriers > Sprint
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.