Related
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/25/fcc-unanimously-approves-lte-standard-for-nationwide-public-safe/
simple as that
The FCC's been looking to establish a nationwide public safety network since the early days of the infamous 700MHz spectrum auction, and while it never quite accomplished that task, the commission has made a small but important step -- it's unanimously decided that Long Term Evolution (LTE) will be the one ring that binds all future chunks of public safety radio band. Of course, this wasn't a terribly hard decision for the FCC to make, as major commercial cellular carriers and a number of regional public safety agencies have already invested in LTE equipment for the 700MHz band... and the decision doesn't yet specify a voice standard. All that's been decided upon is how those countless packets of data will float over the air. How will disparate groups of first responders communicate with one another in the event of a national emergency? That's what the organization is asking you right now -- feel free to contact the FCC anytime within the next 45 days with your proposal.
Show full PR text
FCC TAKES ACTION TO ADVANCE NATIONWIDE BROADBAND COMMUNICATIONS FOR AMERICA'S FIRST RESPONDERS
FCC Takes Significant Steps toward Solving Problems Identified by 9/11 Commission
Washington, D.C. – The Federal Communications Commission today adopted a Third Report and Order (Order) and Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) that will significantly advance communications interoperability for our Nation's first responders. The rules adopted and proposed in today's Order and FNPRM support the build out of robust, dedicated and secure mobile broadband networks that will enable public safety broadband users to share information, videos, photos and emails across departments and jurisdictions nationwide for day-to-day operations and during large-scale emergencies.
The Order and FNPRM requires all 700 MHz public safety mobile broadband networks to use a common air interface, specifically Long Term Evolution (LTE), to support roaming and interoperable communications and seeks comment on additional rules to enable nationwide interoperability. The FCC's actions today build on the technical requirements that state and local 700 MHz broadband waiver recipients are already subject to in the early buildout of their regional public safety broadband networks.
The FNPRM seeks public comment on, among other things:
The architectural vision of the network;
The effectiveness of open standards;
Interconnectivity between networks;
Network robustness and resiliency;
Security and encryption;Coverage and coverage reliability requirements;
Roaming and priority access between public safety broadband networks; and
Interference coordination and protection.
The deadlines for public comments and reply comments on the FNPRM are 45 days and 75 days, respectively, after publication in the Federal Registry.
Action by the Commission January 25, 2011, by Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 11-6). Chairman Genachowski, Commissioners Copps, McDowell, Clyburn, and Baker. Separate statements issued by Chairman Genachowski, Commissioners Copps, McDowell, Clyburn, and Baker.
For additional information, please contact Jennifer Manner, Deputy Bureau Chief, PSHSB, at (202) 418-3619 or [email protected]; or David Furth, Deputy Bureau Chief, PSHSB, at (202) 418-0632 or [email protected].
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so THATS what LTE stands for... I thought it was a vzw marketing gimmick.
At the pace the government moves at it will be an antiquated standard by the time it rolls out anyway.
Feb 7th announcement "Watch us implode in seconds right before your very eyes"
1. Remove discounts
2. Change upgrade policy
3. Up-charge all smartphones
4. Gov drives a nail right between your eyes....lol
5. IMPLODE
Bye Bye
azfxstb said:
Feb 7th announcement "Watch us implode in seconds right before your very eyes"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol
Screw David Copperfield and his disappearing motorcycles, Blain is going to make a national leader in wireless service vanish overnight*
*Feb MRC will not be prorated
*whether, and I doubt that would have any impact on Sprint and them being forced to go LTE.
Just because the government chooses to go LTE, doesn't mean every other company in the nation has to too. Government/World prefers Blu-ray, Microsoft still uses HD-DVD. Plus, the First Responders are a group who respond to emergency situations first. The fact that they'll be using LTE is purely for them to contact others in their group.
Both LTE and WiMax have their advantages and disadvantages. This is all just a repeat of DVD vs VHS, DVD vs UMD, and Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD bouts, just to name a few. However, I do see LTE winning. It is getting the most support, and now that the government will start supporting it 10 years from now, Sprint will probably make the move then.
What I hope is that when/if LTE does win, what will Sprint do to the users who have WiMax devices? Will Sprint replace the device with it's WiMax cousin? Or will Sprint give everyone the middle finger? What will the companies with LTE do if WiMax wins? Will Sprint throw a Nation-wide party if WiMax wins?
PsychoFox13 said:
What I hope is that when/if LTE does win, what will Sprint do to the users who have WiMax devices? Will Sprint replace the device with it's WiMax cousin?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They do not care about your wimax device it will be at least 1+ years old anyways..EOL dead gone later sucka
PsychoFox13 said:
*whether, and I doubt that would have any impact on Sprint and them being forced to go LTE.
Just because the government chooses to go LTE, doesn't mean every other company in the nation has to too. Government/World prefers Blu-ray, Microsoft still uses HD-DVD. Plus, the First Responders are a group who respond to emergency situations first. The fact that they'll be using LTE is purely for them to contact others in their group.
Both LTE and WiMax have their advantages and disadvantages. This is all just a repeat of DVD vs VHS, DVD vs UMD, and Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD bouts, just to name a few. However, I do see LTE winning. It is getting the most support, and now that the government will start supporting it 10 years from now, Sprint will probably make the move then.
What I hope is that when/if LTE does win, what will Sprint do to the users who have WiMax devices? Will Sprint replace the device with it's WiMax cousin? Or will Sprint give everyone the middle finger? What will the companies with LTE do if WiMax wins? Will Sprint throw a Nation-wide party if WiMax wins?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i would disagree considering most other providers will be using it. Sprint is very big in the gov sector...i assure you they will not miss out.
The thread title is misleading, as it seems to imply that Sprint will be required to move to LTE. However, Sprint will probably choose to move to LTE anyway. This might be one more reason why, but I doubt it will be the main one.
OP, there's one major flaw:
Sprint doesn't have 700MHz spectrum, last I heard. Of the Big Four, only AT&T and VZW got in on that cake. Oops.
drmacinyasha said:
OP, there's one major flaw:
Sprint doesn't have 700MHz spectrum, last I heard. Of the Big Four, only AT&T and VZW got in on that cake. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right on the nose. This announcement is all but irrelevant to Sprint since they have nothing in the affected band.
I agree that they probably will go LTE in the long run, but I knew that when I got my phone. They have enough investment in WiMax and enough customers using WiMax devices that they're not going to just go and switch it all out overnight. I understand many of their WiMax base stations can do both with a firmware upgrade, so I suspect they'd roll out such an update and split the spectrum as needed in various areas while they release new LTE devices and get existing users transitioned over.
Remember that while most Sprint customers have dual-mode gear CDMA/WiMax, many of the Clear WiMax fixed install radios as used for home/small business service are WiMax only, so those would also all have to be switched out before they could disable WiMax in a given area.
tl;dr - Don't worry about it. By the time any forced switch is actually happening you'll be looking for a new phone anyways.
drmacinyasha said:
OP, there's one major flaw:
Sprint doesn't have 700MHz spectrum, last I heard. Of the Big Four, only AT&T and VZW got in on that cake. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking at the FCCs website they show 763 to 775Mhz & 793 - 805MHz are set aside for public safety services, my guess is that's what they are planning to use. Since Sprint's IDEN network is in the 800s I wouldnt think it would be too difficult to make them work on whichever frequency the FCC calls for.
http://reboot.fcc.gov/spectrumdashboard/searchSpectrum.seam
xHausx said:
Looking at the FCCs website they show 763 to 775Mhz & 793 - 805MHz are set aside for public safety services, my guess is that's what they are planning to use. Since Sprint's IDEN network is in the 800s I wouldnt think it would be too difficult to make them work on whichever frequency the FCC calls for.
http://reboot.fcc.gov/spectrumdashboard/searchSpectrum.seam
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly! I mean we really knew it was comming but this is one of the many nails in the coffin
Justin.G11 said:
At the pace the government moves at it will be an antiquated standard by the time it rolls out anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reminds me the Congress's 1988 legislation about the metrication of the US.
Eh it'll be funny if and when sprint goes to wimax2. Then gov will be all what happened here. Thought lte was the best. Lol
Sent from the Evo 4G
xHausx said:
Looking at the FCCs website they show 763 to 775Mhz & 793 - 805MHz are set aside for public safety services, my guess is that's what they are planning to use. Since Sprint's IDEN network is in the 800s I wouldnt think it would be too difficult to make them work on whichever frequency the FCC calls for.
http://reboot.fcc.gov/spectrumdashboard/searchSpectrum.seam
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, but isn't this a good thing? If those are LTE frequencies, then those carriers that use them will have to give them up and/or have more interference from the gov't using them.
Since Wimax is out of that range, our signals are in a less crowded spectrum.
It's like if you bought frequencies in a certain range, then the gov't steps in and say, hey wait, we want those bands for our emergency units to communicate with each other. So, you have to give them some bands in the middle of your spectrum. That would suck.
Maybe I'm not understanding this clearly, but it seems like a good thing.
When the FCC get's involved in this kind of stuff it makes me feel really uneasy. Big government leave our phones and internet along
Bigjim1488 said:
When the FCC get's involved in this kind of stuff it makes me feel really uneasy. Big government leave our phones and internet along
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pink Floyd....lawl
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
drmacinyasha said:
OP, there's one major flaw:
Sprint doesn't have 700MHz spectrum, last I heard. Of the Big Four, only AT&T and VZW got in on that cake. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sprint does have 700mhz spectrum. And it uses it fully, today. Remember Nextel?
I know it's hard to believe but Sprint easily has the most spectrum out of all carriers in the US.
Also, the fact that it's not 700mhz makes the network useless is a myth. Did you that 2.5ghz is the spectrum being used right now on LTE rollouts around the world? The US is pretty much the only country right now using 700mhz for LTE.
With a proper network buildout there's no difference from 700mhz to 2.5ghz.
zeuzinn said:
Sprint does have 700mhz spectrum. And it uses it fully, today. Remember Nextel?
I know it's hard to believe but Sprint easily has the most spectrum out of all carriers in the US.
Also, the fact that it's not 700mhz makes the network useless is a myth. Did you that 2.5ghz is the spectrum being used right now on LTE rollouts around the world? The US is pretty much the only country right now using 700mhz for LTE.
With a proper network buildout there's no difference from 700mhz to 2.5ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not to familiar with this but doesnt 700 mhz offer better wall penetration as opposed to to 2.5 ghz? I would love decent wimax coverage indoors.
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=.../www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2386864,00.asp
They should upgrade those damn GPS.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Thats been common knowledge for awhile now that they fail on GPS.
Well that's no good. The sad part is, since the issue is that GPS satellites are relatively weak compared to Lightsquared, the only real solution would be for Lightsquared to adjust their broadcast. which i would think means slower(then is possible) data speeds.
SilverStone641 said:
Well that's no good. The sad part is, since the issue is that GPS satellites are relatively weak compared to Lightsquared, the only real solution would be for Lightsquared to adjust their broadcast. which i would think means slower(then is possible) data speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah I'm surprised that they would run that article as that news is pretty old about them failing the GPS sats and causing interferince.
As assumed they responded with the "we think we have a fix for it though..." line in response.
Its worth noting that this was B4 sprint came out saying they were going with them too...
Lte is failed we all know wimax wave 2 will beat lte in no time
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
tech7 said:
Lte is failed we all know wimax wave 2 will beat lte in no time
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes!
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Lightsquared is dead in the water, they scammed the FCC to use the low powered frequency band of the satellites in high powered ground stations. Their license technically doesn't allow this and if it didn't interfere with gps they may have just overlooked it. Now congress is involved and the military said that defense of the country and defense of gps navigation is a higher priority than broadband. They will never be able to go online. We aren't talking about grandma in her car not being able to navigate to walmart. We are talking about planes falling out of the sky and smart bombs not landing on their targets.
Lightsquared is a very ambitious company. The concept of having LTE 4G anywhere you can see sky is very intriguing. However Clearwire is currently conducting their own LTE trials anyway. I'm guessing Sprint could go Clearwire's route for LTE also?
For those of us who don't live in a major US city, lets just hope Lightsquared gets their technology figured out.
The whole point of the Sprint deal is so lightsquared can use Sprint's spectrum instead of the spectrum that is interfering with GPS.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
http://m.engadget.com/default/artic...ed-by-federal-agency-report/&icid=eng_txt(3:4)
Sent from my EVO
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/14/lightsquareds-lte-hopes-dashed-by-federal-agency-report/
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9223412/LightSquared_seeks_probe_of_GPS_advisory_board_member
Well now the looks for sprint to have an LTE partner other than itself and Clear are looking dim according to this story. Lightsquared was going to be a big help to Sprints LTE efforts and give them more spectrum to work with and enable users to connect to.
The issue has always been GPS interference with Lightsquared's LTE implementation. What MANY people FAIL to realize its NOT Lightsquared's fault for the interference. The GPS handsets/systems are encroaching on Lightsquared's Spectrum/frequency and that is whats causing the interference. The FCC even made notice to give manufacturers many many years heads up notice that Lightsquared was coming and using Freq X but the manufacturers did squat and so in turn they still encroach on the signal causing issues to themselves. Now b/c they have been there for so long everyone looks at it as if Lightsquared is causing the problem but its actually the other way around.
Whats sad is even though lightsquared made deals with other companies to implement fixes on these GPS handsets for FREE, it still didn't fly with ppl.
"...Trimble sells products and services for precision GPS and has been one of the most prominent opponents of LightSquared's network plan. LightSquared said deployment of its network could force Trimble to adapt its equipment to stop using frequencies licensed to LightSquared, a concern that LightSquared said Trimble has acknowledged. Parkinson sits on the board of Trimble, so he should have recused himself from the government's decision-making process on the LTE proposal, LightSquared said...."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's truly a shame the GPS manufacturers are so set in there way and control so much of the FCC, as in they have much much more $$ to toss around capitol hill and get things their way.
Now we will be the ones hurt in the end by this more than anyone else.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
That's what I out up in the 3D section on this.
Btw it doesn't mean no LTE as sprint is doing their own LTE aside from what they were going to share with lightsquared and Clear.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Getting easier and easier to buy Sprint stock at rock bottom prices..Clearwire as well.
I don't know what is going to happen to light squared, but sprint will deliver their 4g just as they planned. The main purpose of light squared was to have more spectrum and more resources to use with their 4g network.
Sent from my Acer Iconia A500 using xda premium
Interesting read. Was wondering what was going on with LightSquared. Hopefully they get it situated so we as the consumers don't loose out too much.. But i am not holding my breath.
devnulldroid said:
Getting easier and easier to buy Sprint stock at rock bottom prices..Clearwire as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Think Sprint shares will go below $2?
Im actually leaning towards the 3g tab but now i can confirm that both have an exynos engine .
international version has slower 3g but with voice capability
US version has the faster LTE but without voice but i can still use GV for voice calls + it has the IR blaster.
so which one is better now i need to buy one now please help me decide. Also can i use the Straight Talk sim card on the lte tab?
mywingtophone said:
Im actually leaning towards the 3g tab but now i can confirm that both have an exynos engine .
international version has slower 3g but with voice capability
US version has the faster LTE but without voice but i can still use GV for voice calls + it has the IR blaster.
so which one is better now i need to buy one now please help me decide. Also can i use the Straight Talk sim card on the lte tab?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on carrier preference and LTE availability
Verizon 3G is ridiculously slow and you lose voice capability however, you do get IR port for universal remote app
ph00ny said:
Depends on carrier preference and LTE availability
Verizon 3G is ridiculously slow and you lose voice capability however, you do get IR port for universal remote app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, only the Verizon LTE version has the IR blaster? Not the international version?
Diversion said:
Wait, only the Verizon LTE version has the IR blaster? Not the international version?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it looks like it. One reason why i didn't get the international version because this is going to be sitting at home most of the time except when i'm traveling
Verizon LTE = Carrier locked, bloated up, no phone functionality, less community support, not too much of a cost difference, works as a universal remote with IR blaster.
Unlocked 3G = Works with just about any GSM carrier (though T-Mobile 3G not compatible), free of carrier bloat, double's as a phone, currently goes for about $650 on Negri, works as a universal remote with RedEye Remote. BONUS: RedEye Remote will continue to work with future devices when you decide to eventually replace the 7.7, as well as working with all your existing Android/iOS devices as well.
Jade Eyed Wolf said:
Verizon LTE = Carrier locked, bloated up, no phone functionality, less community support, not too much of a cost difference, works as a universal remote with IR blaster.
Unlocked 3G = Works with just about any GSM carrier (though T-Mobile 3G not compatible), free of carrier bloat, double's as a phone, currently goes for about $650 on Negri, works as a universal remote with RedEye Remote. BONUS: RedEye Remote will continue to work with future devices when you decide to eventually replace the 7.7, as well as working with all your existing Android/iOS devices as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmmmm that really make sence now i want an unlocked tab 7.7!!!!!
Jade Eyed Wolf said:
Verizon LTE = Carrier locked, bloated up, no phone functionality, less community support, not too much of a cost difference, works as a universal remote with IR blaster.
Unlocked 3G = Works with just about any GSM carrier (though T-Mobile 3G not compatible), free of carrier bloat, double's as a phone, currently goes for about $650 on Negri, works as a universal remote with RedEye Remote. BONUS: RedEye Remote will continue to work with future devices when you decide to eventually replace the 7.7, as well as working with all your existing Android/iOS devices as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think logitech has a similar product as well.
Also one thing missing from your post is the LTE data speed vs HSPA+ on AT&T. LTE is much more reliable and faster but the coverage is limited to metropolitan area
ph00ny said:
i think logitech has a similar product as well.
Also one thing missing from your post is the LTE data speed vs HSPA+ on AT&T. LTE is much more reliable and faster but the coverage is limited to metropolitan area
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE will be faster.
But with my 7.7 and ATT service I am averaging 6-9mb download speeds. Which is plenty fast for me.
LTE for the Win !
ph00ny said:
i think logitech has a similar product as well.
Also one thing missing from your post is the LTE data speed vs HSPA+ on AT&T. LTE is much more reliable and faster but the coverage is limited to metropolitan area
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest, I'm not really sold on the whole LTE thing. I mean, sure it's fast and reliable and all, which is great, but while throttling, caps, and other limits still exist, the benefits of LTE are kinda rendered useless to me...
It's like saying, "Here! You can drive this supercar as fast as you want!!*"
*Up to a certain point, at which time you have to reduce your speed to a crawl, or be charged $10 more for every mile past that point...
Really? Wow, no thanks. I'm good.
Jade Eyed Wolf said:
To be honest, I'm not really sold on the whole LTE thing. I mean, sure it's fast and reliable and all, which is great, but while throttling, caps, and other limits still exist, the benefits of LTE are kinda rendered useless to me...
It's like saying, "Here! You can drive this supercar as fast as you want!!*"
*Up to a certain point, at which time you have to reduce your speed to a crawl, or be charged $10 more for every mile past that point...
Really? Wow, no thanks. I'm good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My (fairly limited) experience with both AT&T's and Verizon's LTE networks has been pretty good, actually. It's not about 30+ Mbps downloads, but about landline-level latency. HSPA+ is plenty fast in terms of raw throughput--realistically getting 5-6Mbps regularly is more than enough for loading images off webpages or youtube clips. However, I found LTE to be much more responsive on top of being faster--though it's possible this is as much a function of newer, less-congested networks as of LTE itself. Still, I think you could fool me into thinking that an LTE connection was, in fact, a landline, whereas the latency involved in every webpage load over HSPA+ would never pass muster.
Throttling/bandwidth caps are another issue entirely, but I'm not looking to go on a jihad here, and I don't think they entirely negate the benefits of LTE.
Jade Eyed Wolf said:
It's like saying, "Here! You can drive this supercar as fast as you want!!*"
*Up to a certain point, at which time you have to reduce your speed to a crawl, or be charged $10 more for every mile past that point...
Really? Wow, no thanks. I'm good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet you're someone who drives their superfast car as fast they want(!!) and wonders why they get speeding tickets or why car insurance is so required too.
Its your car, sure, but its the carriers road. Oh, and before you try the monthly bill argument... you pay your taxes to the state/city/fed too, still gotta pay your fine for going over the limit.
@OP: All that being said, I'd recommend just getting the wifi version and calling it a day.
Sent from my Galaxy Tab 7.7
unremarked said:
I bet you're someone who drives their superfast car as fast they want(!!) and wonders why they get speeding tickets or why car insurance is so required too.
Its your car, sure, but its the carriers road. Oh, and before you try the monthly bill argument... you pay your taxes to the state/city/fed too, still gotta pay your fine for going over the limit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I certainly do drive my supercar as fast as I want, and until recently, I have been doing so on the proverbial autobahn, with no limitations to my capabilities.
To put it another way, let's go ahead and compare AT&T/VZW LTE with other ISP technologies, like Cable and FiOS. Yes I know, the other two are landline based tech, but bear with me here...
See, all three of these tech's, whether wired or wireless, are all last-mile technologies. They all have some kind of local distribution point. With Cable, it would be your neighborhood's hub, or with FiOS, it's your local optical splitter, with LTE, it's the tower.
So, if LTE can consistently deliver bandwidth and latency on par with, or in competition to the other technologies, and in particular, if it costs the wireless carrier less in terms of maintaining service (no need for house calls for stupid things like one person not being able to figure out how to reboot their modem), then it stands to reason that data access and costs for LTE ought to be similar to what one already expects from the former technologies. Anything less than that is just being greedy.
I mean, you figure how much bandwidth land based ISP's are able to give to their customers, without limitation, and now LTE provides that same capability to wireless ISP's too? The wired ISP's are handling it just fine. Wireless ISP's are creating the illusion that they somehow can't do the same, which is just simply not true. LTE makes the carrier cost/per MB exponentially cheaper to provide service. So, why isn't that savings being passed on to the consumer? Hmmm...
Thus, I stand by my original position: While greedy artificial limitations, modeled for, and designed within the confines of the previous generation's technology, remain as they are, I see no point in upgrading.
Most of the would-be benefits of LTE are squelched by the limitations and artificial cost restrictions imposed upon us.
AT&T advertises all the time how you can stream video, or post your video's on Facebook, etc. Except that, the more I do all those things, the quicker I'm running into overages or throttling anyway, so what's the point?
Has anyone heard of these people. My local phone company has partnered with them to start a wireless LTE carrier.
sent from 1 of 4 Galaxy devices
I've heard of them, but nothing good. They wanted to create a wireless broadband network using a system that would have rendered GPS useless due to interference. The FCC smacked them down, and the company filed for bankruptcy. A Google search will tell you everything. You can go to lightsquared.com to read the press releases with their side of the story.
Thanks all I had earlier was that my cable company went with them
sent from 1 of 4 Galaxy devices