backtop


Print 22 comment(s) - last by brentpresley.. on Sep 11 at 9:15 PM


  (Source: androidauthority.com)
The release is expected to happen over "the coming months"

Only days before the iPhone 5's release, Sprint has announced that it's expanding its 4G LTE to more than 100 cities throughout 2012. 
 
Sprint started rolling out its 4G LTE service on July 15. Currently, Sprint offers 4G LTE connectivity in 19 cities in the United States, including Houston; Atlanta; Baltimore; Dallas; Athens, Georgia; Calhoun, Georgia; Carrollton, Georgia; Newnan, Georgia; Rome, Georgia; Fort Worth, Texas; Gainesville, Georgia; Granbury-Hood County, Texas; Huntsville, Texas; Kansas City, Montana/Kansas City, Kansas; Manhattan/Junction City, Kansas; San Antonio, Texas; Sedalia, Montana; Waco, Texas and St. Joseph, Montana. 
 
The new 4G LTE offerings will now spread further across the U.S., entering cities like Boston, Chicago and New Orleans. 
 
"We are committed to delivering a cutting-edge network as quickly as possible, one that provides a greater level of reliability and speed to our 3G and 4G customers," said Bob Azzi, senior vice president of Network for Sprint. "We know our customers depend on their mobile devices as their primary source of communication, business, connectivity and entertainment. We want to deliver a network that delivers mobile access, productivity and entertainment at a highly competitive price point."
 
Sprint's complete list of cities to receive the 4G LTE network in the coming months can be found here.
 
Sprint, which obtained the iPhone for the first time last fall when the iPhone 4S was released, could likely be preparing for the iPhone 5’s release in two days. The iPhone 5 is the first Apple smartphone to have 4G LTE connectivity. 

Source: Sprint



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Colorado
By fic2 on 9/10/2012 5:53:44 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing in Colorado. Makes my planned move to a different network seem like a no brainer.




RE: Colorado
By wiz220 on 9/10/2012 6:08:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yep, very disappointing indeed. They see it fit to deploy LTE in Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, La. but not Denver, great. My EVO LTE remains crippled :(


RE: Colorado
By bjacobson on 9/10/2012 7:32:41 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, there is nothing in colorado. Why would they erect LTE towers there?


RE: Colorado
By TheSlamma on 9/10/2012 8:33:00 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah only the 21st largest metro area in the US. Plus NORAD, the Air Force academy, USOC, Tesla seemed to like it there and do some "interesting" work, 3rd largest airport on the planet, there is more than that but I'm bored.

Yeah it's totally blank there.


RE: Colorado
By Samus on 9/10/2012 11:58:18 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing in Colorado? A better question is what the hell is there in Montana!?


RE: Colorado
By coondini on 9/11/2012 10:00:33 AM , Rating: 2
Actually those should say Missouri, as those are all cities in Missouri. My guess is that the author mistakenly thought MO meant Montana when she was reading off the list of cities.


RE: Colorado
By zippyzoo on 9/11/2012 6:26:43 AM , Rating: 2
There is now Verizon 4g LTE in Pueblo Colo. Springs Fort Colins and Denver. Sure it will be on sprint soon.


RE: Colorado
By RufusM on 9/11/2012 10:12:37 AM , Rating: 2
I still fail to see the real world speeds LTE promised (40-50mbit). I'm on T-Mobile and I get 10-13mbps consistently with a good signal using HSPA+. I have friends on Verizon LTE and they get about the same with Verizon LTE and a good signal.

Maybe they have less latency or maybe it's throttled for them but it just doesn't seem like LTE's promises are being met.

Anyone else getting good LTE speeds?


Bye bye Sprint
By mcnabney on 9/10/2012 5:54:13 PM , Rating: 2
Sprint was dumb enough to sign a huge deal with Apple requiring them to buy tens of billions of dollars in iPhones, whether they get sold to customers or not. The problem is that it will be really really really really hard to sell iPhones with LTE when they don't have much of an LTE network to go with the phones.

And that list of 'cities' that Sprint says it will provide LTE includes a whole nine cities with a population over 250k. Most of them are small towns like Salina, KS or Rocky Mount, NC.




RE: Bye bye Sprint
By euclidean on 9/10/2012 10:52:54 PM , Rating: 1
Disagree. While yes, they're pretty far behind Verizon, Sprint just jumped ahead of AT&T in LTE converage. Yes, they are still taking their time to get there, but companies generally release based on customer base, to get closer to that magic 90-94% coverage in the least amount of cost/time.


RE: Bye bye Sprint
By Myrandex on 9/11/2012 9:08:06 AM , Rating: 2
I don't see them as being above AT&T in LTE coverage. Perhaps that's because not a single location in Ohio is shown on that list, but yea AT&T's LTE network is working nice and fast for me.


RE: Bye bye Sprint
By mcnabney on 9/11/2012 9:15:08 AM , Rating: 2
You can't compare what Sprint promises by EOY with what AT&T can meagerly deliver now. Apples and Oranges.

I also suspect the footprint in some of these cities might be tiny. For example - Sprint is HQ'd in Kansas City, but their LTE footprint barely covers half of the city. They can claim that they are providing LTE in KC, but when half the city is dark - that is going to cause serious fallout and returns. Especially with the iPhone, because it doesn't have Wimax - when there is no LTE the customer is stuck with Sprint's extremely slow and bogged down EVDO.


Sprint stirring up shareholders again?
By Jalek on 9/10/2012 7:02:27 PM , Rating: 2
Have they cleared this with shareholders? I know Verizon had a backlash when they were rolling out new technology before competitors. They wanted their dividends instead of reinvesting the profits and expanding FiOS.

Some people assume the US has the latest tech available, but in terms of infrastructure, that's rarely true.




By Ringold on 9/10/2012 11:16:35 PM , Rating: 2
Wanting their dividends instead of spending it on FiOS turns out would've been a better use of money, considering the problems it ran in to.

At the very least, spending it elsewhere would've been wise.


By Newspapercrane on 9/11/2012 10:38:09 AM , Rating: 2
Honestly, looking at how the stock price was performing before they started rolling out LTE... compared to now... I think the stockholders are happy with their 50% price increase.


Thats funny
By cknobman on 9/11/2012 9:59:00 AM , Rating: 2
I live in DFW a "launch" market and Sprint still does not have LTE working here.

Seems like they should focus on actually getting LTE to work in the markets they claim to already have it working.

Sprint as a whole is just a huge FAIL. I have been with them for the last 3 years because with a family of 4 they have the cheapest smartphone plans (with unlimited data).

My wife jumped on a SGIII and was super excited to get LTE. To this day LTE does not work except 1% of the time and as soon as you see the connection and try to do something it drops back to 3G immediately.




RE: Thats funny
By bigboxes on 9/11/2012 10:42:11 AM , Rating: 2
I was going to say the exact same thing, except the part about the wife getting the S3. I love my EVOLTE, but not having a decent network to use it on is maddening. Sure, find a hotspot and you are gold, but why lie to their customers and tell them they have a working 4G network when they are still testing it. I've been with Sprint for 13+ years. I may not make it to 14 if they don't actually get their network working.


RE: Thats funny
By brentpresley on 9/11/2012 9:15:46 PM , Rating: 2
LTE is working fine here for me in DFW.

Got this at a stop light the other day:
http://www.speedtest.net/android/242728393.png

Coverage needs improvement, for sure, but on the drive in every day I get more of that.


Los Angeles
By Jedi2155 on 9/10/2012 7:12:44 PM , Rating: 2
"Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, Calif."

If that is through the LA metro area, that's potentially 8 million customers. Not a small roll out hopefully! I go to Long Beach for my grad school, so at least I may be part of it.
Screw Verizon and AT&T, their shared data plans suck. Plus my 3 Verizon coworkers have been constantly complaining about their LTE outages as of late and one them is going to switch to someone else as soon as their contract is over.

I was seriously considering moving to T-Mobile's 4G Monthly unlimited for $30/mon (Unlimited Data/Text + 100 minutes), but if they can get LTE in SoCal quickly, then I'll stay. Contract is ending in November....can upgrade to a LTE device now....




Montana?
By coondini on 9/11/2012 9:56:55 AM , Rating: 2
Strange, I didn't know there was a Kansas City in Montana. I do know there's one in Missouri though...

Editor's note, Tiffany: MO = Missouri; MT = Montana.




hurray?
By djc208 on 9/11/2012 11:33:25 AM , Rating: 2
My area is on the list, but there are no dates other than before the end of 2013. They made the same promise when I bought my original EVO. Then they abandoned WiMax.

Still for $20/month less than even the cheap Verizon plan it might be worth staying when I go looking for a SGS3.




Anyone know?
By Souka on 9/11/2012 2:56:52 PM , Rating: 2
Do they activate each tower when they put them up? or do they wait until a certain number are reached then they flip a switch to activate them all at once?

Just curious if anyone knew.




"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki