Sprint Unveils New Gold Standard in Push-to-Talk

[VCI_Cell]

^ Sorry. Never post while in a bad mood.

Latency is almost guaranteed to suffer in roaming markets, which is the real problem with every PTT solution besides iDEN. Try as they might, I'm not sure Sprint will be able to deliver an experience that's as good as iDEN when it comes to PTT. Now, they'll be able to add awesome new compelling features to PTT, which I like, but the latency/call set up times are the biggest "feature" a lot of hardcore PTT-ers want.

Then again, with the PTT subscriber base dwindling every day, I don't know that it matters all that much anymore.

[Evan702]

Latency is almost guaranteed to suffer in roaming markets, which is the real problem with every PTT solution besides iDEN.

Exactly as Nextel iDEN has no domestic roaming partners. So if you're somewhere like Montana, for example, which has no native Nextel coverage, is it better to have roaming PTT on CDMA which may lag a second or two or would it be preferable to have no PTT at all with Nextel iDEN?

[VCI_Cell]

Personally, I'd much prefer the option of coverage and slow PTT, rather than nothing at all. But that leads to an inconsistent user experience, which is harder to sell people on. When I was selling Nextel in 04, the mantra was, "every Nextel phone is a walkie talkie, cellphone, two way pager, and Internet browser. If you're in coverage, all those features work. If you're not, none of them do."

People ate it up. They loved the simplicity. You're in or you're out. All or nothing.

Post-merger, it all changed. Explaining to them roaming agreements, 3G coverage vs 1X and native vs roaming, etc ... It was a far less appealing pitch. Even though the customer was getting more functionality in more places, they responded negatively because it was more complex. And who can blame them? Black-or-white, yes-or-no is much easier to deal with than "it depends."

So while I think the new PTT solution will be better than iDEN in many respects in native markets, the fact that it will doubtless suffer in roaming markets will seal its fate.

[bigsnake49]

I think that Bob Azzi said that they will match 95% of the native IDEN footprint with CDMA PTT and far surpass it with roaming. I hope they do better than 100% natively.

[NGeorge]

When I was selling Nextel in 04, the mantra was, "every Nextel phone is a walkie talkie, cellphone, two way pager, and Internet browser. If you're in coverage, all those features work. If you're not, none of them do."

People ate it up. They loved the simplicity. You're in or you're out. All or nothing.

I do technology consulting for a small business owner who was sold on Nextel for this exact same reason--they use the PTT occasionally, but primary use it as a cell service. In 2003 he switched from AT&T to Nextel "They told me AT&T would work all over the place--and it did, but dropped calls everywhere inside the coverage area, even with 3-4 bars--Nextel has had less physical coverage, but they were honest about it, and I get a decent signal everywhere in their map".

They still have IDEN to this day--upgraded to I1s for their field techs & wife/kids, and I680's in the shop & warehouse. They get 4-5 bars on their Nextels, where I get 1-2 bars on CDMA in the same locations--with all the towers in the area either synergy sites or co-located/right next to each other.


This illustrates the issue of public perception--either 1. Sprint needed to increase their 1900 coverage to match the signal strength of Nextel (as in 1900 fill-in sites), or 2. Since *we* all know bars don't matter, and that a 1 bar CDMA signal can sound as good as a 5 bar IDEN signal, at least tweak the signal indicator in CDMA phones to base off of "quality" rather than "signal strength" just like the old style Sanyo phones did (showing 3-4 bars pretty much always until the conversation started to garble & drop).

Even given the above, unless you are a very "old school" businessperson (which I would say he is) who truly likes the answer "because it makes phone calls where we say it will and it won't break when you drop it"--the honesty sales pitch probably just doesn't work as good as it used to when you also get "So why can't it stream videos again?", "Why is it a brand new phone and can only access about 20% of older apps in the Android Market?" "What about all the crap my kid wants?" etc.
--Nat

[larryt510]

Since *we* all know bars don't matter, and that a 1 bar CDMA signal can sound as good as a 5 bar IDEN signal, at least tweak the signal indicator in CDMA phones to base off of "quality" rather than "signal strength" just like the old style Sanyo phones did (showing 3-4 bars pretty much always until the conversation started to garble & drop).

Yeah I remember those Sanyo's that had signal meters that would show 4 bars probably even on the moon. Today's signal meters are calibrated differently and could help fuel negative perception. A 1 bar Sprint signal has always seemed to work better than a 1 bar signal from another carrier phone. At least that's what I've heard.

[bigsnake49]

I do technology consulting for a small business owner who was sold on Nextel for this exact same reason--they use the PTT occasionally, but primary use it as a cell service. In 2003 he switched from AT&T to Nextel "They told me AT&T would work all over the place--and it did, but dropped calls everywhere inside the coverage area, even with 3-4 bars--Nextel has had less physical coverage, but they were honest about it, and I get a decent signal everywhere in their map".

They still have IDEN to this day--upgraded to I1s for their field techs & wife/kids, and I680's in the shop & warehouse. They get 4-5 bars on their Nextels, where I get 1-2 bars on CDMA in the same locations--with all the towers in the area either synergy sites or co-located/right next to each other.


This illustrates the issue of public perception--either 1. Sprint needed to increase their 1900 coverage to match the signal strength of Nextel (as in 1900 fill-in sites), or 2. Since *we* all know bars don't matter, and that a 1 bar CDMA signal can sound as good as a 5 bar IDEN signal, at least tweak the signal indicator in CDMA phones to base off of "quality" rather than "signal strength" just like the old style Sanyo phones did (showing 3-4 bars pretty much always until the conversation started to garble & drop).

Even given the above, unless you are a very "old school" businessperson (which I would say he is) who truly likes the answer "because it makes phone calls where we say it will and it won't break when you drop it"--the honesty sales pitch probably just doesn't work as good as it used to when you also get "So why can't it stream videos again?", "Why is it a brand new phone and can only access about 20% of older apps in the Android Market?" "What about all the crap my kid wants?" etc.
--Nat

If Sprint puts 800MHz CDMA everywhere they have IDEN, then they definitely can match IDENs range and even extend it. Between the increased range of 1x Advanced on 1900MHz and the increased range of 800MHz CDMA they should do fine.

[chamb]

And---How about if they go CDMA 1X ADVANCED on 800 Meg??? Even Better. Is there any reason why they would not.

[Guest 171]

Remember, in order for a phone to be allowed to use SMR it has to have PTT capabilities. So all phone's will have to be PTT ready, which they all should have been a long time ago.

[boss_hog]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9650; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.1+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/6.0.0.436 Mobile Safari/534.1+)

You guys trip me out with the speed of qchat and vzw ptt. Qchat at best is a 5 second delay from the time voice is transmitted into the first phone til the time it comes out the second phone . Vzw at best is 8 seconds on high speed and as high as 17 seconds . That may not seem like much to hofo guy but in a work enviroment or surveilance operations that delay can be fatal. It is a safety issue. And what does that have to do withh ptt , everything because its the biggest market for ptt. If that becomes the best companies will just simply leave pTt behind and break out traditonal two-ways and most likely switch providers. Everbody looses. And you are going to be highley disappointed if you really believe switching cdma to 800mhz will match Iden coverage. Alltel is all 800mhz in my area and if you travel from an area with Nextel and alltel towers close to each other with no tower in that direction Nextel cuts alltels ***. That doesn't happen to often because alltel has towers everywhere here but there are many spots that I go to daily. And sprints native coverage , well enough said and issues with data while roaming and roaming in general. Most people don't travel like I do but most mobile companies do and that's Nextel's bread and butter.

[bigsnake49]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9650; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.1+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/6.0.0.436 Mobile Safari/534.1+)

You guys trip me out with the speed of qchat and vzw ptt. Qchat at best is a 5 second delay from the time voice is transmitted into the first phone til the time it comes out the second phone . Vzw at best is 8 seconds on high speed and as high as 17 seconds . That may not seem like much to hofo guy but in a work enviroment or surveilance operations that delay can be fatal. It is a safety issue. And what does that have to do withh ptt , everything because its the biggest market for ptt. If that becomes the best companies will just simply leave pTt behind and break out traditonal two-ways and most likely switch providers. Everbody looses. And you are going to be highley disappointed if you really believe switching cdma to 800mhz will match Iden coverage. Alltel is all 800mhz in my area and if you travel from an area with Nextel and alltel towers close to each other with no tower in that direction Nextel cuts alltels ***. That doesn't happen to often because alltel has towers everywhere here but there are many spots that I go to daily. And sprints native coverage , well enough said and issues with data while roaming and roaming in general. Most people don't travel like I do but most mobile companies do and that's Nextel's bread and butter.

Maybe in your market. Not in all markets. it depends on where the Qchat server is located. If it's alf way across the country, then it will be delayed. I have not seen the kinds of delays you have experienced and I know a few people with QChat phones

[boss_hog]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (BlackBerry; U; BlackBerry 9650; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.1+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/6.0.0.436 Mobile Safari/534.1+)

Side by side all day long anywhere in south carolina. My workers call the v950's and sanyo pro 700's ,them slow b***chs. I saw no differance in charlotte nc or tri cities area in TN. It is what it is

[VCI_Cell]

You guys trip me out with the speed of qchat and vzw ptt. Qchat at best is a 5 second delay from the time voice is transmitted into the first phone til the time it comes out the second phone .

You're joking, right? At BEST, it's a 5-second delay with Qchat? So every time you use your Qchat phones, the best they ever perform is with 5 second latency? As usual, I find that impossible to believe. I never experienced anything close to that level of latency using the PRO 200 or my V950 between MA and NY and NY and VA in 2008-09.

Anyone else currently using Qchat want to chime in on this? I don't have recent performance data, but --forgive me-- I'm unwilling to believe fanboy rants without confirmation.

[Evan702]

I don't currently use QChat, but when I did use my V950 in 2009 and a portion of 2010 as my primary phone I tested with other Nextel users and with my own Nextel phone. This guy's claims of 5 second latency are ridiculous at best. But as you've noted, he's a fanboy and I expect such drivel from him.

[bigsnake49]

I don't currently use QChat, but when I did use my V950 in 2009 and a portion of 2010 as my primary phone I tested with other Nextel users and with my own Nextel phone. This guy's claims of 5 second latency are ridiculous at best. But as you've noted, he's a fanboy and I expect such drivel from him.

No, his claim is unbelievable, but fast response depends on the QChat server being relatively local to minimize latency. Number of hops from the handset to the QChat server and back out to other handset is also critical.