T-Mobile moves customers off 2G!

[DRNewcomb]

One, both AT&T and Verizon (or the companies that they came from) came out of the A and B cellular carriers of the early 80's. They had an advantage from the start in that they had cellular (800/850 Mhz) spectrum so they needed to deploy fewer base stations plus which they had over ten years of a lead on the PCS (1900 Mhz) operators .....

They are mostly "B-side" which also implies that they are the local incumbent wireline carrier, which also says that they control the bulk of the wireline backhaul. Their wireline sides can overcharge for backhaul as long as they charge everyone the same. It doesn't matter to ATT corporate if ATT (SCB) charges ATT (Wireless) too much for backhaul, it just moves from one pocket for to the other. It certainly matters to T-Mobile and Sprint's bottom lines if they're overcharged.

[jarrodpd]

They are mostly "B-side" which also implies that they are the local incumbent wireline carrier, which also says that they control the bulk of the wireline backhaul. Their wireline sides can overcharge for backhaul as long as they charge everyone the same. It doesn't matter to ATT corporate if ATT (SCB) charges ATT (Wireless) too much for backhaul, it just moves from one pocket for to the other. It certainly matters to T-Mobile and Sprint's bottom lines if they're overcharged.

T-Mobile and Sprint should partner up and make a joint venture for wireline backhaul and lay 10gbps ethernet across the country to connect all of their towers and others that want to buy backhaul.

[n2jtx]

T-Mobile and Sprint should partner up and make a joint venture for wireline backhaul and lay 10gbps ethernet across the country to connect all of their towers and others that want to buy backhaul.

There is no rule that says they have to use a telco for backhaul. The cable companies have been offering backhaul services for quite some time now too. I do hope that the recent "agreement" between the Verizon and the cable companies does not cause the cable companies to back out of the backhaul service. Story at http://www.lightreading.com/document...&site=lr_cable. They "say" it won't but with so much obnoxious behavior by companies these days, it would not surprise me if there is a wink-wink, nod-nod agreement in place.

[jarrodpd]

There is no rule that says they have to use a telco for backhaul. The cable companies have been offering backhaul services for quite some time now too. I do hope that the recent "agreement" between the Verizon and the cable companies does not cause the cable companies to back out of the backhaul service. Story at http://www.lightreading.com/document...&site=lr_cable. They "say" it won't but with so much obnoxious behavior by companies these days, it would not surprise me if there is a wink-wink, nod-nod agreement in place.

I know that but the cable companies are starting to get out dated compared to the demands that are going across the network. They might as well put something in place that will be 5/10 years more advanced then what they need to pull data demands from cellular. The fastest Comcast offers in my area is 100 Mbps and with the LTE speed capability about to jump into the 100s they will have to bond the connection or pull something out of their hat.

[brad15]

I know that but the cable companies are starting to get out dated compared to the demands that are going across the network. They might as well put something in place that will be 5/10 years more advanced then what they need to pull data demands from cellular. The fastest Comcast offers in my area is 100 Mbps and with the LTE speed capability about to jump into the 100s they will have to bond the connection or pull something out of their hat.

Just because 100Mbps is the fastest available to the consumer, that's not necessarily what's available for a company to buy, you have to remember they have pretty much 100% fiber on any main line and that's capable of several Gbps, a majority of cable co's are in much better shape bandwith wise than any of the baby bell operations.

When Digitial Cable came out in the late 90's, that caused the cable co's to do huge upgrades to their network and put them years ahead of anything anyone else has done (especially Time Warner as much as i despise that company, but i've seen them not spare any expense on upgrading to fiber to future-proof themselves as in Ohio they went from the last place awful analog provider to top tier in a matter of about a year)

Granted my TWC example is Columbus where they had competition from two other Cable co's depending on the part of town and AT&T landline (somewhat but not really since they're DSL) - but i've seen what can be done by a cable co.

[MrObvious]

A lot of the towers Verizon uses around my area actually use Cox fiber.

Sent from my xt862 using HowardForums

[DRNewcomb]

There is no rule that says they have to use a telco for backhaul.

Essentially there are three options: telco, cableco & microwave. Cable is only and option where there is a cable company that's in the backhaul business. Microwave is a good short-hop option in areas where the microwave channels are available and there are no problems with line of sight. Sooner or later you have to make the hop back to the switch. Satellite is an expensive option that gets used in very remote sites, such as offshore oil platforms. There was one manufacturer that built self-backhauling cell sites. They essentially acted as a cellular WDS node by backhauling on unused GSM channels. Very handy for very rural areas and developing countries. Not a good idea where spectrum allocations are tight.

Point being that there are lots of options, not all of which work in every situation. Being an affiliate of an incumbent wireline carrier gives a wireless carrier a huge advantage wrt backhaul.

P.S. I'm talking mostly "last-mile" backhaul. Backhaul from the concentrator to the switch is a whole different animal with many options for 3rd party fiber, etc.

[n2jtx]

Microwave is a good short-hop option in areas where the microwave channels are available and there are no problems with line of sight.

This tower near my home:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=23+Du...jLYEQm4pOkoKgA

has a microwave aimed at this tower located on the other side of Hempstead Harbor on Long Island:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Shore...ork+11050&z=19

I am not sure which tower the link supports but the water tower near me has quite a few fiber connections to it. The other tower is off of a golf course and may have had issues with getting sufficient back haul to it.

[DRNewcomb]

Microwave is also pretty "bomb-proof". A lot of backhaul failed in Hurricane Katrina. The FCC expedited approvals for a lot of microwave links to quickly replace the failed backhaul. So, many towers in this area have microwave backhaul, at least as a backup.

[jarrodpd]

Microwave is also pretty "bomb-proof". A lot of backhaul failed in Hurricane Katrina. The FCC expedited approvals for a lot of microwave links to quickly replace the failed backhaul. So, many towers in this area have microwave backhaul, at least as a backup.

Is micro wave more expensive than regular fibre?

[DRNewcomb]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.1; U; en-us) AppleWebKit/413 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/413 es61)

Is micro wave more expensive than regular fibre?

Actually, after you pay for the installation, it's cheap. The problem is that microwave channels are limited, so they are mostly usable in rural areas. They also take up space on the tower, for which the tower company must charge.

[tmobiley]

I think it's true that when a company has "Long Lines" in it's name that they usually use microwave... true?

I'm thinking of LongLines Wireless (current) in Iowa, and AT&T LongLines (past?).

[Loyal Servant]

Verizon (at least here in SC) uses a LOT of microwave backhaul.
I know they do it to save a buck and I can understand that.

There is a site here that I looked at that has more backhaul pulled in than you can shake a stick at
but Verizon was using microwave... ok.. whatever.

This particular site had AT&T, TW Telecom, Dukenet, Windstream and Spirit Telecom pulled in and in use.
ALL fiber to boot.

They could have used one of those providers but they prefer their microwave.... no wonder their LTE sucks here.
Verizon maxes at around 7 down 2 up... I guess if they can't rob wireline here like they do up in New England they will just use their cheap microwave instead.
I was told by some peeps that I know in TW Telecom that they pull their fiber rings into cell sites and that T-Mobile and AT&T use them for backhaul.

I can see that being the case... T-Mobile averages 15-20 down in a lot of places and I am sure a lot of that is due to their network being underutilized.
AT&T is like.... 2

[brad15]

Here in Phoenix, T-Mobile uses mostly Cox and Sprint's fiber, and i usually pull ~15-25Mbps on my amaze unless im in an over crowded area then i'm still looking for ~10Mbps, but still much better than AT&T and VZW provide here.

I will say though that T-Mobile has a ton of market share in Phoenix as you see Tmo phones out everywhere (well pretty much everyone who didnt jump ship for iPhone)

[Wireless Junkie]

Here in Phoenix, T-Mobile uses mostly Cox and Sprint's fiber, and i usually pull ~15-25Mbps on my amaze unless im in an over crowded area then i'm still looking for ~10Mbps, but still much better than AT&T and VZW provide here.

I will say though that T-Mobile has a ton of market share in Phoenix as you see Tmo phones out everywhere (well pretty much everyone who didnt jump ship for iPhone)

This may explain your slow Verizon speed's in AZ.

Verizon is has DOMINATE market share there at 45%, followed by T-Mobile then nearly the same market share for AT&T and Sprint as well.

Verizon having nearly half the market, I would think they would be a bit slower than a company that has 16%