Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 120

Thread: T-Mobile live with 600 MHz in 586 cities and towns!!

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    13,679
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    Sometimes the good guys do win, as in this recent victory:
    Yes, we know you don't believe that officials that were elected by the local citizens to serve their communities should be able to decide on what's best for their community. You believe that the large corporations with deep pockets should have the courts override the wishes of those citizens.

    As the article stated, the community was looking for redevelopment opportunities for their commercial corridor which clearly is suffering as indicated by the mix of open and closed businesses. Why should the people that live there and have to live with a struggling commercial corridor have a say as to whether the tower would diminsh redevelopment opportunities? To heck with the citizens, right! Per you, they're the bad guys and the mighty corporation contains the good guys

    Good guy (per NotABiot):


  2. #62
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,339
    Feedback Score
    0
    ...Snickers
    "Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property." - Milton Friedman.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    14,317
    Device(s)
    Samsung Avant, Nexus 5X, Moto G
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, Project Fi, PagePlus
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shilohcane View Post
    USC would still have the issue they are a regional network that customers have to roam when they travel. USC outside of their Mid-West area just has very small patches of native networks. Some of these native sites are less than 100 miles wide or long. Also, USC is still pretty expensive since they have to pay for a lot of roaming outside their native coverage. AT&T has just announced they will have 5G in several location this year. Will USC have 5G by 2020 or 2021? I don't think so.
    It comes down to how much should T-Mobile spend to provide LTE coverage to an area with a population density of 17/sqmi. If you want Verizon-like coverage, sooner or later, you get to pay Verizon-like prices (TANSTAAFL). I, personally, would like to see T-Mobile duplicate Verizon's coverage before they (Verizon) shut down their 2g network, rendering my PagePlus backup phone a useless paperweight. Do I believe this will happen? Not really.

    At some point, wishes must collide with reality. Reality is that T-Mobile can't afford to cover every square inch of the contiguous 48 states with native LTE service within the next couple of years. I'd contend that they don't want to. It is much better to leave some rural markets to niche carriers. Alaska is a good example. AFAIK, Viaero has been a good partner in much of Nebraska. USCC's roaming is a mixed bag; very slow off the mark. They didn't implement in Vermont in time for this winter's ski season, leaving T-Mobile without coverage at some ski resorts. Their cost structure is not important to T-Mobile customers, except that their customers' ability to roam on T-Mobile's LTE service helps them control their costs, motivating management to follow through on their commitment to T-Mobile.

    For me, if I'm out in the boonies and have 3G coverage, I'm thrilled. Voice and text is my basic requirement in the out-back. AT&T's 5G will be based mostly on mm-wave (39 GHz). You're going to have to be within 100' of a site to use it. They won't have Gb service in the boondocks.
    Last edited by DRNewcomb; 01-09-2018 at 10:01 AM.
    Donald Newcomb

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,339
    Feedback Score
    0
    Population density is but a small part of the picture, DR. The numbers of visitors often dwarf the fixed population totals. Like the millions who go to the Western and Central Upper Peninsula annually. I identified a million who just went to two parks in the Western and Central UP alone.

    Anyway, I think you are in the minority arguing for poor or out of date coverage.

    The horse is out of the barn: T-Mobile is expanding and committed to coverage, and is no longer the niche player with poor coverage of 2014. Nostalgia for a bad network is pointless at this time.
    Last edited by NotABiot; 01-09-2018 at 11:24 AM.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,787
    Device(s)
    LG G4
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DRNewcomb View Post
    It comes down to how much should T-Mobile spend to provide LTE coverage to an area with a population density of 17/sqmi. If you want Verizon-like coverage, sooner or later, you get to pay Verizon-like prices (TANSTAAFL). I, personally, would like to see T-Mobile duplicate Verizon's coverage before they (Verizon) shut down their 2g network, rendering my PagePlus backup phone a useless paperweight. Do I believe this will happen? Not really.

    At some point, wishes must collide with reality. Reality is that T-Mobile can't afford to cover every square inch of the contiguous 48 states with native LTE service within the next couple of years. I'd contend that they don't want to. It is much better to leave some rural markets to niche carriers. Alaska is a good example. AFAIK, Viaero has been a good partner in much of Nebraska. USCC's roaming is a mixed bag; very slow off the mark. They didn't implement in Vermont in time for this winter's ski season, leaving T-Mobile without coverage at some ski resorts. Their cost structure is not important to T-Mobile customers, except that their customers' ability to roam on T-Mobile's LTE service helps them control their costs, motivating management to follow through on their commitment to T-Mobile.

    For me, if I'm out in the boonies and have 3G coverage, I'm thrilled. Voice and text is my basic requirement in the out-back. AT&T's 5G will be based mostly on mm-wave (39 GHz). You're going to have to be within 100' of a site to use it. They won't have Gb service in the boondocks.
    So far T-Mobile is currently spending money building out 600Mhz and even buying extra 700 Mhz spectrum in some small population areas.

    Check out;

    Wyoming population of 585K. Getting lots of B71 plus in Nov2017 TM purchased 700B license covering a third of Wyoming and to add to their 700A.
    North Dakota with only 757K population where TM is building out 600 Mhz in the NW and 700 Mhz in the rest.
    South Dakota Pop 865K is getting B71 and B12.

    T-Mobile is doing major B71 build out in Kansas, Missouri and West Oklahoma.

    Oct2017 after B71 auction T-Mobile buying 700A license partition covering Chaves county, NM that is in Roswell, NM pop 48K and nothing but dirt around Roswell's area. Top that off with TM has already deployed B71 to Roswell, NM. Also,T-Moble has deployed B71 in Santa Fe, NM.

    But this B71 map sure looks like T-Mobile is going after lots of rural areas. Maine, Vermont West Virginia are getting some love.
    https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...f5TbuyggWTC-pO

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,339
    Feedback Score
    0
    And that, Shiloh is nothing but a good thing.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,787
    Device(s)
    LG G4
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    And that, Shiloh is nothing but a good thing.
    Agreed. T-Mobiles 600 Mhz will allow them to cover flat states like Kansas & Nebraska very cheap. No clue how 600 Mhz will work out in mountainous states like Wyoming and Montana that are the only two states in that area I have gone to for snow skiing.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,045
    Carrier(s)
    at&t
    Feedback Score
    0
    Just saw where TMobile gained something like 1.8m in q4 with over 1m being postpaid adds. They are on a roll all the way around thats for sure.

    Now I just want a lower priced 600 phone. Doesn't have to be dirt cheap just lower than 800s (for me at least)

  9. #69
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,339
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jet1000 View Post
    Yes, we know you don't believe that officials that were elected by the local citizens to serve their communities should be able to decide on what's best for their community. You believe that the large corporations with deep pockets should have the courts override the wishes of those citizens.

    As the article stated, the community was looking for redevelopment opportunities for their commercial corridor which clearly is suffering as indicated by the mix of open and closed businesses. Why should the people that live there and have to live with a struggling commercial corridor have a say as to whether the tower would diminsh redevelopment opportunities? To heck with the citizens, right! Per you, they're the bad guys and the mighty corporation contains the good guys

    Good guy (per NotABiot):

    If he owns the land, he is the good guy. Because it's the business of the land owner. Anyone harassing the land owner counts as the "bully".

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    13,679
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    If he owns the land, he is the good guy.
    Nothing in the article said that Verizon owned the land. As I stated previously, you believe that the large corporations with deep pockets should have the courts override the wishes of those citizens.

    As the article stated, the community was looking for redevelopment opportunities for their commercial corridor which clearly is suffering as indicated by the mix of open and closed businesses. Why should the people that live there and have to live with a struggling commercial corridor, not have a say as to whether the tower would diminish redevelopment opportunities? You never answered that question. Because your support of the multi-billion corporations runs so strong and deep, that you believe that anything they want to do makes them the "good guys".

  11. #71
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,339
    Feedback Score
    0
    Jet said "As I stated previously, you believe that the large corporations with deep pockets should have the courts override the wishes of those citizens. "

    You are fibbing. I said the wishes of the citizens who own the land come first.

    Your last sentence was a flat out lie as well.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    13,679
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    Jet said "As I stated previously, you believe that the large corporations with deep pockets should have the courts override the wishes of those citizens. "

    You are fibbing. I said the wishes of the citizens who own the land come first.

    Your last sentence was a flat out lie as well.
    There was no "flat out lie" as you falsely claim. Here's your quote word for word:

    "Sometimes the good guys do win, as in this recent victory:

    http://www.postcrescent.com/story/ne...wer/955572001/

    I hope any carrier can add towers to serve the people like this. A Verizon victory helps all. "


    My statement said, "you believe that the large corporations with deep pockets should have the courts override the wishes of those citizens. "

    In your own quote, you said Verizon (the large corporation with deep pocket) had a "victory". The article said the victory was over the votes of the citizens on the Common Council. You clearly support the large corporation over the citizens that live in that community. No need to try to deny your support now.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,339
    Feedback Score
    0
    I have no interest in denying claims, support which I never made. Let those who made them deny them. Playing games with strawmen is your type of thing, but not mine.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    10
    Feedback Score
    0
    Sweet 3 new sites about an hour away from me. Carolina beach nc st. Helena nc and Burgaw nc

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Patriots Nation
    Posts
    9,405
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s, Droid Turbo 2, Galaxy S4
    Carrier(s)
    Changes often
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by themanhimself View Post
    Just saw where TMobile gained something like 1.8m in q4 with over 1m being postpaid adds. They are on a roll all the way around thats for sure.

    Now I just want a lower priced 600 phone. Doesn't have to be dirt cheap just lower than 800s (for me at least)
    Keep an eye out for the new Revel series when it arrives. Apparently they are the ZTE Blade private labeled for T-Mobile and will be an affordable 600 device.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. T-Mobile lights up 700 MHz in Chicago
    By shilohcane in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 121
    Last Post: 08-22-2017, 09:18 AM
  2. First 600 Mhz in world is now live
    By obeythelaw in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 08-18-2017, 02:34 PM
  3. T-Mobile to launch 600 Mhz in 2016
    By shilohcane in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-20-2017, 02:27 PM
  4. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 04-20-2017, 09:40 AM
  5. a girl living with two guys in the same apartment?!?
    By eddie3390(",) in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 02-24-2003, 07:47 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks