Sprint/Verizon EVDO and Cingular HSDPA compared

n6gn

As I've been thinking about our recent discussion, it strikes me that part of the differences of opinion may stem from different metrics. Specifically, CDMA services have been considered to have the ability to trade off coverage and capacity in a useful way.

But the bottom line user experience and cost, which I think we agree will determine the 'winners' is a complex and changing thing. Not only are customer expectations a moving target, as we move from voice to data, but so are the user applications and the pressures all these put onto the available technology.

Coverage
For voice and lower data rate services, particularly 1xRTT and the reverse EVDO channel(user to network), this amounts to providing 10k-100kbps service to a large geographical area. Counting towers and handicapping for the ~10 dB 850/1900 frequency absorption differences is in order. We've already talked about that.
For higher rates; forward channel EVDO rev 0 and reverse channel EVDO rev A, that need to provide several 100's of kbps to low MBps, this footprint has to shrink because of the physics of propagation over real terrain. Forward link EVDO rev 0 doesn't shrink only because the service gives up the ability to support multiple users in order to increase data rate and uses the entire carrier inTDMA mode (time sharing among all requesting users). This starts to impact --

Capacity
which is related to how many simultaneous users there are vying for the same limited resource. As mentioned, EVDO rev 0 has already given up a great deal of capacity (~60 users down to 1 per carrier-in-a-sector) in order to achieve 'broadband' speeds. But things are going to get bad/worse as customer uptake of EVDO increases. For this, things get even more interesting (and complex). Not only are a small number of teenagers waiting for a bus while trying to watch YouTube (or whatever similar mobile content becomes popular) on their smart phones going to drag rev0 performance to a standstill, but as I mentioned before rev A is only going to provide it's maximum uplink when the user has a lot better shot at the cell site than is required for 1xRTT or Rev 0. On top of that the above coverage differences between 850 & 1900 MHz systems will cause the 850 MHz systems to become capacity limited first.

As a consequence of all this, I think it will be fascinating to continue to watch how the competition among carriers plays out.

I'll be interested to see and hear anything that others on this forum observe in this regard.

n6gn

Ben Miller · Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:42 am Post subject:

xenophon,

You stated that Verizon is not adding towers fast enough to keep service quality high. You offer absolutely no evidence of this. Even Sprint's own executives admit that network quality and customer service are the top reasons for churn (in an article you linked to, btw) and we all know that Verizon's churn is the lowest while Sprint's is the highest.

I'm not interested in pure tower numbers because it means nothing at the end of the day. What does mean something is whether you have *enough* towers and if they are installed in the right *locations*. That's what drives a good network.

Look, the bottom line is that you are a Sprint agent. I did a few minutes of googling and found out that you go from message forum to message forum promoting Sprint. I have no idea if you get paid by Sprint for this service or not, but that is your raison d`etre in the world of wireless message boards.

Since you are an agent of Sprint I now look at you as a good source for finding out what Sprint is planning to hype, but ultimately of no use if I'm looking for real information about broadband wireless access. I also look at you as someone who needs to be countered if you get too wild in your promotion of Sprint at the expense of other service providers.

xenophon · EVDO Addict Joined: 30 Aug 2005 Posts: 2004

Not an agent of Sprint, dont work for them - or this site either. I am a Sprint user, chat about Sprint on other boards and enjoy doing analysis (almost a fetish), which happens to point to Sprint when it comes to wireless broadband in my perspective, so of course I point that out at other places too. I'd really talk up Cingular if HSDPA were rolled out as significantly as EVDO as it has more advantages, like simultaneous voice/data on phones.

But you are attempting to spin anything I say just to be argumentitive or whatever your motive is. I do like to be challenged, especially an analysis, but I don't dig your insulting manners of doing so - towards others too. You seem to promote Verizon as what is best for their business, not what is best for users. IE, Verizon's high user/tower ratio is great for Verizon, not customers. Verizon continues to sell outdated Rev0 cards which you say is best for Verizon the business while Sprint sells RevA cards now, so that consumers don't have to buy yet another card.

BTW, Sprint's support can definitely suck more than other carriers. If I worked for Sprint, I wouldn't point that out. It can be atrocious sometimes, which is why it's better to buy service from this site. I also promote this site on other boards... does that make me an agent of this site? I also talk up Treo and Linux quite a bit too.. wish they too would be paying me to do that.

jschurawlow · Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:50 pm Post subject:

While I've refrained thus far on getting into the whole capacity debate and what not as facts tend to get distorted I definitely feel the need to chime in right about now.

Obviously I'm not cell tower tech but at the same time no novice either. Yes 800MHz does cover a wider range/area sure but at the same time the user/tower ratios will kill the tower capacity wise on 800MHz band when it comes to data. So indeed I do see verizon struggling from all the talk over multiple boards I've read thus far. It only equates up with how they have their 5GB cap so to speak. Basically if they move to PCS they're looking at higher costs (bad for their bottomline, or not?) and in return higher capacity and being able to compete better in the data market segment. While Sprint already uses primarily PCS band and has the capacity for growth (thus I too see them pushing forward at a more rapid pace).

I myself am a sprint customer (albeit disgruntled more often than not due to their horrible and crummy support alot of the time) and have no real bias towards any cell carrier however I use my data card alot and don't wish to be stuck having to worry about catch22's everyday and whether or not my provider might drop the ball and just yank the plug on the so called "unlimited" access. Granted obviously it is hardly unlimited but on the same train of thought the more capacity the carrier has the better chance they don't need to worry about whether or not the service is going to get slow in places as they're able to keep up with the demand placed on them (which is exactly what I don't see Verizon even attempting to do right about now). While I'm no fan of any of these carriers it's gotten to where cellular is a necessary evil more often than not.

Anyways that's just my 2 cents on this as we all have and hold our own opinions on the matter. Thus, certain carriers are for certain classes of users (in my opinion), and I am able to appreciate that fact.

Ben Miller · Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 10:46 am Post subject:

js,

I do see Sprint agents (paid or unpaid) like xenophon trashing Verizon on message forums, but I don't see real stories of poor service. That could always change, but from my brief experience using Verizon's data service these last few months I have run into no problems.

As far as Verizon's decision to boot customers for high usage, I look at it in completely the opposite way. I want to be on a network where abusers are cancelled because I'm not an abuser. I use Skype and I occasionally share my connection (two things that violate the ToS), but my overall usage is relatively low (well below 1 GB per month). I'm much more concerned with high-quality service being there when I need it. If that means booting excessive users, then I'm all for that.

From what I've seen in terms of real movement from both companies and in terms of first-hand information posted online, Verizon is easily the choice for me. Both companies have been rolling out new EV-DO coverage at a pretty good pace, though according to advertised figures Sprint does cover more of the general population. Verizon has an ExpressCard that supports EV-DO, they offer data access when roaming and they terminate abusive users. Sprint has no ExpressCard, they charge for data roaming and to my knowledge they allow abusive users free reign on the network. Sprint is touting EV-DO Rev. A much more aggressively than Verizon at this point, but they have no EV-DO Rev A. network and even when they do the only application I run that will likely be affected is Skype.

daschor · EVDO Newbie Joined: 10 Oct 2006 Posts: 9

Well, for me, the point of unlimited wireless broadband is that it is unlimited. I don't give a rat's arse what Verizon defines as unlimited. They sold the service as unlimited, and on my bill it says "unlimited Mb". If that is not what I am paying for, why the heck do they put it on my bill?

I understand Verizon has the right to cancel my service - and I have the right to spend my money with Sprint from here on out.

If downloading 5-10GB a month is considered abuse, then billing customers for "unlimited Mb" and then booting them when they take you at your word is tantamount to homicide.

Verizon can't have it both ways - they can't send me a bill with "Unlimited Mb" as a line item, and then terminate service for using a finite amount of network resources.

10GB does not take that long to download - part of the marketing of EVDO is the speed, remember? Even an hour a day of using the service could put a person over the 10GB threshold for termination. I would not call that unlimited, and don't know anyone (who doesn't work for Verizon) who would.

Ben Miller · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:44 pm Post subject:

It seems you can't swing a dead cat in this forum without hitting someone with less than 5 posts complaining about Verizon. Hmmm...

Michael · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:11 pm Post subject: Re: The Bottom Line

n6gn · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:47 pm Post subject: Re: The Bottom Line

Ben Miller · Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:35 am Post subject:

n6gn,

Of course if you constantly are downloading at top speed for hours on end you'll get more than 5 GB in very little time. That's the whole point of Verizon clearly stating in the ToS that BroadbandAccess is *not* to be used as a substitution or a backup for wired broadband internet access. When you rebuild a laptop that melted or update service packs, automatic updates, etc., you are definitely violating that part of the ToS.

n6gn · Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:56 pm Post subject:

Ben Miller · Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject:

n6gn,

You must have missed this passage of the Sprint Terms and Conditions:

"Sprint PCS Vision. Not avai'l where use is in connection with server devices or host computer applications, other systems that drive continuous heavy traffic or data sessions, or as substitutes for private lines or frame relay connections. "

The bottom line here is that Verizon has been killing Sprint in EV-DO adoption, so they've had to enforce their Terms of Service to make sure that the network stays strong for the 99.9% of users that don't abuse it. Sprint is not going to start booting people until they get enough adoption of their services to require it.

I can promise you this much: If the tables get turned and this EV-DO Rev. A push causes Sprint's subscriber base to skyrocket, you will start seeing them cancel abusive users or throttle the connection for abusive users (like Clearwise does). They are not dumb enough to give a compomised network to 99.9% of their users just so a few knuckleheads can rebuild melted laptops, play World of Warcraft and download movies over a wireless broadband connection.

fluxt · EVDO Newbie Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 6

n6gn · Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:50 pm Post subject:

Ben Miller · Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:52 pm Post subject:

Sprint's Terms and Conditions are no more liberal than Verizon's. Obviously their enforcement policies have been more liberal so far.

Replacing your DSL or cable modem connection with an EV-DO connection is a clear violation of *Sprint's* Terms and Conditions. So is playing World of Warcraft. It's great for a small percentage of abusive users that they allow those things today. Time will tell if that continues.