Post-Analog: What is the plan for Sprint?

It is my opinion, and we all have some, that since most of the large
and medium carriers, not just Sprint PCS, will not sign up people who do
not live in their covered area, and those areas are large enough that
most of the customers will spend most of their time in it. There are
some people, including me, that have not traveled beyond Sprint PCS
coverage for years.

Mij Adyaw wrote:
> Why are you of the opinion that most SprintPCS customers do not need to
> roam?
>
>
> "Jerome Zelinske" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Almost everywhere there is cellular there is both A and B analog carriers,
>>and usually at least one of those is now also CDMA. Most Sprint PCS phone
>>can roam CDMA cellular. However I am still of the opinion that most
>>Sprint PCS customers do not need to roam.
>>
>>
>>Mij Adyaw wrote:
>>
>>>After the final switch is turned-off for analog cellular in the United
>>>Stated, what will happen to Sprint? Sprint does not have an extremely
>>>large foot-print for native service and therefore it will need to rely on
>>>digital roaming on Verizon and other Digital CDMA carriers. Sprint will
>>>certainly need to negotiate good digital roaming agreements, otherwise
>>>there will be too much of a gap on their service maps.
>>>
>>>I wonder if new phones in the future will offer both CDMA and GSM since
>>>that is all that will be left in the United States after the demise of
>>>analog.
>>>
>>>What do you all think? What will the future bring for Sprint?
>>>
>>>-mij
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

---

› See More: Post-Analog: What is the plan for Sprint?

I wonder what percentage of Sprint PCS customers have added the America
option to their plans? What percentage of those that regularly use it?
What is the percentage of roaming minutes, both under america options
and paid per minute.

Steve Sobol wrote:
> Mij Adyaw wrote:
>
>> Why are you of the opinion that most SprintPCS customers do not need
>> to roam?
>
>
> If it was such a big deal for a large number of Sprint customers, Sprint
> would probably offer better roaming options. The "America" addon isn't a
> bad idea, but it can be restrictive for people who travel extensively
> and end up off Sprint's network often.
>
>

Mij Adyaw wrote:
> After the final switch is turned-off for analog cellular in the United
> Stated, what will happen to Sprint? Sprint does not have an extremely large
> foot-print for native service and therefore it will need to rely on digital
> roaming on Verizon and other Digital CDMA carriers. Sprint will certainly
> need to negotiate good digital roaming agreements, otherwise there will be
> too much of a gap on their service maps.

Your post-AMPS vision is erring on the side of chicken little.

First off, the sunset date for AMPS doesn't REQUIRE everyone to turn of
AMPS after the date has passed. It merely eliminates the requirement
that current AMPS levels be maintained. If a carrier chooses to
continue using AMPS, they are certainly allowed to do so.

Second, if every AMPS switch just turns off, that doesn't mean coverage
will just disappear. Cellular carriers would likely replace the
coverage with some digital format, most likely a mix of CDMA and GSM (or
UMTS).


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

Steve Sobol wrote:

> Analog is completely insecure, and with the current administration in
> the White House wanting to give law enforcement the ability to do almost
> anything they want to without a warrant or probable cause, I don't want
> to use AMPS anymore. At all.

Steve, if the government wants to eavesdrop on your phone conversations,
they generally won't bother to do it over the air. It's much easier for
them to get a warrant and have the cellular carrier's compliance office
set up a tap for them at the MTSO, which pretty much circumvents any
over the air interface, no matter how secure.



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

What is a "MTSO"? It is a new acronym for me.

"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Steve Sobol wrote:
>
>> Analog is completely insecure, and with the current administration in the
>> White House wanting to give law enforcement the ability to do almost
>> anything they want to without a warrant or probable cause, I don't want
>> to use AMPS anymore. At all.
>
> Steve, if the government wants to eavesdrop on your phone conversations,
> they generally won't bother to do it over the air. It's much easier for
> them to get a warrant and have the cellular carrier's compliance office
> set up a tap for them at the MTSO, which pretty much circumvents any over
> the air interface, no matter how secure.
>
>
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

"Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:UMPDe.2999$bp.626@fed1read03...
> What is a "MTSO"? It is a new acronym for me.

Mobile Telephone Switching Office

Mij, I might recommend that you bookmark this following link, as it's pretty
helpful in finding acronyms.
http://www.acronymfinder.com/

Bob

Again, delusions of grandeur. Nobody cares what you have to say on your
phone unless you are a terrorist, then they should not only eavesdrop on
your phone, but cut your throat as well.

scannell
cols oh


"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Paul Miner wrote:

>
> As I mentioned, CDMA encryption is not a panacea. Plus, law enforcement
> can get a warrant and force the landline and cellular carriers to install
> a tap within the POTS or cellular network. But *legal* wiretaps aren't
> really my concern. My concern is with wiretaps where the government pulls
> a stunt like invoking the Patriot Act or something like that, where
> (legally) the wiretap is in a gray area and they're trying to pull my
> conversation off the airwaves.
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Company website: http://JustThe.net/
> Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
> E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

scannell wrote:
> Again, delusions of grandeur. Nobody cares what you have to say on your
> phone unless you are a terrorist, then they should not only eavesdrop on
> your phone, but cut your throat as well.

It's not that I think I'm important, my friend. The government has gone way
overboard in their desire to root out terrorists. They've made it quite
clear that they want law enforcement to be able to do a lot of things
without warrants that currently require them. This is no big secret.

It's not that I think the FBI gives a damn about me personally. I'm pretty
convinced they don't.


--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

> Jerome Zelinske wrote:
> However I am still of the opinion that most Sprint PCS customers do not need to roam.
>
> and Mij Adyaw asked:
>
>> Why are you of the opinion that most SprintPCS customers do not need
>> to roam?

As I'm roaming 1/3 of the time on Verizon's analog (I assume its Verizon
as my company Cingular phone was out of range and my buddy's Verizon
phone still worked)...my initial knee-jerk reaction was "what did you
base your opinion on that most Sprint users don't need to roam..."

As i thought about it, in reality, VERY VERY few users ever need to roam
*taken in the context that most usage is in principle cities.*

Case in point, a trade magazine quoted a Cingular spokesman as saying x
percentage of users (something like 95%)in Texas will be GSM by the end
of some year. Since was referring to the number of minutes used, not
number of cities or areas, his statement was misleading as 95% of the
users would be in the Dallas & Ft. Worth, Houston, and San Antonio areas.

To this end, a carrier could drop ALL service outside of the most
profitable areas, and still make lot of money...actually more perhaps as
thousands of little used tower sites could be retired.