4 ms·

The regulators could have forced the big four carriers (now three) into a common carrier model. In that setup, all cell providers would effectively be an MVNO,

by hedora 2y ago

The regulators could have forced the big four carriers (now three) into a common carrier model. In that setup, all cell providers would effectively be an MVNO, and the three (then, four) physical networks would be operated at arms length from the consumer facing side. Also, the four networks could be structured so that their financial incentives were to improve cell coverage and bandwidth instead of undermining each others' operations.

issafram 2y ago
I mean Sprint was strictly CDMA, so that would be an issue on it's own.
- nradov 2y ago
  Sprint had started as CDMA. They were in the process of building a 5G network but lacked the capital necessary for competitive nationwide coverage.
  - Aloha 2y ago
    They didnt start to build their LTE network until 2012-13.
- chimeracoder 2y ago
  > I mean Sprint was strictly CDMA, so that would be an issue on it's own. How so? Sprint operated 4G LTE, which is a GSM technology (or alternatively, unified the two, depending on how you look at it).
  - neelc 2y ago
    The reality is, when a CDMA carrier deploys LTE without deploying UMTS, there are usually compatibility layers between CDMA and LTE such as CSFB and eHRPD for when VoLTE is absent. CDMA was never designed to interoperate with LTE as LTE was built around IMEIs and SIM cards but CDMA was built around burned-in ESNs and PRLs, so LTE support was hacked on. This is why Sprint and Verizon used whitelists: they literally couldn't accept GSM-only devices because you wouldn't be able to make a phone call (the phone would try UMTS but only the non-supported CDMA2000 can be used to actually call, so in turn no phone calls). Sprint went further by using the CDMA provisioning system on top of LTE instead of just using SIM cards and 3GPP provisioning like most GSM and CDMA carriers. This was a nightmare for custom ROM users like me as custom ROMs were designed for GSM carriers in mind and Sprint was at best an afterthought.
  - Tyrannosaur 2y ago
    I once got tossed out of a sprint store for pissing off a salesperson with this factoid.
    - chimeracoder 2y ago
      This is a story that's just begging for more detail
      - Tyrannosaur 2y ago
        Meh, I was a smart-alec kid there with my friend. The salesperson had to go get a sim card "for the LTE to work" and I said "oh right, because LTE is GSM and requires a sim". The salesman insisted Sprint didn't use GSM so I looked up the wikipedia page for LTE on one of their demo phones and started reading out loud "In telecommunications, long-term evolution (LTE) is a standard for wireless broadband communication for mobile devices and data terminals, based on the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA standards." That's when the salesman told me to leave.
  - lagniappe 2y ago
    Sprint also had Wimax https://www.rvmobileinternet.com/farewell-wimax-sprints-original-4g-network-mostly-shuts-down-today/ https://www.rvmobileinternet.com/farewell-wimax-sprints-orig...
- Aloha 2y ago
  CDMA, from an RF performance perspective regularly outperformed GSM, but as is noted downthread, the provisioning/auth system was inherited from AMPS/D-AMPS, CDMA2000 with a GSM network core would have been amazing. Which, tbh, is exactly what LTE is.
kelnos 2y ago
That's kinda orthogonal to the merger deal, though, no? The government could do that today, if there was the political will to do so. Of course there isn't, though, and the merger (or lack thereof) didn't change that.
aiauthoritydev 2y ago
The best way to resolve these issues is never "force the bad guys to do good things" but rather destroy the walls which enable their rent seeking. Regulators can work to make it extremely simple for new techs in this space to come up so there is real competition for ATT etc.
- pjc50 2y ago
  Regulators cannot magic spectrum into existence.
- babypuncher 2y ago
  The problem is that there is finite spectrum available. The upfront cost of building a national cellular network are also astronomical, regardless of regulatory hurdles. The FCC was created to manage the scarcity inherent to the radio spectrum. It's not an area where regular free market economics apply. GP's proposal would actually make it easier for startups to horn in on the territory of the big established players, since the underlying infrastructure would effectively be socialized.
  - specialist 2y ago
    Out of curiosity: What are some examples of "regular free markets"?
  - chrisco255 2y ago
    There are finite amounts of everything. Free market economics solve this problem all the time. There are finite amounts of food, land, energy, shelter, human resources, etc. The problem isn't that spectrum is finite, it's that there is no way to prevent interference. It's questionable if the FCC is really optimal though. There are huge amounts of spectrum still devoted to dying industries like AM/FM radio and broadcast television.
- HumblyTossed 2y ago
  We the People should own infrastructure. Want to start a new shipping company to compete with UPS? You don't have to build roads, We the People provide those to you. So, do the same with wireless.

by hedora 2y ago

issafram 2y ago

I mean Sprint was strictly CDMA, so that would be an issue on it's own.

nradov 2y ago
Sprint had started as CDMA. They were in the process of building a 5G network but lacked the capital necessary for competitive nationwide coverage.
- Aloha 2y ago
  They didnt start to build their LTE network until 2012-13.
chimeracoder 2y ago
> I mean Sprint was strictly CDMA, so that would be an issue on it's own. How so? Sprint operated 4G LTE, which is a GSM technology (or alternatively, unified the two, depending on how you look at it).
- neelc 2y ago
  The reality is, when a CDMA carrier deploys LTE without deploying UMTS, there are usually compatibility layers between CDMA and LTE such as CSFB and eHRPD for when VoLTE is absent. CDMA was never designed to interoperate with LTE as LTE was built around IMEIs and SIM cards but CDMA was built around burned-in ESNs and PRLs, so LTE support was hacked on. This is why Sprint and Verizon used whitelists: they literally couldn't accept GSM-only devices because you wouldn't be able to make a phone call (the phone would try UMTS but only the non-supported CDMA2000 can be used to actually call, so in turn no phone calls). Sprint went further by using the CDMA provisioning system on top of LTE instead of just using SIM cards and 3GPP provisioning like most GSM and CDMA carriers. This was a nightmare for custom ROM users like me as custom ROMs were designed for GSM carriers in mind and Sprint was at best an afterthought.
- Tyrannosaur 2y ago
  I once got tossed out of a sprint store for pissing off a salesperson with this factoid.
  - chimeracoder 2y ago
    This is a story that's just begging for more detail
    - Tyrannosaur 2y ago
      Meh, I was a smart-alec kid there with my friend. The salesperson had to go get a sim card "for the LTE to work" and I said "oh right, because LTE is GSM and requires a sim". The salesman insisted Sprint didn't use GSM so I looked up the wikipedia page for LTE on one of their demo phones and started reading out loud "In telecommunications, long-term evolution (LTE) is a standard for wireless broadband communication for mobile devices and data terminals, based on the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA standards." That's when the salesman told me to leave.
- lagniappe 2y ago
  Sprint also had Wimax https://www.rvmobileinternet.com/farewell-wimax-sprints-original-4g-network-mostly-shuts-down-today/ https://www.rvmobileinternet.com/farewell-wimax-sprints-orig...
Aloha 2y ago
CDMA, from an RF performance perspective regularly outperformed GSM, but as is noted downthread, the provisioning/auth system was inherited from AMPS/D-AMPS, CDMA2000 with a GSM network core would have been amazing. Which, tbh, is exactly what LTE is.

kelnos 2y ago

That's kinda orthogonal to the merger deal, though, no? The government could do that today, if there was the political will to do so. Of course there isn't, though, and the merger (or lack thereof) didn't change that.

aiauthoritydev 2y ago

The best way to resolve these issues is never "force the bad guys to do good things" but rather destroy the walls which enable their rent seeking. Regulators can work to make it extremely simple for new techs in this space to come up so there is real competition for ATT etc.

pjc50 2y ago
Regulators cannot magic spectrum into existence.
babypuncher 2y ago
The problem is that there is finite spectrum available. The upfront cost of building a national cellular network are also astronomical, regardless of regulatory hurdles. The FCC was created to manage the scarcity inherent to the radio spectrum. It's not an area where regular free market economics apply. GP's proposal would actually make it easier for startups to horn in on the territory of the big established players, since the underlying infrastructure would effectively be socialized.
- specialist 2y ago
  Out of curiosity: What are some examples of "regular free markets"?
- chrisco255 2y ago
  There are finite amounts of everything. Free market economics solve this problem all the time. There are finite amounts of food, land, energy, shelter, human resources, etc. The problem isn't that spectrum is finite, it's that there is no way to prevent interference. It's questionable if the FCC is really optimal though. There are huge amounts of spectrum still devoted to dying industries like AM/FM radio and broadcast television.
HumblyTossed 2y ago
We the People should own infrastructure. Want to start a new shipping company to compete with UPS? You don't have to build roads, We the People provide those to you. So, do the same with wireless.