I can't imagine that Sprint would actually be evaluating LTE as an alternative - this sounds more like a comment intended to emphasize the competitive stance Sprint/Clearwire. Something to the effect of, "We're not blind - LTE is a competitive threat and we're going to learn all we can about it and it's weaknesses," rather than insinuating that they may be considering a WiMax/LTE combo or transitioning from WiMax to LTE.

Think of all the embedded capital still being depreciated. A switch like this would be unfathomable for a company with free cash flow issues like Sprint.

EDGE up and running in Denver, CO. However, did have a bizarre amount of data traffic today - battery is down to about 15%, vs. the usual 55% at this time of day.

Good gracious. I actually spent 10 minutes reading the comments.

I will use this as a convenient paperweight.

test

And those rules dictate that only a portion of the spectrum needs to be open-access, not the whole thing.

I had to vote you down because your comment was stupid.

@ Killer

Um, no. Not a possiblity that they can create a giant WiFi network covering 99% of the US at 10Mbps. I HATE when people do this on the internet. There's enough stupidity out there already. 700Mhz isn't even ideal for data transmission. Leave that to the Ghz bands.

Look - the 700Mhz block is valuable for two important reasons:

1) Signal penetration, which has been discussed, which is also related to coverage area. The 700Mhz band allows for a wider coverage area per tower, though there's an incremental investment for carriers as it doesn't allow for a higher efficiency (i.e. fewer Mhz per channel), just a longer range. Think about how ubiquitous broadcast TV is.

2) The huge, geographically contiguous blocks of spectrum are also important. Having a nationwide wireless network makes no sense if you need sextuple-band handsets.

Two lefts don't make a right. But three do.

+1. This looks like stop motion. So strange.