T-Mobile Rolling Out 600 MHz Low-Band Wireless (yahoo.com)

s122604 quotes a report from Yahoo Finance: T-Mobile, the third largest U.S. national wireless operator, has decided to roll out 600 MHz wireless spectrum in its footprints by this summer. Low-band spectrum is essential for wireless operators as the signals can be transmitted over longer distances and through brick-and-mortar walls in cities. Smartphones for this radio frequency are likely to be made available by Samsung and other manufacturers this summer.

Comments

More RF spectrum in private hands

[Anonymous Coward]

That's just not right!

Re:More RF spectrum in private hands

[Anonymous Coward]

in this case, accept it. because the bigger waves of the lower frequencies will offer better coverage and signal quality over larger areas.

Re:More RF spectrum in private hands

[RubberDogBone]

It's more accurate to say it is in their trust. The frequencies belong to the United States government. They are effectively being leased and licensed to carriers like T-Mobile. Their use of the frequencies depends on keeping the licenses.

It is the same for TV and radio: the stations have a license to use their assigned frequency but they don't actually own it, and can have their license revoked if there is reason to do so.

Re:More RF spectrum in private hands

[squiggleslash]

It's the 600MHz spectrum, it's always been in private hands. The difference is now the service it's being used for is more democratic - that is, T-Mobile will allow you and me to use it for a small fee, whereas once upon a time it was for the exclusive use of some TV stations in your area..

Am I gonna need a new phone

[rsilvergun]

to get the benefit of this?

Re:Am I gonna need a new phone

[EvilSS]

to get the benefit of this?

Read the summary to find out

Re:Am I gonna need a new phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Does your phone support 600 MHz? If not, then yes.

Re:Am I gonna need a new phone

[Anonymous Coward]

of course.

Re: Am I gonna need a new phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, ask your Mom to buy you one.

Re:Am I gonna need a new phone

[RubberDogBone]

to get the benefit of this?

Yes. There are no phones on the market that support it right now. Wait. Wait a year or two. Sooner than that and you might have a new phone but it's going to be a while before 600MHz has much deployment.

Since when is T-Mobile the largest US carrier

[Anonymous Coward]

At least it's not conflicting with my 500 MHz cordless.

Re:Since when is T-Mobile the largest US carrier

[sexconker]

Since when is T-Mobile the largest US carrier

Uh...

T-Mobile, the third largest U.S. national wireless operator

Essential?

[Anonymous Coward]

Low-band spectrum is essential for wireless operators as the signals can be transmitted over longer distances and through brick-and-mortar walls in cities.

We seem to be surviving without it at the moment.

Re:Essential?

[Anonymous Coward]

We seem to be surviving without it at the moment.

Do the Hype man. WTH? Low-band bro!

Re: Essential?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think they are including 700 MHz in the definition of "low-band". Verizon already has lots of 700, which is why they are generally better than T-Mobile in buildings and rural areas. The newly aquired 600 blocks should help improve service and compete with the big two. At least that's what T-Mobile is banking on.

I was kinda hoping for software updates.

[rsilvergun]

My Blu HD R1 got one to do 4G LTE. A man can dream, can't he?

Re: I was kinda hoping for software updates.

[corychristison]

I just ordered one of those for my younger brother.

How do you like it? Any quirks or issues I should be aware of? Really can't go wrong for the price.

Re: I was kinda hoping for software updates.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's backdoored by the Chinese.

Zacks Equity Research

[Anonymous Coward]

"made available by Samsung and other manufacturers"

Gee... I wonder if the guy at Zacks who did this research is an android or ios guy... :)

Too bad its a finance story, and not a tech story

[The Cisco Kid]

and contains no concrete details at all.

Next they will release shortwave phones

[jfdavis668]

Then we can get crappy reception all over the world.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I'll take crappy reception if I can be at the beach and get any service at all...

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

>Hey, I'll take crappy reception if I can be at the beach and get any service at all...> Especially if it allows for user-defined p2p encryption.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I'll take crappy reception if I can be at the beach and get any service at all...

If you're using your phone at the beach then you're already doing it wrong.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

This band is more to help out in urban areas like inside of office buildings and sidewalks surrounded by tall buildings. This band will work in conjunction to existing bands to offer better coverage for users. There is one Pho restaurant that I frequent which kills my T-Mobile connection every time I'm in there. I'll upgrade my phone just for restaurant.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Zontar The Mindless]

In *2006*, I was able to ring my mother in the US using my mobile from the beach on Koh Lanta Yai, half a world away.

Which decade did you say you were from?

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess most Sloshdatters have no clue what shortwave is. As a signaller in the Army, I could talk around the world on HF, but the batteries were killing me.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool, now go and try to call your mom from a US beach. Technology in most of the US is rather backwards and spotty, not unlike ye auld CCCP.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

Idiot. Not on Short Wave you didn't.

Re:Next they will release shortwave phones

[Anonymous Coward]

And Hams have been doing this for a hundred years.

Re:Too bad its a finance story, and not a tech sto

[manu0601]

contains no concrete

About walls?

Google Fi support?

[Guppy]

I'd be interested to know if MVNOs / GoogleFi will get access to this new 600MHz spectrum, once the phone support rolls out.

Re:Google Fi support?

[RubberDogBone]

I'd be interested to know if MVNOs / GoogleFi will get access to this new 600MHz spectrum, once the phone support rolls out.

They will, if they support the handsets that support 600MHz.

For Fi, this means whatever Nexus or Pixel or flavor of the moment phone Google is pushing at the time. Google tends to have the latest band support in their Fi devices. The Nexus line was among the first to support T-Mobile's Band 12 700MHz signals and it works with Fi too.

-Former Fi user with a Nexus 6 now on a T-Mo MVNO because it's much less expensive than Fi.

first cap

[Anonymous Coward]

Whining about data caps is obligatory, so...

How will 600 MHz affect my data cap?? Muh cap! Muhhh caaaap.

Re:first cap

[Anonymous Coward]

Muh cap! Muhhh caaaap

Not bad. Not bad at all. Kinda mime-ish. Might catch on. I'll look for it in the next wireless story.

Re:first cap

[Khyber]

It won't. You'll still be in a 20MHz slice of bandwidth. You'll eat it up just as quickly and they'l likely charge you more to recoup costs since this is new spectrum and this requires new radios and new phones.

First SDR.

[Anonymous Coward]

Be nice if phone providers adopted Software Defined Radio technology. Save everyone a lot of money.

Re: First SDR.

[Anonymous Coward]

The hacks.....would cause anarchy.

Re:First SDR.

[Khyber]

SDR doesn't do shit when it comes to the physical limitations of an antenna.

Re:First SDR.

[speedlaw]

Thank you. I've seen dozens of articles about spectrum auctions, swaps, etc.....but they somehow almost never actually say XXX Mhz. The FCC went to a lot of work to clear out the former UHF TV band and give it to data providers. UHF TV, had it worked as intended, would have been dozens of OTA niche channels, like cable without the cable company. 600 mhz wont let you get away with a fractal antenna on a chip, though.

Re:First SDR.

[Khyber]

Well, you COULD go for quarter wavelength harmonics (2400/4=600) with current antennas (only needs to be 1.25 inches for that) and SDR but that's still going to have its own problems. Full wave would need an almost 20 inch antenna.

Cablecos love it; destroy OTA TV 1 bit at a time

[knorthern knight]

First they took away UHF channels 70-83 (800 mhz band)

Then they took away UHF channels 52-69 (700 mhz band)

Now they're taking away UHF channels 36-51 (600 mhz band)

Re:Cablecos love it; destroy OTA TV 1 bit at a tim

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh no, not my precious UHF channels 36-51, hosts to the finest programming that television has ever seen! Have these people no shame?

Re:Cablecos love it; destroy OTA TV 1 bit at a tim

[Anonymous Coward]

Much below 600MHz antenna's get "too large" for hand sets to be efficient, and the bandwidth of antenna's narrows, less bandwidth = low data rates.

At 430MHz a 1/4 wave length is around 17cm, fyi good luck prying 430 to 450MHz from the ARRL with the clout they have in the US.

Though other countries governments have rolled over and re-allocated large bits of the 70cm amateur radio band to commercial interests. NZ first lost 440 to 450 (ok no one was using it much in ham radio circles as everything was located between 430 and 440MHz) and gave amateur radio UHF TV channel 39 - 615MHz, a significant group evolved around experimenting with TV - building their own stuff, establishing low powered (compared to the multi kW commercial stuff) TV repeaters on hill tops, this also helped expose the public to amateur radio as people would accidentally find something on channel 39 when the auto scan tune in TVs would find a signal there and store the channel. The local amateur radio club I belong to in a smallish city would get random enquiries from the public a couple times a month from people that found it and wanted to know more. Then it got taken away with no consultation as part of the digital TV transition. Another nail in the coffin for people who like to tinker with technology.

Losing commercial TV spectrum much above 500MHz isnt so bad, the path loss is higher up there, the loss in your 20 year old water logged coax with lossy cheap connectors and the cheap as can be receiver in the TV all works against it being useful for TV transmission.

If OTA (Free to air) TV in the US was really going to be "something" it would be coming unencrypted from satellite on Ku band - where it would cover a huge population in North America.

for tmobile the benefit isn't the long distance ra

[strstr]

tmobile already has adequate through wall penetration. they already have 700MHz spectrum in most areas.

however tmobile suffers from having virtually no spectrum compared to Sprint, Verizon, or at&t. they nabbed 20-50MHz of 600MHz in nearly every market in America enough to start a second LTE network up alongside their current one. with carrier aggregation they can double or triple speeds in most areas with this 600MHz spectrum.

https://www.trumpsweapon.com/

Re:Cablecos love it; destroy OTA TV 1 bit at a tim

[Known Nutter]

First they took away UHF channels 70-83 (800 mhz band)

Then they took away UHF channels 52-69 (700 mhz band)

Now they're taking away UHF channels 36-51 (600 mhz band)

Yes, we all long for the days of analog TV where you put the top knob on the U and then spin the bottom knob endlessly to get to channel 60 for reruns of the Andy Griffith Show.

If you were lucky, you had a little brother for a remote control. Good times.

Re:Cablecos love it; destroy OTA TV 1 bit at a tim

[Kenshin]

So sad for most of the US where people get maybe 4 OTA channels. /s

Anyway, they're reassigning television channels in most markets to make up for this.