Todd Allcock wrote:

> MetroPCS has their own licenses, spectrum and infrastructure- they
> aren't an MVNO. They typically build tiny systems covering the smallest
> possible area to launch a viable service.

In the bay area they use a subset of Sprint's towers. But yes, they're
not a Sprint MVNO, and I shouldn't have implied that.


>> The latecomers to wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile U.S., got stuck with
>> 1900 MHz, and it works okay in densely populated areas where they can
>> install enough towers.
>
> Fair enough. That generally covers 80+% of the population.

At least in their home area.

>> However an area like mine, a suburb in Silicon Valley, has terrible
>> Sprint and T-Mobile coverage because the zoning in the large
>> residential areas doesn't allow for cell sites.
>
> That's an atypical situation, though.

I don't agree with that. It's a situation that is common in California,
and I suspect in other areas with bedroom communities surrounding large
cities.

>> It's a tremendous battle every time a carrier proposes a site
>> someplace where they aren't permitted. The 800 MHz carriers
>> essentially surround the residential neighborhoods with sites in the
>> commercial areas, and it's good enough to provide good coverage.
>
> That's why it's atypical- in most cases the 1900MHz carriers can do
> exactly the same thing, unless extreme distance or topography interfere.

They can't because 1900 MHz requires far more sites to cover the same
area, especially to provide good indoor coverage.