T-Mobile executives answer 5G questions


T-Mobile executives, Ryan Sullivan and Karri Kuoppamaki, talked about some pressing concerns on 5G. This is in continuation of yesterday’s report

PCMag’s Sascha Segan spoke with the executives and learned these things about 5G:

  • You can’t make 8K video calls on Magenta Max.
  • T-Mobile will be able to take advantage of the Qualcomm X65’s three-carrier 5G aggregation in several different ways, allowing X65 phones (like the Samsung Galaxy S22) to show considerable performance improvements on mid-band 5G.
  • When it comes to spectrum, 3.45-to-3.55GHz is in the middle of being auctioned, and should clear in some places by the end of 2022.
  • T-Mobile is really downplaying millimeter-wave. In previous years it showed mmWave as a layer on its “layer cake” of spectrum; now it’s just a few candles.
  • T-Mobile is getting new home internet equipment to replace the unreliable Nokia modems. The modems failed us in our hands-on tests, and commenters agree that replacement requests are a common occurrence.


You can read more about the interview here


Source: PCMag

Tags: , ,

  • Trevnerdio

    That’s fine that they’re downplaying mmWave, but can we at least get some commitments from them to cover commonly dense areas like sports stadiums and large convention centers?

    • Willie D

      No it isn’t. I pay my monthly fee like everyone else, I expect when they say “layer cake” and mmWave is a nice chunk of the speed portion of that cake to build and deliver. No more of this talk the big talk and then fall back to relying on Mid-band cause they’re too cheap to invest in their network fully. They did the same damn thing with Gigabit-LTE. Like touted that up and down and then we never got anywhere close to the speeds claimed were even possible in REAL WORLD and months after its announcement, quietly never mentioned again. Sounds familiar, sounds like mmWave and it sounds typical of T-Mobile. They’re like the network that cried wolf, the network that overhypes and under-delivers, but because its a pretty color network and they’re hip and with it like Dr Evil doing the Macarena only to really see that they’re masters of marketing and advertising – and if they only applied a fraction of their marketing efforts to their network building/maintaining side we might have a network better than the other two… So no, it’s NOT fine they’re downplaying mmWave. Like it or not mmWave is going to be the capacity and speed driver thats needed as part of a 5G network.

      • Trevnerdio

        For the short term, yes, it’s okay. Mid-band had the range and has well above and beyond the speed and capacity that we’ve come to expect today. Now, do I expect them to rest on their laurels in a year or two still? Hell no. You’re right, mmWave is part of the deal. And if they’re going to be competitive with everyone, they better at least have a direct competition to blue and red.

      • Shaun Michalak

        This is where I think I partly agree, partly disagree.. If mmWave was something that had range, then I would agree more.. But when it comes down to it.. The only real thing I can see, and expect from mmWave, and where it can be installed, and work great, would be in areas with mass amounts of people.. Parks.. Stadiums.. Outdoor arena’s.. etc.. While yes, in general neighborhoods it would be nice to see it.. The fact is, I have seen too many complaints in basic neighborhoods, and the people that live there, that have to deal with them installing poles every so many feet, and a lot of times, in very bad places.. Like in the middle of sidewalks in some cases.. And if all 3 carriers do this, then guess what.. That means 3 times the poles installed too..

        Now if they can install it in places where it does not stick out like a soar thumb.. Have to install tons of poles which can, and does in a lot of places, piss the people off in those regular neighborhoods.. Maybe install them on existing light poles, telephone poles, buildings, etc.. Then I am all for it.. But not if they are a prick about things like how AT&T and Verizon are currently doing with some of their installations. The problems is, mmWave just does not have the distance, or penetration values to really be a good wide spread option.. It is more of a good localized option in certain areas..

        • Glenn Gore

          Agreed. Placing antennas every 100 feet around the ring of a stadium to provide coverage is one thing, but having to place sites every few feet in order to cover everywhere and every home or apartment building on a tree-lined residential street is just a ridiculous endeavor and simply not feasible. mmWave is just not a viable spectrum for broad use.

          There are those who claim that it has been tested in wide-open rural areas and found to have a reach of a mile or two, but to my knowledge, no carrier is doing that, those are only theoretical tests. The most any carrier has done or said they will do is MAYBE use mid-band to provide home internet service, and even those applications are of minimal use as its effective range is only a couple miles at best. Go around the corner of a building into a shadow from a site and you will lose T-Mobile’s mid-band.

        • Shaun Michalak

          I think you hit the nail on the head right there.. Wide open rural areas.. In my neck of the woods where you have high and low ranges every half mile, plus all the trees.. Go 100 feet with mmWave in the country around here, and you are dead..

  • mingkee

    There’s two reasons I don’t switch to SA 5G
    1. VoNR is not available
    2. 5G doesn’t work in NYC subway stations
    My gear are ready but I have to wait