Related
I think this would be a terrible idea since i switched from t-mobile to sprint for better reception.
Check it out
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/13839.cfm
P.S. Just realized that I posted this in the wrong section. Mods please feel free to move to the appropriate catagory.
if they do it will suck but i hope they switch to sim cards
Even if T-Mobile's parent company buys Sprint, they will never change the existing technology. If the deal happens, I bet they don't even change the name. Just because the parent company of T-Mobile buys Sprint doesn't mean that Sprint goes away completely and all your handsets now say T-Mobile...it just means you'll be forking over your paychecks to a different money hungry conglomerate.
I.E., Sprint will never use SIM cards, nor will they switch over to GSM...that is until maybe 2010 when LTE gets rolled out, but that's a horse of a different color.
I hope they dont switch to the sim cards those are jus easy ways for someone to steal your expensive pda
coming from T-Mobile to verizon I love the extra data speed but I hate that VZW using CDMA (i.e. no SIM cards) because I travel around the world extensively and stupid CDMA means I have to have a different phone (and number) on a GSM phone so i can use it overseas.
CDMA might be great here in the US, but it sucks everywhere else in the world. GSM might be older technology, but I have never found a country yet that my old nokia gsm phone doesn't work immediately as soon as I step out of the plane.
Why cant people just get along and all start using the SAME technology all round the world.
(I am not originally from the USA, so don't get me started on PAL vs NTSC or ATSC vs DVB. I cant get any AV equipment from OS to work here in USA or vice versa - forgetting even about the voltage difference!!!)
Ya, unfortunately CDMA really is the best option here in the US. Hopefully with Verizon going LTE for 4G we will see more convergence with global standards. And even if GSM is older than CDMA voice channel technology, HSDPA gives up nothing to it's CDMA counterparts (EVDO Rev A). How many 7.2 or 14.4 mbps EVDO networks are opperating in the states? Zero.
See that's the thing though...sadly GSM networks in the U.S. suck the proverbial big one when it comes to voice quality. As I said in my previous post, I have my fingers crossed that when LTE is rolled out in a few years, it fixes a lot of the problems here in the good ol' US of A.
bedoig said:
Ya, unfortunately CDMA really is the best option here in the US. Hopefully with Verizon going LTE for 4G we will see more convergence with global standards. And even if GSM is older than CDMA voice channel technology, HSDPA gives up nothing to it's CDMA counterparts (EVDO Rev A). How many 7.2 or 14.4 mbps EVDO networks are opperating in the states? Zero.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is LTE the natural progression path for both CDMA and GSM? If that would be the case then things are looking up for equipment compatibility.
gc, Agree though that in US, CDMA really is king - for now.
I don't buy what the articles says about Sprint users having to get GSM phones...
more than Half the value of sprint assets is in the infrastructure they have built, Not the actual subscribers who use that infrastructure.
What is more likely is that T-Mobile will add GSM support to the existing Sprint towers so that their coverage is better but keep the CDMA business since that is the one most prevelant in the US and the one most likely to generate additional revenues based on relay calls from other CDMA carriers.
At some point the phone industry has to start building dual format phones for those who need both GSM for overseas and CDMA for US use.
gcincotta said:
See that's the thing though...sadly GSM networks in the U.S. suck the proverbial big one when it comes to voice quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, I didn't know voice quality on GSM networks was any lower. I've only been on Sprint and Verizon myself.
maccaberry said:
Is LTE the natural progression path for both CDMA and GSM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To my knowledge, LTE is actually unrelated and incompatible with any existing CDMA or GSM technologies. It would be a new from the ground up system. LTE seems to be the path that the global standard will take though, and since GSM (and its related data protocols) is currently the global standard, the two are often associated.
Asphyx said:
At some point the phone industry has to start building dual format phones for those who need both GSM for overseas and CDMA for US use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are a few (mostly Blackberries I think) but they are nothing that I particularly care for.
I dont know where they came up with sprint switching to gsm,my guess is the article was written by a gsm fanboy. Eventually of course,they would want to transition everyone onto a single network.A model for this is the sprint-nextel merger. Sprint still runs an IDEN network along side their CDMA netowork. In that case there were reasons to keep IDEN around,since PTT did not really work well over their data network. (I understand that EVDO rev A has QOS features that make it work better)
If sprint ends up merging with T-Mobile,I expect that something similar might happen. T-Mobile does not have nearly as good of data coverage as Sprint does. (Although I have heard rumors of HSPDA coming to T-Mobile,but havent really looked into it that much) For the time being they would run both networks. Its possible that they might actually convert the whole network to CDMA instead of GSM due to the fact that sprints network seems to be more developed.
In that case,they would probably stop selling new GSM handsets. When a customer wanted to upgrade their handset,they would have to get a CDMA unit. Eventually,there would be very few GSM users left,all of which would have older handsets. They would then offer those last few new handsets and discontinue GSM service. Other carriers have done exactly this in the past. I imagine that roaming agreements with at&t would actually allow them to turn off their gsm towers before they had transitioned those last few customers to CDMA. At the end of the day,they of course get those last customers to sign new contracts,a win for Sprint-Mobile.( T-Sprint? S-Moprint?)
Similarly,if they decided to go to GSM,they would have to wait untill a HSPDA network was ready. The transition would go the same way.
To my knowledge, LTE is actually unrelated and incompatible with any existing CDMA or GSM technologies. It would be a new from the ground up system. LTE seems to be the path that the global standard will take though, and since GSM (and its related data protocols) is currently the global standard, the two are often associated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is untrue. LTE (Long Term Evolution) is the code name given to the project that the 3GPP is currently working on for their 4G standard (Release 8), and is aimed towards improving the current UMTS standard. The outcome will be modifications or extensions to UMTS, not a brand new system. The architecture we will likely see will be E-UTRAN (built off of existing UTRAN) standing for Evolved UTRAN which is on the access side, and EPC (Evolved Packet Core) on the core side, which make up the EPS architecture (Evolved Packet System).
Verizon has already announced they will be using "LTE" as their standard instead of UMB which is the successor in the CDMA2000 family. AT&T will also be using it as their 4G standard, but will provide HSUPA and HSPA+ as bridge standards.
Now, as of right now, Sprint on the other hand has announced they will be using WiMAX as their 4G standard. IF the Sprint - T-Mobile merger happens, we will not be seeing Sprint customers walking around with GSM handsets, instead we will see both Sprint and T-Mobile customers walking around with either full WiMAX handsets, or if they choose to, dual CDMA + WiMAX handsets.
gcincotta said:
This is untrue. LTE (Long Term Evolution) is the code name given to the project that the 3GPP is currently working on for their 4G standard (Release 8), and is aimed towards improving the current UMTS standard. The outcome will be modifications or extensions to UMTS, not a brand new system. The architecture we will likely see will be E-UTRAN (built off of existing UTRAN) standing for Evolved UTRAN which is on the access side, and EPC (Evolved Packet Core) on the core side, which make up the EPS architecture (Evolved Packet System).
Verizon has already announced they will be using "LTE" as their standard instead of UMB which is the successor in the CDMA2000 family. AT&T will also be using it as their 4G standard, but will provide HSUPA and HSPA+ as bridge standards.
Now, as of right now, Sprint on the other hand has announced they will be using WiMAX as their 4G standard. IF the Sprint - T-Mobile merger happens, we will not be seeing Sprint customers walking around with GSM handsets, instead we will see both Sprint and T-Mobile customers walking around with either full WiMAX handsets, or if they choose to, dual CDMA + WiMAX handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's interesting. I was under the impression that although LTE was an evolution of current standards, in practice there would not be backwards compatibility with existing networks. I could very well be wrong, so please provide some evidence to the contrary (no wikipedia please).
Also, I believe that Sprint is second guessing their position on WiMax. They may still go forward with that technology, but I think (based on conversations with people from Sprint) they are evaluating other options now as well.
http://www.gsacom.com/news/gsa_240.php4
http://www.3gpp.org/Highlights/LTE/lte.htm
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/04/verizon-announces-700mhz-lte-plans-can-you-wait-3-years/
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Plans-2008-3G-Expansion-91637
Thanks for the links.
While it appears that most networks will support both LTE and legacy technologies concurrently, the two are not interchangeable. A strictly LTE device wouldn't function on an HSDPA/HSUPA/UMTS/GSM network, and vice versa.
From the first link: "...co-existence with GSM/EDGE/UMTS systems..."
The two will not interfere with each other, and they can even be run from the same tower, but that is as far as it goes. They are still totally seperate technologies.
This is illustrated further in the second link you provided: "Co-existence in the same geographical area and co-location with GERAN/UTRAN on adjacent channels." The two cannot operate simultaneously on the same channel. Towers that support both LTE and existing technologies will be able to hand off the connection from one to the other though:
"E-UTRAN terminals supporting also UTRAN and/or GERAN operation should be able to support measurement of, and handover from and to, both 3GPP UTRAN and 3GPP GERAN."
"The interruption time during a handover of real-time services between E-UTRAN and UTRAN (or GERAN) should be less than 300 msec."
This supports my original statement. I may have been overly broad in saying that LTE is completely unrelated to existing technologies. There are undoubtebly some similarities, but the radio technology is radically different than anything currently used.
In practice, I would assume most devices will support both systems until 3G (and earlier) technologies are completely phased out. It would be a similar situation if Sprint decides to deploy a WiMAX network. The first WiMAX devices that appear would naturally support Sprint's existing networks as well as WiMAX. The device may operate on both WiMAX and EVDO, and may even be able to seemlessly hand off between the two, but that doesn't mean they are related.
You seem to be forgetting the original question you were answering though. One of the posters had asked if LTE is the natural progression path for CDMA and GSM networks. You answered him by stating that it is completely unrelated and is a completely new system altogether. I corrected you by saying that it is untrue as LTE is the natural progression path for GSM/UMTS/HSDPA networks as it is wholly based off current UMTS networks. I then went on to say that Verizon opted to vary off their natural progression path towards UMB instead by choosing to adopt LTE.
Though the radio/network infrastructures will be different, current GSM/UMTS/HSDPA providers will continue to support GSM/UMTS/HSDPA alongside LTE as it is their natural progression path. I wasn't trying to say that a GSM handset would simply work fine when trying to use a PURE LTE network. Providers will not just wake up one day and pull down all existing architecture completely expecting everyone to go buy a new PURE LTE handset. Just like when digital networks first came out, analog stayed around for a WHILE before they pulled it down...and handsets had BOTH analog and digital capabilities.
gcincotta said:
LTE is the natural progression path for GSM/UMTS/HSDPA networks as it is wholly based off current UMTS networks. I then went on to say that Verizon opted to vary off their natural progression path towards UMB instead by choosing to adopt LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that I may have oversimplified by calling them completely unrelated, but I think it is a bit of a misnomer to call LTE the natural progression path for one and not the other. Implementation of LTE will require a rollout of completely new network infrastructure. It is not merely an update to existing UMTS hardware. The two protocols have virtually nothing to do with each other, other than the fact that they were both introduced by the same regulatory body. It is the same thing with UMB. Just because CDMA and UMB were both developed by Qualcomm, doesn't imply a great deal of similarity or interoperability. UMB is only considered the natural progression of CDMA (as LTE is to UMTS) because they are both sanctioned by the same group. I don't think it is any more of a natural progression for an existing UMTS network to implement LTE than for Verizon, as both will have to roll out entirely new systems. The only difference would be that Verizon's network would be a mixture of CDMA and LTE, while the global standard would be a mixture of GSM/UMTS and LTE.
It looks like you are definetly right about Sprint going WiMAX. The Sprint/Clearwire deal that had previously fallen through is now back on. Several other companies like Intel, Google, and Time Warner are now investing in the deal as well. WiMAX it is.
bedoig said:
It looks like you are definetly right about Sprint going WiMAX. The Sprint/Clearwire deal that had previously fallen through is now back on. Several other companies like Intel, Google, and Time Warner are now investing in the deal as well. WiMAX it is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well.. there goes standardization down the toilet..
I think they do it deliberately so we can't port or devices from one carrier to another.
Yeah you'd think Sprint would smarten up too when they see every other top carrier in the U.S. choosing LTE as their 4G solution...
The Dell Streak is a GSM device. GSM is an abbreviation for "Global System for Mobile Communications". GSM is a European phone standard that has become a global standard, with some 1.5 billion people using it. Phone carriers such as Verizon and Sprint in the United States, as well as Telus and Bell Mobility in Canada, utilize a different standard, CDMA. CDMA is an abbreviation for "Code Division Multiple Access".
The two standards are incompatible, even though both may use the same frequencies. CDMA devices cannot see a GSM network, and a GSM device like the Streak is unable to see a CDMA network. This is because the method these companies use to transmit their data on their cellular networks are completely different.
"It all has to do with the way your data is converted into the radio waves that your cellphone broadcasts and receives. To keep from lulling you to sleep with the deep dive, I'll just scratch the surface and say that GSM divides the frequency bands into multiple channels so that more than one user can place a call through a tower at the same time; CDMA networks layer digitized calls over one another, and unpack them on the back end with sequence codes."
--Gizmodo Explains GSM vs. CDMA
EDIT: This thread was initially a global post to a few Canadian Streak users trying to use the Streak on their networks. I did research into this, but did not double-check my research before posting. The network they were attempting to use (Bell Mobility) in fact uses dual networks utilizing CDMA and GSM. So I deleted the information directed towards the Canadian users in question and apologize to them for making the error.
Is it possible that a a carrier using a dual network may have different apn settings depending on the type of phone? Could it be that the Canadian Streak users are using settings that are apparently correct, but aren't because they have a GSM phone?
You may also want to mention the varying radio bands used by different carriers even if they use the same technology, for example T-Mobile and AT&T in the US. Both are GSM, but phones dedicated to one network can not use 3G on the other.
I thought about mentioning the frequency difference between AT&T and T-Mobile when I wrote the FAQ. However, since an AT&T/Unlocked Streak can see the T-Mobile network and a T-Mobile Streak can see the AT&T network, even though the Streak is unable to take advantage of 3G/HSPA in either case, I decided against it.
As for the APN settings, I honestly don't know on that one. I am sure that the APN settings will be different depending on whether the phone is using CDMA or HSPA+. But how different I couldn't tell you. There are more than a few Canadian Streak owners that have posted on these boards the last four days that have run into issues getting their phones to see the Bell Mobility network. In fact, the rash of such posts is what prompted me to write this FAQ in the first place.
The biggest issue I believe is that Bell's HSPA+ network is still new compared to Rogers', and thus not as well established.
Good post !
For those looking for more Canadian carrier specific info such ad APN, there's a popular phone forum which has sub-forums dedicated to individual CDN carriers.
Just Google "howard" and "forum" together.
Sent from my Dell Streak using XDA App
Has anyone tried using one of the white unlocked Lumia 920 from Clove (I guess the ones from Expansys are the same) on an LTE network?
Specifically, do you have the "4G" option in the "highest connection speed" settings?
In my case, although I am using an LTE SIM with an LTE network on a supported band, I only have "2G" and "3G" options in the Highest Connection Speed settings. So normally it is only connecting over HSPA. Through playing around a lot with scanning LTE bands with the Field Test tool (##3282#), I can sometimes get the device to connect to LTE, after which it works perfectly on LTE until reboot. But it's not really a long-term solution.
The default firmware on my device is country variant "CV GB SW Variant ID 276 v03" which (apart from the version number) seems to be the same firmware as that sold by Orange / T-Mobile in the UK (i.e. for 3G networks).
I was thinking about trying to flash the EE firmware, but concerned this could create other issues (such as end up locking the phone to EE, or to certain LTE bands, or something...). Any thoughts appreciated.
You don't mention where you are, but that might help respondents.
As you may know, the LTE bands are different between the NA and Europe. The LTE Bands listed on the international version are 800/900/1800/2100/2600 while the NA(Rogers & AT&T) version has 700/850/1700/1900/2100.
Are you sure you are connecting to the LTE bands? Do you have an LTE SIM installed?
tomdjp said:
Has anyone tried using one of the white unlocked Lumia 920 from Clove (I guess the ones from Expansys are the same) on an LTE network?
Specifically, do you have the "4G" option in the "highest connection speed" settings?
In my case, although I am using an LTE SIM with an LTE network on a supported band, I only have "2G" and "3G" options in the Highest Connection Speed settings. So normally it is only connecting over HSPA. Through playing around a lot with scanning LTE bands with the Field Test tool (##3282#), I can sometimes get the device to connect to LTE, after which it works perfectly on LTE until reboot. But it's not really a long-term solution.
The default firmware on my device is country variant "CV GB SW Variant ID 276 v03" which (apart from the version number) seems to be the same firmware as that sold by Orange / T-Mobile in the UK (i.e. for 3G networks).
I was thinking about trying to flash the EE firmware, but concerned this could create other issues (such as end up locking the phone to EE, or to certain LTE bands, or something...). Any thoughts appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have a look at this offivial Blog post from Nokia.
http://goo.gl/L2eiy
They basically saying that even-thought the new Lumias are LTE ready they will required a software update to turn LTE ON.
The information on that is very limited as Nokia didn't specify ANY details on how they will push this OTA.
What happens if you have an unlock device and use it in a different country of its origins? How they will push the update under what criteria?
Is the update is driven by the SIM ID? They will update the OS and turn ON LTE depending the SIM region or the device IMEI region?? Nobody knows...
Even worst there is a rumor that the latest Snapdragon S4 is supporting all 9 LTE bands at ONCE and the software just enable the appropriate ones, its programmable from the firmware. If this is true, then Nokia is committing a suicide here, they can simply program WP8 to recognize the SIM ID and turn ON/OFF LTE Bands depending the Network. Going with OTAs across different devices and regions will be a mess.
nMIK-3 said:
Have a look at this offivial Blog post from Nokia.
http://goo.gl/L2eiy
They basically saying that even-thought the new Lumias are LTE ready they will required a software update to turn LTE ON.
The information on that is very limited as Nokia didn't specify ANY details on how they will push this OTA.
What happens if you have an unlock device and use it in a different country of its origins? How they will push the update under what criteria?
Is the update is driven by the SIM ID? They will update the OS and turn ON LTE depending the SIM region or the device IMEI region?? Nobody knows...
Even worst there is a rumor that the latest Snapdragon S4 is supporting all 9 LTE bands at ONCE and the software just enable the appropriate ones, its programmable from the firmware. If this is true, then Nokia is committing a suicide here, they can simply program WP8 to recognize the SIM ID and turn ON/OFF LTE Bands depending the Network. Going with OTAs across different devices and regions will be a mess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are international versions that HAVE ALL 9 LTE bands enabled and also petaband 3G.
For example in Germany:
http://www.nokia.com/de-de/produkte/smartphones-und-handys/lumia920/technische-daten/ (expand where it says "Basisdaten")
or in Singapore:
http://www.nokia.com/sg-en/products/phone/lumia920/specifications/ (expand where it says "Hardware")
or also in Switzerland:
http://www.nokia.com/ch-de/produkte/smartphones-und-handys/lumia920/technische-daten/ (expand where it says "Basisdaten")
I think there might be a good chance that you can unlock those extra bands on international versions (RM-821) that have them disabled by flashing a different firmware version. However this is just me thinking out loud so please don't blame me if it doesn't work or if it breaks your phone!
However I would strong discourage you from flashing an RM-821 firmware to an RM-820 (North American version) as I know that sb around here almost broke his phone by doing so.
Hi all
Thanks for your replies so far.
Right now I am using the phone in Japan, where there are three carriers with Band 1 (2100 MHz) LTE networks. I only tried one carrier so far, and yes it is an LTE SIM. As mentioned, I can actually connect to LTE and have used it for several hours, it's just necessary to use an unreliable trick (with ##3282#) to get the phone to see the LTE network. This seems related to the fact there is no 4G option in my highest connection settings.
Thanks for the heads-up on the OTA updates, agreed it's not clear how this will work at all...
Regarding the LTE band support, personally (although it's just my intuition) I think the lists of 9 LTE supported bands on those regional Nokia websites are probably in error (it wouldn't be the first time). Normally the most reliable source in Nokia's website is Nokia Developers, which clearly shows five bands for global RM-821 (1, 3, 7, 8, 20) and four bands for AT&T RM-820 (2, 4, 5, 17).
While the Snapdragon baseband may be able to support all 9 bands, the most difficult part of the design is the RF - filters, amplifiers, etc. So I imagine different RF chains are used in the two variants to support these specific bands.
Again, if anyone has the unlocked RM-821 and tried with an LTE SIM, if you could confirm if the 4G setting is available in highest connection settings, it would be much appreciated.
karlmueller said:
There are international versions that HAVE ALL 9 LTE bands enabled and also petaband 3G.
For example in Germany:
http://www.nokia.com/de-de/produkte/smartphones-und-handys/lumia920/technische-daten/ (expand where it says "Basisdaten")
or in Singapore:
http://www.nokia.com/sg-en/products/phone/lumia920/specifications/ (expand where it says "Hardware")
or also in Switzerland:
http://www.nokia.com/ch-de/produkte/smartphones-und-handys/lumia920/technische-daten/ (expand where it says "Basisdaten")
I think there might be a good chance that you can unlock those extra bands on international versions (RM-821) that have them disabled by flashing a different firmware version. However this is just me thinking out loud so please don't blame me if it doesn't work or if it breaks your phone!
However I would strong discourage you from flashing an RM-821 firmware to an RM-820 (North American version) as I know that sb around here almost broke his phone by doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought the same thing on PentaBand 3G and 9 Bands LTE, however in another discussion we verified (at least for the German model) that even thought the Nokia German website states PentaBand 3G and 9 Bands LTE, in the retail Box it only mentions QuadBand 3G (AWS missing) and PentaBand LTE.
With the Canadian model being PentaBand and Snapdragon's S4 Specs claiming that is fully supporting it, along with the programmable LTE, we really have no clue of whats really going on until Nokia, or anyone else clarify it...
I have a very bad feeling that the all 920s are PentaBand 3G and support all bands of LTE with programmable software but Nokia for some reason is locking specific bands on specific models/regions.
Hopefully in time we will clarify everything and hopefully its sooner rather than later..
nMIK-3 said:
I thought the same thing on PentaBand 3G and 9 Bands LTE, however in another discussion we verified (at least for the German model) that even thought the Nokia German website states PentaBand 3G and 9 Bands LTE, in the retail Box it only mentions QuadBand 3G (AWS missing) and PentaBand LTE.
With the Canadian model being PentaBand and Snapdragon's S4 Specs claiming that is fully supporting it, along with the programmable LTE, we really have no clue of whats really going on until Nokia, or anyone else clarify it...
I have a very bad feeling that the all 920s are PentaBand 3G and support all bands of LTE with programmable software but Nokia for some reason is locking specific bands on specific models/regions.
Hopefully in time we will clarify everything and hopefully its sooner rather than later..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Different frequency bands require different antenna design. It is probably very difficult to design an antenna that can satisfy all LTE bands even though the chipset can support it. So, instead, Nokia is probably going to selectively make different hardware with different antenna design to fit a specific region. Apple iPhone 5 uses the similar Qualcomm chipset and it only supports very limited LTE bands for international version.
foxbat121 said:
Different frequency bands require different antenna design. It is probably very difficult to design an antenna that can satisfy all LTE bands even though the chipset can support it. So, instead, Nokia is probably going to selectively make different hardware with different antenna design to fit a specific region. Apple iPhone 5 uses the similar Qualcomm chipset and it only supports very limited LTE bands for international version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For 3G PentaBand is now standard in almost all chips and since the Canadian variant comes with PentaBand on board and the fact that is standard on the S4 I really see no reason of why Nokia will order a custom version of the S4 to just physically take off the AWS. It doesn't make any sense, so if its missing, most likely is turn off in firmware.
For the LTE. Qualcomm introduced a revolutionary technology called Software Defined Radio or simply SDR and the Snapdragon S4 Plus MSM8960 chip which is inside the Lumia 920, supports that technology. With SDR the chipset support all LTE bands from a low to high frequency, it can work in everything between, of course not at the same time, the software programs what frequency the antenna should be set.
If the Lumia 920 and its S4 really have SDR technology, they it will make sense for Nokia to have the firmware deride what LTE to make available to the user, by reading the SIM region and not providing individual updated per region, or based on device product number.
This finally solves a major issue for the manufactures because they do not have to build customs chips for specific countries, the software simply programs it. If you Google it you can find a lot of info regarding SDR. Of course we are not in the engineering team of the Lumia 920 line and its obvious whatever we say here is based on theory and specs that are available to us.
nMIK-3 said:
For 3G PentaBand is now standard in almost all chips and since the Canadian variant comes with PentaBand on board and the fact that is standard on the S4 I really see no reason of why Nokia will order a custom version of the S4 to just physically take off the AWS. It doesn't make any sense, so if its missing, most likely is turn off in firmware.
For the LTE. Qualcomm introduced a revolutionary technology called Software Defined Radio or simply SDR and the Snapdragon S4 Plus MSM8960 chip which is inside the Lumia 920, supports that technology. With SDR the chipset support all LTE bands from a low to high frequency, it can work in everything between, of course not at the same time, the software programs what frequency the antenna should be set.
If the Lumia 920 and its S4 really have SDR technology, they it will make sense for Nokia to have the firmware deride what LTE to make available to the user, by reading the SIM region and not providing individual updated per region, or based on device product number.
This finally solves a major issue for the manufactures because they do not have to build customs chips for specific countries, the software simply programs it. If you Google it you can find a lot of info regarding SDR. Of course we are not in the engineering team of the Lumia 920 line and its obvious whatever we say here is based on theory and specs that are available to us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you understand radio technology at all, you should know the most important part that make all things work is the radio antenna, not the chipset. The chipset itself can't receive or transmit radio signal without a proper antenna. Try to disconnect your car radio antenna and see how many stations you can receive
foxbat121 said:
If you understand radio technology at all, you should know the most important part that make all things work is the radio antenna, not the chipset. The chipset itself can't receive or transmit radio signal without a proper antenna. Try to disconnect your car radio antenna and see how many stations you can receive
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We're going a bit off-topic from the thread here, but you're right - SDR defines the baseband, not the RF components.
If you look at Nokia's FCC filing for the RM-821, you can see it has two cellular antennas ("main" and "MIMO") for each of two bands ("HB" high-band and "LB" low-band). Presumably LB is used for bands below 1 GHz or so, while HB is used for bands above. So you can see it's not necessary to have different antennas for every band - bands 1 to 4 (including AWS) could also use the same antennas, for example.
However, each band needs its own RF filters to prevent interference from neighbouring channels, and also needs amplifiers that have flat gain over those bands. These RF components are usually band specific, relatively bulky and expensive, and there are some challenges to use several RF chains in parallel. To my understanding these are the limiting factors that explain why a given device tends to support maximum 4 or 5 LTE channels.
tomdjp said:
We're going a bit off-topic from the thread here, but you're right - SDR defines the baseband, not the RF components.
If you look at Nokia's FCC filing for the RM-821, you can see it has two cellular antennas ("main" and "MIMO") for each of two bands ("HB" high-band and "LB" low-band). Presumably LB is used for bands below 1 GHz or so, while HB is used for bands above. So you can see it's not necessary to have different antennas for every band - bands 1 to 4 (including AWS) could also use the same antennas, for example.
However, each band needs its own RF filters to prevent interference from neighbouring channels, and also needs amplifiers that have flat gain over those bands. These RF components are usually band specific, relatively bulky and expensive, and there are some challenges to use several RF chains in parallel. To my understanding these are the limiting factors that explain why a given device tends to support maximum 4 or 5 LTE channels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You nail it.
foxbat121 said:
If you understand radio technology at all, you should know the most important part that make all things work is the radio antenna, not the chipset. The chipset itself can't receive or transmit radio signal without a proper antenna. Try to disconnect your car radio antenna and see how many stations you can receive
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that a joke?? I am spending my time explaining what SDR is and I am getting that respond??
I am assuming that I am talking with a person that knows at least a modern chipset like the S4 package contains all the antennas for GSM/WCDMA/LTE a separate antenna for Bluetooth and Wifi, GPS (S4 also includes GLONASS), the CPU and the Adreno GPU.
All the above come in the same tinny chip that in the size of your nail. And all this is called the "chipset". Qualcomm does not use a separate antenna anymore its integrated to the chipset.
nMIK-3 said:
Is that a joke?? I am spending my time explaining what SDR is and I am getting that respond??
I am assuming that I am talking with a person that knows at least a modern chipset like the S4 package contains all the antennas for GSM/WCDMA/LTE a separate antenna for Bluetooth and Wifi, GPS (S4 also includes GLONASS), the CPU and the Adreno GPU.
All the above come in the same tinny chip that in the size of your nail. And all this is called the "chipset". Qualcomm does not use a separate antenna anymore its integrated to the chipset.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With respect, that's not right - the antennas and RF components are external to the chipset.
Go and get the SAR compliance test report for Nokia 920 from the FCC's website, and you can see diagrams showing the external antennas for cellular, WLAN/BT and GPS which are positioned in various places inside the phone's chassis (btw, the LB MIMO antenna is about 7 cm long!)
Or go and check out the iFixit teardown for iPhone 5 and you can see the same kind of thing...
tomdjp said:
With respect, that's not right - the antennas and RF components are external to the chipset.
Go and get the SAR compliance test report for Nokia 920 from the FCC's website, and you can see diagrams showing the external antennas for cellular, WLAN/BT and GPS which are positioned in various places inside the phone's chassis (btw, the LB MIMO antenna is about 7 cm long!)
Or go and check out the iFixit teardown for iPhone 5 and you can see the same kind of thing...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is correct. Many manufactures are placing antenna extensions and putting additional GPS censor in more practical areas.
The actual GSM/WCDMA/LTE modem WiFi, Bluetooth and GPS for Qualacom solutions are placed inside the chipset.
Please see http://www.qualcomm.com/chipsets/snapdragon for more information.
4g / LTE
tomdjp said:
Has anyone tried using one of the white unlocked Lumia 920 from Clove (I guess the ones from Expansys are the same) on an LTE network?
Specifically, do you have the "4G" option in the "highest connection speed" settings?
In my case, although I am using an LTE SIM with an LTE network on a supported band, I only have "2G" and "3G" options in the Highest Connection Speed settings. So normally it is only connecting over HSPA. Through playing around a lot with scanning LTE bands with the Field Test tool (##3282#), I can sometimes get the device to connect to LTE, after which it works perfectly on LTE until reboot. But it's not really a long-term solution.
The default firmware on my device is country variant "CV GB SW Variant ID 276 v03" which (apart from the version number) seems to be the same firmware as that sold by Orange / T-Mobile in the UK (i.e. for 3G networks).
I was thinking about trying to flash the EE firmware, but concerned this could create other issues (such as end up locking the phone to EE, or to certain LTE bands, or something...). Any thoughts appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I go into into field test mode and it says 4g then asks what LTE Band. My phone shows 4G not LTE in top left... is it LTE or 3G+?
Does anyone know what the different bands stand for? (band 5 etc) under the field service menu?
zok-star said:
Does anyone know what the different bands stand for? (band 5 etc) under the field service menu?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Likely they are LTE bands (e.g. band 5 = 850 MHz), but as you probably noticed they don't completely match with the LTE band support of the device. Keep in mind this field test program was probably thrown together by Nokia's R&D guys for internal testing only (not for consumers), so could be a legacy of earlier testing, another device variant, or some other reason...
Anyway, it seems fine to keep this setting on Automatic.
dougwallace said:
I go into into field test mode and it says 4g then asks what LTE Band. My phone shows 4G not LTE in top left... is it LTE or 3G+?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi Doug, could you share what version of the Lumia 920 you have, and which firmware?
As mentioned in my mail above, there seems no problem to leave the 4G band on automatic, and the bands available to be selected don't seem relevant. (My device picks up Band 1 LTE networks even though band 1 is not in the list).
Regarding 4G vs LTE, my device (unlocked UK CV) shows 4G in the top left when it is connected to LTE. I assume this can be changed by Nokia depending on the operator's requirement (esp in the US where 4G means HSPA...). You can be sure you're on LTE by going back to the field test menu, selecting GSM option, then looking at "Radio Access Technology". If you're on LTE, it should say LTE there.
tomdjp said:
Likely they are LTE bands (e.g. band 5 = 850 MHz), but as you probably noticed they don't completely match with the LTE band support of the device. Keep in mind this field test program was probably thrown together by Nokia's R&D guys for internal testing only (not for consumers), so could be a legacy of earlier testing, another device variant, or some other reason...
Anyway, it seems fine to keep this setting on Automatic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've kept mine on all automatic and i have noticed it switch to 4G at times, but then when i go to use it, it'll flick back to 3G... I'll need to test this in CBD sometime this week.
I got my device from clove, but im in Australia on Telstra 4G network. They use 1800mhz.
zok-star said:
I've kept mine on all automatic and i have noticed it switch to 4G at times, but then when i go to use it, it'll flick back to 3G... I'll need to test this in CBD sometime this week.
I got my device from clove, but im in Australia on Telstra 4G network. They use 1800mhz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, yes better to test in CBD where there's strong LTE signal.
In your Settings => Mobile Network, do you have a "4G" option under "Highest connection speed", or is it 2G and 3G only?
Is there any way to get the AT&T variant working on Verizon? Heard users could flash the T-Mobile radio for them but what about Verizon?
No. Not at all possible.
Thank you, it was worth a shot
Airo18 said:
Thank you, it was worth a shot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the correct answer is, no one knows yet. Modern smartphones are capable to supporting multiple network types, frequencies and technologies. Hardware-wise, the AT&T, T-Mobile, and (probably) the Sprint versions are identical and differ only by provisioning and preloaded software.
d2kplus said:
I think the correct answer is, no one knows yet. Modern smartphones are capable to supporting multiple network types, frequencies and technologies. Hardware-wise, the AT&T, T-Mobile, and (probably) the Sprint versions are identical and differ only by provisioning and preloaded software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon and AT&T while both "4G LTE" using basically the same technology, have different frequency radios in them. They aren't cross platform capable.
d2kplus said:
I think the correct answer is, no one knows yet. Modern smartphones are capable to supporting multiple network types, frequencies and technologies. Hardware-wise, the AT&T, T-Mobile, and (probably) the Sprint versions are identical and differ only by provisioning and preloaded software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rogue Leader said:
Verizon and AT&T while both "4G LTE" using basically the same technology, have different frequency radios in them. They aren't cross platform capable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not possible, period. Sprint and Verizon operate on CDMA networks, whereas AT&T and T-Mobile operate on GSM. As long as the proper frequencies are supported, any GSM phone can run on any GSM network provided they're SIM unlocked.
4GLTE is currently only used by Verizon for data connections, and not for voice/text--that relies on the 3G CDMA antennae. The same goes for Sprint. The AT&T/T-Mobile-/International HTC One does not physically possess an CDMA atennae. Now before you get your hopes up about using a Sprint phone on Verizon, here's another little wrinkle. As you know, every phone has a serial number. That serial number is known as the IMEI on GSM carriers, and ESN on CDMA carriers. Both Verizon and Sprint operate a massive list of ESNs for everyone phone that can operate on their network. If your ESN is not found on that list, then you cannot activate it on that particular network period, paragraph, end of story. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Things get a little murkier with CDMA when it comes to flashing the radios over to other CDMA carriers, but you're looking at services like MetroPCS, PagePlus, etc and that's outside my realm of expertise.
Airo18 said:
Thank you, it was worth a shot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rogue Leader said:
Verizon and AT&T while both "4G LTE" using basically the same technology, have different frequency radios in them. They aren't cross platform capable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Verizon and AT&T networks use the different frequencies and technologies. However, the HTC One (like the iPhone 5) is able to run on nearly all permutations of modern phone networks. Apple makes only two versions of the iPhone, one for AT&T and one for everyone else. The AT&T version only exists because AT&T strong armed Apple into removing AT&T's LTE block from the main model.
For example, the Sprint version of the One is a world phone, usable on global "GSM" networks, as well as Sprint's "CDMA" networks. I put GSM and CDMA in quotes because modern wireless networks are more complicated than either of those two designations, and high-end phones are now designed to deal with those complexities via soft configuration vs. dedicated hardware.
d2kplus said:
The Verizon and AT&T networks use the different frequencies and technologies. However, the HTC One (like the iPhone 5) is able to run on nearly all permutations of modern phone networks. Apple makes only two versions of the iPhone, one for AT&T and one for everyone else. The AT&T version only exists because AT&T strong armed Apple into removing AT&T's LTE block from the main model.
For example, the Sprint version of the One is a world phone, usable on global "GSM" networks, as well as Sprint's "CDMA" networks. I put GSM and CDMA in quotes because modern wireless networks are more complicated than either of those two designations, and high-end phones are now designed to deal with those complexities via soft configuration vs. dedicated hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sort of, sort of. You're going in the right path, but still not quite there. Hardware is still very important.
GSM phones are considered world phones because most of the networks operated in foreign countries run on GSM, right. CDMA world phones possess both antennae in order to access the networks over seas, but GSM phones don't have CDMA antennaes because... well, they don't need them. Your chances of going to a CDMA-only country is so very small that it's not worth while to make the investment. Let's take the opposite example using the iPhone 5: You can't take an AT&T/T-Mobile/International iPhone 5 and put in a Sprint SIM card. You can even do a iTunes restore using the Sprint IPSW onto that phone(actually don't know if that would work or not, but I digress) and it STILL won't get a signal because it physically lacks the antennae.
unremarked said:
Sort of, sort of. You're going in the right path, but still not quite there. Hardware is still very important.
GSM phones are considered world phones because most of the networks operated in foreign countries run on GSM, right. CDMA world phones possess both antennae in order to access the networks over seas, but GSM phones don't have CDMA antennaes because... well, they don't need them. Your chances of going to a CDMA-only country is so very small that it's not worth while to make the investment. Let's take the opposite example using the iPhone 5: You can't take an AT&T/T-Mobile/International iPhone 5 and put in a Sprint SIM card. You can even do a iTunes restore using the Sprint IPSW onto that phone(actually don't know if that would work or not, but I digress) and it STILL won't get a signal because it physically lacks the antennae.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I was talking about modern phones (like the HTC One), which are designed to be multi network and multi frequency global phones by default. HTC makes three versions of the phone: UMTS/GSM Only (MDM8215), UMTS/GSM+LTE (MDM9215), CDMA + UMTS/GSM +LTE (MDM9615). Sprint sells the version using the MDM9615 chipset which supports CDMA + UMTS/GSM + LTE. The Sprint variant has the capabilities to support all of the US/Canada frequencies, but I don't know what would be required to activate non Sprint frequencies. Neither do you. It's foolish to make grand pronouncements stating what is or isn't possible with phones until someone has actually attempted something.
Regarding your antenna statement, the HTC One has three antennas, one for WiFi and BT and two for wireless. The phone selects the best antenna to use in any given situation.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
More info here
d2kplus said:
Again, I was talking about modern phones (like the HTC One), which are designed to be multi network and multi frequency global phones by default. HTC makes three versions of the phone: UMTS/GSM Only (MDM8215), UMTS/GSM+LTE (MDM9215), CDMA + UMTS/GSM +LTE (MDM9615). Sprint sells the version using the MDM9615 chipset which supports CDMA + UMTS/GSM + LTE. The Sprint variant has the capabilities to support all of the US/Canada frequencies, but I don't know what would be required to activate non Sprint frequencies. Neither do you. It's foolish to make grand pronouncements stating what is or isn't possible with phones until someone has actually attempted something.
Regarding your antenna statement, the HTC One has three antennas, one for WiFi and BT and two for wireless. The phone selects the best antenna to use in any given situation.
MY EDIT: REMOVED IMAGE.
More info here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're a little confused on exactly what we're talking about here. Yes, you're absolutely right that the Sprint HTC One possess all the necessary ingredients to operate on just about any network/carrier in the world--GSM or CDMA. And, actually, I do know what's required in order to it to happen. For a GSM network, the only requirements to do so is a correctly provisioned SIM cards and the applicable access point names for the network you're trying to utilize. I've personally taken an CDMA world device and used it on a GSM network(VZW iPhone 5 on Straight Talk/AT&T). The Sprint HTC One would even work on Verizon, provided you get the ESN added to the master database of approved devices which is highly unlikely. Source: I worked for Verizon Wireless. Other CDMA carriers like MetroPCS, PagePlus, Cricket, etc do not have this requirement and it's relatively easy to flash Sprint/VZW phones over to their network.
But that's not at all what's being debated. WiFi and Bluetooth likewise have nothing to do with this conversation. As you've correctly noted, the MDM9215M chipset(step 10, highlighted in green) which powers the wireless antennae and allows them to connect to cellular networks does not support CDMA in the AT&T/T-Mobile/International version of the phone. Because of this fact alone, regardless of software configuration, these phones will never operate on a CDMA network. Now if you're an enterprising individual and decide to open your phone, remove the chip, and replace it with one that does support CDMA... you'd still run into the issue of the master database.
EDIT: I removed the image just to clean up the look of the post.
unremarked said:
Sort of, sort of. You're going in the right path, but still not quite there. Hardware is still very important.
GSM phones are considered world phones because most of the networks operated in foreign countries run on GSM, right. CDMA world phones possess both antennae in order to access the networks over seas, but GSM phones don't have CDMA antennaes because... well, they don't need them. Your chances of going to a CDMA-only country is so very small that it's not worth while to make the investment. Let's take the opposite example using the iPhone 5: You can't take an AT&T/T-Mobile/International iPhone 5 and put in a Sprint SIM card. You can even do a iTunes restore using the Sprint IPSW onto that phone(actually don't know if that would work or not, but I digress) and it STILL won't get a signal because it physically lacks the antennae.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
unremarked said:
I think you're a little confused on exactly what we're talking about here. Yes, you're absolutely right that the Sprint HTC One possess all the necessary ingredients to operate on just about any network/carrier in the world--GSM or CDMA. And, actually, I do know what's required in order to it to happen. For a GSM network, the only requirements to do so is a correctly provisioned SIM cards and the applicable access point names for the network you're trying to utilize. I've personally taken an CDMA world device and used it on a GSM network(VZW iPhone 5 on Straight Talk/AT&T). The Sprint HTC One would even work on Verizon, provided you get the ESN added to the master database of approved devices which is highly unlikely. Source: I worked for Verizon Wireless. Other CDMA carriers like MetroPCS, PagePlus, Cricket, etc do not have this requirement and it's relatively easy to flash Sprint/VZW phones over to their network.
But that's not at all what's being debated. WiFi and Bluetooth likewise have nothing to do with this conversation. As you've correctly noted, the MDM9215M chipset(step 10, highlighted in green) which powers the wireless antennae and allows them to connect to cellular networks does not support CDMA in the AT&T/T-Mobile/International version of the phone. Because of this fact alone, regardless of software configuration, these phones will never operate on a CDMA network. Now if you're an enterprising individual and decide to open your phone, remove the chip, and replace it with one that does support CDMA... you'd still run into the issue of the master database.
EDIT: I removed the image just to clean up the look of the post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The ESN information for LTE enabled smartphones is included on the SIM/UICC/R-UIM rather than the phone itself, so the issue is one of provisioning a given phone's capabilities to work on the VZW vs the Sprint network. I don't know if this is user configurable or if carriers would be willing to do.
Regarding the antennas, the same antenna configuration is used on all models. There is no additional antenna on the CDMA capable model. That functionality is provided by the Qualcomm MDM9615. It's a bit unfortunate that HTC didn't take Apple's approach in using the MDM9615 on all HTC One variants. I assume that VZW's decision to pass on the phone may have had something to do with it.
Now back to your original point, I was mistaken and you are correct. While the Sprint version could potentially be used on AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon. The AT&T (UMTS/GSM+LTE) version cannot be used on the Verizon network, and that's a damn shame.
unremarked said:
It's not possible, period. Sprint and Verizon operate on CDMA networks, whereas AT&T and T-Mobile operate on GSM. As long as the proper frequencies are supported, any GSM phone can run on any GSM network provided they're SIM unlocked.
4GLTE is currently only used by Verizon for data connections, and not for voice/text--that relies on the 3G CDMA antennae. The same goes for Sprint. The AT&T/T-Mobile-/International HTC One does not physically possess an CDMA atennae. Now before you get youSprint
esopes up about using a Sprint phone on Verizon, here's another little wrinkle. As you know, every phone has a serial number. That serial number is known as the IMEI on GSM carriers, and ESN on CDMA carriers. Both Verizon and Sprint operate a massive list of ESNs for everyone phone that can operate on their network. If your ESN is not found on that list, then you cannot activate it on that particular network period, paragraph, end of story. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Things get a little murkier with CDMA when it comes to flashing the radios over to other CDMA carriers, but you're looking at services like MetroPCS, PagePlus, etc and that's outside my realm of expertise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMEI/ESN is carrier specific. Can't be changed. However can't we trick the phone itself through software to unlock the capability of using a Verizon LTE Sim in a Sprint phone. Flash a Verizon ROM? Sprint and Verizon are the exact same CDMA/LTE band, same internal hardware.
Speaking only of using a Verizon LTE sim for data on a Sprint device. I have a Sprint One. Not with Sprint any longer. Want to use my device as a PDA, internet capable.
Hi guys, some super important info here, For anyone considering getting the international version should CONSIDER getting the T-mobile phone instead because it can utilize future LTE channel 700MHZ worldwide: (Assuming this is correct)
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Now with this information above,
I noticed the only difference between T-mobile's Samsung Galaxy S5 (G900T), and the international Version (G900F) Is that the LTE 700MHZ is missing from the international version.
This brings 2 important questions for BOTH users of both phones.
1. Now, Assuming the specs are correct on the G900T, (it appears to have future compatibility with 700MHZ being released by Tmobile, and other networks worldwide in 2014-2015.) We need to know if this is indeed correct or not.
2. I had flashed AllianceROM for the international version on my G900T, and it shows G900F in the about device.
Will this prevent any phone flashed in this manner from using 700 MHZ if the ROM is a G900F and flashed on a G900T. This is not important now, but will be very much so in the future as the cellular networks mature and roll out the AWS LTE band 700.
This is SUPER important as it may cause headaches for developers/users and mass confusion in the future if the issue isn't caught now before everyone starts using LTE 700 (AWS), and projects mature, and users may notice coverage gaps, if (2) above is confirmed to be a problem.
solrazr said:
Hi guys, some super important info here, For anyone considering getting the international version should CONSIDER getting the T-mobile phone instead because it can utilize future LTE channel 700MHZ worldwide: (Assuming this is correct)
Now with this information above,
I noticed the only difference between T-mobile's Samsung Galaxy S5 (G900T), and the international Version (G900F) Is that the LTE 700MHZ is missing from the international version.
This brings 2 important questions for BOTH users of both phones.
1. Now, Assuming the specs are correct on the G900T, (it appears to have future compatibility with 700MHZ being released by Tmobile, and other networks worldwide in 2014-2015.) We need to know if this is indeed correct or not.
2. I had flashed AllianceROM for the international version on my G900T, and it shows G900F in the about device.
Will this prevent any phone flashed in this manner from using 700 MHZ if the ROM is a G900F and flashed on a G900T. This is not important now, but will be very much so in the future as the cellular networks mature and roll out the AWS LTE band 700.
This is SUPER important as it may cause headaches for developers/users and mass confusion in the future if the issue isn't caught now before everyone starts using LTE 700 (AWS), and projects mature, and users may notice coverage gaps, if (2) above is confirmed to be a problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Edit build.prop and you can make your phone appear as any model.
Docmjldds said:
Edit build.prop and you can make your phone appear as any model.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough, however we need to get confirmation if the international ROM's are compatible and can utilize the 700 MHz LTE band (radio) on the G900T regardless of model displayed on the phone. I would think it *might* work, but without 700MHz available yet on T-mobile, I can't test it.
Doesn't matter what ROM you installed ... If you actual phone has LTE bands than it wouldn't really matter what ROM you installed .... and like the other guy posted you can edit build.prop and make it to any model you want ...
Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk
Your answer is yes, just know when flashing a int rom, apn settings are for other bands. When I flashed alliance, I had to change apn settings to the LTE version. I know this for a fact cause I have 2 s5's and I had to copy its original settings to get LTE speeds
Sent from my Stanced Out S5
Sometimes you don't need to set up apn's they set up by itself .. that's why I like tmobile
Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk
Looks like the gsmarena specs might be wrong, according to this LTE band 12 (700 MHz) is not supported on the SM-G900T:
http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SM-G900TZKATMB-specs
solrazr said:
Hi guys, some super important info here, For anyone considering getting the international version should CONSIDER getting the T-mobile phone instead because it can utilize future LTE channel 700MHZ worldwide: (Assuming this is correct)
I noticed the only difference between T-mobile's Samsung Galaxy S5 (G900T), and the international Version (G900F) Is that the LTE 700MHZ is missing from the international version.
This brings 2 important questions for BOTH users of both phones.
1. Now, Assuming the specs are correct on the G900T, (it appears to have future compatibility with 700MHZ being released by Tmobile, and other networks worldwide in 2014-2015.) We need to know if this is indeed correct or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not the only difference:
T-Mobile (T) has LTE 700 & 1700 (Band 17/4), International version (F) does not. (mainly used in North America)
F has LTE 800 (Band 20), T does not. (mainly used in Europe)
F - WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100
T - WCDMA 850/1700&2100/1900/2100
I'm in Hong Kong where they sell unlocked F version but I travel to the US (and Europe) very often (have a place there) so I'm waiting to get a T-Mo version - which IMHO has the best world wide LTE coverage.
I am confused and would very much appreciate if someone here who knows this stuff clear it out. According to these sites the T-Mobile 700 MHz block will be band 12 and the SM-G900T has band 17 which is a subset of band 12.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mobile_US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-UTRA#Frequency_bands_and_channel_bandwidths
So it seems to me that while our phones might be able to get on some 700 MHz LTE networks they would not be able to use the USA T-Mobile 700 MHz band?
Edit: Just found this:
"Annoyingly, both the AT&T and T-Mobile (SGS5) models lack LTE Band 12, which T-Mobile and some regional carriers are implementing at the end of this year to improve rural coverage, but no other phone has that yet, either."
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2456033,00.asp
Wondering if band 12 LTE access can be added through a modem upgrade...?
rtwhtever said:
...
"Annoyingly, both the AT&T and T-Mobile (SGS5) models lack LTE Band 12, which T-Mobile and some regional carriers are implementing at the end of this year to improve rural coverage, but no other phone has that yet, either."
Wondering if band 12 LTE access can be added through a modem upgrade...?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More than likely, No.
Based on what I've read in other articles there is "physical" gap between the bands on 700mhz which requires filters on the PCB.
The S5 would have had to be shipped band 12 capable from the start or the hardware would have to be refreshed later in the year.
If the GS5 were band 12 capable you'd think they would try to market it as such, since that would be a major upsell.
I wouldn't hold my breath for a hardware refresh though. Seeing as the carriers (especially T-Mobile) seem to have a "hard time" trying to stock multiple internal storage and color options as it is, throw band 12 capable" and "not band 12 capable" and the whole system might collapse!
Old topic ?
Flash an international S5 rom then flash a t-mobile radio.
..
fffft said:
I'd say more than likely, yes.
Your information about SAW filters being necessary is out of date. The S5 has been reported to use the Qualcomm WTR1625L RF transceiver. This chipset is capable of operating on all LTE bands.
There may still be cost saving or protectionist measures in supporting hardware choices that limit us but given the available evidence, the overwhelming chances are that each variant can access an arbritrary set of LTE frequences and that the restrictions will be firmware based.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I stand corrected if that's the chipset used. I knew Samsung had been using SDRs I just was not aware that chips had become available to also dynamically handle the filtering.
Here's hoping it gets resubmitted to the FCC for band 12 approval later this year.
..
fffft said:
Chipworks says that is the chipset and they should certainly know. The WTR1625L is release 10 compliant so it supports all 34 announced bands, not just the current bands in use. The companion WFR1620 chip in the photo is used for carrier aggregation which is LTE channel bonding to achieve higher speeds. Interestingly, Qualcomm's aggressive release schedule already puts a 28 nm successor on the table, the WTR3925 which will be the first single chip carrier aggregation solution to market. It will be release 11 compliant.
The move away from discrete filtering and aggressive push towards single IC systems is meant to capture a larger market share in this multi billion dollar market. Single chip solutions can hit cost and power reduction goals that discrete components could not reach.
The wild card, the possible hardware bottleneck will be the Avago RF front end. It's rumoured to be release 10 compliant as well, but since Avago only releases their specs and datasheets to qualified customers we can't be certain yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IFixit found a Qualcomm WTR1625L within when they did their teardown.
mastarpete said:
I stand corrected if that's the chipset used. I knew Samsung had been using SDRs I just was not aware that chips had become available to also dynamically handle the filtering.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gentlemen, all phones operating in full duplex mode require band-specific RF duplexers to separate the uplink and downlink frequencies and route the antenna to and from the receiver and transmit PA respectively. These are essentially paired RF filters. Duplexers serve the additional purpose of blocking out of band interferers including harmonics generated by the phone transmitting on other bands. Additional SAW and BAW filters are still required in the receive chain in some cases to block interference as well.
E-UTRA bands 1 through 32 are FDD bands and require duplexers. B12 requires its own duplexer. A tunable duplexer that can operate over several of the 700 MHz E-UTRA bands might be possible in the future, but for now a phone that can operate in LTE mode on AT&T (B17), Verizon (B13), US Cellular etc.(B12) requires multiple duplexers.
A phone operating in "All LTE bands" would require an unworkable number of duplexers. As a result, LTE phones are operator and region specific with respect to LTE, and right now it takes at least three SKUs to cover the main population regions and LTE operators across the world. The radio chipset is the same, but not the duplexers and usually not the RF power amps. Some phones will not operate on the right frequencies for LTE on some carrier networks without hardware changes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ylo said:
Gentlemen, all phones operating in full duplex mode require band-specific RF duplexers to separate the uplink and downlink frequencies and route the antenna to and from the receiver and transmit PA respectively. These are essentially paired RF filters. Duplexers serve the additional purpose of blocking out of band interferers including harmonics generated by the phone transmitting on other bands. Additional SAW and BAW filters are still required in the receive chain in some cases to block interference as well.
E-UTRA bands 1 through 32 are FDD bands and require duplexers. B12 requires its own duplexer. A tunable duplexer that can operate over several of the 700 MHz E-UTRA bands might be possible in the future, but for now a phone that can operate in LTE mode on AT&T (B17), Verizon (B13), US Cellular etc.(B12) requires multiple duplexers.
A phone operating in "All LTE bands" would require an unworkable number of duplexers. As a result, LTE phones are operator and region specific with respect to LTE, and right now it takes at least three SKUs to cover the main population regions and LTE operators across the world. The radio chipset is the same, but not the duplexers and usually not the RF power amps. Some phones will not operate on the right frequencies for LTE on some carrier networks without hardware changes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ylo said:
Gentlemen, all phones operating in full duplex mode require band-specific RF duplexers to separate the uplink and downlink frequencies and route the antenna to and from the receiver and transmit PA respectively. These are essentially paired RF filters. Duplexers serve the additional purpose of blocking out of band interferers including harmonics generated by the phone transmitting on other bands. Additional SAW and BAW filters are still required in the receive chain in some cases to block interference as well.
E-UTRA bands 1 through 32 are FDD bands and require duplexers. B12 requires its own duplexer. A tunable duplexer that can operate over several of the 700 MHz E-UTRA bands might be possible in the future, but for now a phone that can operate in LTE mode on AT&T (B17), Verizon (B13), US Cellular etc.(B12) requires multiple duplexers.
A phone operating in "All LTE bands" would require an unworkable number of duplexers. As a result, LTE phones are operator and region specific with respect to LTE, and right now it takes at least three SKUs to cover the main population regions and LTE operators across the world. The radio chipset is the same, but not the duplexers and usually not the RF power amps. Some phones will not operate on the right frequencies for LTE on some carrier networks without hardware changes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the response.
When I google the WTR1625L the results I'm seeing are claiming it is Release 10 based and supports all announced bands. Maybe their wording is over simplifying but it seems to imply it's capable of handling the duplexing, antenna switching and basic filtering as one combined chipset.
I understand that there could still be a possibility of needing additional interference filtering.
Are you pointing out that the WTR1625L really only has selective support based on how the OEM builds out the chipset?
ie. Hardware wise (ignoring software configuration), if the OEM using the WTR1625L gets a request to not include (or doesn't ask for) a specific band they wont actually physically assemble it in a way that supports all bands.
Edit: here's a link to the press release from when the WTR1625L was announced.
http://www.multivu.com/mnr/60452-qualcomm-rf360-front-end-solution-global-4g-lte-for-mobile-devices
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..
fffft said:
The observations about discrete components being a limiting factor was accurate five years ago. It largely out of date now and specifically has little relevance to the specific chipset under discussion. This chipset is release 10 compliant and only requires minimal external hardware support.
A RF front end is still required, but as the current generation of Avago chips have made comparable advances and are also R10 compliant. The days when we needed a slew of SAW filters and other discrete components are behind us.
Between that and general manufacturing practice, it is all but certain that the in situ chipset can support all existing GSM and LTE bands. The (artificial) restrictions will be in the firmware.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any new thoughts or information on this discussion?