So i live the Dallas Ft worth area of TX and have ATT. ATT now says that 4G LTE is available in DFW, but i havnt gotten it yet. I still see the H with the 2 arrows for data and ATT says i should see a 4G symbol.
Is there something i need to do to get the LTE?
Sadly there is no LTE antenna.
Unfortunately AT&T calls our phone 4g. Really it's like 3.5g. The HSPA+ antenna in our phones is just glorified 3G. They just fancied up their 3G towers to handle data better. Hints we can get up to 14 Megs a second if we are lucky. Though I have only seen it near the 6 Meg mark.
Jonny Steele said:
So i live the Dallas Ft worth area of TX and have ATT. ATT now says that 4G LTE is available in DFW, but i havnt gotten it yet. I still see the H with the 2 arrows for data and ATT says i should see a 4G symbol.
Is there something i need to do to get the LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Atrix was labeled as a 4G phone as a marketing trick, but its "4G" is really just a slightly modified 3G and is not compatible with LTE.
Jonny Steele said:
So i live the Dallas Ft worth area of TX and have ATT. ATT now says that 4G LTE is available in DFW, but i havnt gotten it yet. I still see the H with the 2 arrows for data and ATT says i should see a 4G symbol.
Is there something i need to do to get the LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I came to this thread at first thinking you were joking but yes, unfortunately Companies like ATT and Rogers where I am from market there HSPA+ devices as 4G and differentiate the two technologies by saying '4G' and 'LTE' respectively. They are scamming their customers with this. According to the wireless device spec, 4G technology is only LTE but the companies decide to market things however they want to; bending the truth to make a sale.
Sorry that they tricked you, as they have to millions of customers who are now cheated into upgrading to a valid LTE phone less than a year after they purchased their '4G' phone.
tayshun12 said:
I came to this thread at first thinking you were joking but yes, unfortunately Companies like ATT and Rogers where I am from market there HSPA+ devices as 4G and differentiate the two technologies by saying '4G' and 'LTE' respectively. They are scamming their customers with this. According to the wireless device spec, 4G technology is only LTE but the companies decide to market things however they want to; bending the truth to make a sale.
Sorry that they tricked you, as they have to millions of customers who are now cheated into upgrading to a valid LTE phone less than a year after they purchased their '4G' phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In December 2010, the ITU declared HSPA+ as 4G. Prior to that declaration, not even LTE qualified as 4G. Only Wimax and LTE-Advanced were considered 4G.
http://www.intomobile.com/2010/12/18/itu-reverses-its-decision-lte-wimax-and-hspa-are-now-4g/
If people would stop saying hspa+ is not 4G (i don't care if you disagre it has officially been certified as 4G) and rather just explain that hspa+, and LTE are two different versions of 4G currently marketed by Att of which LTE is the faster things might go smoother for everybody....
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
Tomdg07 said:
If people would stop saying hspa+ is not 4G (i don't care if you disagre it has officially been certified as 4G) and rather just explain that hspa+, and LTE are two different versions of 4G currently marketed by Att of which LTE is the faster things might go smoother for everybody....
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Come on, pal... if hydrochloric acid is defined as "water" will you drink it? HSPA+ is not 4g. Redefining standards to accommodate what is currently available does not change reality. Many people can't just swallow the blue pill... Others will call hydrochloric acid water. Good luck getting people to switch camps!
Marketing dishonesty sucks...
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
xfinrodx said:
Come on, pal... if hydrochloric acid is defined as "water" will you drink it? HSPA+ is not 4g. Redefining standards to accommodate what is currently available does not change reality. Many people can't just swallow the blue pill... Others will call hydrochloric acid water. Good luck getting people to switch camps!
Marketing dishonesty sucks...
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is you don't make the standards, by refusing to accept them you are only spreading more confusion and making the problem worse. Both LTE and hspa+ are officially certified as 4G, and will from this point on be advertised as 4G. Did you know all thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.... hmm guess I can say stupid stuff irrelevant to the conversation as well
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
xfinrodx said:
Come on, pal... if hydrochloric acid is defined as "water" will you drink it? HSPA+ is not 4g. Redefining standards to accommodate what is currently available does not change reality. Many people can't just swallow the blue pill... Others will call hydrochloric acid water. Good luck getting people to switch camps!
Marketing dishonesty sucks...
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE is not 4G either by the initial definition. Blame the ITU, not AT&T. If the ITU says it is, you can't fault AT&T for calling it 4G.
Tomdg07 said:
The problem is you don't make the standards, by refusing to accept them you are only spreading more confusion and making the problem worse. Both LTE and hspa+ are officially certified as 4G, and will from this point on be advertised as 4G. Did you know all thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.... hmm guess I can say stupid stuff irrelevant to the conversation as well
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A worthless reply, not worth my time to say any more.
robrj said:
LTE is not 4G either by the initial definition. Blame the ITU, not AT&T. If the ITU says it is, you can't fault AT&T for calling it 4G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for adding to the conversation. I am not at all confident in the ITA personally... To me, it has looked like they bowed their definition to the initial dishonest advertising and changed the meaning of 4g to fit what the industry in the US wanted it to be. Lot of blame to go around in my eyes, some toward at&t, T-Mobile, sprint, ITU... Just disappointing as a consumer that what was defined originally has been repeatedly backed off of to the detriment of the consumer. Many people therefore choose not to go along with the repeatedly lowered definition: Even Motorola's engineers apparently, as you won't find a 4g icon for hspa+... Difficult situation indeed.
(ITU wasn't the first to call hspa+ 4g either...)
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
no provider has real 4g at all read this
http://kschang.hubpages.com/hub/What-You-Do-NOT-Know-about-4G-Cellular-Phones
pressure from phone companies decided what they can call 4g. Some of the companies decisions have changed sprint is going to do advanced lte now rather than wimax but the article is valid nonetheless. 100 meg download is a tall order maybe one day.
This would fix things
http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/10/14/new.senate.bill.should.bring.better.4g.definition/
do away with such a general description and just say what it really is. just label it a h+ phone or wimax or lte
xfinrodx said:
A worthless reply, not worth my time to say any more.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Listen buddy bottom line is hspa + has been approved as 4G, I don't care if you're still butt hurt because you and you're nerd herd friends had higher expectations for 4G wireless technology. However it was determined that hspa + was a big enough jump from 3G that it could be called 4G. Bottom line is we will never have truth in advertising when we advertise in G's rather than expected download speeds using X technology (hspa+/LTE/Wimax/ect.)
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
xfinrodx said:
Thank you for adding to the conversation. I am not at all confident in the ITA personally... To me, it has looked like they bowed their definition to the initial dishonest advertising and changed the meaning of 4g to fit what the industry in the US wanted it to be. Lot of blame to go around in my eyes, some toward at&t, T-Mobile, sprint, ITU... Just disappointing as a consumer that what was defined originally has been repeatedly backed off of to the detriment of the consumer. Many people therefore choose not to go along with the repeatedly lowered definition: Even Motorola's engineers apparently, as you won't find a 4g icon for hspa+... Difficult situation indeed.
(ITU wasn't the first to call hspa+ 4g either...)
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess for Motorola is that the phone was developed before HSPA+ was considered 4G which was why the H+ icon and not 4G. It was declared 4G in December and the Atrix was released in February. Technically, the Atrix would show H+ even if the phone was HSPA; there was no seperate 3G icon. So it was somewhat deceptive to put an H+ icon up even though it was only standard 3G.
I think the only retailer you can truely blame is T-Mobile. They were calling theirs 4G (HSPA+) long before the ITU caved. I believe AT&T only called it 4G after the ITU declared it as such.
That said, you definitly can blame the ITU for it. They're the standards body. Regardless of who was calling something 4G, they're the ones who determined what the definition of 4G was. They could have just stated that HSPA+ was not 4G (neither was LTE) and that T-Mobile was using false advertising. If the standard is that flexible, and they can change it on a whim, then there was no 4G standard.
As others have said, HSPA+ and LTE are different enough from 3G that you have to call it something. It's working itself out. LTE is called 4G LTE to distinguish itself.
What's the point if arguing weather its 4g or not when we all are gonna still use their phones.
When life sucks I just enjoy the head
im still satisfied with my phone and had done enough reading to know what i was buying. and as for the arguing i dont think anyone here is getting to upset.this is a relevant conversation even if we had amazing download speeds who is going to start downloading movies on there phone rather than a pc especially with data caps.phone still browses can download small bits of information at a reasonable speed and holds its own compared to newer devices
Related
I currently have the EVO (great phone) but I have trouble using the 4G (WIMAX), I live in a 4G area that doesn't have 4G, lol and and work I have a lot of concrete around, so 4G doesn't work there either, so I'm wondering if I should try the TB 4G on LTE, I use 3g at work no problem but its still too slow. I hardly never have the 4G turned on my EVO which Im kinda upset about, so far WIMAX has really kinda sucked. Does anyone have experience with both radios? and do you think LTE might penetrate the concrete at my work?
It should do better. The way i understand it, higher frequencies (Wimax being 2.5 -3.5 GHz range) are more easily deflected. Like a bouncing ball.
LTE runs at 700 MHz and does penetrate better. Like a dodgeball.
arkshel said:
I currently have the EVO (great phone) but I have trouble using the 4G (WIMAX), I live in a 4G area that doesn't have 4G, lol and and work I have a lot of concrete around, so 4G doesn't work there either, so I'm wondering if I should try the TB 4G on LTE, I use 3g at work no problem but its still too slow. I hardly never have the 4G turned on my EVO which Im kinda upset about, so far WIMAX has really kinda sucked. Does anyone have experience with both radios? and do you think LTE might penetrate the concrete at my work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody can really say because we don't have a LTE phone yet. You might want to test one when they come out.
Sent by my Droid Incredible
jbh00jh said:
Nobody can really say because we don't have a LTE phone yet. You might want to test one when they come out.
Sent by my Droid Incredible
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks I will try it and ill keep my fingers crossed.
LTE will penetrate buildings better than WiMAX. The question is whether your specific spot is in good coverage and only you can test that.
I've been ordering 4G LTE usb modems for my company's new hires and had one of the other IT guys do some bandwidth tests. (I ordered one of his new hires the 4G modem and he promptly had me switch it into his name and gave his new hire his old 3G model). Anyway, he got 4.55 Mb/s down and 3.13 Mb/s up compared to 1.75 Mb/s down and 0.53 Mb/s up on his 3G modem. This was in NYC. Indoors, but with good reception. This is very fast indeed.
LTE is vastly superior to wimax. I can write more details out later, but you can put your faith in it.
Worked on the infrastructure!
Quite simply, Wimax sucks. I can only get it downtown. I can get it for thirty seconds at my job and I can't get it at all in my home. I can't even get it if I step outside. Sprint has really dug a hole for themselves tacking on 10 dollars under the title of "Premium Data." They later tacked on a premium data charge for all smartphones; they would have been better off simply saying that they were raising prices to offset the costs of being able to provide unlimited data... These things led to Sprint having record lows on their quarterly report. Having a new Nintendo DS-like non-4G enabled phone isn't gonna help their sales much more... Making the decision to switch to Verizon to get the Thunderbolt because I will be able to get the best service. In my neighborhood, Verizon is the only carrier that gets full bars and doesn't drop calls. They charge a lot but you can't say that you don't get what you pay for. I'm certain that Verizon's LTE will be superior to Wimax. Verizon is all about having services and devices that are superior to their competition.
Sent from my PG06100 using XDA App
Amen !
Sent by my Droid Incredible
bobbysteels216 said:
Quite simply, Wimax sucks. I can only get it downtown. I can get it for thirty seconds at my job and I can't get it at all in my home. I can't even get it if I step outside. Sprint has really dug a hole for themselves tacking on 10 dollars under the title of "Premium Data." They later tacked on a premium data charge for all smartphones; they would have been better off simply saying that they were raising prices to offset the costs of being able to provide unlimited data... These things led to Sprint having record lows on their quarterly report. Having a new Nintendo DS-like non-4G enabled phone isn't gonna help their sales much more... I making the decision to switch to Verizon to get the Thunderbolt because I will be able to get the best service. In my neighborhood, Verizon is the only carrier that gets full bars and doesn't drop calls. They charge a lot but you can't say that you don't get what you pay for. I'm certain that Verizon's LTE will be superior to Wimax. Verizon is all about having services and devices that are superior to their competition.
Sent from my PG06100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said. The thunderbolt/Verizon is definitely ahead of the curve at this moment, and probably will be through 2011.
Sent from my DROIDX using XDA App
karnovaran said:
LTE will penetrate buildings better than WiMAX. The question is whether your specific spot is in good coverage and only you can test that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically, its the frequency being used (700mhz vs 2.5ghz), rather than the technology (LTE vs WiMax).
Higher frequency (2.5ghz) can't travel as far (so you need more towers per square mile), and has a harder time penetrating solid objects compared to lower frequencies (700mhz).
Multiple technical support reps have told me over the phone that Atrix will do LTE (att flavor I guess). Yet I everything I've read contradicts this. Rumor is att will begin launching lte in certain areas june/july. Can anyone offer some clarifications reflgarding the Atrix radio capabilities?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
NibblerWeather said:
Multiple technical support reps have told me over the phone that Atrix will do LTE (att flavor I guess). Yet I everything I've read contradicts this. Rumor is att will begin launching lte in certain areas june/july. Can anyone offer some clarifications reflgarding the Atrix radio capabilities?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They told me the same thing! when i bought the phone i specifically asked them and they said yes
forget it, they meant hspa+, this phone doesn't have a lte radio, no matter who says anything
HSPA can do up too 14.4mps and thats why they care calling it 4g even though 4g originally was data service of 100mb or better. The Atrix like stated above DOES NOT have the LTE radio no madder what ATT tells you.
Im not even on true HSPA in my area but I do know one thing, ever since the update that unlocked the upload I have seen 6mb down and 1.2mb up. I almost always see between 3-5mb now and I'm not even in a 4g area.
The good thing about HSPA is it uses the same 3g towers and technology so battery is not affected. I guess the verizon guys on LTE are seeing very horrible battery life compared to running 3g. Thats why those Thunderbolts get such bad battery life. We get faster speeds without hurting the battery.
JayRolla said:
HSPA can do up too 14.4mps and thats why they care calling it 4g even though 4g originally was data service of 100mb or better. The Atrix like stated above DOES NOT have the LTE radio no madder what ATT tells you.
Im not even on true HSPA in my area but I do know one thing, ever since the update that unlocked the upload I have seen 6mb down and 1.2mb up. I almost always see between 3-5mb now and I'm not even in a 4g area.
The good thing about HSPA is it uses the same 3g towers and technology so battery is not affected. I guess the verizon guys on LTE are seeing very horrible battery life compared to running 3g. Thats why those Thunderbolts get such bad battery life. We get faster speeds without hurting the battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are multiple versions of HSPA - the Atrix can do 14.4 mbps on download, but other phones can do 7.2 or 21 or even 42 mbps. The Atrix will not support LTE ever. It does not have an LTE modem and is not upgradeable to one. ifixit's teardown showed that the Atrix has a Qualcomm MDM6200, which is not an LTE modem (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releas...ls-new-roadmap-gobi-connectivity-technologies).
The best download speeds i've found in my area are about 7.1 down. Pretty darn good....not consistent at all though.
It also seems like att is coaching employees to tell customers that the Atrix will do LTE.
Im starting to wonder if they are going to market their hspa+ as a synonym for LTE.
Thanks for the responses and the link. Pretty clear att is continuing to lie about the subject.
If any of you are curious I encourage you to call ATT tech support and ask them about LTE and the Atrix. Post your responses here.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
Lets be realistic about this:
HSPA and LTE aren't that far apart from each other in the current state. Theoretically speaking, HSPA should be VERY close to LTE speeds once they fully roll out. HSPA is "4G" like whenever that will be fully rolled out to everyone. I'm sure there are a ton of you that are going to give out all of these statistics and what not to disprove me. The fact is, those numbers are all in "theory" and the fact of the matter is that we will never see those speeds....EVER, unless you live next to a cell tower.
I personally think that if we get 14mb speeds, we're damn good. The point is do we really need all of that speed?...not really...it's not that big of a deal. The phone is pretty bomb, the features are amazing.
NibblerWeather said:
..
It also seems like att is coaching employees to tell customers that the Atrix will do LTE.
Thanks for the responses and the link. Pretty clear att is continuing to lie about the subject.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really don't think they are training their employees to say the phone is LTE capable. AT&T knows what the phone can and cannot do (its even printed on the box)
It sounds like you've just spoken with people who either didn't get all the facts or don't know the difference... not everybody is nerdy like us on all this HSPA+ LTE stuff
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
m.cnet.com/Article.rbml?nid=20112095&bid=94&test=20112095%26assetType=BLOG_POST%26beginStartDate=20110829%26endStartDate=20110927
So I know that there is a chip set I believe the Qualcomm msm8960 that supports all lte bands but does the chip in the photon sport lte? also does anybody know if any phone has the msm8960 chipset in it on sprint currently? Just looking for everybodys thoughts on the news today.
Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk
Well - my thoughts on it. By the time that LTE is rolled out on Sprint, most of us if not all of us will be on a new phone. So it really doesn't matter if this phone supports it or not.
the Photon does not support LTE
halfdriven said:
the Photon does not support LTE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have heard otherwise but still cannot get a straight answer... we are talking about LightSquared 4G LTE, and I spoke to nearly 10 Sprint/Motorola reps and they all say yes, but then I here no. We are not talking about Verizon LTE.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Why is LTE like all over the build.prop then?
Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk
darktranquility18 said:
Why is LTE like all over the build.prop then?
Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon is also slathered all over the framwork files. Phone still doesn't run on their network.
It could be possible depending on what frequencies were rolled out that you could pick up and authenticate to them. Though we have a SIM card slot LTE standard does not Require a SIM card. I have a feeling though it would never happen.
Like I said in my above post I highly doubt any of us will actually have this phone once LTE is available.
All of it really depends on what Sprint does and how they handle their particular implementation.
Look at this and give your opinion...
09/20/2011
BUFFALO, NY — Verizon Wireless announced today it will launch its 4G LTE high-speed data network in the Buffalo/Niagara area on October 20. Residents, businesses and visitors to the area will be able to use their 4G LTE smartphones, tablets, notebooks, laptop modems and hotspots to take advantage of speeds up to 10 times faster than the company’s 3G network. At launch, 4G LTE will be available from the Hamburg and Orchard Park areas in the south to the Niagara Falls and eastern Grand Island areas in the north and east toward the Clarence, Cheektowaga and Depew areas. This deployment is part of the company’s nationwide rollout of its super-fast data network, scheduled to be complete by the end of 2013.
“We’re excited to lead the Buffalo/Niagara area into the 4G LTE wireless broadband world, helping residents, businesses, and local government connect faster and more fully with each other and with those outside the area,” said Russ Preite, president of Verizon Wireless’ Upstate New York Region. “Our 4G LTE network is revolutionizing the way people communicate. We know this connectivity will be a key communications and technology enabler for many years to come.”
In real-world, fully-loaded network environments, 4G LTE users should experience average data rates of 5 to 12 megabits per second (Mbps) on the downlink and 2 to 5 Mbps on the uplink – perfect for surfing the Web, streaming video, and downloading large files wirelessly.
Verizon Wireless introduced the globe’s first large-scale LTE network on December 5, 2010 and is quickly expanding national coverage, currently offering service in 143 markets covering more than half the U.S. population. The company is on course to cover more than 185 million Americans with 4G LTE by the end of 2011. The service launched in the Rochester and New York City markets in December and recently went live in the Albany, Syracuse and Ithaca areas. When customers travel outside of a 4G LTE coverage area, their 4G devices automatically connect to Verizon Wireless’ 3G network, enabling them to stay connected from coast to coast.
As the first wireless company in the world to broadly deploy game-changing 4G LTE technology, Verizon Wireless is committed to building its 4G network with the same performance and reliability for which it has long been recognized. Verizon Wireless’ consistent focus on reliability is based on rigid engineering standards and a disciplined deployment approach year after year. The company’s 700 MHz spectrum gives Verizon Wireless specific advantages with 4G, including a contiguous, nationwide network license.
Visit www.verizonwireless.com/lte for more information about Verizon Wireless’ 4G LTE network.
Buffalo doesnt even have full 3g let alone 4g with sprint yet here comes Big Red to **** **** up for everyone...
Kcarpenter said:
Well - my thoughts on it. By the time that LTE is rolled out on Sprint, most of us if not all of us will be on a new phone. So it really doesn't matter if this phone supports it or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I will still have the same phone because it looks like it might only be 6 months away...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20...aunch-own-4g-lte-network-in-early-2012-scoop/
May be wishful thinking, but we can dream, right?
my2cents said:
I think I will still have the same phone because it looks like it might only be 6 months away...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20...aunch-own-4g-lte-network-in-early-2012-scoop/
May be wishful thinking, but we can dream, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll believe it when I see it. Honestly - I live so far out in the country ill probably never have 4G service, but we'll see.
There are a lot of rumors flying about with the October 7th meeting.
Not true. There is already a list of supported phones. Lte and Rev b and the photon is not listed. So much for a world phone.
ricocollege said:
Not true. There is already a list of supported phones. Lte and Rev b and the photon is not listed. So much for a world phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hard to support 9 different standards.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
ricocollege said:
Not true. There is already a list of supported phones. Lte and Rev b and the photon is not listed. So much for a world phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you post the link to this list?
ricocollege said:
Not true. There is already a list of supported phones. Lte and Rev b and the photon is not listed. So much for a world phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would like to see this list of lte rev b phones, and for those of you out in the country I bet you get lte coverage soon once light squared is up and running all it takes is a receiver to the tower to enable lte. Plus strange thing about the announcement is that sprint is building the lte network and not out sourcing it like their current network.hopefully that is good news.
Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk
Where's the List? Wheres Your Facts?????
ricocollege said:
Not true. There is already a list of supported phones. Lte and Rev b and the photon is not listed. So much for a world phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats odd, a google search only brings up one thing about a list.....YOUR POST.
The photon is in FACT evdo Revision B capable with it's qualcomm cdma mdm6600 chip
there is no such list of supported phones anywhere on sprint for lte because no such list exists
the Photon 4g uses a BECEEM chip for its wimax, indications are that this is the beceem bcs 500 chip that is in fact wimax AND lte capable, motorola has been working with this company on just such a chip, while circumstantial at this time, there is a very strong amount of circumstantial evidence that the photon 4g has the beceem bcs 500 chip in it, some sprint reps and some folks at mortorola have stated this as well besides motorolas partnership with beceem and the beceem chip shipped out first quarter of 2011.
please stop posting disinformation
neither evdo rev b or a wimax/lte chip have anything at all to do with the photon being a worldphone
---------- Post added at 10:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 PM ----------
halfdriven said:
the Photon does not support LTE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lots of rumors, partnerships, statemens that it does indeed support lte, that the motorola photon 4g has the beceem bcs 500 chip in it, the fcc hardware specs are classified til jan 2 of 2012, rather odd since no other phone has a gag order on its wimax chip, motorola has been working with beceem for two years on just such a chip, beceems first wimax/lte chip shipped out first quarter of 2011, plans for the chip began in early 2010. Photon began production in 2nd quarter of 2011. There is no concrete evidence yet but we do know for a fact the photon has a beceem chip, i suspect the truth comes out in january, one can clearly understand why sprint wouldnt want this info out just yet and I suspect people who make such short statements saying it doesnt have not spent five minutes researching the topic otherwise they wouldnt be soo convinced it doesnt. feel free to google beceem, motorola, beceem bcs 500 chip etc. and connect the dots folks.
only one posting claiming it has the beceem bcs 350 chip and thats all that post says, no support at all of their claims.
mystery, intrigue, classified fcc documents with held from the public, partnership between motorola and beceem, sprint switching to lte, beceem the only maker of a wimax/lte compatible chip who the hell else would they be selling that chip to? verizon? like I said folks......do about twelve hours of research on the topic as I have and see if you come away confident with the statement that the photon does not support lte. and dont forget to hook the photon up to your computer, lte is all over the build files.
Yup! I concur! We're light years away from getting any network improvements...lol
Kcarpenter said:
Well - my thoughts on it. By the time that LTE is rolled out on Sprint, most of us if not all of us will be on a new phone. So it really doesn't matter if this phone supports it or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you turn on WiMAX then dial ##786# it lists the WiMAX chipset as bece3502 take that for what you want.
Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk
Lte seems like a no go:
deedscreen said:
I have heard otherwise but still cannot get a straight answer... we are talking about LightSquared 4G LTE, and I spoke to nearly 10 Sprint/Motorola reps and they all say yes, but then I here no. We are not talking about Verizon LTE.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hearing otherwise and knowing for a fact are two different things. The Photon does not have the capability to use LTE....Fact
halfdriven said:
Hearing otherwise and knowing for a fact are two different things. The Photon does not have the capability to use LTE....Fact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
jeriel05 said:
Lte seems like a no go:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe yes, maybe no. All the screen print shows is that LTE isn't in the current software build.
Could a future software build enable LTE? I don't know.
I have an Infuse and plan to stay with it until it comes off contract, but I looked at the SGSII page on AT&T's website and it says 4G HSPA+... Really? Is it really only HSPA+? Or does AT&T want to repel all customers by advertising a Ferrari as having a 20HP Ford engine?
LTE is on a different model and comes out later. This one is HSPA+ only.
I'm glad it doesn't have LTE. I like having a reasonably sized phone with good battery life.
Haven't you noticed that Verizon customers are screwed? They get a choice of outdated underpowered phones, or battery-hogging fatties that provide no speed benefits for a significant portion of the population. In fact, apparently many of Verizon's LTE phones don't work well at all in non-LTE service areas.
I won't see LTE anywhere near where I live for years (probably not until my next upgrade cycle at least) so I'm glad this doesn't have LTE.
strychninetwitch said:
I have an Infuse and plan to stay with it until it comes off contract, but I looked at the SGSII page on AT&T's website and it says 4G HSPA+... Really? Is it really only HSPA+? Or does AT&T want to repel all customers by advertising a Ferrari as having a 20HP Ford engine?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it does not have LTE. LTE on AT&T is only available in a very small amount of cities. However, AT&T is not good at advertising just as you are not good at researching....
Entropy512 said:
I'm glad it doesn't have LTE. I like having a reasonably sized phone with good battery life.
Haven't you noticed that Verizon customers are screwed? They get a choice of outdated underpowered phones, or battery-hogging fatties that provide no speed benefits for a significant portion of the population. In fact, apparently many of Verizon's LTE phones don't work well at all in non-LTE service areas.
I won't see LTE anywhere near where I live for years (probably not until my next upgrade cycle at least) so I'm glad this doesn't have LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 10char.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
The guy at the store said that the phone is let capable and can be upgraded by an ota update later on. People have also found out that they have an lte icon in the system too. So its definitely on this phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
shadowskorch said:
The guy at the store said that the phone is let capable and can be upgraded by an ota update later on. People have also found out that they have an lte icon in the system too. So its definitely on this phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your ****ing kidding me right? You can't be that dumb. It's not software related. There is NO LTE modem in the device. Are people seriously this gullible?
They use the same systemUI.apk where all your 3G, H, and H+ icons are located and just change xml's for different devices.
If the guy at the store said you can run iPhone apps, you going to believe him too?
Call me a jerk, asshole, whatever some people just need to be treated like they have no intelligence.
Sent from my Insanity powered SGS2
shadowskorch said:
The guy at the store said that the phone is let capable and can be upgraded by an ota update later on. People have also found out that they have an lte icon in the system too. So its definitely on this phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep.
SALESMEN NEVER LIE TO MAKE A SALE
shadowskorch said:
The guy at the store said that the phone is let capable and can be upgraded by an ota update later on. People have also found out that they have an lte icon in the system too. So its definitely on this phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Store reps can NEVER be trusted for information like this.
And the presence of icons means nothing. A lot of frameworks are designed in a generic manner to ease software maintenance. We've got bootsplashes for Korean devices in our param.lfs for example.
Woah. Slow down there bud. This isn't my first android phone. I knew i wanted this weeks in advance so i didn't really care whether it had 4g. Now that i see reports of it being a possibility you go ape sh*t on me. You have to chill out.
Sent from my SGS II using xda premium
Because by marketing regulations, AT&T can call their HSPA+ network 4G.
I'm surprised no one's complaining about TMO's less competent HSPA+ network.
Its just how oil companies can market their stuff as full synthetic as long as they have an X% of synthetic oil in overall volume.
shadowskorch said:
Woah. Slow down there bud. This isn't my first android phone. I knew i wanted this weeks in advance so i didn't really care whether it had 4g. Now that i see reports of it being a possibility you go ape sh*t on me. You have to chill out.
Sent from my SGS II using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You didn't "see reports of it being a possibility" - you said it was definitely on this phone.
It is definitely NOT on this phone.
Entropy512 said:
You didn't "see reports of it being a possibility" - you said it was definitely on this phone.
It is definitely NOT on this phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 and ill chill out when you educate yourself.
Sent from my Insanity powered SGS2
In the "post your stock firmware " thread most, but not all were identical. Could odd balls possibly have different hardware? I can early upgrade on 10/16 from Infuse. If LTE version comes out wouldn't one be able to disable LTE radio/network like other bands? Would think it also would have hsdpa+ as a fallback??
an INFUSION of REALITY
shadowskorch said:
Woah. Slow down there bud. This isn't my first android phone. I knew i wanted this weeks in advance so i didn't really care whether it had 4g. Now that i see reports of it being a possibility you go ape sh*t on me. You have to chill out.
Sent from my SGS II using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In your post you said it was "definitely" on this phone "because the guy in the store told you" and you wonder why you got skewered?
At$t also has not finished the backhaul on its Hspa+ network, so most places do not even get that.
But the nice thing about hspa+ once it is done everyone will have access to a 21mbps network, that is pretty damn fast.
The no lte does not bother me a bit considering At$t hasn't even completed their +hspa.
smitty1 said:
At$t also has not finished the backhaul on its Hspa+ network, so most places do not even get that.
But the nice thing about hspa+ once it is done everyone will have access to a 21mbps network, that is pretty damn fast.
The no lte does not bother me a bit considering At$t hasn't even completed their +hspa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 - Couldn't agree more.
bluetoothless said:
In the "post your stock firmware " thread most, but not all were identical. Could odd balls possibly have different hardware? I can early upgrade on 10/16 from Infuse. If LTE version comes out wouldn't one be able to disable LTE radio/network like other bands? Would think it also would have hsdpa+ as a fallback??
an INFUSION of REALITY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the LTE version just entered field testing. It is different sized phone and uses a different CPU (1.5Ghz Qualcomm vs 1.2GHz Exynos) as well. So, there will not be a mix up.
I guess the way AT&T advertises is they write 4G in bold letters with a star which says 4G speeds by HSPA Network.
smitty1 said:
At$t also has not finished the backhaul on its Hspa+ network, so most places do not even get that.
But the nice thing about hspa+ once it is done everyone will have access to a 21mbps network, that is pretty damn fast.
The no lte does not bother me a bit considering At$t hasn't even completed their +hspa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is LTE even that much faster than H+'s 21mbps? I don't see the point of getting an LTE phone for that extra speed while it drains your battery. How much speed do you really need to play Words with Friends? I'll stick with H+ phones
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/10/3011498/sprint-small-cell-deployment-lte-rollout
pretty interesting.
Sprint better find a way to roll out their LTE quicker and with more coverage. After all, who launches a LTE phone without LTE being available? I think the sales for Evo LTE will suffer greatly because of lack of LTE. By the time LTE is up, the Evo LTE will be old news.
aypanthony said:
Sprint better find a way to roll out their LTE quicker and with more coverage. After all, who launches a LTE phone without LTE being available? I think the sales for Evo LTE will suffer greatly because of lack of LTE. By the time LTE is up, the Evo LTE will be old news.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The evo 4g was available before Wimax was in 90% of places that it's currently available.
I think more people are likely to buy a phone that is ready for what is coming(LTE) than a phone that is for what is leaving(WiMax).
aypanthony said:
Sprint better find a way to roll out their LTE quicker and with more coverage. After all, who launches a LTE phone without LTE being available? I think the sales for Evo LTE will suffer greatly because of lack of LTE. By the time LTE is up, the Evo LTE will be old news.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I might be mistaken, but im pretty sure VRZ did the same thing. The sold LTE phones before the LTE network was officially up and running.
swaze said:
I might be mistaken, but im pretty sure VRZ did the same thing. The sold LTE phones before the LTE network was officially up and running.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. The Thunderbolt didn't have LTE at launch if I remember correctly. Sprint has LTE running but has blocked users from connecting. I bet they will have the Atlanta market ready by release of the new Evo.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Vinchenzop said:
The evo 4g was available before Wimax was in 90% of places that it's currently available.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear ya knockin'. These days, phones become outdated fast....faster than when the OG Evo came out. I want the Evo LTE to succeed, but not having LTE out at this point in time doesn't make me want to upgrade to it and people from other carriers won't want to leave their 4G. And a few months from now, when LTE finally gets going, the Evo LTE will be considered old. Just my $0.02.
Good news that Sprint is going the extra mile to improve the LTE.
This makes me laugh.
Sprint is essentially using hardware that is designed for home use (say a family of four) and rolling it out as a solution to it's congested network.
Is THIS their "Network Vision?"
No wonder I'm not surprised when I get 1kbps download. Can't wait for Sprint to install some "personal network extenders" (way better than an actual network) in my area, maybe I'll see 2kbps.
Two kids with a couple of paper cups connected by a piece of string has a better network than Sprint.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
flonker said:
This makes me laugh.
Sprint is essentially using hardware that is designed for home use (say a family of four) and rolling it out as a solution to it's congested network.
Is THIS their "Network Vision?"
No wonder I'm not surprised when I get 1kbps download. Can't wait for Sprint to install some "personal network extenders" (way better than an actual network) in my area, maybe I'll see 2kbps.
Two kids with a couple of paper cups connected by a piece of string has a better network than Sprint.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're so disgruntled with them, then why do you stay with them? Not trying to argue, nor troll.
edit: I don't have 4g, I barely have 3g, and when I do have 3g it is intolerable. However, sprint has the best voice coverage in my area, so I keep them. After all, these are phones
Vinchenzop said:
If you're so disgruntled with them, then why do you stay with them? Not trying to argue, nor troll.
edit: I don't have 4g, I barely have 3g, and when I do have 3g it is intolerable. However, sprint has the best voice coverage in my area, so I keep them. After all, these are phones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not paying to get out of my contract (especially now that Sprint upped ETF's), that is why I stay. Simple as that.
Before I signed my current contract, I talked to a Sprint representative (not a Sprint store employee) who assured me that Sprint was going to be extremely proactive in establishing a network.
Since then:
-Sprint upped ETF's
-Sprint spent funds that should have been allocated to improving it's network on the iPhone
-Sprint ended the premiere rewards program (a major reason I stayed)
Prediction: When Sprint finally has a network that can compete with other companies say goodbye to unlimited data plans. Sprint only keeps them around because that is the only card they have to play.
Getting back to the article, Sprint needs to completely overhaul it's network, not deploy "personal network extenders" that only mask the problem.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Sounds like a stall on the lte?
Sent from my EVO 4G LTE
flonker said:
I'm not paying to get out of my contract (especially now that Sprint upped ETF's), that is why I stay. Simple as that.
Before I signed my current contract, I talked to a Sprint representative (not a Sprint store employee) who assured me that Sprint was going to be extremely proactive in establishing a network.
Since then:
-Sprint upped ETF's
-Sprint spent funds that should have been allocated to improving it's network on the iPhone
-Sprint ended the premiere rewards program (a major reason I stayed)
Prediction: When Sprint finally has a network that can compete with other companies say goodbye to unlimited data plans. Sprint only keeps them around because that is the only card they have to play.
Getting back to the article, Sprint needs to completely overhaul it's network, not deploy "personal network extenders" that only mask the problem.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't care how they do it, I just want the end result to be better than the Wimax. Which it will be.
Verizon did it pretty damned fast, AT&T is trying under extreme odds, Sprint doing it on their own should be inbetween.
flonker said:
This makes me laugh.
Sprint is essentially using hardware that is designed for home use (say a family of four) and rolling it out as a solution to it's congested network.
Is THIS their "Network Vision?"
No wonder I'm not surprised when I get 1kbps download. Can't wait for Sprint to install some "personal network extenders" (way better than an actual network) in my area, maybe I'll see 2kbps.
Two kids with a couple of paper cups connected by a piece of string has a better network than Sprint.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lets just say someone has no idea what network vision is or what it entails.
swaze said:
Lets just say someone has no idea what network vision is or what it entails.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It involves awesomeness. That's what. I bet it will be better than the other 3 carriers once it is finished.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
notasimpleway said:
It involves awesomeness. That's what. I bet it will be better than the other 3 carriers once it is finished.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...if Sprint can do it without going bankrupt first.
This sounds like a great idea for high traffic areas. Reminds me specifically last year at the state fair; there were so many people in such a small area that the tower(s) were so overloaded that data, voice, AND texting were absolutely unusable. You simply could not get through no matter what. It was horrible. Areas like that would be perfect for these small cells.
I'm just as fed up with sprints data service as everyone else is, but I have hope. If network vision ends up being as good as they say it is, I'll definitely be staying with them.
ncfastls1 said:
This sounds like a great idea for high traffic areas. Reminds me specifically last year at the state fair; there were so many people in such a small area that the tower(s) were so overloaded that data, voice, AND texting were absolutely unusable. You simply could not get through no matter what. It was horrible. Areas like that would be perfect for these small cells.
I'm just as fed up with sprints data service as everyone else is, but I have hope. If network vision ends up being as good as they say it is, I'll definitely be staying with them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
look at the towers they own. lmao. they don't own any towers. they have an entire tower in a CITY! then claim, OH YOU NOW HOW 4G! OR WE'RE DOING VOICE UPGRADES! SERIOUSLY!? TO A SINGLE TOWER!? It takes a network of towers in the RIGHT SPOTS to provide service. Sprint is a waste of time.
runcool said:
look at the towers they own. lmao. they don't own any towers. they have an entire tower in a CITY! then claim, OH YOU NOW HOW 4G! OR WE'RE DOING VOICE UPGRADES! SERIOUSLY!? TO A SINGLE TOWER!? It takes a network of towers in the RIGHT SPOTS to provide service. Sprint is a waste of time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. All these people are swallowing everything Sprint is feeding them.
"Network Vision is going to be great!"
"Sprint's network is going to be better than all the other carriers!"
Please. "Network Vision" is just that, a vision, a concept, an idea, a hope and a dream. It only becomes a reality when Sprint begins to aggressively overhaul it's 3G and 4G networks. Not install "personal network extenders." lol.
Sprint has the crappiest network and is pretty much broke. I'm so sure that they will have the best network available in two years time.
I'm guessing that the people who believe in all this "Network Vision" crap are the same people that thought WiMAX would be better than lte. How'd that play out.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
flonker said:
Exactly. All these people are swallowing everything Sprint is feeding them.
"Network Vision is going to be great!"
"Sprint's network is going to be better than all the other carriers!"
Please. "Network Vision" is just that, a vision, a concept, an idea, a hope and a dream. It only becomes a reality when Sprint begins to aggressively overhaul it's 3G and 4G networks. Not install "personal network extenders." lol.
Sprint has the crappiest network and is pretty much broke. I'm so sure that they will have the best network available in two years time.
I'm guessing that the people who believe in all this "Network Vision" crap are the same people that thought WiMAX would be better than lte. How'd that play out.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Played out pretty well. 12-15 mbps for me. That's plenty of fast for the things I use it for.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
swaze said:
Played out pretty well. 12-15 mbps for me. That's plenty of fast for the things I use it for.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did it? Know how much money Sprint shoved into that network even though nearly everyone in the industry said it would never work? What do they have to show for it? A network that they will keep around for the next couple of years until they redo it with lte, what it should have been in the first place.
I'm glad you can use it and that it works good for you, that still doesn't replace the fact that it was a huge business mistake.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA