I guess I am gullible.
AT&T says their network is the only one that you can talk and surf at the same time.
Not true. I most certainly can on my EvoLte.
If I am the only one that was this ignorant then man do I really feel stupid.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
They advertise it typically on their iPhone commercials, and that was certainly true before iPhone 5.
All GSM networks can talk and surf at the same time. All networks can talk and surf if backed up by data network (LTE/wimax or WiFi). But CDMA networks such as Verizon and Sprint, without backup data connection, it's Evo LTE and maybe Droid DNA are the only phones that can talk and surf at the same time.
I find it fun to show my AT&T rep (i work @ best buy mobile) but then she shows me a speed test (just HSPA+ in the area for AT&T but there is Sprint LTE in the neighborhood but not in the building). lol
sent from my EVO LTE using xda premium, proud owner since 6/3/12
droiddawg said:
I find it fun to show my AT&T rep (i work @ best buy mobile) but then she shows me a speed test (just HSPA+ in the area for AT&T but there is Sprint LTE in the neighborhood but not in the building). lol
sent from my EVO LTE using xda premium, proud owner since 6/3/12
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol. I did a speed test brawl with my mom's iPhone 5 on 4G at&t and mine wy evo lte. She had 40mbps or something like that. Mine topped at 350kbps. Hahaha. 3G speeds are great in Minnesota... 4G LTE doesn't really exist here.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Its called svdo and its very old news.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Well I've hit 36mbps here at my house on Sprint LTE!! Not sure how AT&T compares as I don't know anyone with AT&T, but with that said, I'm assuming they aren't that great in my area.
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
stanglifemike said:
Well I've hit 36mbps here at my house on Sprint LTE!! Not sure how AT&T compares as I don't know anyone with AT&T, but with that said, I'm assuming they aren't that great in my area.
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds great!
stanglifemike said:
Well I've hit 36mbps here at my house on Sprint LTE!! Not sure how AT&T compares as I don't know anyone with AT&T, but with that said, I'm assuming they aren't that great in my area.
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great speed. In NYC, where LTE is available, I get something around 3-4mbps down, about 4 up. Maybe because NYC is not officially launched and they are still testing things.
Meanee said:
They advertise it typically on their iPhone commercials, and that was certainly true before iPhone 5.
All GSM networks can talk and surf at the same time. All networks can talk and surf if backed up by data network (LTE/wimax or WiFi). But CDMA networks such as Verizon and Sprint, without backup data connection, it's Evo LTE and maybe Droid DNA are the only phones that can talk and surf at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not quite true, did you know that the iphone 5 on sprint/verizon can't do voice and data at the same time even while on lte? Also, did you know that the evo lte, gs3, viper 4g can also do voice and data simultaneously over 3g and not just lte? Like someone else said, its called svdo. Not every lte phone is capable of svdo but there are a few that are and what determines svdo capabilities is the chip/radio design in the phone and not on the network side.
themuffinman said:
Not quite true, did you know that the iphone 5 on sprint/verizon can't do voice and data at the same time even while on lte? Also, did you know that the evo lte, gs3, viper 4g can also do voice and data simultaneously over 3g and not just lte? Like someone else said, its called svdo. Not every lte phone is capable of svdo but there are a few that are and what determines svdo capabilities is the chip/radio design in the phone and not on the network side.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, if possible, why wouldn't Apple install the chip/radio possible of doing simultaneous voice and data on the Verizon and Sprint versions of all the iPhones since they did on all of the AT&T versions? Seems like a no-brainer for Apple to do that, and make their iPhone stand out amongst all other phones. Also, why only do it for AT&T versions and not Sprint and Verizon? Just seems like a stupid business/marketing decision Apple made, if it is possible and they just chose not to...
Also, so the GS3 can do simultaneous voice and data over 3G on all of the carriers that it's offered on? That's very interesting, because I had no idea! I thought that it was something only possible on newer Android phones when connected to LTE. I have never known that it has been possible for a while on Android with the right chip/radio. Why wouldn't manufacturers do this sooner!? Why did multiple manufacturers suddenly decide to do this to their phones around the same time? Just seems crazy to me! If I was HTC, I would have been putting this chip/radio in for a while now, as something to make them stand out against other Android phones! Seems like a very obvious marketing strategy!!
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
I have and do quite often talk and use data at the same time on Sprints 3G signal on my EVO LTE. It does work.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
stanglifemike said:
So, if possible, why wouldn't Apple install the chip/radio possible of doing simultaneous voice and data on the Verizon and Sprint versions of all the iPhones since they did on all of the AT&T versions? Seems like a no-brainer for Apple to do that, and make their iPhone stand out amongst all other phones. Also, why only do it for AT&T versions and not Sprint and Verizon? Just seems like a stupid business/marketing decision Apple made, if it is possible and they just chose not to...
Also, so the GS3 can do simultaneous voice and data over 3G on all of the carriers that it's offered on? That's very interesting, because I had no idea! I thought that it was something only possible on newer Android phones when connected to LTE. I have never known that it has been possible for a while on Android with the right chip/radio. Why wouldn't manufacturers do this sooner!? Why did multiple manufacturers suddenly decide to do this to their phones around the same time? Just seems crazy to me! If I was HTC, I would have been putting this chip/radio in for a while now, as something to make them stand out against other Android phones! Seems like a very obvious marketing strategy!!
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iphone on att has been able to talk and surf at the same time because thats how gsm works. For a cdma phone to do talk and surf at the same time u need a dedicated internet source or an svdo radio installed in the phone. My guess is apples proprietary hw wouldnt work with an svdo radio on sprint/verizon. Or they just simply didnt want to include it.
Sent from my EVO LTE 4G
franky_402 said:
The iphone on att has been able to talk and surf at the same time because thats how gsm works. For a cdma phone to do talk and surf at the same time u need a dedicated internet source or an svdo radio installed in the phone. My guess is apples proprietary hw wouldnt work with an svdo radio on sprint/verizon. Or they just simply didnt want to include it.
Sent from my EVO LTE 4G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool. Thanks. Yea, I knew that the iphone on AT&T has been capable of this for a while now. I thought that all GSM networks were capable of this. After reading themuffinman's post, I thought he was saying that it was all up to the phone itself and didn't rely on the network at all. That would mean that a GSM network wasn't always capable of doing this, but if the phone was capable THEN it was possible. After reading your post, then re-reading his post; I think what he was saying is that CDMA networks couldn't do this if the phone isn't made capable, and not that GSM networks couldn't if the phone wasn't capable. Now that makes sense to me, and is how I've always thought that it worked.
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
stanglifemike said:
So, if possible, why wouldn't Apple install the chip/radio possible of doing simultaneous voice and data on the Verizon and Sprint versions of all the iPhones since they did on all of the AT&T versions? Seems like a no-brainer for Apple to do that, and make their iPhone stand out amongst all other phones. Also, why only do it for AT&T versions and not Sprint and Verizon? Just seems like a stupid business/marketing decision Apple made, if it is possible and they just chose not to...
Also, so the GS3 can do simultaneous voice and data over 3G on all of the carriers that it's offered on? That's very interesting, because I had no idea! I thought that it was something only possible on newer Android phones when connected to LTE. I have never known that it has been possible for a while on Android with the right chip/radio. Why wouldn't manufacturers do this sooner!? Why did multiple manufacturers suddenly decide to do this to their phones around the same time? Just seems crazy to me! If I was HTC, I would have been putting this chip/radio in for a while now, as something to make them stand out against other Android phones! Seems like a very obvious marketing strategy!!
Sent from my White Evo LTE running MeanBean, using XDA Premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the Qualcomm chip that enables svdo on cdma networks wasn't out yet. It made its first appearance on the LG Viper 4G. Once the chip became available only then could manufacturers add it on. Like Evo lte and GS3. You see how Samsung decided to go with their Exynos quadcore in the Note 2 and because of it unlike the S3 we have no svdo.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using xda app-developers app
I forget who but I just laugh at the one who doesn't understand why apple wouldn't do it for all phones, its bad marketing.
HELLO its apple after all lol
Not being mean, please don't take it that way, just saying
RootBox EVO LTE 4.2 Baby!
IMO it's because apple likes to leave things out so they can put them in the next version. That way they can tout it as a 'new' feature (new to them at least) and the sheep will buy in.
Remember how the original Iphone didn't have 3g?
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
moses2303 said:
IMO it's because apple likes to leave things out so they can put them in the next version. That way they can tout it as a 'new' feature (new to them at least) and the sheep will buy in.
Remember how the original Iphone didn't have 3g?
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This probably wasn't so much an Apple decision as it was an AT&T decision. AT&T has been hit hard ever since they lost the iPhone exclusivity in the states, they want to milk it for all its worth. Apple doesn't do the "leave a feature out" bit on purpose.
The original iPhone did not have 3G because 3G wasn't nearly as ubiquitous as it is now. Well, I say "as it is now" but then I look at my phone right now and I see that I'm on 1X anyway. Not many people even realize that when the first iPhone came out, smartphones weren't seen as the multi-purpose machines that they are now. Hell, the first few revisions of iOS weren't even designed with the idea of third-party apps at all. We've come a long way since then.
We could also be called "sheep" as well, you know, we keep buying into more and more powerful Android phones with insane processors and ridiculous GPUs but it wasn't until Android 4.2 that the UI is as consistently 60FPS-smooth as an iPhone that has half (if not less) the processing power. Just saying, you should keep an open unbiased mind, that's what separates you from the fanboy-lusting Android people who froth at the mouth when Apple is mentioned and mature, logical, and reasonable adults. (not accusing anyone of the former)
Afaik all iPhones are identical internally across all carriers regardless of gsm/cdma...only reason a att iPhone won't work on sprint is bc sprint won't allow it ...they won't even allow an unlocked phone on the network even though it is perfectly capable of it ..
firmbiz94 said:
Afaik all iPhones are identical internally across all carriers regardless of gsm/cdma...only reason a att iPhone won't work on sprint is bc sprint won't allow it ...they won't even allow an unlocked phone on the network even though it is perfectly capable of it ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, due to the nature of CDMA and ESNs, you can't actually "unlock" a CDMA phone (unless someone would like to correct me).
RayTrue04 said:
Because the Qualcomm chip that enables svdo on cdma networks wasn't out yet. It made its first appearance on the LG Viper 4G. Once the chip became available only then could manufacturers add it on. Like Evo lte and GS3. You see how Samsung decided to go with their Exynos quadcore in the Note 2 and because of it unlike the S3 we have no svdo.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not entirely true there.... Chips were out that could support it before the Viper...
Hence the Thunderbolt had it with the addition of an extra modem on board on the MDM9600, which was used for evdo data, and let the MSM8655 handle the 1x cdma voice connection....bringing you svdo... Now sprint had no need for the extra MDM chip like Verizon did back then as its main purpose was for LTE connectivity... Not worth adding the extra modem back then just for svdo...
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Related
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
so sprint just announced there first lte network area, and i just happen to live smack dab in the middle
http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/28/sprint-caps-year-of-network-vision-milestones-with-first-lte-clu/
so other than huge jumping jacks being done by me, how likely is it that our/my phone will be able to be the new baddest MoPho on the planet?
**edit** wrong link
Photon doesn't have an LTE radio so its not like you'll get to use it *jealousy shrug* lol. LTE sprint phones should make an appearance on sprint's line up some time next year. I'm thinking after the summer or Q4.
i thought i read somewhere that the photon had a dual wimax/lte chip?
bullfrog527 said:
i thought i read somewhere that the photon had a dual wimax/lte chip?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope lol. Just wimax, cdma 1x evdo, and the gsm bands. I don't think there's a single phone on the market that has both wimax and lte if it is I bet you won't find in the US.
http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_photon_4g_mb855-3987.php
bullfrog527 said:
i thought i read somewhere that the photon had a dual wimax/lte chip?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Theres been rumors it does and that motorola has been hiding it..
We wont know until motorola releases the official full hardware specs of the phone this month (i think around mid this month) along with the phones kernel
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
TheChronicDroid said:
Theres been rumors it does and that motorola has been hiding it..
We wont know until motorola releases the official full hardware specs of the phone this month (i think around mid this month) along with the phones kernel
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no way they could hide it lol. The phone would have to be thicker to include a wimax and LTE radio. Again, there's no phone in the US that has this and I assure you the photon isn't going to be the one. There's been plenty of complete tear downs/videos and a wimax radio was alone. No LTE. I doubt they would "hide it" then reveal it. That doesn't really make sense to a marketing standpoint; if it had an LTE radio sprint would market the **** out of the photon to make money since the photon would be the only phone in the world with that combo.
I've been told many times by Motorola & Sprint that it has LTE, and we will get it in a software update. I am going to wait and see. Who knows, we may be surprised, although I am not counting on it.
kennypow3rs said:
There's no way they could hide it lol. The phone would have to be thicker to include a wimax and LTE radio. Again, there's no phone in the US that has this and I assure you the photon isn't going to be the one. There's been plenty of complete tear downs/videos and a wimax radio was alone. No LTE. I doubt they would "hide it" then reveal it. That doesn't really make sense to a marketing standpoint; if it had an LTE radio sprint would market the **** out of the photon to make money since the photon would be the only phone in the world with that combo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then why else would they not release there specs till january around the same time sprint reveals a big suprise at ces the 10th and motorola be the first company around the same time as development of this phone talk with beceem to create a wiimax+lte chip anddd they could not release that info to sell sprints other phones for the time being then the people who have those phones but want lte when available would have to buy the photon?.. also like the guy said above me many sprint stores will tell you there will be an update for lte on our phones.. And the phone wouldnt be that much thicker at all if it was anyways its already a lil thick compared to samsung phones... The only tear downs ive seen couldnt get past the metal plating covering the radios.. If they did the lte+wiimax chip is a pretty simple looking chip so easily missed.. Not saying your wrong just saying I do believe there is a possibility and listed all the arguements ive heard stating why (ive also validated those arguements too) either way I love this phone!!
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
I guess I'll be one of the first to find out! It would be really cool if it is true, oh well if not.
bullfrog527 said:
I guess I'll be one of the first to find out! It would be really cool if it is true, oh well if not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you plan on doing a teardown and soldering off the metal plates? Because if so yoyu would settle a long time rumor and possibly make it to engadget or phandroid. Either way I'm excited.
Sent from the MY perspective EVO SHIFT 4G using xda premium
I meant ill find out if it does when they turn on the network and update the software on our phones.
bullfrog527 said:
I meant ill find out if it does when they turn on the network and update the software on our phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You willing to put a little wager on that? You're not getting an update because it doesn't have LTE in the phone lol.
Hey chronic you wanna bet?
deedscreen said:
I've been told many times by Motorola & Sprint that it has LTE, and we will get it in a software update. I am going to wait and see. Who knows, we may be surprised, although I am not counting on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I work for corporate Sprint and can say that the Motorola Photon 4G does not have a LTE chipset in it nor do any of the smartphones in current product line up have one either. Go into a Sprint S&R Center and have a TSR show you the MoBo of a MoPho and you'll see the chipset is a WiMax one. The Sprint market where LTE has been turned up is immaterial in the sense that they are not any devices currently available to take advantage of it. I would suggest people to tune into CES 2012 where we will make announcements pertaining to various technologies to be deployed as well as new products and services
I've been telling these dudes this lol.
Oh well, I guess it was just another wet dream!
wireless.praying.mantis said:
I work for corporate Sprint and can say that the Motorola Photon 4G does not have a LTE chipset in it nor do any of the smartphones in current product line up have one either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Was told by Motorola this same thing... however, was told also that they're working on an LTE phone for Sprint... for some reason, Sprint & Motorola don't get along that well...
So if us cellular has a LTE network in select cities, could the electrify have the lte radio? Or do they have another 4G phone in the works?
Now would it be possible that they made the photon with the beacem 500 for the purpose of having a test phone for the network for when they were testing their lte network?
Sent from the MY perspective EVO SHIFT 4G using xda premium
bullfrog527 said:
So if us cellular has a LTE network in select cities, could the electrify have the lte radio? Or do they have another 4G phone in the works?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From everything I've read from US Cellular, our phone wont do 4g. (this wont surprise some, but there were/are people holding out hope). Just read there announcement today that they have several new phones and a tablet in "R&D" for there new 4g network. Supposed to debut in select areas in June, if memory serves.
Sent from my CWM OC'd CM7 Electrify.
Sprint store reps don't know
I was due for a phone update and asked a rep in one of the Sprint corporate store about the LTE 4G that is coming out and does the current phones have the hardware to be able to use this and was told that all of the current top 4G phones (Galaxy II s, HTC Evo 3D, Motorola Photon, etc..) will be able to use the LTE 4G. Now that I have a Photon and will be stuck for 22 months should I return it and wait for a LTE 4G phone to upgrade to? I thought it was probably tgtbt that the current phones would be able to support the new LTE 4G. I probably should contact someone in Sprint about what customers are being told to make a sale!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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
I've been with Sprint for 12 years and it has always been that you couldn't have data and voice at the same time with their system unless you were on the 4G connection. What changed with the EVO, I now have a data connection when I am talking. I can surf the net, emails come through, everything just like I have a 4G connection. I'm in Portland and we don't have LTE here so I know that's not it. I'm not complaining just curious.
It's called SVDO, simultaneous voice over data. Separate chips allow for this.
Well-known feature, but not well-publicized. The upgraded towers will allow SVDO on newer phones.
muffinhunter said:
Well-known feature, but not well-publicized. The upgraded towers will allow SVDO on newer phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has nothing to do with upgraded towers, its either a phone supports it or not. Hell, the iphone 5 doesn't support it and neither does the gnex, but the evo lte, gs3 and viper does.
themuffinman said:
It has nothing to do with upgraded towers, its either a phone supports it or not. Hell, the iphone 5 doesn't support it and neither does the gnex, but the evo lte, gs3 and viper does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was my understanding it was a combination of both. I find it difficult to imagine that Sprint could've had SVDO for years if only phone manufacturers supported it.
Edit: there's really no clear answer, but you may be right.
Closing this as there is a lengthy thread on this already here...
SVDO....and yes its the phone that allows it. Nothing to do with a change they made nationwide to all towers overnight...
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
While this isn't a deal breaker as I get 4g about 90% of the time, it may be a bummer for other people. The galaxy s3 can do data and voice simultaneously while on 4g and 3g. I don't know why they did not include it on this phone. The gs4 only does simultaneous voice/data while on 4g. I download files all the time as well as ROMs and would hate for my download to be interrupted or broken if a call comes in. Just posting this to help anyone who has not yet purchased their s4 and has to have this feature... You have been warned!!
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
cell128 said:
While this isn't a deal breaker as I get 4g about 90% of the time, it may be a bummer for other people. The galaxy s3 can do data and voice simultaneously while on 4g and 3g. I don't know why they did not include it on this phone. The gs4 only does simultaneous voice/data while on 4g. I download files all the time as well as ROMs and would hate for my download to be interrupted or broken if a call comes in. Just posting this to help anyone who has not yet purchased their s4 and has to have this feature... You have been warned!!
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i remember no Verizon phone was able to get data while on a voice call prior to 4G LTE deployment. And I remember AT&T took that as a marketing advantage against Verizon.
cell128 said:
While this isn't a deal breaker as I get 4g about 90% of the time, it may be a bummer for other people. The galaxy s3 can do data and voice simultaneously while on 4g and 3g. I don't know why they did not include it on this phone. The gs4 only does simultaneous voice/data while on 4g. I download files all the time as well as ROMs and would hate for my download to be interrupted or broken if a call comes in. Just posting this to help anyone who has not yet purchased their s4 and has to have this feature... You have been warned!!
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
3g, being CDMA for Verizon, is not capable of supporting simultaneous voice and data. The Verizon Galaxy SIII was not able to do it on 3g either. Hopefully it won't be a problem too much longer as Verizon moves away from crappy CDMA and covers the whole country in tasty LTE.
camaroz28 said:
3g, being CDMA for Verizon, is not capable of supporting simultaneous voice and data. The Verizon Galaxy SIII was not able to do it on 3g either. Hopefully it won't be a problem too much longer as Verizon moves away from crappy CDMA and covers the whole country in tasty LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^this! word!
yea, most areas already have 4G LTE compared to the other big 3 providers. I'm very happy with Verizon's LTE coverage.
camaroz28 said:
3g, being CDMA for Verizon, is not capable of supporting simultaneous voice and data. The Verizon Galaxy SIII was not able to do it on 3g either. Hopefully it won't be a problem too much longer as Verizon moves away from crappy CDMA and covers the whole country in tasty LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The GS3 IS capable of doing voice & data simultaneously over 3g CDMA. I've done it many times. For the first few months of owning the GS3 my area was 3g only and I would talk and surf simultaneously all the time.I wasn't able to do it on any of my previous phones.
Thankfully I have LTE now but the GS3 can do CDMA+Data
I'm not familiar with the GS3, but I know the Thunderbolt was capable of simultaneous voice & data in either 3G & LTE, but that was because it had multiple onboard radios. The major downsides with having multiple radios is that it raises cost and constantly draws power (even when off due to leakage current). They probably made a design decision to not include additional hardware for simultaneous connections because LTE has become prevalent (as well as WiFi) so this isn't a major issue for most folks.
It was my understanding (since I've been with verizon, and 3 phones so far) that CDMA is 1X (equivalent of Edge on GSM) and EVDO is 3G while 4G is LTE (which uses a GSM style signal if I'm not mistaken also).
Granted the only phone I was forced to use 3G on was the Thunderbolt (no 4G LTE yet) so I guess I can't compare, but this is interesting if it actually is true. I'll have to try it later... tether in 3G mode and call someone
yyhd said:
i remember no Verizon phone was able to get data while on a voice call prior to 4G LTE deployment. And I remember AT&T took that as a marketing advantage against Verizon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thunderbolt, that was a huge "forum" selling point on VZW. I don't think they ever publically marketed that feature!
syntrix said:
Thunderbolt, that was a huge "forum" selling point on VZW. I don't think they ever publically marketed that feature!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i dont think they did on commercials, but i do recall them advertising it some other places like radio or something else.
camaroz28 said:
3g, being CDMA for Verizon, is not capable of supporting simultaneous voice and data. The Verizon Galaxy SIII was not able to do it on 3g either. Hopefully it won't be a problem too much longer as Verizon moves away from crappy CDMA and covers the whole country in tasty LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is patently false. You may want to read the white papers on the last couple of generations of Snapdragons as well as the FCC filings for some phones. The simple fact is that the Verizon Galaxy SIII is capable of SVDO, along with a handful of other phones such as the Incredible 4G, Rezound, and Thunderbolt.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
najaboy said:
That is patently false. You may want to read the white papers on the last couple of generations of Snapdragons as well as the FCC filings for some phones. The simple fact is that the Verizon Galaxy SIII is capable of SVDO, along with a handful of other phones such as the Incredible 4G, Rezound, and Thunderbolt.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it's good to be set straight and educated. Thanks for lesson, Najaboy. I honestly did not know this.
yyhd said:
I guess it's good to be set straight and educated. Thanks for lesson, Najaboy. I honestly did not know this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually... thank you for not taking my post the wrong way. In hindsight, it could have been worded better so as to not have a condescending tone.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
najaboy said:
Actually... thank you for not taking my post the wrong way. In hindsight, it could have been worded better so as to not have a condescending tone.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol no worries.
Sent from my Verizon S4 using Tapatalk 2
So does the S4 have ehrpd or not????
mexiken said:
So does the S4 have ehrpd or not????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that all 4G Verizon phones do. More interesting to me is whether the S4 has SVDO like the S3.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
My HTC Rezound was able to do data and voice over 3g as well. I'm a little underwhelmed and overwhelmed at the same time with the S4. I like it, but there are some things I liked better with HTC.
SVDO on Verizon was never simultaneous over 3G itself, but data over 3G, and voice over 1X. eHRPD has nothing to do with SVDO as it's just the communication network used to hand off 1X to 4G. Apparently the Sprint GS4 can't do SVDO either, so it seems to either be a limitation of the new radio in the Snapdragon 600, or Samsung chose to not add in support this round.
Berzerker7 said:
SVDO on Verizon was never simultaneous over 3G itself, but data over 3G, and voice over 1X. eHRPD has nothing to do with SVDO as it's just the communication network used to hand off 1X to 4G. Apparently the Sprint GS4 can't do SVDO either, so it seems to either be a limitation of the new radio in the Snapdragon 600, or Samsung chose to not add in support this round.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're a little confused on what eHRPD does, but in essence, the rest is correct.
Alright, so it is pretty much certain that 3G and voice are not simultaneous on the S4?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
cell128 said:
While this isn't a deal breaker as I get 4g about 90% of the time, it may be a bummer for other people. The galaxy s3 can do data and voice simultaneously while on 4g and 3g. I don't know why they did not include it on this phone. The gs4 only does simultaneous voice/data while on 4g. I download files all the time as well as ROMs and would hate for my download to be interrupted or broken if a call comes in. Just posting this to help anyone who has not yet purchased their s4 and has to have this feature... You have been warned!!
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since Verizon now covers 497 markets and 95% of their 3G footprint is also LTE, this warning will only affect 5% of Verizon customers. Glad i'm not one of them. Sorry for those of you who still live in the Boonies....well not even just the Boonies since Verizon is often in the Boonies. You guys must live in the BOONY of Boonies! :laugh: