My understanding is that all cell devices had to be equiped with a GPS by 2005. Does the Dash have a Built in GPS that can be hacked?
Nope.......
what do you mean by "hacked"?
My understanding is that all the current cell devices have gps that only the service provider can use to access you location. For our safety they say, so Bush can monitor us I say. Anyhow I wanted to know if it is in there, and if so, can we access it somehow.
By 2005, all handsets intended for US release needed to be capable of Wireless Eenhanced 911. Additionally, "New" handsets are generally only provisioned if they are capable of WE911 by all the major carriers.
One of the ways to make a phone support WE911 is through an integrated GPS, but there are many other more common methods of getting the same results. Verizon uses cell tower triangulation, not sure about the others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E911#Wireless_Enhanced_911
Related
Does Dash have all the hardware to support Tmobile @home service, eg, roaming between wifi and cell connections?
No
No, it isn't compatible with the [email protected] service.
because it's lacking some hardware? or some software to bridge the two connections?
qaplus said:
because it's lacking some hardware? or some software to bridge the two connections?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im trying to get this working also, but can't seem to get a straight answer either. Closest I got to a rational answer is tmobile will release a smartphone in the future that supports the @home service, but wifi battery life is preventing them from doing so on current hardware. I assume it is only software we are lacking since there are other UMA handsets in the wild utilising the Kineto uma client. If you find anything else i would love to know about it.
T-Mobile @ Home won't work on the Dash unless T-Mobile decides to implement it, and even then it would most likely require a dedicated encoder chip due to the puny power of the OMAP 850. Not something that the community can do.
Basically, it wraps the GSM communication in an encrypted packet, sending it over the internet to T-Mobile's server/MSC where it is unwrapped and sent on as a normal call would.
This is a gross oversimplification, but the point is that it's never going to happen on any current smartphones
merwin said:
T-Mobile @ Home won't work on the Dash unless T-Mobile decides to implement it, and even then it would most likely require a dedicated encoder chip due to the puny power of the OMAP 850. Not something that the community can do.
Basically, it wraps the GSM communication in an encrypted packet, sending it over the internet to T-Mobile's server/MSC where it is unwrapped and sent on as a normal call would.
This is a gross oversimplification, but the point is that it's never going to happen on any current smartphones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the answer.
Boy Genius report "Not wanting to be extremely late to the show like they were with 3G devices for GSM networks (bringing up painful memories, anyone?), the folks over at RIM HQ recently decided to create a work team that’s been specifically entrusted with the task of creating an LTE BlackBerry. The intention of the RIM execs is to have an LTE BlackBerry ready at approximately the same time that LTE begins worldwide deployment, something that could come as early as late 2009 if Motorola has their way. Motorola’s seemingly overly zealous ambitions aside, 2011 is the year when LTE is generally expected to be available with the major carriers of the world. In case some of you are wondering what the hell LTE is, it’s also known as 4G network technology and is the heir to 3G and 3.5G networks. Think of it as an IP-based network in which voice and data connections are streamed together without distinction and are broadcasted through a ridiculously fast connection that has up to four-times the efficiency at delivering data-packets than the 3.5G networks of today. As with all of our scoops, we’ll be sure to keep monitoring this situation and keep you updated with the latest news."
Wow, now imagine some Windows Mobile devices having this speed for data and voice, I know that the blackjack II has great speed in ATT network, but seriously, why don't carriers have a more unified network, look at Tmobile, with there obscure frequency, instead of having the same frequency as ATT and being able to have those folks that defect to Tmobile and would like a fast connection, they don't realize that ATT's 3G connection keeps a lot of customers happy, its just fast as hell and like me and I'm sure there are a ton of us out there but oh well, enough ranting
blackjack2 said:
Boy Genius report "Not wanting to be extremely late to the show like they were with 3G devices for GSM networks (bringing up painful memories, anyone?), the folks over at RIM HQ recently decided to create a work team that’s been specifically entrusted with the task of creating an LTE BlackBerry. The intention of the RIM execs is to have an LTE BlackBerry ready at approximately the same time that LTE begins worldwide deployment, something that could come as early as late 2009 if Motorola has their way. Motorola’s seemingly overly zealous ambitions aside, 2011 is the year when LTE is generally expected to be available with the major carriers of the world. In case some of you are wondering what the hell LTE is, it’s also known as 4G network technology and is the heir to 3G and 3.5G networks. Think of it as an IP-based network in which voice and data connections are streamed together without distinction and are broadcasted through a ridiculously fast connection that has up to four-times the efficiency at delivering data-packets than the 3.5G networks of today. As with all of our scoops, we’ll be sure to keep monitoring this situation and keep you updated with the latest news."
Wow, now imagine some Windows Mobile devices having this speed for data and voice, I know that the blackjack II has great speed in ATT network, but seriously, why don't carriers have a more unified network, look at Tmobile, with there obscure frequency, instead of having the same frequency as ATT and being able to have those folks that defect to Tmobile and would like a fast connection, they don't realize that ATT's 3G connection keeps a lot of customers happy, its just fast as hell and like me and I'm sure there are a ton of us out there but oh well, enough ranting
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-mobile and At&T can't have the same frequencies unless they were the same business. Since they are separate entities, if they used the same bands, there would be interference and the present 3g would not work on either network. I wish that wireless carriers would simplify aswell, however there is the fact that they are businesses, and businesses want more money. They are not parts of the government.
skyler17 said:
T-mobile and At&T can't have the same frequencies unless they were the same business. Since they are separate entities, if they used the same bands, there would be interference and the present 3g would not work on either network. I wish that wireless carriers would simplify aswell, however there is the fact that they are businesses, and businesses want more money. They are not parts of the government.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if THAT were true, how do you explain the fact that Tmobile and ATT use the same regular GSM frequencies (850, 1900..) ? Or, how would explain the fact that there's SEVERAL carries throughout Europe that ALL use 3G bands at the same time ?
NRGZ28 said:
Well, if THAT were true, how do you explain the fact that Tmobile and ATT use the same regular GSM frequencies (850, 1900..) ? Or, how would explain the fact that there's SEVERAL carries throughout Europe that ALL use 3G bands at the same time ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, I agree with you, I'm sure its done on purpose so people like me who buy ATT phones can't use them to full specs on Tmobile and vice versa, If Europe can deal with tons of 3G towers, why can't we, MONEY, MONEY.
NRGZ28 said:
Well, if THAT were true, how do you explain the fact that Tmobile and ATT use the same regular GSM frequencies (850, 1900..) ? Or, how would explain the fact that there's SEVERAL carries throughout Europe that ALL use 3G bands at the same time ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha nice way to put it... they do use the same frequency as when you are roaming on t-mobile it will pick up at&t at times... therefore it has to be the same frequency...
So, I'm currently in a debate with a friend over the announcement of the LTE on Verizon. My friend (who works in multiplexing telecommunications) tells me that all current Verizon phones will receive a firmware update in order to move onto the LTE network since the current EVDO RevA communication is similar to that of LTE.
I completely disagree and state that the current radio functions on all phones including the droid incredible cannot handle communication with the LTE standard and will require a different chip in order to properly access LTE network.
Does anyone have any documents or citing that says current 3G phones are not forward compatible with LTE?
Thanks.
It would take David Copperfield to make LTE work on our devices
You might want to convince your friend to place a large bet on this with you because there is virtually no way that I know of that he will win the bet. Your friend has lost his marbles...
pmarinel said:
So, I'm currently in a debate with a friend over the announcement of the LTE on Verizon. My friend (who works in multiplexing telecommunications) tells me that all current Verizon phones will receive a firmware update in order to move onto the LTE network since the current EVDO RevA communication is similar to that of LTE.
I completely disagree and state that the current radio functions on all phones including the droid incredible cannot handle communication with the LTE standard and will require a different chip in order to properly access LTE network.
Does anyone have any documents or citing that says current 3G phones are not forward compatible with LTE?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my desire z inc port.
LTE requires a SIM card, which will never be delivered Ota, nor inserted into ur Dinc. Tell genius to stick to multiplexing, and if he doesn't listen take his money.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
I agree, place a very large bet on this. You are absolutely correct. I work for Vzw, if I didn't run the risk of getting fired for screenshotting some of the documentation we have about 4G, I'd attach it. 4G devices will be backward compatible with 3G networking, not vice versa.
something but what
LTE no, but voice&data at once maybe?
I was on the phone with VZW activating a new device last week and the rep on the phone was trying to tell me that certain devices will end up getting an update that allows for data communications and voice communications simultaneously. Which is currently not possible. I tried to tell them that this sounded like it was not possible and that only new devices with new hardware will be able to do such things. They remained firm that certain current devices would get an update to allow this. I just don't see it happening. Time will tell.
thehoovie said:
LTE no, but voice&data at once maybe?
I was on the phone with VZW activating a new device last week and the rep on the phone was trying to tell me that certain devices will end up getting an update that allows for data communications and voice communications simultaneously. Which is currently not possible. I tried to tell them that this sounded like it was not possible and that only new devices with new hardware will be able to do such things. They remained firm that certain current devices would get an update to allow this. I just don't see it happening. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont see why they can't...I can talk and text at the same time on 1X rofl!
Every reference to HD Voice and Sprint talks about the EVO 4G LTE. The Galaxy S3 has the same SoC from Qualcomm that the EVO 4G LTE has. Both phones state that they support 1x Advanced which is required for HD Voice to work. So far I haven't found anything that states that the S3 actually has the codec installed on the phone for HD Voice. Has anyone seen/heard anything that says that Samsung/Sprint will support HD Voice on the S3? Apparently the hardware can support it so I hope it is just a matter of installing the codec.
HD Voice seems like it would be a cool extra. Normal cell phone quality (GSM or CDMA) is crappy even compared to POTS. When I make a VoIP call to VoIP call using non-compressed ("toll quality") is sounds so much better than a cell call. I'm looking forward to HD Voice for cell phones!
jeffgus said:
HD Voice seems like it would be a cool extra. Normal cell phone quality (GSM or CDMA) is crappy even compared to POTS. When I make a VoIP call to VoIP call using non-compressed ("toll quality") is sounds so much better than a cell call. I'm looking forward to HD Voice for cell phones!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HD Voice requires both phones/callers to support it.
By not requesting it on the GS3, Sprint has already killed off and made the feature useless.
But then again, we probably won't be using our phones with it, as it requires 1x Advanced. Which won't be implemented until after the Network Vision rollout in 2014. We'll have new phones around that time.
jnadke said:
HD Voice requires both phones/callers to support it.
By not requesting it on the GS3, Sprint has already killed off and made the feature useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, you think that Sprint didn't request it? It seems to me that they would want to tout as many HD Voice phones as possible. To only have the EVO 4G LTE is kinda lame.
jnadke said:
But then again, we probably won't be using our phones with it, as it requires 1x Advanced. Which won't be implemented until after the Network Vision rollout in 2014. We'll have new phones around that time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought that any area that has Sprint LTE is already a Network Vision site. They're stripping out all the old equipment and putting in newer 3G radios (that support Rev.b and 1x Adv) in addition to LTE radios. Is this not the case? Or is the current LTE deploy just the foundation for full NV that can be handled in software later once they get all the RF spectrum worked out.
jeffgus said:
So, you think that Sprint didn't request it? It seems to me that they would want to tout as many HD Voice phones as possible. To only have the EVO 4G LTE is kinda lame.
I thought that any area that has Sprint LTE is already a Network Vision site. They're stripping out all the old equipment and putting in newer 3G radios (that support Rev.b and 1x Adv) in addition to LTE radios. Is this not the case? Or is the current LTE deploy just the foundation for full NV that can be handled in software later once they get all the RF spectrum worked out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Usually with this type of stuff, Samsung might develop the initial support, but there might be patent royalties associated with HD Voice. Samsung has no incentive to pay money out of pocket and develop it and put it in and pay more. Usually for things like this, the carrier is the customer, and it's up to the customer to pay for it.
Don't be mad at Samsung, this is just how the system works. The other carriers don't need the feature, so it was up to Sprint to ask for it by paying NRE. Be mad at Sprint for not wanting it.
Of course, the feature is just software. So there's no reason Sprint already hasn't paid for it and it will be released as an update in the future (just as Verizon said they will support GSM roaming).
2. Network Vision is much more than that. They're deploying Software-Defined radios on the towers. The initial rollout is LTE, but 1x Advanced will be rolled out later on the 800Mhz spectrum.
After the tower is built, it's technically just a software update.
Of course, every once in a while Sprint might need a hardware update as technologies evolve. Or install new antennas as they acquire more frequencies.
jnadke said:
1. Usually with this type of stuff, Samsung might develop the initial support, but there might be patent royalties associated with HD Voice. Samsung has no incentive to pay money out of pocket and develop it and put it in and pay more. Usually for things like this, the carrier is the customer, and it's up to the customer to pay for it.
Don't be mad at Samsung, this is just how the system works. The other carriers don't need the feature, so it was up to Sprint to ask for it by paying NRE. Be mad at Sprint for not wanting it.
Of course, the feature is just software. So there's no reason Sprint already hasn't paid for it and it will be released as an update in the future (just as Verizon said they will support GSM roaming).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. Qualcomm's original model is that the license was part of the chip. For example, CDMA had patents, the codec had patents, etc, but if you bought one of their chips, the price of that part covered the patent cost. This was different than how others were doing things where a company would have to license the patent and then make the hardware themselves.
jnadke said:
2. Network Vision is much more than that. They're deploying Software-Defined radios on the towers. The initial rollout is LTE, but 1x Advanced will be rolled out later on the 800Mhz spectrum.
After the tower is built, it's technically just a software update.
Of course, every once in a while Sprint might need a hardware update as technologies evolve. Or install new antennas as they acquire more frequencies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So it is a multi-phase rollout? The equipment that goes in with LTE is the foundation? I figured everything is SDR these days. SDR makes things simple for upgrades.
It seems like an easy win for Sprint to take all of their MSM8960 based phones and push out an update for HD Voice when their side is ready. I'm hoping that they will do that with the Galaxy S3.
Just saw this article on droid-life. Not sure in what form, but Verizon and starlink connections would make the connection godlike all over the US. A14 and starlink sat comms
From what I gather, nothing special needs to be done to support starlink. Starlink is being equipped with PCS spectrum, and your EXISTING phone will be able to connect to it *as is*.
96carboard said:
From what I gather, nothing special needs to be done to support starlink. Starlink is being equipped with PCS spectrum, and your EXISTING phone will be able to connect to it *as is*.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who owns PCS spectrum? What ISPs?
rester555 said:
Who owns PCS spectrum? What ISPs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody "owns" it, its just a frequency of RF. Most cell providers are licensed a subset of it, including tmobile (note: Its tmobile working with starlink, NOT verizon as you suggested). Tmobile is going to be re-allocating some of their allocation to starlink.
Ah ok. I understand no one "owns" it, but I was more curious if it was auctioned off similar to c block was for 4G but I see it's licensed. I didn't say Verizon is doing it, but if they did, this would make their footprint amazing.
Yes, I saw that T-Mobile was actively working with that spectrum for use with starlink. This might be one reason in the future to switch to TMobile if their reliability goes up.
Any carrier can set aside spectrum for Starlink. But the challenge is finding one that is available nationwide and you wouldn't miss it.
PCS-G made it easy for T-Mobile because they don't have to do it market by market and pick the right set of frequencies. It's the same everywhere. Everything they've acquired from Sprint has paid off multiple times.
However, it's news to me that Android has to enable this rather than let the phone figure it out itself.