Develop Bugs

3g Expansion In Los Angeles (finally!!!)

I know this has little to do with WM6; however, when I was gonna post it on the Hermes forum, I came across a post of someone asking how to unlock the Hermes/TyTN/8525 to work on SPRINT (a CDMA provider). I decided to come back here, where I do most of my creeping and share it with more level-headed people such as yourselves.
ANYWAYS...I just got off the phone with an AT&T rep that was extremely knowledgeable (for a change) and he gave me some GREAT new info:
-3G expansion to the rest of Los Angeles, including the WEST SAN FERNANDO VALLEY, SANTA MONICA, and other dead spots in the Basin and the Valley is set to start ANY DAY! The rep told me that 2 TOWERS within 2 miles of my location (Winnetka Ave & Vanowen St) are COMPLETED and are set to be activated ANY DAY NOW, noting that the planned activation day had passed. One of these towers is located around Sherman Way and Canoga, while the other is located around Victory and De Soto. He added that a 3rd tower in the close vicinity is set for activation on September 25th...
-Video calls are already enabled in 3 test markets, including DETROIT, and will be released to the public once tower switching and caching issues are sorted out to enable higher quality less delayed functionality.
-For those of you without internet in LA, sit tight, it is set to be back up @ exactly 19:29 PST. (Go figure)
In conclusion it's about fkn time this happens! By the time i get HSDPA here, my friends in Israel have been on HSOPA for the better half of a year now. O well; since I'm used to EDGE, this will be HUGE.

bad ass man.
I've got some friends where I live and 3G is supposed to go live around september 29th here. I can't wait!
I feel your excitement, haha

Any word on Agoura Hills ?

My gf is an att manager she says that ALL of the towers should be up and running by the end of the year. Im 3 blocks away from 3g service right now and its f*kin killin me

Man, those towers are just too far...i'm near Burbank and Owensmouth which is like 1 mile from those towers, but I don't think the signal goes that far Sooooo close but yet so far!!

DeniaL said:
Man, those towers are just too far...i'm near Burbank and Owensmouth which is like 1 mile from those towers, but I don't think the signal goes that far Sooooo close but yet so far!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A - if the rep told me it would reach Winnetka and Vanowen, then I'm sure it will reach you, and B - He did not give me a whole list of planned towers; he searched for ones that will give me service at my address. I'm sure the expansion is way more widespread than just our cluster of blocks, and, as peezy implied, by the end of the year 3G should be pretty solid accross all major metropolitan areas in the US. I just hope they don't plan to simply spread the patchy service they have in the East Valley and West LA and try to pass that off as "complete 3G coverage". I've dropped 3G service in many places that are right in the middle of the blue areas on AT&Ts coverage map, while even more areas have one bar of UMTS, which often fails to even connect to the internet and if it does, speeds are often slower than EDGE! AT&T needs to get their sht together and put behind the half-ass job they've done while dedicating resources to EDGE for the iPhone!
twist said:
Any word on Agoura Hills ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't ask him, though think it's pretty safe to assume that AT&T will focus their resources on properly covering all of LA City before expanding to the suburbs.

still cannot believe that LA doesnt have 3G... we have had 3G for at least 2 years... 4G trials starting next year

I'm in remote island.., and HSDPA here is soooo fast.. I think since 3-4 months ago..
I'm used to GPRS before that.., so you probably know how it feels...

gonna be so nice to finally take advantage of that! a bit crappy to live in ventura county and only get 3g when i'm at a show in LA, haha.

I'm quite surprised that LA coverage isn't better. I live in the Atlanta Suburbs and our coverage seems to be better than that... It extends into most of the suburbs and beyond. I would like better coverage, but I can't complain...

k2bikerider said:
I'm quite surprised that LA coverage isn't better. I live in the Atlanta Suburbs and our coverage seems to be better than that... It extends into most of the suburbs and beyond. I would like better coverage, but I can't complain...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Atlanta's land area is 131.8 sq mi (341.2 km²), while the area of Los Angeles and its ENCLOSED unincorporated cities includes:
- City of Los Angeles - 469.1 sq mi (1,214.9 km²)
- Beverly Hills - 5.7 sq mi (4.7 km²)
- Santa Monica - 8.3 sq mi (21.4 km²)
- West Hollywood - 1.9 sq mi (4.9 km²)
- Culver City - 5.11 sq mi (13.25 km²)
- Inglewood - 9.1 sq mi (23.7 km²)
- Burbank - 17.4 sq mi (45 km²)
And theres more but u catch my drift; we're looking at at around 5 times the size of Atlanta WITHOUT SUBURBS. Takes AT LEAST 5 times more towers to get it running. Not that I'm in any way justifying AT&T for depriving us with EDGE for SOOO LONG.
d1eter said:
I'm in remote island.., and HSDPA here is soooo fast.. I think since 3-4 months ago..
I'm used to GPRS before that.., so you probably know how it feels...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The same applies here on a bigger scale. It is ALOT faster to cover a tiny island with towers than it is to cover the whole US. Now when we're talking about an island that's not exactly that small, such as walshieau's over here, then we have good grounds for complaints to AT&T....

@lax2tlv
What department did you call? Do you have a number? Or is it just the regular CS number? I'm in Orange and I'm about 1 block away from 3G and it bloooooows. I would like to know how soon they will get me enveloped in some nice 3G speeds consistently.
Thanks

I'm seeing 3G in Orange and around JohnWayne Airport but alas, 3G dies away about 1 mile from my house in CDM. Hoping Newport Beach gets it someday soon...

still nothing... I wonder how much longer they plan on postponing this beyong the original activation date... It seems more and more appearant that AT&T's "3G launch" was intended for little more than bragging rights. While my office is in the MIDDLE of a blue "3G" zone on AT&Ts coverage map, UMTS reception ranges from 0-1 bar outside to nothing indoors. I really don't get it... I mean I do - stinginess and iPhone EDGE priority, but it just pisses me off. This is 2007!!! Some places in the world have cellular broadband speeds that exceed those of land based ISPs! I just really hope they get their act together FAST!

d1eter said:
I'm in remote island.., and HSDPA here is soooo fast.. I think since 3-4 months ago..
I'm used to GPRS before that.., so you probably know how it feels...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HA HA HA, Thats a good one . You would think LA would have been one of the first places considering how gadget oriented we are.
This is good news by the way, thanks for sharing lax2tlv

better return that I(nferior)Phone, cus u wont be able to enjoy those 3G/dsl speed! haha

Ok, it's funny that this happened on the day i decided to try and revive this thread:
I was driving home from work on Vanowen St from North Hollywood, an area which has had 3G coverage for quite a while, while watching some free MobiTV in the LA traffic. My eyes widened with excitement when the phone (running BLACK MAGIC LE) showed full HSDPA reception as a crossed Lindley Ave, then Reseda, then Tampa, and all the way to my place on Winnetka where the HSDPA was still on but at 2-3 bars of reception. HOWEVER, to my great dismay, as soon as I ended the data call, the same ol' "E" was right back up there... forcing WCDMA + going back to where I was apparently getting full 3G reception failed to pick up UMTS... Now, given what little knowledge I have + some educated guessing, I suspect one of the following scenarios as being the culprit of this disgusting event:
A. There could have simply been a glitch in the phone, where it showed the H and 3G symbols instead of the E; HOWEVER, the streaming video on MobiTV was significantly better than anything i've seen on EDGE. Maybe some caching may be responsible for this?
B. Newly activated UMTS towers were able to register my phone when it attempted to continue an existing HSDPA data call, but have yet to be instructed to register idle phones looking for signals.
I raised this issue to an AT&T rep. Unfortunately, as opposed to the extremely helpful and friendly rep I got last time, I got some douchebag that hasn't been laid in 3 years claiming that he "cannot elaborate beyond the information presented in the coverage map posted on the AT&T website, or [he] would be compromising the security of their cell sites." ****en idiot....
Anyways, I was hoping someone with a little more technical expertise in the matter could help clarify what's going on here and why my excitement was cut short when I was seconds away from bragging to all the 3G-less iPhone owners I know...

Man, I hope they stick to their august date for launching 3G in the SFV. That would be an awesome B-Day present from AT&T

lax2tlv said:
Ok, it's funny that this happened on the day i decided to try and revive this thread:
I was driving home from work on Vanowen St from North Hollywood, an area which has had 3G coverage for quite a while, while watching some free MobiTV in the LA traffic. My eyes widened with excitement when the phone (running BLACK MAGIC LE) showed full HSDPA reception as a crossed Lindley Ave, then Reseda, then Tampa, and all the way to my place on Winnetka where the HSDPA was still on but at 2-3 bars of reception. HOWEVER, to my great dismay, as soon as I ended the data call, the same ol' "E" was right back up there... forcing WCDMA + going back to where I was apparently getting full 3G reception failed to pick up UMTS... Now, given what little knowledge I have + some educated guessing, I suspect one of the following scenarios as being the culprit of this disgusting event:
A. There could have simply been a glitch in the phone, where it showed the H and 3G symbols instead of the E; HOWEVER, the streaming video on MobiTV was significantly better than anything i've seen on EDGE. Maybe some caching may be responsible for this?
B. Newly activated UMTS towers were able to register my phone when it attempted to continue an existing HSDPA data call, but have yet to be instructed to register idle phones looking for signals.
I raised this issue to an AT&T rep. Unfortunately, as opposed to the extremely helpful and friendly rep I got last time, I got some douchebag that hasn't been laid in 3 years claiming that he "cannot elaborate beyond the information presented in the coverage map posted on the AT&T website, or [he] would be compromising the security of their cell sites." ****en idiot....
Anyways, I was hoping someone with a little more technical expertise in the matter could help clarify what's going on here and why my excitement was cut short when I was seconds away from bragging to all the 3G-less iPhone owners I know...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like they're testing it in the area you drove in to, but the towers aren't set to broadcast the signal, but if you come with in range of the tower while in transmission the tower will let you use it's signal.
It definitely was not caching... the caches are only a few seconds long, so any cached high-quality video would've dropped through with in a couple seconds.

How can I get internet speed 7.2Mb?

Is there any rom or program can make the internet speed on HTC DIMOND 7.2mb instead of 3.6mb?
Thanks very much.

you need a service provider that will provide 7.2mbps in your area (not many provide that atm in UK, but i know orange are expanding it up to 7.2 over the next year) either vodaphone uk or t-mobile uk do it, google it as it depends on your areas coverage.

JanDaMan said:
you need a service provider that will provide 7.2mbps in your area (not many provide that atm in UK, but i know orange are expanding it up to 7.2 over the next year) either vodaphone uk or t-mobile uk do it, google it as it depends on your areas coverage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
vodafone is already 7.2mbps and three are gonna do it before christmas if they cant they are definattely gonna do it on the first quarter of 2009

Unfortunately, saying that the diamond(or any device using the 3G network) is capable of 7.2mbps is not really correct. Sure, the device itself is very much capable of receiving data at these speeds but the latency in the network itself will never provide that speed, unless perhaps you're sitting three feet from a transmitter...
Basically, even though you're paying for "7.2mbps" you'll never see those speeds in real life...
Oh, and I don't really think that this question belongs in the "Diamond ROM development" section.

7.2 long long way away dude. i have tried vodafone 7.2 from many different locations and using a 7.2 mbps modem the best i have achived is maybe 3mbps but not a solid speed, avrage speed is about 1-2mbps, so 7.2bmps true speed will be achived when, the networks advertise 48Mbps lol.
anyway you dont need that speed on the phone, 1mb is enough mos of the times,
unless you want to stream HD media..

Guys...7.2 is obviously a "dream" for me...considering I'm still with the "E" = Edge under my local ISP DIGI MALAYSIA! Argh!!
and sometimes i can't get 90% of the EDGE speed too

Can i just add to this... MOST servers do not upload more than 1mb/sec.. so how do you expect to download @7.2mb... Not possible, until servers start to upload at those speed you are not going to be able to download @7.2......do you believe mobiles would be fast than a fixed line... Yrs from that happening I'm afraid...!

fyew-jit-tiv said:
Can i just add to this... MOST servers do not upload more than 1mb/sec.. so how do you expect to download @7.2mb... Not possible, until servers start to upload at those speed you are not going to be able to download @7.2......do you believe mobiles would be fast than a fixed line... Yrs from that happening I'm afraid...!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mine is comparable with my broadband actually. obviously the rendering on my firefox is faster but the phone is not that far behind on less demanding web pages

I here provide the Tips & free software site http://www.vclcomponents.com/s/0__/need_for_speed_undercover_htc_diamond for increase the Internet speed of the HTC..Then check the speed of the Internet using the site http://www.ip-details.com/internet-speed-test/ in the Mobile Browser.

The only way you'll ever get 7.2mps is by sitting on the mast, at 3am with no one trying to use a mobile in the surrounding 25 mile radius.
Oh, and 3 are not going to have 7.2 before christmas. We've had them in at work today and they're having to talk nicely with T-Mobile so they can improve their network coverage. They have 3.6mps, quote 2.8mps as an average but they want to get away from "HSDPA" as they know it'll never work properly on their network.
... They did however quote by 2010, they should have 14.4mbps
... Now thats a pipe dream...

Alasio said:
The only way you'll ever get 7.2mps is by sitting on the mast, at 3am with no one trying to use a mobile in the surrounding 25 mile radius.
Oh, and 3 are not going to have 7.2 before christmas. We've had them in at work today and they're having to talk nicely with T-Mobile so they can improve their network coverage. They have 3.6mps, quote 2.8mps as an average but they want to get away from "HSDPA" as they know it'll never work properly on their network.
... They did however quote by 2010, they should have 14.4mbps
... Now thats a pipe dream...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hi,
In Denmark, they already started with the 16 Mbit on 3 network, but as we all know, it is not practical. it is just teoritical.

lomo2002 said:
hi,
In Denmark, they already started with the 16 Mbit on 3 network, but as we all know, it is not practical. it is just teoritical.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guys on the continent get the best... Higher speed home bband connections, the UK average being <8mps, there's more money pumped into the development of the mobile networks including city-wide WiFi and we just get screwed.
3 claimed today in their presentation to have 14.4mps under testing inside certain cells in the UK, but didn't seemingly know where. That coupled with the Virgin Media testing of their 200mps connection, well... Will wait to see...
The only "decent" connection in the UK (personal experience) is T-Mobile as their parent company have pumped the most money into cell development but still its completely lacking. Look at the current Orange & T-Mobile merger that's on / off... 3 in the UK have so little 3G coverage they have had to make a deal with T-Mobile so they can use their backbone and masts for transmitting their signal, else they're never going to get anywhere with signal coverage.
But either way, the lack of cells in the UK coupled with a poor backbone simply means that speeds are too unstable in the UK to ever get the full 7.2mps stable.

Actually the all the tier one UK networks (Vodafone, O2, Orange, T-Mobile) support 7.2 in various locations around the country - the issue we will always have is contention.
The certainly won't admit it but only the first 6 or 7 connections to a mast have any chance of reaching 7.2 - after that it drops off dramatically. When you get up to 30 then your down to GPRS speeds. As someone pointed out, the only way to reach anywhere close to the potential 7.2 is to sit under a mast a 3AM and hope that no one else in the vicinity is online too.
T-Mobile, Orange and 3 will always win out when it comes to contention as they run on an 1800 MHZ network as they came late to the game in the UK. 1800 has a shorter range and therefore T-Mobile put up many more masts to compensate - 3 for every one mast that Vodafone put up on the older 900MHZ network. The Vodafone network will punch out much further from the mast which works better in more isolated areas but in urban or densely populated areas, T-Mobile's 3 masts to Vodafone or O2's 1 mast will always give a better experience.
At the end of the day its swings and roundabouts and experiences are so localised that its not worth swapping networks to improve speed unless you intend to stay always in the same location and never go out the front door.
I've been using mobile data on all four networks all over the UK over the last few years and the only thing I can guarantee is that Orange (which has stupidly been my sole personal network provider for over 15 years) will always be the worst of the lot!!!
Their data network is honestly shocking and with all the outages I've experienced this year I would say that the network is really struggling - actually I think most of them are going that way - and it will be a relief if they do actually join forces with T-Mobile.
Anyway this rant has been building up for some time - anyone else experienced the networks performance getting worse this year particularly?
I blame all the new iPhone users myself!!! LOL

Alasio said:
... 3 in the UK have so little 3G coverage they have had to make a deal with T-Mobile so they can use their backbone and masts for transmitting their signal, else they're never going to get anywhere with signal coverage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it was announced recently that 3 have the most comprehensive data coverage in the UK at the moment!

Yeah sorry, you'll probably never see 7.2Mb, just like you never get full internet speed it's always 'up to xxMb'
If you live near a mast then yeah signal should be good but probably 5-6Mb at most you would get. (If)

You can follow the tips in the site tips to speed up 7.2mb interent for increasing the speed of the Internet then you can check the Speed in the site http://www.ip-details.com/internet-speed-test/Internet Speed Testyou will know the Difference.

Your tips are useful...

Sending back my Tmobile TP2

not because i dont like the phone, but because i found tmobile's service to be vastly inferior compared to ATT. I have a way to get unlimited minutes via google voice, so i need fave 5, so i think i'll be switching to verizon.
Any eta on when the verizon TP2 comes out?

What exactly do you mean by vastly inferior? I think T-Mobiles serive is great and very cheap but it's all about the area you are in. You should always go with the carrier who has the best coverage in your area.

i'm in the MD/DC/VA area.
i'm driving through areas that tmobile reports Great coverage, but i'm still experiencing dropped calls, breaking up of reception, no 3g service (it drops to edge, or G). sometimes i can't transmit ANY data
when it works, it works great, but as i'm on the road quite a bit (realtor), i need something that i can talk on reliably. ATT isn't supposed to be that great, but i definitely value their service over what i got with tmobile. i'll have to wait for verizon
i thought tmobile would be a great option just because of their costs, but the service degradation isn't worth the savings to me.

Ever since one of my old jobs, something became quite obvious to me. No matter what service you have, if you are getting **** service, the price is of no relevance. **** is **** at any price.
I have no problems with it here in Southern California, but I do understand your needs. The one on Verizon won't be out till I think they were saying Oct or something like that.

kidvi said:
i'm in the MD/DC/VA area.
i'm driving through areas that tmobile reports Great coverage, but i'm still experiencing dropped calls, breaking up of reception, no 3g service (it drops to edge, or G). sometimes i can't transmit ANY data
when it works, it works great, but as i'm on the road quite a bit (realtor), i need something that i can talk on reliably. ATT isn't supposed to be that great, but i definitely value their service over what i got with tmobile. i'll have to wait for verizon
i thought tmobile would be a great option just because of their costs, but the service degradation isn't worth the savings to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should have filed a service request for more 3g towers in your area, Thats what I did

tarroyo said:
Should have filed a service request for more 3g towers in your area, Thats what I did
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did it help? I don't know anyone that has had to do this, so no experience with it.

I am in the same situation, I am trying out the TMobile but here in Puerto Rico is not 3g yet but I really like the phone and Att doesnt look that are going to release it soon, if they actually are going to do it... ???

They're only focusing on more densly populated areas at the moment.

TheMan42 said:
tmobile doesnt and will not currently honor requests for 3G service in specific areas, and if youre having your doubts about my infomration, i work for the company. They're only focusing on more densly populated areas at the moment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info. Do they consider Puerto Rico a populated area? Do you know when they are going to launch it here?

According to T-mo I should be getting 3 bars (NOT) in my house but if I even pick up the TP2 I have no signal. I have repeatedly called to complain and all my neighbors also called with T-Mo to complain so after 4 months of *****ing they claim they are buying space on a tower close to me in 120 days (we shall see)...Tj

petitioning for better service isnt an option for me as i am within my trial period, and by the time they would act on it (if at all) the tp2 will be out on all the other carriers

gehzumteufel said:
Did it help? I don't know anyone that has had to do this, so no experience with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It did 3 more towers were installed in my area, went from having 1 bar to full bars!

kidvi said:
petitioning for better service isnt an option for me as i am within my trial period, and by the time they would act on it (if at all) the tp2 will be out on all the other carriers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree, it took three weeks at most not months

tarroyo said:
It did 3 more towers were installed in my area, went from having 1 bar to full bars!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow that is quite awesome. I should do the same in my area by my home. Signal is usually 1-2 bars, with it hovering around 1 bar more often than not.

I played with the TP2 on the T-Mobile 14 day trial. It was terrible! T-Mobile not the TP2! The phone is AWESOME!
Dropped calls, garbled calls, and the data is so slow you can’t get a connection half the time (browser timing out) and with Google maps the page refresh/update was so slow you would drive right off the page onto a blank screen even at moderate speeds around town. I travel around the country and it was no better anywhere. Even with 3G showing!
I’m with Verizon (not had hardly any issues with service) and plan to wait until they offer it, PLEASE DON’T START THE Verizon Vis …. Thing. Just stating an asked for opinion.
Rich

gehzumteufel said:
Ever since one of my old jobs, something became quite obvious to me. No matter what service you have, if you are getting **** service, the price is of no relevance. **** is **** at any price.
I have no problems with it here in Southern California, but I do understand your needs. The one on Verizon won't be out till I think they were saying Oct or something like that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sprint is going to release the tp2 on Sept 8th so I don't think Verizon is going to release it no later than Sept.

Guess your mileage will vary...
Here in s fl, tmo works great for me. Had att some years ago, also good here. Tmo price and cs seems better to me. Got the unlimited loyal customer plan for $49.99month. Hard to beat that.
No dropped calls, ever, and the ph seems to ring for ever if I don't answer.
Web pages open fast.
I seem to get 3-4 bars H3g service most of the time around here. Never seen 5 bars though.
Here is a screen shot at my office showing 4 bars H3g.

Same thing here. I live in Tampa and I always have full bars with 3g. but then again I think Tampa is the 11th largest city in US so it would make sense we all have pretty good service over here. Most people here, that I know or come across have t-mobile. The only thing verizon is good for around here is Fios. what;s sprint? ;p; and at&t are for rich preppy kids who think theyre cool with their iphones. At least...thats the trend over here
apache1 said:
Guess your mileage will vary...
Here in s fl, tmo works great for me. Had att some years ago, also good here. Tmo price and cs seems better to me. Got the unlimited loyal customer plan for $49.99month. Hard to beat that.
No dropped calls, ever, and the ph seems to ring for ever if I don't answer.
Web pages open fast.
I seem to get 3-4 bars H3g service most of the time around here. Never seen 5 bars though.
Here is a screen shot at my office showing 4 bars H3g.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

apache1 said:
No dropped calls, ever, and the ph seems to ring for ever if I don't answer.
Web pages open fast.
I seem to get 3-4 bars H3g service most of the time around here. Never seen 5 bars though.
Here is a screen shot at my office showing 4 bars H3g.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your 4 bars is max signal, there isnt' a 5th bar.
btw, what is that a pic of for your background?

Rich W said:
I played with the TP2 on the T-Mobile 14 day trial. It was terrible! T-Mobile not the TP2! The phone is AWESOME!
Dropped calls, garbled calls, and the data is so slow you can’t get a connection half the time (browser timing out) and with Google maps the page refresh/update was so slow you would drive right off the page onto a blank screen even at moderate speeds around town. I travel around the country and it was no better anywhere. Even with 3G showing!
I’m with Verizon (not had hardly any issues with service) and plan to wait until they offer it, PLEASE DON’T START THE Verizon Vis …. Thing. Just stating an asked for opinion.
Rich
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the confirmation rich! i feel really bad because the customer service at tmobile is GREAT! unfortunately, the actual phone service wasn't good enough for my needs. i hate having to go back to at&t, but i guess i'm enslaved to them. i'm waiting for either verizon to get it, or att now as i know i will NEVER use sprint. i really wanted to use tmobile and hoped they would meet my needs

Three network - 2G/3G

I went into Three shop on Oxford street today and aksed about returned defective handsets, but she didn`t know what I`m talking about. After I explained, she said they don`t use 2G for voice any more, its all 3G now, hence no returned phones with volume bug. "All 2G masts have been replaced with 3G ones, very very few 2G left".
I thought 3G was only for data? Or it can also transmit voice? Some time ago I remember they used o2 for their voice calls?
I`m currently on Vodafone and their coverage is so crap. Try getting signal(iPhone 4) indoors with thick walls or with steel constructions - good luck. Not even talking getting 3G for data. But my Three USB broadband dongle just flies, no difference indoors/outdoors whatsoever. Very impressive.
So, would this mean that if I switch to Three, my voice coverage would also be much better not just 3G?

I'm with 3 uk, good coverage and signal most places. I was told that 3 doesn't use the 900Mhz band so I can only assume it uses 3g for voice as well.
I've also had the GNexus for a week and not noticed the volume bug at all.

2G can be either voice or Data. You get crappy speeds compared to 3G, and the trade off is you can only have one running at the given time, meaning you can't browse the web while in a call.
3G is the next step after 2G, and allows for both voice and data(at least on a GSM carrier), and offers a lot better speeds than 2G.
To answer your last question, it really depends on the coverage you have in the area, so I cannot answer it; you just have to try it out yourself.

I am on three network, I am pretty sure they using "3g" (probably why its called three?), and don't actually has any 2g network/mast anymore. In fact, when you request for a sim card from three, it says you must have a 3g type of phone.
Where you get areas that doesn't have 3g, it will fall back to 2g but will be using someone elses network to provide (last I had heard was orange network). Not sure if that is true anymore as that news I had heard is a few years old.

They used to have a deal with orange to carry 2G, and it still works in a few places, although officially they'll tell you that's all done with. Three have been aggressively rolling out their network to replace all that (which is why you can get 3g signal in fields in the middle of nowhere).

Three only has 3g masts which means you get 3g signal pretty much everywhere. If you go somewhere with a poor or non existent 3g signal the phone will roam on to Orange 2g. Three used to have a roaming agreement with Orange for the entire uk however, recently they have started to end this agreement with Orange in areas where they know the 3g network is strong enough.
I'm with three and if you're on the three 3g network it will show 3 as the operator when you pull down the notification bar. If you roam on to Orange 2g it shows 3 with another 3 directly underneath it. On a side note I actually left orange for three due to signal issues, oh how the tides have changed since three first started out with 3g .
Oh and Three use 2100mhz for their 3g network and Orange use 1800mhz for their 2g which is why customers on Three or Orange never have the volume issue which affects people on o2 and Vodafone(both mainly use the 900mhz frequencies).
Rik.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

DDRFAN said:
2G can be either voice or Data. You get crappy speeds compared to 3G, and the trade off is you can only have one running at the given time, meaning you can't browse the web while in a call.
3G is the next step after 2G, and allows for both voice and data(at least on a GSM carrier), and offers a lot better speeds than 2G.
To answer your last question, it really depends on the coverage you have in the area, so I cannot answer it; you just have to try it out yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simultaneously? Can I surf web and at least receive phone call & sms? Or if somebody calls me it will go to voicemail?

aindow said:
Three only has 3g masts which means you get 3g signal pretty much everywhere. If you go somewhere with a poor or non existent 3g signal the phone will roam on to Orange 2g. Three used to have a roaming agreement with Orange for the entire uk however, recently they have started to end this agreement with Orange in areas where they know the 3g network is strong enough.
I'm with three and if you're on the three 3g network it will show 3 as the operator when you pull down the notification bar. If you roam on to Orange 2g it shows 3 with another 3 directly underneath it. On a side note I actually left orange for three due to signal issues, oh how the tides have changed since three first started out with 3g .
Oh and Three use 2100mhz for their 3g network and Orange use 1800mhz for their 2g which is why customers on Three or Orange never have the volume issue which affects people on o2 and Vodafone(both mainly use the 900mhz frequencies).
Rik.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i'm confused.. does this mean three does not also get hsdpa? or hspa+? i get that signal on my orange desire hd - as the galaxy nexus is hspa+ device its now got me puzzled.. hmmm..

Three will not let you use 2g signal. They lock all their phones up so it's not possible. That's how they claim to have the fastest network in the uk. If your our of a 3G signal area, you have no signal.

GR36 said:
Three will not let you use 2g signal. They lock all their phones up so it's not possible. That's how they claim to have the fastest network in the uk. If your our of a 3G signal area, you have no signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure?! That sounds very unrealistic.

MrYuzhai said:
i'm confused.. does this mean three does not also get hsdpa? or hspa+? i get that signal on my orange desire hd - as the galaxy nexus is hspa+ device its now got me puzzled.. hmmm..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Three has HSDPA/+ because I have their mobile broadband USB dongle.

GR36 said:
Three will not let you use 2g signal. They lock all their phones up so it's not possible. That's how they claim to have the fastest network in the uk. If your our of a 3G signal area, you have no signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is rubbish IMO. Three use orange 2g as already said if there isn't 3g network. I work in the middle of nowhere and get excellent 3g signal from three. I have tried all operators before three and it has the best coverage and speed that I have found. Its like having 3 meg broadband.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App

I've used a 2G signal recently on 3 so can't agree with that either.
What I heard though is the 2G will be restricted to voice only? Not sure how true that is.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

rbs_uk said:
Simultaneously? Can I surf web and at least receive phone call & sms? Or if somebody calls me it will go to voicemail?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, on 3G or HSPA you can be online and receive calls and texts simultaneously.
with 2G you can only receive texts whilst in a call.
rbs_uk said:
GR36 said:
Three will not let you use 2g signal. They lock all their phones up so it's not possible. That's how they claim to have the fastest network in the uk. If your our of a 3G signal area, you have no signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure?! That sounds very unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's not unrealistic, it's true
chrishiggins said:
That is rubbish IMO. Three use orange 2g as already said if there isn't 3g network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to this article dated more than a year ago, you are wrong.

oscillik, once again you're the one that's wrong. Three do still allow you to roam onto oranges 2g network in areas with no 3g signal. I know this is true as I still occasionally do it.
Did you even bother reading the Reg article you posted. Try reading the very first paragraph "3 has started to switch off roaming onto Orange's 2G network in locations where it reckons its own coverage makes the 2G partner redundant."
If that looks familiar, it should as it's almost exactly what chrishiggins said.
You must be getting used to being wrong by now...

erbain said:
oscillik, once again you're the one that's wrong. Three do still allow you to roam onto oranges 2g network in areas with no 3g signal. I know this is true as I still occasionally do it.
Did you even bother reading the Reg article you posted. Try reading the very first paragraph "3 has started to switch off roaming onto Orange's 2G network in locations where it reckons its own coverage makes the 2G partner redundant."
If that looks familiar, it should as it's almost exactly what chrishiggins said.
You must be getting used to being wrong by now...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually you are wrong. Here is what chrishiggins said, with the pertinent details bolded for you
chrishiggins said:
That is rubbish IMO. Three use orange 2g as already said if there isn't 3g network. I work in the middle of nowhere and get excellent 3g signal from three. I have tried all operators before three and it has the best coverage and speed that I have found. Its like having 3 meg broadband.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now, as you can see, he quite clearly states that even in the middle of nowhere, he gets excellent 3G signal. Nowhere in his post does he make any allusions to anything that the Register article mentions.
Also, yes I did read the article, particularly the part that states that the article is a year old.
Since you seem to be so keen on facts, please, find every single instance of where I have been wrong and haven't admitted to being so, and post the evidence for all to see, collated into one area.
Take your time.

Wow, what have you been smoking? I know what he said, you have quoted it several times.
Let's try this one more time :
"Three use orange 2g as already said if there isn't 3g network" This is what you originally quoted and stated was wrong, it is in fact true and is exactly what the Reg article says. You used to be able to use orange 2g anywhere in the UK but now you can only use it where there no good 3g signal.
"I work in the middle of nowhere and get excellent 3g signal from three" So he has a good 3g signal at his work, what's this got to do with being able to roam onto 2g in bad 3g areas?
oscillik said:
Since you seem to be so keen on facts, please, find every single instance of where I have been wrong and haven't admitted to being so, and post the evidence for all to see, collated into one area.
Take your time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I'll pass, but If I'm reading a thread where you're spewing ****e and generally being rude I'll make a point of replying.

erbain said:
Wow, what have you been smoking? I know what he said, you have quoted it several times.
Let's try this one more time :
"Three use orange 2g as already said if there isn't 3g network" This is what you originally quoted and stated was wrong, it is in fact true and is exactly what the Reg article says. You used to be able to use orange 2g anywhere in the UK but now you can only use it where there no good 3g signal.
"I work in the middle of nowhere and get excellent 3g signal from three" So he has a good 3g signal at his work, what's this got to do with being able to roam onto 2g in bad 3g areas?
I think I'll pass, but If I'm reading a thread where you're spewing ****e and generally being rude I'll make a point of replying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I apologise for being wrong with regard to your first point. As you have correctly made me out to be a fool here, chrishiggins does say that. Although it is still yet to be ascertained whether 3-UK still have any existing 2G roaming agreement with Orange, and if so, what areas this covers. I'm sure you can agree with me that 3-UK should really be a bit more transparent about which areas are able to receive 2G roaming. This would be beneficial for all existing and prospective customers.
The second point has a lot to do with being able to roam onto 2G in bad 3G areas, since in the majority of cases, 'middle-of-nowhere' places tend to not have 3G coverage. Now I know that is a very vague definition, but it is one that I'm sure you have experienced yourself. I would be very surprised if you had kept 3G reception whilst being in a place that most would regard as being in the middle of nowhere.
As for your closing point, I respect your tenacity. After the conversation we've had, you've successfully proven me wrong regarding something I have said, made me out to be a fool, and furthered the exploration of fact. You weren't trolling, you actually had a beef with what I had said. All in all, you've come out on top here, I've been given a swift clip round the ear, and other readers should hopefully be more informed. Can we at least agree that this is a positive outcome?

oscillik said:
I apologise for being wrong with regard to your first point. As you have correctly made me out to be a fool here, chrishiggins does say that. Although it is still yet to be ascertained whether 3-UK still have any existing 2G roaming agreement with Orange, and if so, what areas this covers. I'm sure you can agree with me that 3-UK should really be a bit more transparent about which areas are able to receive 2G roaming. This would be beneficial for all existing and prospective customers.
The second point has a lot to do with being able to roam onto 2G in bad 3G areas, since in the majority of cases, 'middle-of-nowhere' places tend to not have 3G coverage. Now I know that is a very vague definition, but it is one that I'm sure you have experienced yourself. I would be very surprised if you had kept 3G reception whilst being in a place that most would regard as being in the middle of nowhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would be nice if 3 were a bit more transparent about where 2g was still available, unfortunately I don't see that ever happening.
Personally I've had a fairly good experience with 3 over the last 5 months, I get a good 3g signal at home and at work and find it generally OK. I was down in Cornwall a couple months ago staying in a hotel that could have been described as the middle of nowhere, I had no 3g signal but I was still able to roam onto 2g, so I know it still works in some places.
3 do seem to have improved there network since I last used them a few years ago. As a bonus, I think my GN is able to pick up a weaker 3g signal than my N1 was, maybe the hspa+ radio helps.
oscillik said:
As for your closing point, I respect your tenacity. After the conversation we've had, you've successfully proven me wrong regarding something I have said, made me out to be a fool, and furthered the exploration of fact. You weren't trolling, you actually had a beef with what I had said. All in all, you've come out on top here, I've been given a swift clip round the ear, and other readers should hopefully be more informed. Can we at least agree that this is a positive outcome?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I try to never troll, If I'm arguing a point it's because I believe what I'm saying is correct. Anyway I'm glad in this instance we're able to agree

rbs_uk said:
Are you sure?! That sounds very unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, I'm calling BS here, I've been talking to them recently, they were telling me they don't run 2G themselves. If there really is no 3G coverage, they have a fallback in place that runs off the back of Orange.
They are slowing turning off 2G fallback in places where they consider their 3G coverage to be more than adequate.
cow.neondragon.net/index.php/three-begins-2g-coverage-switch-off-have-you-been-affected-your-rights

Sprint LTE connection issues...article...

I am going to put this here. Any comments from developers that can help us?
http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-312-sprint-lte-launch-market-connection-issues/
This has been confirmed by myself and others on that site. My nick is troyd96 on there.
Can a developer figure out how to manually adjust the signal thresholds so that the phone knows weak LTE signals are preferable to stronger 3G signals. An OTA might fix this, but I am not holding my breath of it coming.
There is no hidden menus where you can adjust this threshold.

I've been looking for setting to change threshold like I did for Wi-Max
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

Just trying to read the LTE signal strength can be challenging because the Android standard doesn't cover it yet. So even discovering what OEM voodoo is being done to read that on this phone would be interesting. See my post at S4GRU here.

boomerbubba said:
Just trying to read the LTE signal strength can be challenging because the Android standard doesn't cover it yet. So even discovering what OEM voodoo is being done to read that on this phone would be interesting. See my post at S4GRU here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It may be voodoo, but it is obvious that places that should be getting LTE with live towers, on their weakest coverage area the phone does not like it and rejects it. Regardless of what the true signal levels are. There are enough people that have tested this, for me to believe. So regardless there is an issue here. It would be nice to try to play around with the threshold to see if it helps. IMHO it would.

slickdaddy96 said:
It may be voodoo, but it is obvious that places that should be getting LTE with live towers, on their weakest coverage area the phone does not like it and rejects it. Regardless of what the true signal levels are. There are enough people that have tested this, for me to believe. So regardless there is an issue here. It would be nice to try to play around with the threshold to see if it helps. IMHO it would.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not arguing with you or with the content of the S4GRU article. I just thought I might bootstrap the conversation with a little additional research on what to look for in the code. However this fallback threshold is being handled under the hood, it must include reading some metric for LTE signal strength.

I do not think this is a hardware issue.. I think it is more of a Sprint is lying about how many towers are actually live..
case in point.. I can go to the woodlands or to Copperfield and my phone locks into LGE4G and switches seamlessly as needed..
however.
anywhere else that Sprint is showing as active is pretty much dead with no 4G and patehtic 3G even though if you go to the LGE coverage map as of Sunday it is showing as covered..
I think a large portion of what they think is covered now.. really isn't.

CVSiN said:
I do not think this is a hardware issue.. I think it is more of a Sprint is lying about how many towers are actually live..
case in point.. I can go to the woodlands or to Copperfield and my phone locks into LGE4G and switches seamlessly as needed..
however.
anywhere else that Sprint is showing as active is pretty much dead with no 4G and patehtic 3G even though if you go to the LGE coverage map as of Sunday it is showing as covered..
I think a large portion of what they think is covered now.. really isn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't believe you are correct here. The creator of that site gets official info from Sprint about what towers are live, and he also has official info on Towers that will be upgraded and not live yet. People can force their phone to use LTE in those weak areas where it wants to go 3G by ##data## HDR/1X settings checking LTE only. The only issue with that is that you lose voice/text. So it is indeed something software wise on the hardware telling the phone to accept the 3G signal and reject the weak LTE signal.
The amount of towers live is accurate on that site. I am unsure of what maps you can see on the site if you are not a sponsor, but I have seen the maps they are accurate, but it does take sometimes up to two weeks for the info the be released to where he can update the "live" maps.
The LTE in the Atlanta area where I am is probably 20-30% complete, but the problem I am talking about is people on the edge of what should be coverage on a known active site (meaning it has been verified by users and by the site as a live tower) are getting switched to 3G.
There is known range of what LTE towers can do at certain frequency when it comes to coverage. People are within these ranges and on the weaker ranges of the LTE signal area they are being forced to 3G, when they can force their phone to LTE and it works fine.
So it is definitely software/firmware/modem based.

CVSiN said:
I do not think this is a hardware issue.. I think it is more of a Sprint is lying about how many towers are actually live.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody said it was a "hardware issue." The hypothesis in the article, proved in disabling the fallback, is that a firmware issue is a factor. There is a programmed threshold level of signal strength that forces the phone to fall back. The hypothesis is that this threshold would work better if it were set lower, because even a weak LTE connection can be better than a stronger EVDO signal.
And this is not mutually exclusive vis a vis your complaint about thin tower coverage. It is well known, at least to those who follow this closely at S4GRU, that these markets were launched with thinner coverage than originally planned but are continuing to be built out.
In fact, the fallback-threshold problem and the thin-coverage problem just magnify each other, because only those devices with very strong LTE signal will avoid falling back to 3G.

slickdaddy96 said:
I don't believe you are correct here. The creator of that site gets official info from Sprint about what towers are live, and he also has official info on Towers that will be upgraded and not live yet. People can force their phone to use LTE in those weak areas where it wants to go 3G by ##data## HDR/1X settings checking LTE only. The only issue with that is that you lose voice/text. So it is indeed something software wise on the hardware telling the phone to accept the 3G signal and reject the weak LTE signal.
The amount of towers live is accurate on that site. I am unsure of what maps you can see on the site if you are not a sponsor, but I have seen the maps they are accurate, but it does take sometimes up to two weeks for the info the be released to where he can update the "live" maps.
The LTE in the Atlanta area where I am is probably 20-30% complete, but the problem I am talking about is people on the edge of what should be coverage on a known active site (meaning it has been verified by users and by the site as a live tower) are getting switched to 3G.
There is known range of what LTE towers can do at certain frequency when it comes to coverage. People are within these ranges and on the weaker ranges of the LTE signal area they are being forced to 3G, when they can force their phone to LTE and it works fine.
So it is definitely software/firmware/modem based.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care where he is getting his info from.. do you honestly think Sprint would come out and say they lied about coverage?
They are flat lying and covering their asses.
There is no 4G coverage in 2/3s of the areas down to street view where they say there is supposed to be live towers at least here in Houston.
and the fact that in the 2 places that have been confirmed in the other thread by other users just solidify my theory.
The hardware is working fine at least on the GS3.. it swiches in and out of 4G perfectly when it senses it..
you can sit in these 2 areas and it will pick it uip every time no reboot needed..
yet go to most of the other so called covered areas.. and reboot till your phone blows up or force to LTE and still not get crap..
they are lying..
I will post flat GPS pics of my exact location and then post the Sprint service map right over my coords.. and prove it to you.
I am right smack dab in the middle of a heavy LTE covered area on the sprint map..
but no matter what you do on the device there is no signal.

In the woodlands just as in Conroe, I have areas where no 4g, mid range, or full strength. I even went to Houston the other day. No 4g in sight around 1960 area or greater. I can say that it's not a 4g blanket as the coverage map wants you to believe. Seems that's actually a when completed map.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

hayabusa1300cc said:
In the woodlands just as in Conroe, I have areas where no 4g, mid range, or full strength. I even went to Houston the other day. No 4g in sight around 1960 area or greater. I can say that it's not a 4g blanket as the coverage map wants you to believe. Seems that's actually a when completed map.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly my same experience.

hayabusa1300cc said:
In the woodlands just as in Conroe, I have areas where no 4g, mid range, or full strength. I even went to Houston the other day. No 4g in sight around 1960 area or greater. I can say that it's not a 4g blanket as the coverage map wants you to believe. Seems that's actually a when completed map.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Dallas is same way. SHows a large portion of Dallas as covered and everywhere I have been I have connected in only 2 places.
The coverage map is very deceiving as this is clearly not all the covered areas. Now, maybe in future build out it will be, but certainly not right now.

I was in San Antonio over the weekend and for the most part I was unable to connect to LTE. That is until I was on the runway of San Antonio International Airport. Then afte I landed in Dallas I didnt recieve LTE at all. I walked all over the airport since I had a long as hell layover. Still no LTE. However the DFW airport seems to be sponsored by Samsung. They have a Samsung lounge as well as NFC chips everywhere to download stuff for free.

Uh, this thread is not about how overly optimistic Sprint's published coverage maps are. (I actually agree that they are way overstated, on the basis of credible reports on forums.)
That does not mean that the fallback-threshold setting does not also contribute to the problem! And that is what this thread is about -- actually seeking technical solutions. If people just want to rant about Sprint, there are lots of other threads for that.

CVSiN said:
I don't care where he is getting his info from.. do you honestly think Sprint would come out and say they lied about coverage?
They are flat lying and covering their asses.
There is no 4G coverage in 2/3s of the areas down to street view where they say there is supposed to be live towers at least here in Houston.
and the fact that in the 2 places that have been confirmed in the other thread by other users just solidify my theory.
The hardware is working fine at least on the GS3.. it swiches in and out of 4G perfectly when it senses it..
you can sit in these 2 areas and it will pick it uip every time no reboot needed..
yet go to most of the other so called covered areas.. and reboot till your phone blows up or force to LTE and still not get crap..
they are lying..
I will post flat GPS pics of my exact location and then post the Sprint service map right over my coords.. and prove it to you.
I am right smack dab in the middle of a heavy LTE covered area on the sprint map..
but no matter what you do on the device there is no signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are not getting my point. We are not talking about the official sprint.com coverage maps. We all know those are inaccurate to what really is going on. He has specific placemarked towers on Google maps, he has several actually (known live maps which only sponsors can see, and planned towers which lump the live and not-live together on a non-interactive map). The completed ones (which have been verified by him and this is through internal sprint info) They have also been proven by people with phones going right where the known "live" sites are on his map and getting full bar 4G service. You obviously have not looked at his maps at all and are just assuming things, and you are assuming wrong. I have a tower that is "live" about 0.5 miles from my house I get almost full bars in my house. I go to other places pull up his maps and where he says they are live they are indeed live.
So now that we have gotten that out of the way. It is widely known how far LTE coverage will go per tower based on frequency and power broadcast. There is no disputing that. The problem lies within places that are in the outer range of that specific (or any specific tower) they are connected to. Forcing the phone to LTE only does make the phone connect to the LTE tower with verified speed and data flowing, so no the users aren't lying either. Once they turn their phone back to LTE/CDMA/EVDO, the phone again sees the stronger 3G signal and refuses to connect to LTE in the EXACT SAME LOCATION THEY WERE WHEN THEY TOGGLED LTE ONLY.
Stick your head in the sand and be negative about Sprint all you want, meanwhile the rest of us will continue to try to find a way to fix the threshold problem that indeed exists.

boomerbubba said:
Uh, this thread is not about how overly optimistic Sprint's published coverage maps are. (I actually agree that they are way overstated, on the basis of credible reports on forums.)
That does not mean that the fallback-threshold setting does not also contribute to the problem! And that is what this thread is about -- actually seeking technical solutions. If people just want to rant about Sprint, there are lots of other threads for that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that is the issue.. if there was coverage where they say it is.. your phone would not need tweaked..
They are one and the same issue.

CVSiN said:
But that is the issue.. if there was coverage where they say it is.. your phone would not need tweaked..
They are one and the same issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can be both causes. They are complementary, not mutually exclusive. (Sorry to interrupt your emoting with logic.)

slickdaddy96 said:
You are not getting my point. We are not talking about the official sprint.com coverage maps. We all know those are inaccurate to what really is going on. He has specific placemarked towers on Google maps, he has several actually (known live maps which only sponsors can see, and planned towers which lump the live and not-live together on a non-interactive map). The completed ones (which have been verified by him and this is through internal sprint info) They have also been proven by people with phones going right where the known "live" sites are on his map and getting full bar 4G service. You obviously have not looked at his maps at all and are just assuming things, and you are assuming wrong. I have a tower that is "live" about 0.5 miles from my house I get almost full bars in my house. I go to other places pull up his maps and where he says they are live they are indeed live.
So now that we have gotten that out of the way. It is widely known how far LTE coverage will go per tower based on frequency and power broadcast. There is no disputing that. The problem lies within places that are in the outer range of that specific (or any specific tower) they are connected to. Forcing the phone to LTE only does make the phone connect to the LTE tower with verified speed and data flowing, so no the users aren't lying either. Once they turn their phone back to LTE/CDMA/EVDO, the phone again sees the stronger 3G signal and refuses to connect to LTE in the EXACT SAME LOCATION THEY WERE WHEN THEY TOGGLED LTE ONLY.
Stick your head in the sand and be negative about Sprint all you want, meanwhile the rest of us will continue to try to find a way to fix the threshold problem that indeed exists.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have that map as well.. they are flat wrong.. at least for Houston and other members that have the same maps are reporting the exact same thing. So whose head is in the sand?
I literally work 5 blocks from 1 on his list and live right next to another.. and no 4G on those towers at all in LTE forced mode or not.
Ive been with Sprint for 8 years.. so I have earned the right to be a little angry over this broken promise and lied about coverage maps.
I would never have bought the phone this early had it not been for his maps which show coverage in my area. but in reality there is none.

CVSiN said:
I have that map as well.. they are flat wrong.. at least for Houston and other members that have the same maps are reporting the exact same thing. So whose head is in the sand?
I literally work 5 blocks from 1 on his list and live right next to another.. and no 4G on those towers at all in LTE forced mode or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you looking at a sites complete map, or a map of the whole NV project for the area? Since only 14 percent of the total sites in the Houston market are reported complete, most of them have no LTE yet.

There's an LTE test app (maybe 2) in /system/app that may hold the answers. Just go ahead and create a shortcut to its activity with your launcher and see what's there. I've frozen it so I can't really comment on if it works for changing thresholds or not