Related
In the Seattle area the best I get is around under 8m up 1m down average around 3-4m down. how come the Thunderbolt speeds are ridiculously faster?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=996183&highlight=speed 30m+ uploads wtf?
Different wireless technologies?
madflasher said:
In the Seattle area the best I get is around under 8m up 1m down average around 3-4m down. how come the Thunderbolt speeds are ridiculously faster?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=996183&highlight=speed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing about the thunderbolt's 4g and the Evo's 4g are the same, except for the name. Two completely different technologies. The Evo uses Sprint/Clear's Wimax system, only capable of so much. The thunderbolt uses LTE, which is a completely different ball game. That's why you see all these thread's around talking about if Sprint is going to make the switch to LTE.
Does anyone know if sprint plans on stepping it up?
Went to the Vz store to try the TB thought I was on wifi. Checked. It was 4g. Makes wimax look like **** lol... Like EVO2, IF Vz gets a TB2.. Bye bye sprint.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
I've read of rumors that Sprint, even though they own the controlling share of Clearwire, have already started test LTE on there towers. Technically Sprint already own the frequency range that LTE falls in so it would be a matter of them just setting up the network. It would still be 2012 -> 2013 before it would roll out but if they want to stay in this wireless game then they will have to move to LTE.
Those upload speeds for the thunderbolt aren't accurate btw. Its a known issue with the phone. But yea, LTE is better than Wimax.
madflasher said:
In the Seattle area the best I get is around under 8m up 1m down average around 3-4m down. how come the Thunderbolt speeds are ridiculously faster?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=996183&highlight=speed 30m+ uploads wtf?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also remember, VZW's LTE has like 2 users in Seattle.
Part of it is technology, yes, but the other part is that there's probably virtually no traffic on their LTE spectrum right now.
TonyArmstrong said:
Also remember, VZW's LTE has like 2 users in Seattle.
Part of it is technology, yes, but the other part is that there's probably virtually no traffic on their LTE spectrum right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1, since almost everyone who doesn't own an iPhart in seattle owns an evo, sprints wimax lags due to the heavy volume. Try your 4g late at night, it is notably faster.
Sent from my hand with XDA Premium installed
Also, it's interesting to note that maximum data-rate with WiMAX is actually (in theory) 20-30% faster than LTE.
The question is one of load per cell, and implementation. VZW says that their "loaded" LTE net will support 5-12Mbps depending on distance from the tower.
One has to wonder, if Clear hadn't spent money on trying to build a retail presence instead of doing more tower build out and optimizing its network for backhaul and QOS to handsets and dongles, what would our WiMAX 4G speeds be like...
So I was thinking about getting the GS24G but I have no 4G coverage in my area. I know this could be considered the best phone on the market but would you pick it up if you have no 4G coverage? That's my deciding factor. This is a beast of a phone but I do not know if I want to be stuck with Sprint's 3G coverage.
I have the E4GT and don't get 4G. Thankfully Sprints network, regarding 3G isn't too bad where I live.
rllong1 said:
So I was thinking about getting the GS24G but I have no 4G coverage in my area. I know this could be considered the best phone on the market but would you pick it up if you have no 4G coverage? That's my deciding factor. This is a beast of a phone but I do not know if I want to be stuck with Sprint's 3G coverage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no 4G where I live (40 miles north of Los Angeles) but EVERYWHERE else there is and I have never really *had* to use 4G. 3G is plenty good.
Best. Phone. Ever. ET4G!
rllong1 said:
So I was thinking about getting the GS24G but I have no 4G coverage in my area. I know this could be considered the best phone on the market but would you pick it up if you have no 4G coverage? That's my deciding factor. This is a beast of a phone but I do not know if I want to be stuck with Sprint's 3G coverage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dood i just coughed up my 3D for this today....i mean i get 4G (that i never ever, ever USe by the way) and i can def say that i get a much better signal where i live....i live just north of boston and i get decent 3G all over but with my 3D it really sucked....i'd say go for it....all my buddy were bustin my balls cause i was contimplating keeping my EVO....it was a great decision, this thing is blazing fast.,.....i just gotta get used to TW till we get somethign else
reverepats said:
dood i just coughed up my 3D for this today....i mean i get 4G (that i never ever, ever USe by the way) and i can def say that i get a much better signal where i live....i live just north of boston and i get decent 3G all over but with my 3D it really sucked....i'd say go for it....all my buddy were bustin my balls cause i was contimplating keeping my EVO....it was a great decision, this thing is blazing fast.,.....i just gotta get used to TW till we get somethign else
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ohai!
Yeah I have no 4g... Never stopped me from getting any of the dualcore phones ive gotten (all 4g capable)
3g is decent in my area aswell...
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
I'm in a 4G saturated area and I never have 4G, big deal. I wouldn't use it for browsing...it isn't that much faster for browsing. If I had a big download I would use it, it makes a giant difference for that...but I keep it off even if I could get it cuz my battery is far more important than 4G to me. Shaving 3 or 4 hours off of my battery to shave 1 or 2 seconds off of every page load just ain't worth it to me.
Sprint's 4G speed is not that great to me.In my area I get around 8mb with a MyTouch 4G and almost 20 on a Thunderbolt. Sprint's 3G gets me half a mb if I'm lucky. I def want the ET4G but I'm trying to weigh whether the phone is that much better than anything else to put up with the 3G speeds.
If any of you guys have a Photon. What do you prefer?
rllong1 said:
Sprint's 4G speed is not that great to me.In my area I get around 8mb with a MyTouch 4G and almost 20 on a Thunderbolt. Sprint's 3G gets me half a mb if I'm lucky. I def want the ET4G but I'm trying to weigh whether the phone is that much better than anything else to put up with the 3G speeds.
If any of you guys have a Photon. What do you prefer?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive had the photon, evo 3d, and now the epic touch
Photon had great reception for calls vs evo 3d... But I epic touch wins
Data in my area was faster with the photon but the epic.touch still beats the 3d...
And gps on.all three seems better than last years line up
I hated the.shape of the photon but loved the dedicated camera buttons on the 3d and.photon... But the epic touch is still faster better.screen and thinner..... I dunnk thats my first opinion of all three hope it helps...
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
rllong1 said:
Sprint's 4G speed is not that great to me.In my area I get around 8mb with a MyTouch 4G and almost 20 on a Thunderbolt. Sprint's 3G gets me half a mb if I'm lucky. I def want the ET4G but I'm trying to weigh whether the phone is that much better than anything else to put up with the 3G speeds.
If any of you guys have a Photon. What do you prefer?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't come to Sprint just for a phone. The network sucks and gets worse every day. I left them last week.
What company did you go to. What phone did you get?
I've had AT&T and Sprint both for a while now. AT&T for work and Sprint for personal. I'm using a Captivate on AT&T and my account has unlimited data. Over the past few months I've been comparing the Captivate to the Epic around many different places in town and the Captivate always wins out for speed and reliability. Running CM7 with the i9000 modem the data is pretty fast and battery life is almost double what I was getting with the Epic. What prompted me to start considering this was the fact that Sprint started screwing people out of their annual upgrades back in April. They changed the criteria of what qualified you so barely any one qualified any more. Network coverage has been getting worse since they did that as well. So I'm using my work phone for personal use now with a google voice number to keep things separated. Dad ported out to Verizon and gets better coverage and call quality is so much better which I attribute to 50/50 phone and network. Wife is still on Sprint till the next best keyboard phone comes out. She'll probably ride out her Epic till it explodes then we'll figure it out.
I just switched from AT&T today and got the Evo 3D, figuring I could try it out and probably swap it within the next two weeks if it has bad battery life/the 3D turns out to be just a gimmick. I wasn't prepared for it to have bad 4G reception in areas that are supposed to have good reception. Then I look on Google and apparently the Photon 4G crushes the signal quality of my Evo, so I'm thinking about taking it back.
I'm thinking that I will return the Evo 3D because of signal strength issues (and I hear bad battery life too, although I haven't yet had a chance to test that), and I'm torn between the Photon and Epic 4G Touch.
TL;DR:
How's the 4G reception of this compare to Evo 3D and Photon?
If signal reception is the most important thing to you, go with the Photon. If you are looking for the overall best phone on Sprint, get yourself an Epic 4G Touch.
BTW, I have the E4GT and my 4G reception has actually been very good. I compared the E4GT to the Photon side-by-side and while the Photon had a stronger signal and slight edge in DL speed, the E4GT was just hands-down a nicer phone.
Wimax reception is as good as the EVO 4G not 3D (judging from the signal indicator) but the Epic seems to get faster speeds in the same spot =] - Evo was maxing out at 5Mbps where as the Epic was getting 8mbps same servers, using speedtest.
But yep wimax is pretty spotty you will have to sit in one place where you get coverage and even then it might kick you off. If you really need 4G i would suggest verizon or even att's hpsa, (i think its called?) should be fast enough. If you are looking at the Sprint coverage map there are two indicators dark orange i believe? for indoor service and lighter orange for on street. BLAH!
Horrible. The entire 4G network on Sprint is horrible. They should just give it up and go back to the drawing boards. I hope they announce LTE on the upcoming October announcement.
akarol said:
Horrible. The entire 4G network on Sprint is horrible. They should just give it up and go back to the drawing boards. I hope they announce LTE on the upcoming October announcement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sadly, this is probably a more accurate description of 4g than many of us are willing to admit. i have been trying out the epic for 7 days now in kansas city (
sprint headquarters) and the consistency of 4g is flaky at best. the 3g is worse than my verizon 3g speeds. coming from att i would venture to guess you are going to be very dissappointed with the data. now the epic is a whole different ball of wax. this has to be the nicest phone on the planet. just wish it was with another carrier.
Like the poster before me said. 4G is absolutely terrible in my area. I'm getting 1.4 mbps down on 4G!!!! 3G gets like 200kbps tops. It's ridiculous how terrible the Sprint Network has gotten in the past year.
For the many of you that don't understand/don't "believe" in network vision...
Android police posted this article which is actually pretty informative.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...ce-but-the-800mhz-rollout-will-drop-your-jaw/
mattykinsx said:
Android police posted this article which is actually pretty informative.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...ce-but-the-800mhz-rollout-will-drop-your-jaw/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...I understand the underlying concepts and already knew that's what the 800mHz band was capable of....but...to see it laid out like that--even as overly optimistic as internal corporate presentation slides likely are--holy ****.
Thanks for the post...I gotta admit, my jaw dropped as well.
daneurysm said:
...I understand the underlying concepts and already knew that's what the 800mHz band was capable of....but...to see it laid out like that--even as overly optimistic as internal corporate presentation slides likely are--holy ****.
Thanks for the post...I gotta admit, my jaw dropped as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've talked to Sprint technicians that are working on the project and they truly believe this will bring them inline with, or better than, the big two.
And that seems very likely.
Lets just hope they keep unlimited data and don't turn into At&t and Verizon.
I've had Sprint for able 6 years, my family has had it for I wanna say 15+, they've had their ups and downs but I believe it's a stable cell phone provider. I can't ever picture myself without it loving my speeds, loving my service (I currently live in the country AND getting 4G) I'll always be a loyal sprint customer and this link you posted makes me happy haha
Anyone have the link to check and see if you have tower updates in your area in the past 6 months or scheduled?
Oh wow...I knew Network Vision was supposed to give them a boost but I didn't think it'd be this much of a boost.
cds0699 said:
Anyone have the link to check and see if you have tower updates in your area in the past 6 months or scheduled?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
network.sprint.com
It burns when I tapatalk...
Still impresses me every time I see it, thanks for the reminder of what's to come.
It burns when I tapatalk...
I've learned over the years to believe it when it is done rather than believe the powerpoint.
There are always caveats like, coverage is factoring in 800MHz, but some phones aren't FCC certified to work at 800MHz even though they might be otherwise capable (Photon comes to mind)
Are they running both the 1xAdvanced voice and EVDO carrier at 800 in every market on just the voice carrier or only augmented 800 in select markets? If some markets only get LTE on 800, then that won't help our phones out.
Conceptually Network Vision is the right thing to do, but there can be a significant difference between the design and implementation. The latter is where they usually see the unanticipated issues.
So yeah, it looks good on paper, let's see it in action.
Beejis said:
network.sprint.com
It burns when I tapatalk...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very much.
Hopefully Sprint does not have too much trouble raising the additional $3 billion needed to complete Network Vision.
I just went on an ADD fueled wikipedia/internet spree because I realized as I was reading that article that I knew nothing about sprints actual network or network at all. I had to keep looking up each term, staring further down Sprint's rabbit hole. I found a lot of interesting information but what really stunned me was that WiMax 4G network runs at 2.5Ghz. By comparison, Verizon's LTE network, which technically by definition is not a true 4G network, runs at 700Mhz.
I cannot wait for this upgrade to come to my area soon enough.
My area:
Past 6 months: 3 data speed upgrades
Planned: 4 data capacity upgrades
Nice!
doesn't Verizon use a 700mhz wavelength for lte which would make better
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Well i just speed tested both a sprint EvDo revA and roamed on versizons EvDo rev0.... Guess what. I got 1.2mb/sec on sprint ( its 3am here so ones on the towers) on verizon i got 1.9mb/sec.... Wtf!?!? I though EvDo revA was way faster than Rev0!? Yet rev0 its litterally 80% faster! Please, some one explain this to me. Please, this is actually a serious queztion
Sent From My Epic Touch 3g
bluefire808 said:
Well i just speed tested both a sprint EvDo revA and roamed on versizons EvDo rev0.... Guess what. I got 1.2mb/sec on sprint ( its 3am here so ones on the towers) on verizon i got 1.9mb/sec.... Wtf!?!? I though EvDo revA was way faster than Rev0!? Yet rev0 its litterally 80% faster! Please, some one explain this to me. Please, this is actually a serious queztion
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rev0 vs RevA is just the air interface. If you connect a fast air connection to a slow backhaul then the lowest common denominator is the backhaul and that will limit your speeds. If there are too many people on the tower sharing the limited bandwidth, that will limit your speeds too.
If you connect a 802.11n wireless router to a 56k modem, what would you expect your Internet speeds to be? That is analogous to what is happening with Sprint, though the backhauls are more capable (and also shared amongst more people)
Assuming you are sure the Verizon connection was Rev 0, it is theoretically capable of 2.45Mbps while Rev A is theoretically capable of 3.1Mbps. Drop around 18-20% for actual use and you get the real-world #s.
So a fast Rev0 could easily beat a rate limited RevA on the download side.
Now the upload side, RevA beats Rev0 by more than an order of magnitude. .15M vs 1.8M theoretical. I'd be surprised if a Rev0 uplink beat a RevA uplink, but if the towers are overloaded enough, anything can happen.
sfhub said:
Rev0 vs RevA is just the air interface. If you connect a fast air connection to a slow backhaul then the lowest common denominator is the backhaul and that will limit your speeds. If there are too many people on the tower sharing the limited bandwidth, that will limit your speeds too.
If you connect a 802.11n wireless router to a 56k modem, what would you expect your Internet speeds to be? That is analogous to what is happening with Sprint, though the backhauls are more capable (and also shared amongst more people)
Assuming you are sure the Verizon connection was Rev 0, it is theoretically capable of 2.45Mbps while Rev A is theoretically capable of 3.1Mbps. Drop around 18-20% for actual use and you get the real-world #s.
So a fast Rev0 could easily beat a rate limited RevA on the download side.
Now the upload side, RevA beats Rev0 by more than an order of magnitude. .15M vs 1.8M theoretical. I'd be surprised if a Rev0 uplink beat a RevA uplink, but if the towers are overloaded enough, anything can happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was just the info i needes. I had also wiki'd it and saw that too. But i like your real world explanation. Yup 2Mb/sec on verizon rev0 and 1.2Mbsec on sprinta revA. Eh o well. Thanks again for getting back to me. Big props to you brother!
Sent From My Epic Touch 3g
iSkylla said:
I found a lot of interesting information but what really stunned me was that WiMax 4G network runs at 2.5Ghz. By comparison, Verizon's LTE network, which technically by definition is not a true 4G network, runs at 700Mhz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They have a wider bit of spectrum down there at 700mhz at a much lower wavelength. WiMax and LTE are pretty much just protocols. Verizon's LTE would suck on that thin slice of 2.5gHz and Sprint's WiMax would kick ass at 700mHz....roughly....and that's not taking into considering signal propagation and obstruction penetration.
My 3G speeds suck... but who cares, 4G has gone through the roof down here.
3mb/s -> 9mb/s in my living room
5mb/s -> 18mb/s in my friend's house
I'm gonna go drive all over and run speed tests now.
Orrr... they are showing the map like that because there won't be any buildings in 2013 to penetrate.
Food for thought gentleman.
PS. Jk
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Simple question..
I'm a bit confused about WiMax and whether or not it is (strictly) a cellular communications technology embedded in the Evo 4G, such as 3G and 4G Mobile Data Speeds, and how this relates to the Evo's normal wifi connection.
Is there any crossover between WiMax and WiFi?
Or is WiMax simply a mobile data technology not related to the onboard wifi network card?
Thanks
I think the wimax is part of the 4g service...
Sent from my PC36100 using xda app-developers app
WiMax is a type of 4G, with LTE being another type (of 4G)
And yes, neither of those have anything to do with the wifi and there is no crossover involved
Sent from my PG06100
CNexus said:
WiMax is a type of 4G, with LTE being another type (of 4G)
And yes, neither of those have anything to do with the wifi and there is no crossover involved
Sent from my PG06100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^This. Older Sprint phones like the EVO 4G, EVO 3D and Samsung Galaxy S2 E4GT (among others) use Wimax, which was Sprint's original offering for 4G service. Sprint has since gone to LTE (Long Term Evolution) for their 4G service, although Wimax still works in areas where it's already active. Phones on Sprint utilizing LTE include the EVO 4G LTE and Samsung Galaxy S3. Wifi has nothing to do with either Wimax or LTE, as previously stated. A Wimax-enabled phone cannot utilize LTE, and vice-versa, as they are two completely different 4G standards and operate on different frequencies.
The advice is free....the bandwidth, not so much
It really grinds my gears that there aren't new phones available supporting either Wimax or LTE or Wimax AND LTE. I am stuck in Ohio where the Wimax roll out was thorough, and now there is no info on if/when LTE will come here. Eventually people in ohio will all have upgraded to LTE phones due to attrition and we are paying for data plans that we can't take advantage of. I really want a new phone, maybe the new One that is coming out soon, but the drawback is no 4G in Ohio. Sprint really dropped the ball on this one. I'd take a phone that was a little thicker so they could fit both chipsets in there no questions asked.
thebbbrain said:
It really grinds my gears that there aren't new phones available supporting either Wimax or LTE or Wimax AND LTE. I am stuck in Ohio where the Wimax roll out was thorough, and now there is no info on if/when LTE will come here. Eventually people in ohio will all have upgraded to LTE phones due to attrition and we are paying for data plans that we can't take advantage of. I really want a new phone, maybe the new One that is coming out soon, but the drawback is no 4G in Ohio. Sprint really dropped the ball on this one. I'd take a phone that was a little thicker so they could fit both chipsets in there no questions asked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats very true. I think it proabably has to do with the extra work of getting the two to play nice while both being available in one phone, and the extra drivers and hardware required to have both
Definitely what you said though, I'd have no problem with a bit thicker phone that features both but since other competitors are moving towards slimmer and sleeker phones, while at the same time having monstrously powerful processors, it probably wouldnt be a smart move on Sprint part
I was trolling the new HTC One forum yesterday, and did notice that the One might be coming with an LTE radio supporting 800mhz and 1900mhz. This is promising as I believe the 800mhz is what sprint rus the Direct Connect system on. That system is avail in my area so maybe they will use it for LTE? #wantLTE
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2158662
thebbbrain said:
I was trolling the new HTC One forum yesterday, and did notice that the One might be coming with an LTE radio supporting 800mhz and 1900mhz. This is promising as I believe the 800mhz is what sprint rus the Direct Connect system on. That system is avail in my area so maybe they will use it for LTE? #wantLTE
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2158662
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I remember hearing or reading something sometime back from sprint that eventually they were going to convert the old Nextel iden network over to 4g lte because of the bandwidth it runs on. I also remember that person telling me that this new lte on this frequency would penatrate 2-3x better meaning better 4g lte signals indoors. It may have been a sprint tech who told me on one of the many phone calls I have made to them over the years.
Sent from my ever-changing OG Evo...
Everything you say is true, just replace the word "bandwidth" with "spectrum". iDen was using lower frequencies which penetrate better. You get slightly lower theoretical max speeds, but the connection is more reliable, and people generally agree that's what's important.
Sent from my PC36100 using xda app-developers app