Related
I'm not versed in spectrum-talk, so here it goes: Why is it that T-Mobile HSPA+ states peak speeds of 21.6 Mbps, yet the G2 states peak speeds of 14.4 Mbps?
Also, what is the difference between HSDPA+ and HSPA+?
The HSPA+ network is capable of 21 Mbps, but the HSPA+ radio chip in the G2 is only rated at 14.4 Mbps. Currently the only device tmobile has that is capable of 21 Mbps is the web connect rocket.
HSPA = High Speed Packet Acces
HSPA includes both
HSDPA = High Speed Downlink Packet Access
and
HSUPA = High Speed Uplink Packet Access
HSPA+ = HSPA of 14.4 Mbps or faster (21 Mbps or the next step is 42 Mbps.
joebobjoe said:
I'm not versed in spectrum-talk, so here it goes: Why is it that T-Mobile HSPA+ states peak speeds of 21.6 Mbps, yet the G2 states peak speeds of 14.4 Mbps?
Also, what is the difference between HSDPA+ and HSPA+?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HSPA+(3.75G) is actually newer and faster than HSDPA+(3.5G). In terms of speed, theoretically HSPA+ can reach speeds of 56Mbit/s while HSDPA+ can reach 21Mbit/s. Though in really the fastest your going to get for HSPA+ is 21.6 Mbps. As for why the G2 14.4 Mbps I have no clue. but its faster then my home internet
mtl171,
Technically HSPA+ consists of HSDPA+ and HSUPA+ just like HSPA contains both HSDPA and HSUPA.
I agree that we are unlikely to see HSPA+ networks faster than 21 Mbps in the U.S., I think carriers including T-Mobile will be investing in LTE before 42 Mbps HSPA+ especially since the speed on 21 Mbps is on par with many home broadband connections.
LTE has more benefits for carriers than just speed.
atlp99 said:
Technically HSPA+ consists of HSDPA+ and HSUPA+ just like HSPA contains both HSDPA and HSUPA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my bad. forgot about that.
atlp99 said:
I agree that we are unlikely to see HSPA+ networks faster than 21 Mbps in the U.S., I think carriers including T-Mobile will be investing in LTE before 42 Mbps HSPA+ especially since the speed on 21 Mbps is on par with many home broadband connections. LTE has more benefits for carriers than just speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True. though i thought Verizon and AT&T were going for LTE while T-Mobile and Sprint are going with Wi-Max. though i might be mistaken...
Well there are rumors about a merger between Clearwire and T-Mobile.
Anyway, does HSDPA+/HSPA+ rely on MIMO?
Sprint is the only carrier using WiMax
T-Mobile is also going to LTE.
Verizon , ATT, and T-Mobile have all committed to LTE for long term 4G networks.
Sprint is the only one using WiMax, and there is a chance they will switch to LTE also in the long run. Clearwire (which Sprint the majority shareholder) has indicated that their WiMax network could be converted to LTE without much effort.
T-Mobile is deploying HSPA+ currently before deploying LTE.
This makes sense to me, since the speeds of HSPA+ are higher than LTE will be at launch and T-Mobile does not have the network congestion problems that ATT and Verizon have. The biggest advantage of LTE is increased network capacity because of more efficient spectrum usage. I don't think that LTE speeds will pass HSPA+ speeds for at least a couple of years, but LTE has the potential to be faster in the long run.
Verizon is starting to deploy LTE for data cards the end of this year and is rumored to be launching LTE handsets towards the last half of 2011. Depending on the rumors, they may be running behind due to issues with calling over LTE but there are conflicting rumors at this point.
Joebojoe,
HSPA+ running at 42 Mbps and above technology similar to MIMO to download from 2 towers simultaneously.
There are rumors about a Clearwire and T-Mobile partnership. It could make sense for them to partner together for a LTE network roll out, and Clearwire has indicated that it could switch its network over to LTE or run LTE and WiMax.
The other option that has been rumored is that T-Mobile would simply buy some of the excess spectrum that Clearwire has.
Either of those options could make sense, but are just rumors with no real facts to support them. It's fun speculating though.
Thanks for the reply, yet I'm still curious why the G2 is labelled HSPA+ yet only supports 14.4 Mbps. 14.4 Mbps sounds more like HSDPA to me.
joebobjoe said:
Thanks for the reply, yet I'm still curious why the G2 is labelled HSPA+ yet only supports 14.4 Mbps. 14.4 Mbps sounds more like HSDPA to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
idk. design limitations? its still plenty fast. highly doubt people actually get 14.4 Mbps on a HSDPA connection.
Update: its design limitations. According to Qualcomm's website, "MSM7230(proccessor used in G2) support for HSPA+ networks - up to 14 Mbps downloads and 5.76 Mbps uploads"
Like mtl171 posted the 14.4 Mbps speed on the G2 is a limitation of the chipset. I don't think any of the chipsets available for phones HSPA+ at 21 Mbps. The next generation 1.2 and 1.5 Ghz Snapdragon chipsets are supposed to be capable of faster data speeds (if i remember correctly)but they have not reached the market yet.
Joebobjoe,
HSPA and HSPA+ are basically versions of the same technology Hspa+ is the newest iteration. The main difference is the speed.
Please explain... if there are chipsets that support it for the usb dongle, why can't the same thing work on a phone? Have they just not made the chipset small enough for a phone yet?
rpmccormick said:
Please explain... if there are chipsets that support it for the usb dongle, why can't the same thing work on a phone? Have they just not made the chipset small enough for a phone yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
patience young one the geniuses at qualcomm are working on this. meanwhile we just need to patiently wait a year or so for them to release it
Aren't those chipsets coming out in January?
joebobjoe said:
Aren't those chipsets coming out in January?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to tell you the truth, i don't know. but my guess is phones released next year should support it.
Last I heard the 1.2 Ghz Snapdragon chipsets should be released to handset manufacturers late this year or early next year. Then add a couple of months for manufacturers to get handsets built with them, so probably late Q1 for those handsets to get market
rpmccormick,
The chipset in the usb dongle only has to transmit data, it does not have support the other functions of a phone (O.S., wifi, Bluetooth, screen, audio, video, power management, etc..), plus since the usb pulls power from your computer so power management is not as important. The usb dongle uses a much simpler chipset, that only has to transmit data while your computer handles everything else.
atlp99 said:
Last I heard the 1.2 Ghz Snapdragon chipsets should be released to handset manufacturers late this year or early next year. Then add a couple of months for manufacturers to get handsets built with them, so probably late Q1 for those handsets to get market.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.2 ghz early next year. 1.5 dualcore Q4 next year.
http://androidandme.com/2010/09/news/is-qualcomm-and-htc-in-trouble-with-their-dual-core-processors/
Bringing this back since its relavant now....
So just found out about the new Samsung Galaxy S 4g with the new chipsets that give 21+ theroetical speeds....
I am a VERY VERY angry G2 owner who while loves my phone am very upset to find that I will be getting much less speeds out of their network labeled the SAME on both devices. I think this was a VERY deceiving move and hope that with enough complaints we can get some sort of retribution like lower data plan price or what not (the what not are better solutions like a free upgrade but i know those things dont happen as easy)
The only hope is that it can be updated to use 21+ from 14+ but this is HIGHLY unlikely.
Im curious to see what others think of this?
EDIT: this is a smart forum so lets not discuss the fact that not all areas will have that speed and just pretend that im in a market that already is pushing that when using one of those usb sticks..
no6969el said:
So just found out about the new Samsung Galaxy S 4g with the new chipsets that give 21+ theroetical speeds....
I am a VERY VERY angry G2 owner who while loves my phone am very upset to find that I will be getting much less speeds out of their network labeled the SAME on both devices. I think this was a VERY deceiving move and hope that with enough complaints we can get some sort of retribution like lower data plan price or what not (the what not are better solutions like a free upgrade but i know those things dont happen as easy)
The only hope is that it can be updated to use 21+ from 14+ but this is HIGHLY unlikely.
Im curious to see what others think of this?
EDIT: this is a smart forum so lets not discuss the fact that not all areas will have that speed and just pretend that im in a market that already is pushing that when using one of those usb sticks..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't worry about it too much. If you had a 4G galaxy s side by side with a G2 the galaxy s would very rarely achieve higher speeds. The G2 is a high end android phone that will not be obsolete anytime soon. You could always hold out for the next great phone but no matter what there will always be something better in a few months.
You should be happy about your decision to buy a G2 because its a fast, solid device and still the best phone in Tmo's lineup.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
Seriously you are getting that upset? Why do people get so uptight about so many things? Like the previous poster stated, real world is different. But technology moves forward, it doesn't stop for anyone. Life is much more difficult then getting one or two mbps less then another phone. I would be more upset if we never get a gingerbread update (yeah I know I would never use it seeing as I'm a xda member running cm7) simply because of principal. The whole vibrant fiasco would have me really ticked. It wasn't until people really started calling it out and got really loud did things really happen.
Sent from my HTC Vision
I'm seeing very erratic speeds in Manhattan with my new SGS II, but generally I'm in the 2-3 mbps down, 1 mbps up range anywhere I'm inside. Sometimes it is the same outside as well, but occasionally that will spike up to ~16mpbs down outside.
Any other NYC users having similar issues?
Get a new sim at tmobile
sent from my real Gs move in silence like lasagna
Since when is 2-3Mbps slow? Really?
Try Sprint 3G/4G or Verizon 3G or AT&T "4G". 100-900Kbps is the norm on Sprint, Verizon and AT&T except AT&T has higher bursts. Verizon LTE is quick but it's already slowed down below 10Mbps here and coverage is not everywhere
heygrl said:
Since when is 2-3Mbps slow? Really?
Try Sprint 3G/4G or Verizon 3G or AT&T "4G". 100-900Kbps is the norm on Sprint, Verizon and AT&T except AT&T has higher bursts. Verizon LTE is quick but it's already slowed down below 10Mbps here and coverage is not everywhere
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since it's advertised as HSPA+ 42mbps. Yes, really.
mbernusg said:
Get a new sim at tmobile
sent from my real Gs move in silence like lasagna
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How come? Is this sim defective somehow?
ap77 said:
Since it's advertised as HSPA+ 42mbps. Yes, really.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No - you're not going to get close to a theoretical max speed. Sorry to break the news to you, but this is Wireless - there are no guarantees.
heygrl said:
No - you're not going to get close to a theoretical max speed. Sorry to break the news to you, but this is Wireless - there are no guarantees.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Obviously I'm not expecting the 42mbps. But they made a big deal about this being the first DC-HSPA+ phone -- it is, in fact, why this phone doesn't have exynos. Sorry to break it to you, but 2-3 mbps is very slow even for HSPA+ 21mbps. This is slower than Sprint's ****ty wimax.
If you're content with 2-3 mpbs, great, I'm happy for you.
ap77 said:
Obviously I'm not expecting the 42mbps. But they made a big deal about this being the first DC-HSPA+ phone -- it is, in fact, why this phone doesn't have exynos. Sorry to break it to you, but 2-3 mbps is very slow even for HSPA+ 21mbps. This is slower than Sprint's ****ty wimax.
If you're content with 2-3 mpbs, great, I'm happy for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not slower than WiMAX here, and if you are seeing a variance in speed it's obvious that you are bouncing between two different cell towers with two different loads or one without Dual Carrier HSPA deployed on it.
2-3Mbps for a network with 1 3G carrier which means all of the bandwidth on that sector is shared with other T-Mobile subscribers is NOT bad. 50-300Kbps/Sprint 3G speed is bad. Verizon 3G at 500-1000Kbps is mediocre but acceptable due to the low ping. 2Mbps is decent, not bad, and OK for a HSPA network.
heygrl said:
It's not slower than WiMAX here, and if you are seeing a variance in speed it's obvious that you are bouncing between two different cell towers with two different loads or one without Dual Carrier HSPA deployed on it.
2-3Mbps for a network with 1 3G carrier which means all of the bandwidth on that sector is shared with other T-Mobile subscribers is NOT bad. 50-300Kbps/Sprint 3G speed is bad. Verizon 3G at 500-1000Kbps is mediocre but acceptable due to the low ping. 2Mbps is decent, not bad, and OK for a HSPA network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I still have my Sprint Epic and this service is certainly slower than wimax.
Look, I'm not going to argue with you if you think 2mbps is just fine. I don't. What I'm interested in is whether other users in NYC are getting the same kind of speeds.
ap77 said:
I still have my Sprint Epic and this service is certainly slower than wimax.
Look, I'm not going to argue with you if you think 2mbps is just fine. I don't. What I'm interested in is whether other users in NYC are getting the same kind of speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a speedtest i ran and got the same score 3 times in bloomingdales 59th
Get a new sim bro
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
kennyp987 said:
This is a speedtest i ran and got the same score 3 times in bloomingdales 59th
Get a new sim bro
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got 12mbps DL / 0.8mbps UL in Brooklyn last night. Right now I'm downtown and I have 113kbps DL / 381kbps UL.
grabiarz said:
I got 12mbps DL / 0.8mbps UL in Brooklyn last night. Right now I'm downtown and I have 113kbps DL / 381kbps UL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ouch on the downtown.
ap77 said:
I still have my Sprint Epic and this service is certainly slower than wimax.
Look, I'm not going to argue with you if you think 2mbps is just fine. I don't. What I'm interested in is whether other users in NYC are getting the same kind of speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 2.5GHz network reaches few people. In a market where Clear actually has people using the network the speeds are much lower due to the traffic. NYC is still very much brand new with few WiMAX users, not a valid comparison. Here, it's 1Mbps all day long due to the maturity of the network and the usage
Unless they're on the same tower as you -- they're going to get different speeds, higher and even lower depending on load. Something you can't comprehend. It's not going to be 10+ everywhere. What are you desperately needing 10Mbps at home for anyway? Do you have an unlimited plan with no throttle cap you desperately want to use? I don't get it.
heygrl said:
The 2.5GHz network reaches few people. In a market where Clear actually has people using the network the speeds are much lower due to the traffic. NYC is still very much brand new with few WiMAX users, not a valid comparison. Here, it's 1Mbps all day long due to the maturity of the network and the usage
Unless they're on the same tower as you -- they're going to get different speeds, higher and even lower depending on load. Something you can't comprehend. It's not going to be 10+ everywhere. What are you desperately needing 10Mbps at home for anyway? Do you have an unlimited plan with no throttle cap you desperately want to use? I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For god's sake, will you take your concern trolling elsewhere? "Why do you even need something that fast?" Unbelievable.
heygrl said:
The 2.5GHz network reaches few people. In a market where Clear actually has people using the network the speeds are much lower due to the traffic. NYC is still very much brand new with few WiMAX users, not a valid comparison. Here, it's 1Mbps all day long due to the maturity of the network and the usage
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Meant to add: I don't care at all about how wimax works where you are (Vegas?). Here in NYC, I have pretty uniformly seen lower speeds on TMO than I did on wimax, sometimes substantially so. I'm curious about the speeds that others in NYC with DC-HSPA+ are generally seeing on average. Your entire contribution to this thread has been a giant non-sequitur.
This is what im getting in Delaware .....very nice
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA App
ap77 said:
Meant to add: I don't care at all about how wimax works where you are (Vegas?). Here in NYC, I have pretty uniformly seen lower speeds on TMO than I did on wimax, sometimes substantially so. I'm curious about the speeds that others in NYC with DC-HSPA+ are generally seeing on average. Your entire contribution to this thread has been a giant non-sequitur.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your babbling about how you aren't getting 16Mbps everywhere. I'm surprised you can even get a WiMAX signal that doesn't cut out all over the place. It matters because you can't comprehend network load or variances.
heygrl said:
Your babbling about how you aren't getting 16Mbps everywhere. I'm surprised you can even get a WiMAX signal that doesn't cut out all over the place. It matters because you can't comprehend network load or variances.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or never at all. I just noticed your sig -- "LTE killer." Right -- killer 2mbps. Obviously dealing with a fanboy troll here. Move along.
ap77 said:
Or never at all. I just noticed your sig -- "LTE killer." Right -- killer 2mbps. Obviously dealing with a fanboy troll here. Move along.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get 10 Mbps+ on dual cell HSPA which usually outperforms Verizon LTE in Las Vegas on a regular basis, at a much lower price with better phones to boot. Again, you don't/can't comprehend variances per tower. Grasp that first and you will understand why you don't get 16Mbps *EVERYWHERE*
heygrl said:
I get 10 Mbps+ on dual cell HSPA which usually outperforms Verizon LTE in Las Vegas on a regular basis, at a much lower price with better phones to boot. Again, you don't/can't comprehend variances per tower. Grasp that first and you will understand why you don't get 16Mbps *EVERYWHERE*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you seriously this slow? PLEASE, PLEASE stop trolling this thread.
Again, I don't give a **** about your experience in Vegas. This thread is about NYC. Believe me, 2mbps is beyond a joke compared to VZ's LTE in NYC. And, hey, you got 20mbps+ *everywhere* with VZ LTE here. My mighty 2-3mbps DC-HSPA+ is not match.
Seriously, please just stop. You're killing value with every character in this thread.
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
hi
i recently got a nexus from google.
it woks like a charm but i notice i have never gotten 4G on my phone.
i know there is cus my friend has 4G on his GS2.
so any one knows why is my phone not connecting to 4G network?
any help will be appreciated
PS: the APN i have is epc.tmo.com
HSPA+ (the H icon) is the same thing as T-Mobile's "4G."
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
its weird, i get a 3G icon then it changes to an H. but when i go to settings i dont have the network mode option to choose from.
C0dy said:
HSPA+ (the H icon) is the same thing as T-Mobile's "4G."
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It wasn't built to display HSPA+ as 4G for T-Mobile.
Google and rest of Europe considered it plain old 3G.
HSPA+ is not true 4G. It's considered 4G because it's almost as fast as 4G but it's not and people don't mind being tricked by that. They want to feel good about their phone. So they simply accept it.
I would just to brag about it. =p
Look at the AT&T 4S, it has HSPA+ but they don't advertise it as 4G. They just say it's faster then normal 3G.
That's why all my friends on AT&T with a 4S and jailbroken just get winter board and change the 3G to 4G and say they got 4G.
It's as fast so they say, "WTH!!! Let's make people feel like they got 4G and see a symbol that says so, even though they know they don't."
That is why you dont see 4G.
Ahh ok. Im asking cus someone told me i needed a new sim card. But thanks
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA
Yeah I understand why you would be confused. U assume it's 4G since it's as fast. =p
I'd do the same unless I'm told. And since I found out when the 4S came out (I was confused at first), I learned it's just simple 3G on steroids.
Actually one of the firmware updates to the 4S revised the indicator so now it *does* say 4G on AT&T. Which is frustrating because non-technical types now say things like "Well my son didn't get 4G on his Verizon 4G phone in our area, but I get 4G on my AT&T iPhone, so I guess AT&T has better 4G."
I know.
Advertising something that is not true. They can trick people into thinking that the AT&T 4S is better and make people think they have more 4G coverage.
Technically it does since it's considered just as fast. But technically isn't good enough.
DLD511 said:
I know.
Advertising something that is not true. They can trick people into thinking that the AT&T 4S is better and make people think they have more 4G coverage.
Technically it does since it's considered just as fast. But technically isn't good enough.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPhone 4S utilizes HSPA+ just like the Galaxy Nexus. The only difference is that the 4S has an HSPA+ radio that is limited to 14.4Mbps, just like early T-Mobile HSPA+ devices like the G2x. The Nexus has a 21Mbps radio. Functionally, there isn't a whole lot of difference.
Fortunately, we should see true 4G in the states soon, as T-Mobile plans to roll out LTE-Advanced; which, unlike AT&T, Sprint and Verizon's LTE, is the version that actually complies to all of the initial 4G standards, which are not limited to speed. Unfortunately, it will likely still be quite a while before we see speeds of 100Mbps / 1Gbps, which are also one of the requirements. The backhaul and infrastructure for such a network simply aren't utilized in the US. Also, I don't think we really need speeds like that. The initial LTE we have now is still a battery drainer, where HSPA+ still excels in efficiency. The main benefit of LTE and LTE Advanced is changing from a circuit switched network to a fully IP based system, which HSPA+ partially supports.
Correction: The 4S uses HSDPA+HSUPA, which is close but not identical to HSPA+.
HSDPA+HSUPA Release 6
HSPA+ Release 7
LTE Release 8
LTE Advanced Release 10
3G is UMTS. 4G is HSPA/HSPA+
4G and 3G are not the same in these terms.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light."
T-Mobile's LTE gonna be at 48mbps correct??? Gonna be damn fast.
Here's Verizon speeds.
DLD511 said:
T-Mobile's LTE gonna be at 48mbps correct??? Gonna be damn fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile's HSPA+ is already at 48Mbps in most cases. No word on the max speed for LTE Advanced yet.
Keep in mind that maximum theoretical speed and maximum real usage speed are two different things, but LTE Advanced supposedly reduces a lot of the issues that HSPA+ has, including the speed degradation that HSPA+ has when it comes to distance from the tower and interference.
Also, to be honest, speed tests are just like benchmarks. They really don't show realistic results most of the time. Besides, most of us really only use about 250kbps-3Mbps in actual real time usage, at best and on high load.
JaiaV said:
T-Mobile's HSPA+ is already at 48Mbps in most cases. No word on the max speed for LTE Advanced yet.
Keep in mind that maximum theoretical speed and maximum real usage speed are two different things, but LTE Advanced supposedly reduces a lot of the issues that HSPA+ has, including the speed degradation that HSPA+ has when it comes to distance from the tower and interference.
Also, to be honest, speed tests are just like benchmarks. They really don't show realistic results most of the time. Besides, most of us really only use about 250kbps-3Mbps in actual real time usage, at best and on high load.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon got to play serious catch up on speed.
DLD511 said:
T-Mobile's LTE gonna be at 48mbps correct??? Gonna be damn fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're already on 48mbps HSPA+. When they deploy LTE, it'll be LTE-Advanced, which is the next iteration above the current LTE deployments by AT&T/Verizon.
DLD511 said:
Here's Verizon speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cool story.
Verizon gonna do this too???
DLD511 said:
Verizon gonna do this too???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon's still busy implementing Release 9 LTE. Less incentive for them to upgrade to LTE Advanced, but possible the groundwork has already been laid for it, not entirely certain of what the differences between the hardware needed at the cell site or the hardware needed in the handset have to be.
JaiaV said:
Verizon's still busy implementing Release 9 LTE. Less incentive for them to upgrade to LTE Advanced, but possible the groundwork has already been laid for it, not entirely certain of what the differences between the hardware needed at the cell site or the hardware needed in the handset have to be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bet it's gonna **** on the battery.... again.
DLD511 said:
Bet it's gonna **** on the battery.... again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE is quite horrible for battery life. I'm not sure what the difference LTE Advanced will make. I do know that one of the reasons LTE battery life is poor is that LTE coverage is relatively sparse for the time being, as the radio is having to work harder to get and keep a signal than it would if LTE coverage were as prevalent as HSPA+ coverage is.
Just rooted and flashed cm9 for the first time on my t-mo galaxy sII. Working on restoring apps now through titanium, for what ever reason it is only 3G connection now where it always said 4G previously... any idea why or how to fix?
Two things I noticed. I think the original rom reported 3g as 4g so make sure you actually had 4g originally, but you may want to try another radio. Helped me
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
sax911 said:
Just rooted and flashed cm9 for the first time on my t-mo galaxy sII. Working on restoring apps now through titanium, for what ever reason it is only 3G connection now where it always said 4G previously... any idea why or how to fix?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as you are seeing it switch from 3g to "H", you are getting "4g". CM9's icon is not 4g, it is an h.
Did you try a speed test to see if you are still getting "4g" speeds?
H is 4G on CM9
I've noticed the same thing. Where mine used to say 4G (at work), it now says 3G. However, I'm still getting similar speeds via speedtest so it doesn't really matter what it says to me. However, I still may try a different radio.
Update: I don't know much about it and not sure where the settings are for this, but it appears to be a governing feature with CM9. Meaning that if your phone is just sitting idle it'll catch a 3G signal and when you do a speed test, hop on the browser, download something, etc it then kicks into H/4G.
Just to clarify a lil. Technically tmo doesn't have 4g they have hspa+ 42Mbs.They call it 4g and i have found it offten times to be as fast but it is technically not 4g. CM9 being proper folks and all, call it how it is, hence the H icon.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2
bFORTIFIED said:
Just to clarify a lil. Technically tmo doesn't have 4g they have hspa+ 42Mbs.They call it 4g and i have found it offten times to be as fast but it is technically not 4g. CM9 being proper folks and all, call it how it is, hence the H icon.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry man. But your facts are quite out dated. Back in December it was decided that even though hspa +, LTE, and wi Max have not reached the 100 mbs needed to be 4g they are all now officially accepted as 4g.
Funny everyone makes this comment because all T -mobile did was upgrade the existing network .. yet no one mentions the others.. they also do not meet the minimum requirements to be 4G.. well up till December that is..
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
PJcastaldo said:
Sorry man. But your facts are quite out dated. Back in December it was decided that even though hspa +, LTE, and wi Max have not reached the 100 mbs needed to be 4g they are all now officially accepted as 4g.
Funny everyone makes this comment because all T -mobile did was upgrade the existing network .. yet no one mentions the others.. they also do not meet the minimum requirements to be 4G.. well up till December that is..
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well thats good to know, however apparently cyanogen decided to make the distinction between hspa+ and lte, and so i thought I would clarify why there is an H instead of 4G icon.
And upon further research the standard specifies 1 Gbit speeds for pedestrian and stationary devices. Furthermore I dont see any evidence that the definition for the standard was changed simply that the sanctioning body decided to call lte nd wimax 4g because they represented significant improvements on the 3g technologies.
Im in no way knocking tmo for there choice and actually think it makes more sense to fully exploit current technologies rather then investing in new one. An attitude like thats keeps the cost to the consumer lower while still providing a comparable product.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2
Here you go.
http://www.tmonews.com/2010/12/hspa-now-officially-4g-according-to-itu/
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
PJcastaldo said:
Here you go.
http://www.tmonews.com/2010/12/hspa-now-officially-4g-according-to-itu/
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im sorry I dont see where it is stated that HSPA+ is 4G, In this qoute from the ITU.
Following a detailed evaluation against stringent technical and operational criteria, ITU has determined that “LTE-Advanced” and “WirelessMAN-Advanced” should be accorded the official designation of IMT-Advanced. As the most advanced technologies currently defined for global wireless mobile broadband communications, IMT-Advanced is considered as “4G”, although it is recognized that this term, while undefined, may also be applied to the forerunners of these technologies, LTE and WiMax, and to other evolved 3G technologies providing a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed. The detailed specifications of the IMT-Advanced technologies will be provided in a new ITU-R Recommendation expected in early 2012.
I do see where it call's LTE and WiMax 4G though.
bFORTIFIED said:
Im sorry I dont see where it is stated that HSPA+ is 4G, In this qoute from the ITU.
Following a detailed evaluation against stringent technical and operational criteria, ITU has determined that “LTE-Advanced” and “WirelessMAN-Advanced” should be accorded the official designation of IMT-Advanced. As the most advanced technologies currently defined for global wireless mobile broadband communications, IMT-Advanced is considered as “4G”, although it is recognized that this term, while undefined, may also be applied to the forerunners of these technologies, LTE and WiMax, and to other evolved 3G technologies providing a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed. The detailed specifications of the IMT-Advanced technologies will be provided in a new ITU-R Recommendation expected in early 2012.
I do see where it call's LTE and WiMax 4G though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Though is does not particularly say hspa + the network falls under an evolved 3G network.
This will be my last post on the subject I promise
But I think that
PJcastaldo said:
Though is does not particularly say hspa + the network falls under an evolved 3G network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is rather subjective. But we all get our own opinions. Mine would be that the technology is not particularly evolved, but rather refined allowing greater speed then previous "3G" technology.
In any event I believe we both agree that LTE, WiMax, and HSPA+ are more accurate terms then 4G which is simply used as a marketing tool for people less interested in the matter then most members of the XDA forums.
H means 4g. Who gives a **** if it is really 4g or not. If your phone said 4g with a TMO rom then you will see a H from a Cyanogenmod rom.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium