Develop Bugs

[Q] Can I use Tmobile HSPA+ Network

I just noticed yesterday that T-mobile has a 4G network in my area and I was wondering if there was a way to force roam 4G on tmobiles network? So that I could pick up 4G.
If its possible how?
Oh and sprint needs to hurry up and put 4g everywhere

You said it yourself. T-Mobile is HSPA+, Sprint 4G is WiMax. So, no.

Naa dude. HSPA+ is not compatible with cdma(sprint). Matter of fact t-mobile is using 4G now because its "trendy" and everybody else is using it. Their network is closer to 3G in infrastructure. But thats up for debate.

That sucks like hell. There's 4G here I just can't have it. AHHHHHHH!!!
Well if its like 3G I guess I'm not missing much.

david279 said:
Naa dude. HSPA+ is not compatible with cdma(sprint). Matter of fact t-mobile is using 4G now because its "trendy" and everybody else is using it. Their network is closer to 3G in infrastructure. But thats up for debate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are on the money. HSPA+ is no more than an upgrade to existing 3G technology. If I remember right, it only has a theoretical max of 54 Mbps down. It is not, nor will it ever be, 4G.
Granted, the current 802.16e standard of WiMax is not 4G either...just waiting for that 802.16m standard to be finalized =). Which once that is complete, infrastructure can be updated and we should be able to utilize it with a simple firmware update.

Stalte said:
That sucks like hell. There's 4G here I just can't have it. AHHHHHHH!!!
Well if its like 3G I guess I'm not missing much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No its way faster than your normal 3G. Faster than WIMAX too. Its nothing to pull down 7 or 8 Mb.

I bet it's better on battery than wimax is on ours.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

overthinkingme said:
I bet it's better on battery than wimax is on ours.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It uses the same radio for voice. The EVO has a separate 4G radio thats has to be activated and scan then connect. So 2 radios running at the same time would use more battery than 1 GSM radio running. Also CDMA has a tendency to use more battery when searching for signal in low signal areas.

Having installed T-mobiles 3g upgrade here in Chicago market back in 2008, I can say definitively that HSPA is just a radio cabinet addition to the existing cellular framework. Depending on the layout of the tower/site, "Flex radios" handle the data on 1, or sometimes more antennae, while the voice travels over GSM through remaining antennae. Very similar to ATT infrastructure, but tiny radios handling big bandwidth.
Having said all that, 4G is a silly buzzword that Sprint started, and T-mobile is now exploiting.
In a way, Sprint is just using extra radios on top of their existing 3G cellular, and just integrating the enhanced data speeds of Clearwire's network into their own.
T-mobile's speeds are indeed fast both HSPA and HSPA+, but to call them 4g may be overstating it, as it is just an upgrade to their existing technology, and not a new technology.
As another poster stated, nobody officially has 4g yet, not even Sprint, and until the 802.16 commission finalizes and LTE is launched we still won't.
To re-emphasize to the OP, not a chance, and don't believe the hype.

I can see sprint(or clear) and T-mobile going to bed for some real 4G'ness.

david279 said:
I can see sprint(or clear) and T-mobile going to bed for some real 4G'ness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I heard a rumor that Sprint may eventually adopt LTE.... It makes sense.
Wimax will make a great backhaul, and could stay in place, not to mention supporting cities and rural areas. But LTE will be the big daddy, and similar to WiMax, works on it's own and should be seamlessly integrated on top of cellular.
I'm not sure but I think it can work with CDMA or GSM, hooray for global WiFi!

Mitch Matrixx said:
Yeah, I heard a rumor that Sprint may eventually adopt LTE.... It makes sense.
Wimax will make a great backhaul, and could stay in place, not to mention supporting cities and rural areas. But LTE will be the big daddy, and similar to WiMax, works on it's own and should be seamlessly integrated on top of cellular.
I'm not sure but I think it can work with CDMA or GSM, hooray for global WiFi!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't count on LTE on Sprint just yet. Hesse denounced it last week; however, Sprint, Clearwire, Google, Time-Warner, and a couple others purchased Spectrum not only in the 2.5 GHz, but the 2.3 GHz band also. So the bandwidth is there and, in the past, Hesse has been quoted saying they can easily switch to LTE if need be.
Edit: http://gigaom.com/2010/10/29/sprint-ceo-dan-hesse-on-clearwire-lte-wimax/

topdawgn8 said:
I wouldn't count on LTE on Sprint just yet. Hesse denounced it last week; however, Sprint, Clearwire, Google, Time-Warner, and a couple others purchased Spectrum not only in the 2.5 GHz, but the 2.3 GHz band also. So the bandwidth is there and, in the past, Hesse has been quoted saying they can easily switch to LTE if need be.
Edit: http://gigaom.com/2010/10/29/sprint-ceo-dan-hesse-on-clearwire-lte-wimax/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info.
I think the most important thing in the article is that LTE can happen if necessary.
Sorry for getting off topic.

Evdo rev. b shot down by sprint

Official Sprint Answer:
Sprint is committed to delivering the highest quality network experience. Our Network Vision plan will improve your network experience, but it does not include any EVDO Rev B launch. Sprint has evaluated EVDO Rev B and chosen to go directly to 4G connections. Since we are not launching EVDO Rev B, none of our handsets supports EVDO Rev B.
It looks like maybe no Rev. B after all. Hopefully they'll push 4G LTE and keep going.

FINALLY! Thank goodness. Let's stick a fork in this horse.
BTW, where is your source? (I know others will ask)

Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium

corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What good is speed if hardly anybody can get it? Give me more coverage!
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not surprising that a Sprint rep would say that..unfortunately, the truth seems to be just the opposite in the real world, based on everything I have read about Verizons LTE, and my friends who have it say the same thing..makes Sprints non sense look lame compared to it..

and just like i said in the other thread.....you people were freaking out over a baseless rumor
now how many of these idiots actually turned there phones back in
---------- Post added at 04:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
getting your info from a sprint rep is like getting info from sarah palin about the economy....

Neither the LTE that's being rolled out by Verizon and ATT or sprints current Wimax meet the international standard that 4g is supposed to be.
But the LTE technologies being rolled out are a step in the right direction.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

spencer88 said:
What good is speed if hardly anybody can get it? Give me more coverage!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Word! I'll take any form of 4G in San Diego, even if I have to follow a donkey around with a WiMax tower, built by a few guys behind a 7-11 with straws and Big Gulp cups, strapped to its back.

corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is simply idiotic. It makes no sense.
Sprint's WiMax implementation sucks. Putting LTE on those same frequencies would also suck. Maybe worse.
It's not the protocol it's the spectrum. Clearwire/Sprint's WiMax is on a handful of razor-thin bands on high frequencies. It's not surprising that it sucks so much and the word "WiMax" has nothing to do with it.

imtjnotu said:
and just like i said in the other thread.....you people were freaking out over a baseless rumor
now how many of these idiots actually turned there phones back in
Haha right. All that bull**** about rev b and the **** ain't even happening. U said it correctly. The people who returned their phones based on that are IDIOTS
sent from my DAMN phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Wimax doesn't HAVE to be any worse than LTE or suck -- Clear just did a crap job of deploying the most minimal subset of the standard possible. WiMax CAN do soft hand-offs... Clear just didn't bother buying the software license to enable it to work, and instead chose to deploy them the cheapest way possible, and configured them to act like wifi access points that just happen to have ~1km footprints).
There's nothing magic about Verizon's LTE -- they have more backhaul, and allocated more bandwidth to it than Clear did. Sprint LTE can suck every bit as badly as Sprint/Clear Wimax does, and it won't be any more compatible with AT&T or Verizon's LTE than Sprint phones are with their 3G service.
LTE's standard-ness is wildly over-hyped, and almost completely meaningless in the US. In Europe and Asia, it might matter and mean something. Unfortunately, America's wireless phone market is as messed up as Japan's, and unlikely to ever change. If Sprint bought and merged with T-Mobile, and deployed a nationwide unified network with CDMA2000 voice & 1xRTT, legacy GSM & GPRS/EDGE, EVDO (rev.A, B, and Advanced), WiMax, AND LTE... AT&T and Verizon would still manage to find ways to be incompatible with it and each other, because they don't WANT their networks to be commodity-like wireless pipes to the internet where consumers can switch service providers at will and without repercussions.
IMHO, the best thing Sprint could possibly DO right now is repurpose the Wimax for backhaul, and use it to fully saturate their EVDO spectrum (and, once the furor over rev.B dies down, quietly enable and advertise it with some stupid name like "Ultim8 Vision" since their new tower hardware is almost certainly capable of it). Deploying two separate loosely stapled-together data networks was just about the worst idea in mobile phone history, especially when you consider that the move was 100% marketing and had nothing to do with real-world performance.
In most places, unless you're having a picnic lunch outdoors next to the tower, you'd get better sustained performance from Rev.A with enough backhaul bandwidth to fully saturate it, let alone Rev.B -- and unlike Sprint's disastrous experiment with 4G, your phone wouldn't spend half its time madly thrashing back and forth between 3G and 4G trying to make up its mind which one it wants to use (leaving you without network access for 10-30 seconds or more each time). For proof, just look at T-Mobile in places like Chicago. Same un-sexy UMTS as before, but in places where they've put it to full use and squeezed every bit of performance out of it they can, it blows Sprint's 4G away in real-world usability.

Concise and all encompassing. I couldn't have said it better my self. Meaning I actually do not have it in my own capacity to say it better, or even as well, myself.
Your presence in our forum is an asset. You truly know what's up.
That said, I couldn't agree more...lol

I talked to a sprint from corp in lisa angeles he told me lte and wimax have almost the same speeds and lte can go further
corybucher said:
Just throwing this out there bit talked to a sprint rep at my local corporate store and guy said that lte is not faster than wimax infact wimax is true 4g and he told me that lte is like turning your volume to 11 and is just a little better than 3g. Said lte will most likely cover more areas but wimax is still a lot faster.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App

Verizon's current LTE and Sprint's WIMAX are not true 4G. LTE Advanced and WIMAX 2 (802.16m) are the true 4G standards.

F that true 4g stuff. They are the 4th major data network type for their respectable providers
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App

bitbang3r said:
Wimax doesn't HAVE to be any worse than LTE or suck -- Clear just did a crap job of deploying the most minimal subset of the standard possible. WiMax CAN do soft hand-offs... Clear just didn't bother buying the software license to enable it to work, and instead chose to deploy them the cheapest way possible, and configured them to act like wifi access points that just happen to have ~1km footprints).
There's nothing magic about Verizon's LTE -- they have more backhaul, and allocated more bandwidth to it than Clear did. Sprint LTE can suck every bit as badly as Sprint/Clear Wimax does, and it won't be any more compatible with AT&T or Verizon's LTE than Sprint phones are with their 3G service.
LTE's standard-ness is wildly over-hyped, and almost completely meaningless in the US. In Europe and Asia, it might matter and mean something. Unfortunately, America's wireless phone market is as messed up as Japan's, and unlikely to ever change. If Sprint bought and merged with T-Mobile, and deployed a nationwide unified network with CDMA2000 voice & 1xRTT, legacy GSM & GPRS/EDGE, EVDO (rev.A, B, and Advanced), WiMax, AND LTE... AT&T and Verizon would still manage to find ways to be incompatible with it and each other, because they don't WANT their networks to be commodity-like wireless pipes to the internet where consumers can switch service providers at will and without repercussions.
IMHO, the best thing Sprint could possibly DO right now is repurpose the Wimax for backhaul, and use it to fully saturate their EVDO spectrum (and, once the furor over rev.B dies down, quietly enable and advertise it with some stupid name like "Ultim8 Vision" since their new tower hardware is almost certainly capable of it). Deploying two separate loosely stapled-together data networks was just about the worst idea in mobile phone history, especially when you consider that the move was 100% marketing and had nothing to do with real-world performance.
In most places, unless you're having a picnic lunch outdoors next to the tower, you'd get better sustained performance from Rev.A with enough backhaul bandwidth to fully saturate it, let alone Rev.B -- and unlike Sprint's disastrous experiment with 4G, your phone wouldn't spend half its time madly thrashing back and forth between 3G and 4G trying to make up its mind which one it wants to use (leaving you without network access for 10-30 seconds or more each time). For proof, just look at T-Mobile in places like Chicago. Same un-sexy UMTS as before, but in places where they've put it to full use and squeezed every bit of performance out of it they can, it blows Sprint's 4G away in real-world usability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Clears coverage could be the exact same as Verizon's LTE and it would still be garbage due to the frequency its on.
---------- Post added at 05:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:22 AM ----------
Tuffgong4 said:
Verizon's current LTE and Sprint's WIMAX are not true 4G. LTE Advanced and WIMAX 2 (802.16m) are the true 4G standards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think consumers give a damn about this? Honestly...

bitbang3r said:
Wimax doesn't HAVE to be any worse than LTE or suck -- Clear just did a crap job of deploying the most minimal subset of the standard possible. WiMax CAN do soft hand-offs... Clear just didn't bother buying the software license to enable it to work, and instead chose to deploy them the cheapest way possible, and configured them to act like wifi access points that just happen to have ~1km footprints).
There's nothing magic about Verizon's LTE -- they have more backhaul, and allocated more bandwidth to it than Clear did. Sprint LTE can suck every bit as badly as Sprint/Clear Wimax does, and it won't be any more compatible with AT&T or Verizon's LTE than Sprint phones are with their 3G service.
LTE's standard-ness is wildly over-hyped, and almost completely meaningless in the US. In Europe and Asia, it might matter and mean something. Unfortunately, America's wireless phone market is as messed up as Japan's, and unlikely to ever change. If Sprint bought and merged with T-Mobile, and deployed a nationwide unified network with CDMA2000 voice & 1xRTT, legacy GSM & GPRS/EDGE, EVDO (rev.A, B, and Advanced), WiMax, AND LTE... AT&T and Verizon would still manage to find ways to be incompatible with it and each other, because they don't WANT their networks to be commodity-like wireless pipes to the internet where consumers can switch service providers at will and without repercussions.
IMHO, the best thing Sprint could possibly DO right now is repurpose the Wimax for backhaul, and use it to fully saturate their EVDO spectrum (and, once the furor over rev.B dies down, quietly enable and advertise it with some stupid name like "Ultim8 Vision" since their new tower hardware is almost certainly capable of it). Deploying two separate loosely stapled-together data networks was just about the worst idea in mobile phone history, especially when you consider that the move was 100% marketing and had nothing to do with real-world performance.
In most places, unless you're having a picnic lunch outdoors next to the tower, you'd get better sustained performance from Rev.A with enough backhaul bandwidth to fully saturate it, let alone Rev.B -- and unlike Sprint's disastrous experiment with 4G, your phone wouldn't spend half its time madly thrashing back and forth between 3G and 4G trying to make up its mind which one it wants to use (leaving you without network access for 10-30 seconds or more each time). For proof, just look at T-Mobile in places like Chicago. Same un-sexy UMTS as before, but in places where they've put it to full use and squeezed every bit of performance out of it they can, it blows Sprint's 4G away in real-world usability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nicely put even though I am quite sad about no rev b which I think would be a good idea to help with speed and capacity they are applying 1x advanced which will help capacity issues and enable simultaneous voice and data which will be nice. But the combined tower spectrums once phones come out with chips that will take advantage of it it should increase data speeds and coverage greatly the problem now is the wait they need to hurry up and get every one off Nextel, and start the conversion.
Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk

I would be more than happy if they just fixed Rev A to work at a reasonable speed like 1.5-2M (which is what Verizon is providing in my area).
As to "true" 4G, I don't think anybody really cares, they just want something that works, not some experiment where you turn it on to run speed tests and brag to your friends, then turn it off because your battery will die or because you don't get signals indoors.

Gotta love how in all the discussion about frequency strength, frequency distance, speed, technology etc; people tend to forget the meaning of G in 2g, 3g and 4g is GENERATION.
To arbitrarily define how fast something should be to be considered a new "generation" should be insulting and stupid to pretty much everyone. It'd be like saying Generation X were just Baby Boomers 2g because they weren't good enough to be their own generation.
Put a sock in it. 4th generation of mobile networks = 4g. Nuff said.

AbsolutZeroGI said:
Gotta love how in all the discussion about frequency strength, frequency distance, speed, technology etc; people tend to forget the meaning of G in 2g, 3g and 4g is GENERATION.
To arbitrarily define how fast something should be to be considered a new "generation" should be insulting and stupid to pretty much everyone. It'd be like saying Generation X were just Baby Boomers 2g because they weren't good enough to be their own generation.
Put a sock in it. 4th generation of mobile networks = 4g. Nuff said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Quoted for the truth"
LOVE the "Baby Boomers 2G analogy"!
I guess all the BS marketing hype by the phone carriers has actually worked on the mindless lemmings that walk among us..

[Q]HOW TO Connect To A 4G Band Galaxy SII?

A few weeks ago, I posted a thread asking why does my friend get 4G, but I don't. If you are like me in a situation like this, the process is simple. In my area, there are 4G and Edge bands that phones connect to. My phone persistently connected to the edge band while my friend connects to the 4G. So lets get to the point shall we.
If you are having problems like me try this:
Go to your settings, wireless and network, mobile networks, and then select network mode. (After doing some research about GSM and WCDMA, I found out that GSM (3G aka edge) was slower than WCDMA (the newer technology 3G).
Select WCDMA. (For me it took a while so don't worry. If it does take too much time then select WCDMA + GSM.) You are going to have to select it anyway when you are done if you don't automatically connect to 4G.
When you select the combination, your phone should reconnect to your carrier provider and you should get 4G like me.
Oh. F.Y.I. T-Mobile doesn't actually have 4G. It's just a fast 3G network called HSPA, but they still display the 4G symbol when you have it. Hope it helps somebody.

Tmobile doesn't have 4g?
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk

mikeyinid said:
Tmobile doesn't have 4g?
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not "technically" but id say hspa gets the job done... except wen u run out of ur 5gb of data... which i did... n now they slowed me down till the end of billing cycle... what sucks is... my hspa is faster than wifi connection wifi is slow as hellllllll....

mikeyinid said:
Tmobile doesn't have 4g?
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. It's not really 4G. Just a faster 3G Network. It is really fast though.

Radsolutionz said:
not "technically" but id say hspa gets the job done... except wen u run out of ur 5gb of data... which i did... n now they slowed me down till the end of billing cycle... what sucks is... my hspa is faster than wifi connection wifi is slow as hellllllll....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL! That is true.. I find my phone faster than WiFi.

SIISuperUserIIS said:
Oh. F.Y.I. T-Mobile doesn't actually have 4G. It's just a fast 3G network called HSPA, but they still display the 4G symbol when you have it. Hope it helps somebody.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So who has 4G? T-Mobile is faster than the other 3, so no one has 4G?
Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk

mikeyinid said:
Tmobile doesn't have 4g?
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like 4g to me.

nysoprano said:
So who has 4G? T-Mobile is faster than the other 3, so no one has 4G?
Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about the other providers though. I will do some more research when I get out for Christmas break.

billydroid said:
Looks like 4g to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know if you still have the sticker, but look on top of your Galaxy S2 and there should be a sticker that reads "Qualcomm 3G HSDPA". Sorry folks, correction HSDPA*

No company has "4G", none of them meet the official requirements of 4G. Just because your phone says 4G doesn't mean it actually is. Just because David Copperfield made it LOOK like he made a Boeing-747 disappear doesn't mean he ACTUALLY did
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G#Requirements

SIISuperUserIIS said:
I don't know if you still have the sticker, but look on top of your Galaxy S2 and there should be a sticker that reads "Qualcomm 3G HSDPA". Sorry folks, correction HSDPA*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My sticker has 4g qualcomm
From a glaxay better than yours.

billydroid said:
Looks like 4g to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't look like it to me... that's half the speed
Sent from the Galaxy, 2 stars to the left.

tehseano said:
No company has "4G", none of them meet the official requirements of 4G. Just because your phone says 4G doesn't mean it actually is. Just because David Copperfield made it LOOK like he made a Boeing-747 disappear doesn't mean he ACTUALLY did
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G#Requirements
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well sort of. Wiki mentions it but glazes over it a bit. It's a reference anyone can change of course so take it with a grain of salt. ITU relaxed their position about this time last year to include "evolving technologies" of which WiMax, LTE and HSPDA are all included.
So the reality is, all the carriers can make the 4G claim and sleep comfortably and the extended reality is, the speeds are all showing that next evolutionary step in speed, even if the technology as it sits today is just that. Steps toward LTE Advanced and whatever WiMax is calling their next version. As a TMobile customer, and one that it seems will stay with the TMobile branding it's unfortunate they are using a technology that has it's limits. But I'm getting 10-15Mbps on occasion and solid 7 to 8 Mbps speeds generally speaking so I'm not complaining. Until the carriers clear more spectrum what "G" it is isn't relevant to me. With 2Gbps, or even 5Gb soft caps I don't need to get to my ceiling any faster than I am now.

btyork said:
Doesn't look like it to me... that's half the speed
Sent from the Galaxy, 2 stars to the left.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well technically it is a quarter of the speed. If you are going by 100mbs defintion.
By industry standards , marketing, its 4g. But the term is meaningless. It is way faster than previous generation of phones.
So whatever, I'm calling 4g.

Multi-channel HSPA is capable of ~40Mbps, which is damned fast.
Call it what you want; technically LTE ir WiMax is 4g, but if it runs as fast as the others, who cares what it's called?

You would think at those speeds you'll burn through your data cap in days. I don't get the requirement for faster data speeds let alone just for minor things.
Genesis3 said:
Multi-channel HSPA is capable of ~40Mbps, which is damned fast.
Call it what you want; technically LTE ir WiMax is 4g, but if it runs as fast as the others, who cares what it's called?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA App

SHUT UP
SIISuperUserIIS said:
I don't know about the other providers though. I will do some more research when I get out for Christmas break.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can we end this stupid 4g/3g debate? I'll end it for you right now.
Until a few months ago NONE of the technologies out were 4g, not LTE, not WiMax, not HSAP+ ...BUT the ITU (International Telecommunications Union), which are the people that say what's what in the wireless industry, folded under the marketing schemes of the big 4 here in the U.S. and said that TECHNICALLY NOW LTE, WiMax, and HSPA+ All count as 4g. So...yes they have 4g. A few months ago they didn't. Now they do.

So what was the trick again? lol

SIISuperUserIIS said:
I don't know if you still have the sticker, but look on top of your Galaxy S2 and there should be a sticker that reads "Qualcomm 3G HSDPA". Sorry folks, correction HSDPA*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah... mine says 4G also.. odd your sticker is different... As for hitting your cap faster, that doesnt really make much sense since it is just loading faster not loading more..
I have no issues calling it 4G since I get about 19-25 in the late hours pf the night and no less than 13 during prime time hours.

jonjon68 said:
Well sort of. Wiki mentions it but glazes over it a bit. It's a reference anyone can change of course so take it with a grain of salt. ITU relaxed their position about this time last year to include "evolving technologies" of which WiMax, LTE and HSPDA are all included.
So the reality is, all the carriers can make the 4G claim and sleep comfortably and the extended reality is, the speeds are all showing that next evolutionary step in speed, even if the technology as it sits today is just that. Steps toward LTE Advanced and whatever WiMax is calling their next version. As a TMobile customer, and one that it seems will stay with the TMobile branding it's unfortunate they are using a technology that has it's limits. But I'm getting 10-15Mbps on occasion and solid 7 to 8 Mbps speeds generally speaking so I'm not complaining. Until the carriers clear more spectrum what "G" it is isn't relevant to me. With 2Gbps, or even 5Gb soft caps I don't need to get to my ceiling any faster than I am now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wikipedia is an administrator-approved peer-editing system. For one, there are references to back up the claims made, two, you can't just click "edit" then put in whatever you want. A Wiki admin approves all edits made, so bogus stuff can't just be easily added. (Sorry, I'm just sick an tired of people claiming wiki is a poor source for valid information, when in reality it's one of the most largest and beneficial information sources on the internet. Again, sorry, didn't mean that as an attack on you lol)
Either way, yes, our "4G" is fast, but in reality it's not in comparison to what it should be. And for those of you with worries about your data caps, these will be removed in due time. It becomes easier and easier to reach those caps without any effort at all (Google Music being a perfect example), carriers won't have a choice but to remove data caps, especially with carriers like sprint still offering unlimited data (for now lol)

Does the GSM model do 4G?

Does the GSM Nexus Prime do 4g speeds, or only 3g? I'm finding mixed information when I search for an answer.

The GSM model supports HSPA, HSDPA, and HSUPA, so yes, it supports things that fall under the 4G title.

Ok, I was under the impression the things you listed have been available for a while and were available as far back as the Nexus One. Am I mistaken here? The target network would be T-Mobile, if that helps.

My post may have been a bit confusing ^_^
HSPA+, both which the Galaxy Nexus GSM supports, are the "4G" technologies, with HSPA+ being closer to "real 4G". It ALSO supports HSDPA and HSUPA which is the 3G technology.

Ok, so it sounds like it'll go faster than my N1 then. For some reason I thought the N1 did HSPA+, but I think I was confused. Thanks.

harfdorf said:
Ok, so it sounds like it'll go faster than my N1 then. For some reason I thought the N1 did HSPA+, but I think I was confused. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
N1 does not have HSPA+. It tops out at 3.6mbps on the downlink. By a similar token, the GSM SGN doesn't have 4G. I've used HSPA+ and I have an LTE device. I've seen LTE hit 60Mpbs, with a 30Mb upload, with lower latency throughout. That's not even the fastest speed the phone's baseband is capable of.
It murders the battery, though. While HSPA isn't 4G, I don't think the extra "g" is worth halving the battery life.

UMTS = 3G, HSDPA = 3.5G/2M, HSUPA = 3.75G/5.76M and HSPA+ = 4G Technology whiles speed upto 21M.

I get great 4G speeds in Scottsdale, AZ

HSPA+ is NOT 4G. It never will be. According to the official definition of 4G the closest we have right now is LTE which technically isn't 4G either. Carriers are using the term 4G so loosely. Look at Sprint and Wimax and Ma Bell and T-Mobile with HSPA+ carriers are using the term to denote something new and to the average consumer it doesn't make a difference .. but when you get technical there is a HUGE difference.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

LTE-Advanced, which is not even in use anywhere on this planet except maybe in research labs, is the first true fourth-generation wireless technology.
Everything else is 3G, no matter what the dumbass carriers say.

synaesthetic said:
LTE-Advanced, which is not even in use anywhere on this planet except maybe in research labs, is the first true fourth-generation wireless technology.
Everything else is 3G, no matter what the dumbass carriers say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE-Advanced will rule

harfdorf said:
Does the GSM Nexus Prime do 4g speeds, or only 3g? I'm finding mixed information when I search for an answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes. Up to 21mbit
Sent from my GSM Galaxy Nexus on TMoUS using Tapatalk

My own personal definition goes by putting up new hardware technology towers. So we had 2g gsm and edge, then put up new hardware on the towers for 3g umts with hspa added as a software upgrade to the base stations. Then new hardware again had to be put up for lte or wimax.
To me each new physical hardware jump is what should count as a new generation.

To those saying only LTE is the closest to 4G, thats not entirely true.
The ITU has modified their definition of what falls under 4G to include WiMax, HSPA+, etc.
http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2010/48.aspx
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.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

synaesthetic said:
LTE-Advanced, which is not even in use anywhere on this planet except maybe in research labs, is the first true fourth-generation wireless technology.
Everything else is 3G, no matter what the dumbass carriers say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the carriers aren't dumb, the consumer that believes the carrier is dumb. The carriers market lies because we accept it.... just sayin

[Q] Difference between WiMax, 4G, and WiFi on Evo?

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