Is this LTE? It still shows 3G in the notification bar but the sidnal doesn't show 1xRtt or EvRev-a insttead its showing and eHRPD ,it is pretty fast compared to what I've been getting her. Also they were where performing upgrades to my towers last week according to customer service.
Yes, it's LTE.
Are you sure you live in an LTE market?
Be mindful the signal strength on this phone is God awful.
However, it is lightning fast once you're on a 4G network.
Sent from my LG Optimus Prime G
Not according to the lists but have noticed new style towers and for the last two weeks have had horrid service and now the data is much faster. I will still bounce off a slow tower now and again where I live but this is phenomenal. I live a short distance from a major interstate so I suspect that's why it got updated not on the "cities list".
But why does the notification bar still show 3G?
It still shows 3G because that's what you're using. When you see the LTE logo that's when it'll be active. Sprint is also updating 3G service as well which is supposed to bring faster speeds as well. I suspect that's what you're noticing.
Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2
Customer Service
I spoke to customer service last night and brought up the question of the lack of LTE. His answer was that by the end of February or sooner Sprint is dramatically expanding their courage for LTE as well as their two other signals, a total of three signal expands (3G,4G, and LTE) btw LTE is 4 times faster than 4G from what the rep. told me. So lets cross our fingers and hope that by the end of December we get Jelly Bean and by February we get LTE !
Your rep is high on something.
4G IS LTE.
It's just a type of 4G, similar to how WiMax was 4G, and HSPA+ could be considered 4G, but it's really 3.5G.
LTE is just what the interface is called.
I think by the three bands, he's talking about EvDo, CDMA, and LTE
Sent from my LG Optimus Prime G
This is what I found from another site...good reading and yes my "3G" speeds have significantly improved since the updated structure.
http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/1819-what-is-ehrpd/
"In all seriousness, here is a comprehensive understanding of eHRPD:
For the most part, eHRPD is EVDO-A. Both are 3G CDMA technology. EVDO is a High Rate Packet Data technology, and eHRPD is Evolved High Rate Packet Data. It is essentially the same exact technology, except eHRPD data is routed through the LTE core instead of the MSC (switch) so it can maintain the same IP address as LTE. This allows for data hand offs between LTE and 3G. Only LTE devices are capable of eHRPD connections.
eHRPD and EVDO-A are broadcast from the same tower on the same channel using the same technology and the same backhaul. It is one signal, not two different signals. However, if your device is in CDMA only mode (or you have a non-LTE device), your data from your device goes from the site through backhaul to a Sprint MSC switching center is processed and dumped out onto the internet backbone.
If your device is in CDMA/LTE mode and your site has been upgraded to eHRPD, when your device data gets to the site, it goes through the backhaul to a 4G LTE core instead of the MSC. There it is processed and dumped out onto the internet backbone.
So, the only difference in performance between eHRPD and EVDO-A on the same site occurs at the MSC vs. the LTE core. Everything else is pretty much identical between the two. Each site in the Sprint network is tied to a very specific MSC for 1x voice and EVDO data. Sprint has dozens of MSC's scattered around the country. When that MSC experiences problems or has a logjam, it affects all the sites connected to it. And EVDO can slow down (although this is not the big culprit in Sprint 3G deterioration).
In contrast to how the MSC's handle 1x and 3G EVDO data, 3G eHRPD and 4G LTE data are processed through 4G cores. Unlike MSC, sites are not limited to only one core. Sprint is setting up their 4G LTE cores to be dynamic. So if one core is too busy, data can be routed to a different under burdened core.
Performance between EVDO-A and eHRPD should be very similar when on the same channel from the same exact site. The most common difference is that eHRPD will often have faster ping times. And a MSC is more likely to bottleneck than an LTE core, so at peak times EVDO may be slightly slower than eHRPD (when all things are the same)."
When you start using the LTE service in your area the icon will change to this......the picture shows my LS970 in Charlotte NC where LTE is just starting up.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
swizz-knife77 said:
When you start using the LTE service in your area the icon will change to this......the picture shows my LS970 in Charlotte NC where LTE is just starting up.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thankyou. By the way did you know there is a section in display settings that you can optimize proportions of indivdual apps so they take up the entire screen? Works great too.
eHRPD is 3G. Its the stop gap between EVDO and LTE. So that the hand off is easier and faster.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
I did not know that, I will fiddle with the settings immediately lol
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
TheAceX said:
I spoke to customer service last night and brought up the question of the lack of LTE. His answer was that by the end of February or sooner Sprint is dramatically expanding their courage for LTE as well as their two other signals, a total of three signal expands (3G,4G, and LTE) btw LTE is 4 times faster than 4G from what the rep. told me. So lets cross our fingers and hope that by the end of December we get Jelly Bean and by February we get LTE !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Omgosh please read and educate yourself and dont EVER listen to.a sprint rep.come here where the pros are(not me lol) LTE is 4g and the rep is an idiot. They may have meant wimax but.should have said that. Now some say hspa isnt 4g (tmobile) its like 3g on steroids but hey if your getting 15megs then it might.as well b. But sorint is cdma so im.straying off. Anyway please read up and learn so when you post those sprint jerks wont make you look well.....like ya dont know. Good luck and message me anytime. If i dont know the answer i can ask.my friends.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda premium
---------- Post added at 05:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:33 AM ----------
times_infinity said:
eHRPD is 3G. Its the stop gap between EVDO and LTE. So that the hand off is easier and faster.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now.times_infinity knows his stuff its helpful peeps like you that make us smile. Thank.you
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda premium
Related
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..
Reception is weak in my office at work. On my previous phone, Motorola Defy, I noticed my data would go back and forth between 'H' and '3G'.
With my GS2, data is stuck on 4G. I have watched it for hours now and even though I have no bars it does not change. Am I missing something? Is my device defective?
I appreciate your help with this.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA App
There might not be a 3G (icon) for the phone which is why it stays on 4G rather than drop to 3G.
At least that is the case with my G2X, it is either 4G or 2G but never 3G.
Not sure why, but that's how they made it.
Have you done a speed test to see if you are on 4G or not?
This phone also might have better connectivity to the network.
....
I can at least confirm there is an E for edge Found out today at my apartment in Boston (normally I have 4G with great speeds in Boston, but I guess the bathroom doesn't get good reception)
Thanks for the replies. Yes I ran 4 speed tests this morning in 4G and my max was 1490 Mbps so I think it's working well.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA App
There actually is a 3g icon. It is only displayed for Umts networks. The reason it was done that way is because there is no way to differentiate hspa from hspa+. Two network technologies for 3g were in use anyways and so it was easier to display all hspa and hspa+ networks as 4g and all umts as 3g.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Edit due to phone auto correct fail.
So when the new Razr came out for Verizon (cheese) curiosity got the best of me, so I went to check it out. Of course they tried to sell me on it, so I immediately, with chest pushed out, told them I had the fastest phone/4G speeds out there (SG2), and had no need for their gimmicky poop machine. They immediately responded Verizon's LTE will be way faster than TMO's HSDPA, and that our 4G was not real 4G. WTF? How much faster can you get, and I thought LTE being on old CDMA technology wouldn't even be able to come close? Did I put my foot in my mouth, or was that guy just an uninformed kook? I'm confused.
Sent from my CM7 powered SGH-T989 using xda premium
You know their LTE is GSM-based, right? It has no similarity to their 3G network...
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
SoFaKiNgStOkeD said:
So when the new Razr came out for Verizon (cheese) curiosity got the best of me, so I went to check it out. Of course they tried to sell me on it, so I immediately, with chest pushed out, told them I had the fastest phone/4G speeds out there (SG2), and had no need for their gimmicky poop machine. They immediately responded Verizon's LTE will be way faster than TMO's HSDPA, and that our 4G was not real 4G. WTF? How much faster can you get, and I thought LTE being on old CDMA technology wouldn't even be able to come close? Did I put my foot in my mouth, or was that guy just an uninformed kook? I'm confused.
Sent from my CM7 powered SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reps didn't know what they were talking about either. They said hsdpa which is different than hspa+. Their 4g isn't real either unless your over 100mbs it isn't real 4g technology. It just recently got acceptable to to say new technology for mobile wireless. Is acceptable 4g. Lte isn't really old either is hspa+
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Lte is still faster than our hspa+ though
Sent from my telegraph on steroids
jonathan3579 said:
You know their LTE is GSM-based, right? It has no similarity to their 3G network...
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While true that LTE isn't similar to Verizon's 3G, Not sure what you are talking about, LTE isn't at all like GSM. Hell, it's not even like 3G UTMS. UTMS uses WCDMA and a non IP based protocol, while LTE uses OFDMA and IP. GSM uses FDMA and non IP.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA App
SoFaKiNgStOkeD said:
So when the new Razr came out for Verizon (cheese) curiosity got the best of me, so I went to check it out. Of course they tried to sell me on it, so I immediately, with chest pushed out, told them I had the fastest phone/4G speeds out there (SG2), and had no need for their gimmicky poop machine. They immediately responded Verizon's LTE will be way faster than TMO's HSDPA, and that our 4G was not real 4G. WTF? How much faster can you get, and I thought LTE being on old CDMA technology wouldn't even be able to come close? Did I put my foot in my mouth, or was that guy just an uninformed kook? I'm confused.
Sent from my CM7 powered SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The truth of the matter is that LTE is faster than HSPA+. Verizon's "4G" network is faster than T-Mobile's because LTE is a newer type of technology, yes both are GSM based but T-Mobile's HSPA+ is technically still a 3G GSM network that got a signal boost. LTE is a much newer type of GSM network which can reach much faster speeds, NO its not true 4G speeds of "100mbs" but I have gone into one of Verizon's stores in an LTE location to do a speed test on the Verizon RAZR and got 38mbps on their LTE. the fastest I have gotten on either my Samsung Galaxy S II or My HTC Amaze 4G is 22mbps (Both speed tests done in in Atlanta, GA). T-Mobile DOES have the LARGEST "4G" network because it coincides with their 3G network and it is very fast but not the fastest. You could have thrown out the fact that Verizon's 4G devices are overly priced and kill the battery faster than any other network even with all the "Juice Defener" type of applications and battery savers though hope this helps.
Can someone let me know why my phone never shows 3g? Either it is showing 'E' or 4G. My nexus used to show 3G.
I am under the assumption that this sgh-t989 can connect to all those networks t-mobile has....
Thanks
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
It might be because of the fact that everything being advertised now as '4G' is technically '3G.
8Fishes said:
It might be because of the fact that everything being advertised now as '4G' is technically '3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not true anymore.. the T-Mobile 4G network has been officially recognized as 4G along with WiMax and LTE. Happened a few months ago.
The reason your only seeing either E or 4G is because those are the networks you are near. And many people believe that T-Mo sets the software to show 4G in the 3G area to "lie".. personally depending where i am, I see 3G or 4G we dont have any edge left in my area any longer..
Either way does it really matter? I mean as long as you have a solid connection..
PJcastaldo said:
...The reason your only seeing either E or 4G is because those are the networks you are near...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My friend's Nexus S shows 3G or H -depending on which tower it connects to? I don't know but it does show them at different times. we are still living in the same area. So, I am not so sure that they might have "phased out" the 3G. Confusing..
PJcastaldo said:
Either way does it really matter? I mean as long as you have a solid connection..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Suppose it doesn't matter but, I'd rather get 4G > 3G > E, and in that order. As you know, 3G is definitely faster than E and not all markets/areas have been upgraded to 4G...
T-Mobiles "4G" is a boosted UMTS (3G) band per say which is HSDPA. As long as the market you live in supports HSPDA you will see a "4G". If not then you will see a "3G". If none of those you will see "E" for EDGE or "G" for GSM. To say that T-Mobile's "4G" is actually 4G is ridiculous.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
iLeopard said:
T-Mobiles "4G" is a boosted UMTS (3G) band per say which is HSDPA. As long as the market you live in supports HSPDA you will see a "4G". If not then you will see a "3G". If none of those you will see "E" for EDGE or "G" for GSM. To say that T-Mobile's "4G" is actually 4G is ridiculous.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But T-Mobile's 4G is really fast. Lets not start bad mouthing here.
I get on average 18-20mbps on T-Mobiles "4G" here in South Florida. These speeds are absolutely horrible! Youtube videos are fully cached in seconds and i don't even get the buffering icon so I can sneeze or make sure my car is even being driven in the right direction! Someone should report them to the BBB!
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
iLeopard said:
T-Mobiles "4G" is a boosted UMTS (3G) band per say which is HSDPA. As long as the market you live in supports HSPDA you will see a "4G". If not then you will see a "3G". If none of those you will see "E" for EDGE or "G" for GSM. To say that T-Mobile's "4G" is actually 4G is ridiculous.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then call it ridiculous because as of the end of last year the hspa + network was accepted as 4G. As well as wimax and LTE. Since previous non of these where "real " 4G.. 100mbps.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA
tester420 said:
Can someone let me know why my phone never shows 3g? Either it is showing 'E' or 4G. My nexus used to show 3G.
I am under the assumption that this sgh-t989 can connect to all those networks t-mobile has....
Thanks
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basically, if you live in an area with mixed coverage where there are 3g bands in addition to hspa plus (a form of 4g), you will see a mixture between 3g and 4g. However, in most areas the 3g bands have been upgraded to support 4g so the 4g > 3g > edge map has the 4g and 3g combined into 4g so you're not losing out on 3g time but rather are gaining 4g time.
Another explanation involves TMobile showing all 3g as 4g regardless of whether it is actually hspa plus or not. This would explain your friend's nexus s coverage changing. Personally, I only see a difference between 3g and 4g on specific roms which would indicate that TMobile does code their roms to label everything above edge as 4g.
Side note: H is the same as 4g as far as we are concerned. H means hspa plus whereas 4g if the more broad category that also includes lte and Wimax. It's like calling my car a ford fusion versus just a Ford. Neither is wrong.
Bottom line: you are not losing out on 3g coverage. At best, you are getting 4g in place of the 3g even when you should be getting 3g. At worst, you are getting both 4g and 3g but your phone is always telling you that you're on 4g
Hello all!
I have an S4. It's fairly new. I like it and all, good phone. Anyway, my one beef is that I have 2 options for data service - 4g and Edge (no LTE here yet.) I wish that I could use 3g when 4g isn't available (edge is too slow) but nothing I've tried works... APN settings, cell network settings.... It's only 2g or 4g. I live in a reframed area (1900 MHz 3g... Cincinnati) which, according to the phone's specs, it should support. Tmobile support said on Twitter that it wouldn't get any 3g, but I like to take what they say with a pinch of salt, especially since a flagship phone not getting 3g is pretty ridiculous.
Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
Anyone know anything?
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
I'll give you my best guess. T-mobile doesn't have 4G. They call it 4G, but it's really like 3.5G or HSPA. It will show on your phone as 4G though when you are connected to any "H" network or UMTS bands. When you go into menu> settings> more networks> mobile networks> network mode, you should set it to GSM/WCDMA (auto connect) to force 3.5G or 4G as tmo calls it.
I know this doesn't answer your question per se. Edge or "E" is slow as molasses. Verizon's 3G is almost as slow believe it or not (in my location).
Do you not have WIFI?
Or you can dial *#2263# and you will be in service mode. Choose Lte Gsm. It will force Lte
He doesn't have LTE
GS4
jbdan said:
I'll give you my best guess. T-mobile doesn't have 4G. They call it 4G, but it's really like 3.5G or HSPA. It will show on your phone as 4G though when you are connected to any "H" network or UMTS bands. When you go into menu> settings> more networks> mobile networks> network mode, you should set it to GSM/WCDMA (auto connect) to force 3.5G or 4G as tmo calls it.
I know this doesn't answer your question per se. Edge or "E" is slow as molasses. Verizon's 3G is almost as slow believe it or not (in my location).
Do you not have WIFI?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I understand that it's "3.5G" but there should be 3G too....not just "3.5G" and 2G...I'm wondering if I can get 3G on this and if not, why I don't. I have Wifi but not when I leave the house
In short the answer is no. Tmo has its network and it is the way it is. Were you with a cdma carrier (sprint / Verizon) before? Sounds like that's what you are looking for
GS4
No, AT&T and Cincinnati Bell before, never used CDMA.
I read that when T-Mobile upgraded their network, they replaced their 3g with 3.5g - leaving only a few small pockets of T-Mobile 3g remaining. Oh well, I guess that's why they're adding LTE - will be nice when they finally get their stuff straight around here!
Thanks for your help
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
isoh said:
Yeah, I understand that it's "3.5G" but there should be 3G too....not just "3.5G" and 2G...I'm wondering if I can get 3G on this and if not, why I don't. I have Wifi but not when I leave the house
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I live in an area with lte but recently traveled to another city. While driving on the interstate I was getting anywhere from E (in middle of nowhere), 3G (near the city) and 4G (once in the city). So I know this phone is capable of 3G in area with no lte/4G
☞Sent from here☜
baseballfanz said:
I live in an area with lte but recently traveled to another city. While driving on the interstate I was getting anywhere from E (in middle of nowhere), 3G (near the city) and 4G (once in the city). So I know this phone is capable of 3G in area with no lte/4G
☞Sent from here☜
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! Must be just T-Mo's network then. At least I'll have 4g and LTE when they finally get it here.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
isoh said:
Hello all!
I have an S4. It's fairly new. I like it and all, good phone. Anyway, my one beef is that I have 2 options for data service - 4g and Edge (no LTE here yet.) I wish that I could use 3g when 4g isn't available (edge is too slow) but nothing I've tried works... APN settings, cell network settings.... It's only 2g or 4g. I live in a reframed area (1900 MHz 3g... Cincinnati) which, according to the phone's specs, it should support. Tmobile support said on Twitter that it wouldn't get any 3g, but I like to take what they say with a pinch of salt, especially since a flagship phone not getting 3g is pretty ridiculous.
Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I remember correctly when t-mo started with "4g" the majority of the phones had 2 radios, one for 2g and one for 3/4g and it is basically the same way still. So you're never going to see anything in regards to 3g only. but even though your data connection icon may say 4g, u could technically be on 3g at the time.