Related
I am alarmed at the following article :
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/07/atandt-slowing-edge-to-force-customers-to-switch-to-3g/
I know there is still ambiguity about whether it is a hardware limitation or something that can be done in software, but if this holds true.. i may have to give up the best phone I have ever owned.
That doesn't really make sense, considering the fact that where I live, I don't get 3G coverage anyways...
I've seen no such slowing from my HD. I purchased the HD after an experiment with the US version of the Diamond last year. I had used the UK Diamond since it came out in June and then purchased the US version to get the 3G speed. I rarely saw the H or 3G indicator on my US Diamond, I received Edge service in more than 95 percent of the places I travelled during the period of my experiment. I returned the US Diamond to Best Buy and resumed using the UK version until I got my hands on the HD in late November.
The HD works fine for me without 3G. I can use Wifi when I need it.
I agree... 3G coverage is spotty at best in the States and I've had good performance with EDGE for AT&T on my HD... Admittedly I'm usually in a WIFI hotspot at work so EDGE is only for when I'm on the road but still no complaints.
taimoorhusain said:
I am alarmed at the following article :
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/07/atandt-slowing-edge-to-force-customers-to-switch-to-3g/
I know there is still ambiguity about whether it is a hardware limitation or something that can be done in software, but if this holds true.. i may have to give up the best phone I have ever owned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your worry is real. but it won't come true for a long time -- your phone will last till you switch to a new one.
reading the replies below your post, and the original article (which I also read a few days ago). there seems to be some misunderstanding, i will try to explain, and then address your worry. I will use simple terms, although may should foolish (ie. point 1)
- faster the frequency, the faster the battery drains, because the signal oscillates faster. 850 times a second verses 1900 times a second. for those not familiar with signal, just htink of your phone vibrating 850 times a second or 1900 times a second. the latter kills more battery.
- the higher the frequency the less penetration ability it has.
- frequency is freqency, antenna is antenna. an antenna tuned to 850 MHz frequency can transmit 850 MHz signals, simple enough? but the signal may be modulated differently hence the difference between a 2G and 3G 850 band. so you need different hardware to decode and demodulate the two signals, even though the frequency is the same.
- what AT&T's article is saying, is that. they are not going to add extra towers to broadcast 850 3G signals. rather, they are converting 850 2G towers to broadcast 3G 850 signal. This saves them tons of money, because they only need to, for illustration purposes, flip some switches to modulate a 3G signal, instead of purchasing and deploying the towers, since the existing towers are already tuned to 850 MHz.
so yes, when this "fliping switch" operation is done. phones without 850 3G band will only be able to operate on 1900 signals, hence battery drains faster and worse signal indoors.
but back to my first paragraph, judging from AT&T's past records, it would take them a year or two to finish this operation. so .. at least for me. by the time, i will be moving on to a new phone, and i will keep in mind my next phone will have 850 3G chip (or.. if you have learned from my posting, an 850 3G demodulater
Buggy i know you know alot about these types of things (reading your post in the 3g limitation thread) Would you have any thoughts of something and someone that would be able to help us get the 850 3G frequency working?
I am quite impressed actually at the EDGE speeds I do receive. I don't do much of YouTube and other things that require an intense of amount of data when I do use the internet. Google Maps and Live Search works just fine on EDGE. If I need to browse the internet I just use Opera Mini which works awesome on the HD I might add.
The only complaint I have about this device is that it's not 3G. If the great minds on XDA or somewhere else some how figure out to get 3G then that's even better.
I can't wait to see what new devices HTC launches this year. I hear up to 10 new devices. Heck we might even see a HTC Touch HD Pro with the necessary 3G 850/1900 frequency.
3g
I love my touch HD Edge works great 3G is a big hype
I am surprised with the edge speeds on this phone, way quicker than the Omnia, but.... Get for example an iphone 3G (not trying to make a comparison or a phone war as i am not even a fan of it just the first 3g phone that pops up) and go on to the same website and at same time and you will notice a huge difference in my opinion. The HD uses the same exact radio off of the touch diamond American version so i think it should be possible to enable it.
First, for anyone interested in the subject here is a little list of threads I found discussing the subject:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=565000
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=4579528
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=442144
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=2888831
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=530699
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=2843884
As you can see, there seems to be a lot of contradictory information from seemingly knowledgeable people.
My goal is to find a way to get the X1i on Rogers' 850 band they use in most places where they advertise 3G coverage. This might also be beneficial to some AT&T users as I believe they use the same bands.
I live in a suburb of Montreal. I never get anything better than EDGE and same goes when I am in class on the island of Montreal. However, when I go out once in a while and end up in downtown, in my drunken stupor I notice a little 3G symbol where the E used to be... Ha! My guess is that Rogers is using 850MHz all over the place and 1900MHz downtown. It would make more sense because '850' is better for covering vast areas that aren't so populated and '1900' is better at covering densely populated areas (downtown!).
My phone uses the Sony Ericsson supplied ROM for UK (OEM R3..) with a the 1.17 radio found here http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=565182 .
Here's something I discovered that triggered the spark:
-press the call button (get to the dialer)
-press menu (bottom right)
-options
-band
I am now presented with a box to chose my GSM/UMTS band:
"Auto"
"GSM(900+1800)+UMTS(2100+900)"
"GSM(1900+850)+UMTS(1900+850)"
"UMTS(2100)"
UMTS 1900 and 850?? Well well well...
Okay...still EDGE... Another phone (Samsung) supplied by Rogers has 3G right beside me.
Come on people, this really shows that the ROM is intended for a quad band phone. Plus there was a thread that I cannot find anymore with posted PDF's of the phone's chipset specs and it mentioned nothing of the phone being physically different between the X1i and X1a in terms of networking...
I really want to get the ball rolling on this because I have yet to see any solid proof that the X1i cannot do UMTS 850.
you sir, are my savior. thank you for posting and starting this thread. i myself have an X1i in the states and have been reading and reading about this for months on end with lots of conflicting information.
i can connect to HSDPA and Edge network, but never 3G. ONE TIME i saw the 3G logo for about 2 seconds, then it switched over to HSDPA...... i just can't stand the super duper slow edge network
but HSDPA is faster than 3g is it not??
Jonny4911 said:
but HSDPA is faster than 3g is it not??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
correct, but HSDPA doesn't cover everywhere. in some deadspots i'm only on Edge, and i always wonder if i could get 3G instead.....
@ Jonny4911 : HSDPA IS TO 3G what EDGE is to GPRS...that's a good analogy I can think of. Yes, it is faster than regular 3G.
@ asayamalaka : If you have HSDPA, you shouldn't be worrying about 3G Or maybe you meant something else? This little utility should tell you about your connection speed (just type in the address in your phone's browser) : http://www.dslreports.com/mspeed
Until the devs / savvy guys and girls chime in, it would help a lot if anyone can contribute more interesting links to this thread. I am particularly looking for the those PDF's from Qualcomm but I can't find them anymore...
edit:
asayamalaka said:
correct, but HSDPA doesn't cover everywhere. in some deadspots i'm only on Edge, and i always wonder if i could get 3G instead.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh... I see. Have you tried what's in the first post with the phone setup? See if it helps...
Look with your eyes and not your mouth
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=4373262&postcount=12
Hannigan174 said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=4373262&postcount=12
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hannigan is right with this link, in that you cannot force the X1i to use HSDPA/HSPA+ on the 850mhz band, because it is not in the hardware. With all of the knowledgeable people out there, if it was possible to change it by flashing/hacking/etc., then it would have been done by now. I don't believe that we'll see 850mhz HSPA+ on our X1i's.
That being said, I myself have noticed my lil' ol' X1i receiving the "H" symbol while in the boonies (far away from the downtown core). I believe this is because there have been reports that Rogers is ramping up their support for HSPA+ on the 1900mhz band, in preparation for the Olympics out west. If this is the case, then the ODD time that your phone does not find the 850mhz band (or 1900mhz is more prevalent/strong), then it will hop on that frequency and you'll be able to use HSDPA.
What I was looking for, was not a hack to enable 3G on the X1i's 850mhz band, but rather some kind of "band preference" setting where you could force phone to look for and connect to the 1900mhz band over the 850mhz band (or even disable 850mhz all together, but that might give us less reception). As far as I know (and have been hunting the net), this isn't quite possible.
I am thinking that our (well, specifically mine because of where I live), only hope is that if Rogers continues to grow their 1900mhz network which supports HSDPA, and hopefully our X1i's will choose that network over the 850mhz one. My only worry with this is that the phone might see both frequencies, and pick the 850mhz one because it has more penetration in densely packed areas, making it the primary choice for the phone (since the 1900mhz signal would probably be weaker).
Anyways, I'm speculating a bit, as well as reporting the facts that I've heard from users on this forum and others (HowardForums has a topic open as well).
Let's hopefully continue to keep this thread going as a base reference for our issue here, because getting 3G/HSDPA on our X1i's would SIGNIFICANTLY improve our usability!
@andreitu just to clear one thing up for you, the X1i is a quad band phone, however the quad band is only in reference to GSM bands and does not apply to UMTS bands. The X1i is only Tri band UMTS...
To anyone getting the HSDPA in the US with an X1i, it's because the area you are in is served by a UMTS 1900 enabled cell. (i'm in dallas and am almost always on HSDPA on AT&T)...
Also to answer another point which was raised in both in this thread and in this one here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=4373262#post4373262
On AT&T you will almost neevr see just a 3G connection, since AT&T has performed an upgrade t all base stations that enables HSDPA for 3G - so that everyone gets the fast speed possible when connected to 3G...!
scar45 said:
Hannigan is right with this link
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It wasn't just a link, I was quoting myself. It was a link to something I already said in another thread that covered the EXACT same thing.
Maybe I have been here too long, but I am starting to get irritated by seeing the same questions numerous times. I will at least give the thread starter some credit for showing an attempt to look at other threads first, but please do multiple google searches related to your subject before starting a thread.
This question was asked a lot when the phone was new. The 1900/850 option in Phone Settings is just a hardcoded dropdown. It does not magically enable WCDMA on 850MHz on the X1i, the hardware cannot do it.
You can receive 1900MHz signals because the X1i is tri-band 900/1800/2100 (even though the drop down does not indicate so).
In future, please, for the love of god, use search!
rwholden said:
On AT&T you will almost neevr see just a 3G connection, since AT&T has performed an upgrade t all base stations that enables HSDPA for 3G - so that everyone gets the fast speed possible when connected to 3G...!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i figured this much but wasn't 100% sure. good to know, thanks
I live in california, i also have the x1i, and i have sometimes seen the 3G for like two seconds too. From reading the threads i have noticed that in deed H is faster than 3G, and myself i get H the whole time while in my room but when i go to my friends house downtown i get a "full H reception signal" and oh man dat is even faster than my brothers HTC Fuze>
azteca85 said:
I live in california, i also have the x1i, and i have sometimes seen the 3G for like two seconds too. From reading the threads i have noticed that in deed H is faster than 3G, and myself i get H the whole time while in my room but when i go to my friends house downtown i get a "full H reception signal" and oh man dat is even faster than my brothers HTC Fuze>
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh man, words can't even describe how fast full blown H is. i think i clocked it at 1mb/sec on a speedtest last week...makes my roommates iphone 3Gs look like a toy. i've always known it was faster than Edge and 3G, just wasn't sure about the 3G till now
asayamalaka said:
oh man, words can't even describe how fast full blown H is. i think i clocked it at 1mb/sec on a speedtest last week...makes my roommates iphone 3Gs look like a toy. i've always known it was faster than Edge and 3G, just wasn't sure about the 3G till now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is ironic since the iPhone 3GS is HSPA (7.2Mbps) capable...lol. HSPA is fast though. I regularly get between 1.5Mbps and 2.2Mbps here in Raleigh, NC.
After reading of a new Mytouch HD product that is coming for T-Mobile Im pretty impressed with specs but very turned off by the looks.
So that makes me wonder does vibrant have the technology to run on T-mobile's 4G network with simple software updates?
Reason I am asking this is because I know The iphone 4G will be able to run on 4G network as soon as AT&T launch their 4G service.
Thanks for any knowledge in advance
.... Google is your best friend, its not 4g it's hspa+ on order to take advantage of that speed you ned the physical hardware in the phone which only the g2 had right now, in regards to the iphone 4, I've never heard anything about att launching any 4g network, I also work for att, the iphone doesn't have any hardware that support any faster speeds as far as I know
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
iPhone can handle ATT's new "Faster 3G", but they don't have 4G. My understanding is the Vibrant can do HSPa, but not HSPa+? I don't know the difference but that's what i understand. 2G, 3G and HSPa.
4G is just a marketing terms for the masses. After you look at this link...
http://shop.sprint.com/en/stores/popups/4G_coverage_popup.shtml
You should realize that the Vibrant is already capable of reaching the "average" speeds listed here (in areas with proper coverage). Wait...how is that possible?! It's not a 4G phone. Who cares!!! T-Mobile's network and phones already meet or exceed the speeds Sprint is advertising here. T-Mobile is way ahead of the curve here but they're not marketing the hell out of it. FYI, the average website (ATM) may have trouble maintaining a consistent throughput of 5-6 Mbps anyway. Even if you can go faster, does it really matter when the other side can't (yet)?
AlexSochi8 said:
After reading of a new Mytouch HD product that is coming for T-Mobile Im pretty impressed with specs but very turned off by the looks.
So that makes me wonder does vibrant have the technology to run on T-mobile's 4G network with simple software updates?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile does not have a 4G network, and they probably won't roll out 4G for at least 5 years
Reason I am asking this is because I know The iphone 4G will be able to run on 4G network as soon as AT&T launch their 4G service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apple hasn't announced a 4G Iphone, so (by definition) you really don't know what you're talking about.
AT&T is set to roll out LTE, but it will almost certainly be data-only devices as they work the kinks out. (As Verizon has done)
Thanks for any knowledge in advance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should ask yourself why you care about 4G. I doubt you'll notice much of a decrease in load times, and the carriers are probably going to charge out the yin-yang for the enhanced features they will be able to offer to everyone with 4G.
AT&T and Verizon are going to limited data (AT&T already has). You should really look past all the marketing and hype. All the carriers are guilty of confusing the public to serve their interests.
All T-Mobile phones will benefit from HSPA+ as it's backward compatible. However, the theoretical maximum throughput on the Vibrant (or any legacy phone) that doesn't have the HSPA+ antenna built in caps out around 7Mbs as I recall. The G2 which is built to run HSPA+ has a theoretical througput around 15-20 I believe.
Seriously though, even 7Mbs is pretty stupid fast for a cell phone.
Xard said:
All T-Mobile phones will benefit from HSPA+ as it's backward compatible. However, the theoretical maximum throughput on the Vibrant (or any legacy phone) that doesn't have the HSPA+ antenna built in caps out around 7Mbs as I recall. The G2 which is built to run HSPA+ has a theoretical througput around 15-20 I believe.
Seriously though, even 7Mbs is pretty stupid fast for a cell phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Clear explanation
But one thing, i am in Boston and my vibrant never reach over 50KB/s...wtf
It supposed to have the + network already...
I get 6mbps on my vibrant on hspa. Home wifi I get only 2.8, I see no difference in browser page loading time..
Downloading w will be faster but whatever.. 6 is all I need. I've only seen some people getting 8 on their g2s, meh, I'm happy with 6..... Hell I'm happy with 3mbps....
Emama said:
Clear explanation
But one thing, i am in Boston and my vibrant never reach over 50KB/s...wtf
It supposed to have the + network already...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check the data icon top center - should be two arrows (up/down) and 'G','E', or '3G' to indicate tech. GPRS would be my guess for 50k... EDGE should reach around 200kbps. (I've maxed at about 1.8 mbps 3g in Charlotte, about 210k edge nearer home, and about 12mpbs wifi - same locations as that last my netbook gets 40-70mpbs though.
Check 'settings'->'wireless and network'->'mobile networks' and make sure '2g only' is unchecked. If so I'd suspect a hardware problem. (double-check that 3g is available where you're testing, of course)
j
newkirk said:
Check the data icon top center - should be two arrows (up/down) and 'G','E', or '3G' to indicate tech. GPRS would be my guess for 50k... EDGE should reach around 200kbps. (I've maxed at about 1.8 mbps 3g in Charlotte, about 210k edge nearer home, and about 12mpbs wifi - same locations as that last my netbook gets 40-70mpbs though.
Check 'settings'->'wireless and network'->'mobile networks' and make sure '2g only' is unchecked. If so I'd suspect a hardware problem. (double-check that 3g is available where you're testing, of course)
j
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is 3g network already,
My phone and my gf's one has the same result
I can have up to 2000kB/s with my home Wi-Fi....but tmo network sucks..
I never see a "G" in that blue icon
And the above result is based on the 3G icon...if it is E, it has only 4-5 kB/s! !!
Any other guy in Boston can tell me if it is T-Mobile network sucks or my phone
I live in Cambridge and just did the speed-test, 3g w/2 bars in my apartment. 129kbps download 614 upload. It really varies quite a bit probably depending upon network traffic.
Xard said:
All T-Mobile phones will benefit from HSPA+ as it's backward compatible. However, the theoretical maximum throughput on the Vibrant (or any legacy phone) that doesn't have the HSPA+ antenna built in caps out around 7Mbs as I recall. The G2 which is built to run HSPA+ has a theoretical througput around 15-20 I believe.
Seriously though, even 7Mbs is pretty stupid fast for a cell phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the 7mb cap only apply to hspa, or hspa+. Because on my wireless g network I get blazing speeds.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
ackattacker said:
I live in Cambridge and just did the speed-test, 3g w/2 bars in my apartment. 129kbps download 614 upload. It really varies quite a bit probably depending upon network traffic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am talking about KB not kbps,
129 kbps is really slow!
I try to compare my friend incredible verizon network at Cambridge
He has 280KB while i have only 45KB download....damn
I get 5mbs in my hspa area on the vibrant.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Should I call T-Mobile to ask about it as it is ridiculous to have only 50-70kB (Less than 0.6 Mbits) in HSPA+ area
jayprime said:
Does the 7mb cap only apply to hspa, or hspa+. Because on my wireless g network I get blazing speeds.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
theoretical caps. HSDPA 7.2Mbps, T-mobile's variety of HSPA+ 21Mbps according to a T-mobile press release, Wi-fi G 54Mbps.
real word numbers HSDPA 1-5Mbps in good coverage depending on network traffic, HDPA+ on a vibrant 3-7 Mbps again depending on network traffic, Wi-fi... depends on your home internet connection speed.
Some people seem to misunderstand whether or not a non HSPA+ phone (such as ours) can benefit from HSPA+. It indeed can, but not in a straightforward way. In order for T-Mobile to support HSPA+ in a given market they must make reasonable upgrades to their networks backhaul capacity to support it. And these backhaul upgrades will become more important as T-Mobile actually begins selling HSPA+ devices.
One of the most important factors often overlooked with any network is it's backhaul capacity. Bottlenecks in familiar networks can easily make themselves apparent. Take for example the traditional DSL and Cable networks most of us use for wired internet service.
While you may pay for a given advertised speed, whether or not you actually see those speeds has less to do with the connection type and more oftentimes to do with how it has been implemented. In the case of DSL for instance, whether or not you can experience your advertised speed reliably depends on how many other customers are routed through the same DSLAM, *AND* how good the backhaul connection from the DSLAM is to your providers internal network. The same thing occurs with Cable and how many customers are aggregated into a given areas HFC. Bottlenecks within cable and dsl infrastructures occur at different points (because they're architecturally different), but once your outside those infrastructures they both share the potential for having backhaul bottlenecks.
In my area cable is way the fastest connection option, and though I do not pay for the highest speed tier here (15/2, instead of the 10/1 I have), when 10/1 was the fastest tier I'd rarely actually see those speeds. Now I see those speeds reliably. Why? Well there are many factors that effect a network topology, but it's clear that in order to reasonably support 15/2, my cable provider had to make sure it's backhaul could actually handle the load, so it was likely updated to accommodate this.
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Ok, my hspa+ does not work, my top speeds have been 3.2 ....I was wondering if anyone else here in south florida is picking up quicker speeds, I'm using the quick speeds app to see what network speed I'm running also, If you guys know any other one I can use please let me know.
Its been really random for me. I dont think hspa+ is active in all of south florida.
However the other night I was getting 7-9 Mbps constantly. I use speedtest.net app.
Bbe1367 said:
Ok, my hspa+ does not work, my top speeds have been 3.2 ....I was wondering if anyone else here in south florida is picking up quicker speeds, I'm using the quick speeds app to see what network speed I'm running also, If you guys know any other one I can use please let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Miami or Ft Lauderdale? I know West Palm wont be active until the end of the year i think
I drove around today between Hollywood and boca - no H+ indicator at all. The best speed test I've seen was 7mbps on Hollywood Blvd. Thing is, my Nexus One supports HSDPA, so not a huge difference between the two devices in that regard.
I'm sick of T-Mo's bull**** on this, their coverage map is retarded and we can't get a clear idea of wtf service we are supposed to be getting.
That, among many other reasons (especially MMC write protection), is why my G2 goes back to T-Mo this week.
kcm117 said:
I'm using the quick speeds app to see what network speed I'm running
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like to check out that app, but can't find it... What's the full name and/or developer?
I've been using http://bit.ly/dc83QK this widget updates what type of service your getting and strength. Try it out. Hope this helps.
fRom Snugs G2 ^.^
Hey everyone,
Just to add, Im also in South FLA, miami to be exact and I too have been experiencing pretty odd signals on my G2. Sometimes my speeds are blazing fast then all of a sudden I'm running on edge with super low speeds.
It seems to me as the phone has trouble staying connected to one network and is constantly switching.
(I'm on my 2nd G2 btw since I thought it was a hardware related issue)
Esteef said:
Hey everyone,
Just to add, Im also in South FLA, miami to be exact and I too have been experiencing pretty odd signals on my G2. Sometimes my speeds are blazing fast then all of a sudden I'm running on edge with super low speeds.
It seems to me as the phone has trouble staying connected to one network and is constantly switching.
(I'm on my 2nd G2 btw since I thought it was a hardware related issue)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go into settings / about phone / status - you will see exactly what network type you are connected to (UMTS, HSDPA, etc) I'm not sure how + would show up, or if the indicator at the top changes, but you should be able to tell from that screen or the "Phone Information" screen (dial *#*#4636#*#*)
Esteef said:
Hey everyone,
Just to add, Im also in South FLA, miami to be exact and I too have been experiencing pretty odd signals on my G2. Sometimes my speeds are blazing fast then all of a sudden I'm running on edge with super low speeds.
It seems to me as the phone has trouble staying connected to one network and is constantly switching.
(I'm on my 2nd G2 btw since I thought it was a hardware related issue)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's crazy, in westchester I get pretty nice 3G speeds, but I go to kendall and I'm on edge. And it seems like its the most random switchoff too, because 5 steps in one direction I'm back on 3G, so I don't know if it's the phone or tmo's network. I expect edge in the middle of BFE, not in the middle of a pretty densely populated area.
add.: I've never seen my phone connect to the HSPA network, ever. The UMTS 3G has been enough to get me by I guess, it's just the random edge switching thats confusing me.
i live in miami, near the miami international airport. on average my nexus one would run about 1.5-2.5mb per second. with an occasional spike around the 4mb realm.
in contrast, my g2 is getting me 2-4.2 on average with spikes as high as 9mb per second.
Here in Boca the fastest i have gotten is around 3 Mbps in East Boca. In West Boca i only get edge at my house , i have to use wifi at home.
Side note: wow there are alot of South Floridians here, lol.
I live in palm city about 15 minutes from west palm and i get around 7 mbps and it says im on HSPDA network?
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
ShaunMichael80 said:
I live in palm city about 15 minutes from west palm and i get around 7 mbps and it says im on HSPDA network?
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Froyo won't ever say HSPA or anything of that sort, it always will say HSDPA or UMTS, depending on where you're at.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Try this widget out its awesome! http://bit.ly/dc83QK I use it whenever I wanna speed test.
fRom Snugs G2 ^.^
You all need to understand the difference from 3G to HSPA+.
HSPA+ is not 4G network like sprint it is simply a boost to the 3G network. On 3G you would never ever achieve a download speed of 4mb down constantly there for H+ is working how it should. I am getting anywhere from 3mb to 7mb down in NYC and evryone should know that in the city the service kinda blows.
What we should be upset about is the fact they stated we will achieve up to 20mb down. Still I also believe that its too soon for H+ to get these speeds as these "towers" are fairly new and not everywhere yet.
Give it time people and figure out how far you are from your H+ towers. I reach what I do only from 4+ miles away. I still think it isn't bad as it is faster then regular 3G
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
TheMan42 said:
Froyo won't ever say HSPA or anything of that sort, it always will say HSDPA or UMTS, depending on where you're at.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HSDPA is HSPA and HSPA+ - both appear as "H" in the signal indicator.
UMTS appears as "3G" in the signal indicator.
There is no distinction between HSPA and HSPA+ according to T-Mobile - the phone will display H/HSDPA for either.
elracing21 said:
You all need to understand the difference from 3G to HSPA+.
HSPA+ is not 4G network like sprint it is simply a boost to the 3G network. On 3G you would never ever achieve a download speed of 4mb down constantly there for H+ is working how it should. I am getting anywhere from 3mb to 7mb down in NYC and evryone should know that in the city the service kinda blows.
What we should be upset about is the fact they stated we will achieve up to 20mb down. Still I also believe that its too soon for H+ to get these speeds as these "towers" are fairly new and not everywhere yet.
Give it time people and figure out how far you are from your H+ towers. I reach what I do only from 4+ miles away. I still think it isn't bad as it is faster then regular 3G
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually your'e wrong on a couple of points here...
First off, the G2 (and MyTouch HD) have only been advertised to do 14mbps. The 21mbps upgrade does not happen until next year.
Second, just because you have a certain connection, that doesn't mean you can pull that much bandwidth from the internet. There are many obstacles: Traffic on your local cell, insufficient backhaul bandwidth to the tower, any connectivity issues between your tower and the other end of the connection, etc.
This applies to any sort of service, cable, dsl, mobile, etc: Just because you have X mbps connection does not mean that you will see X mbps to every site on the web.
On DSL, for example, you are less limited by others in your area, you have a 1:1 connection that terminates at your local central office. But on Cable or Wireless, you are sharing the available bandwidth X:1 with all others in your "neighborhood" (cable) or cell (wireless).
So your actual speed depends on many factors. Take speed tests with a grain of salt, the bigger issue for mobile is latency, not bandwidth. All the bandwidth in the world still makes a 300ms round-trip time "feel" slow.
ZeroSX said:
It's crazy, in westchester I get pretty nice 3G speeds, but I go to kendall and I'm on edge. And it seems like its the most random switchoff too, because 5 steps in one direction I'm back on 3G, so I don't know if it's the phone or tmo's network. I expect edge in the middle of BFE, not in the middle of a pretty densely populated area.
add.: I've never seen my phone connect to the HSPA network, ever. The UMTS 3G has been enough to get me by I guess, it's just the random edge switching thats confusing me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here, I seem to get the best reception around 137th Ave and Coral way actually. (A go there alot to eat at some place)
And the speeds there are almost at 1MB/sec (Yes i'm saying 1MegaByte not megabit)
But a few hundred feet west of that spot and I'm already running on Edge. O_O
elracing21 said:
HSPA+ is not 4G network like sprint it is simply a boost to the 3G network. On 3G you would never ever achieve a download speed of 4mb down constantly there for H+ is working how it should. I am getting anywhere from 3mb to 7mb down in NYC and evryone should know that in the city the service kinda blows.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, there is no real 4G network yet. Sprint, like T-Mobile, have used the term 4G for marketing purposes.
Here's a good read on Sprint's forums:
http://community.sprint.com/baw/message/141144
With the HSPA+ infrastructure upgrades, T-Mobile also gained the ability for HSDPA to cap at 7.2mbps. So in reality, you might see 6+mbps.
As for the coverage in urban areas, Verizon's frequency is better suited to penetrate buildings and urban environments. This is why they have been so successful in cities like NYC, while GSM-based providers have trouble with weak spots around any given corner.
HamNCheese said:
HSDPA is HSPA and HSPA+ - both appear as "H" in the signal indicator.
UMTS appears as "3G" in the signal indicator.
There is no distinction between HSPA and HSPA+ according to T-Mobile - the phone will display H/HSDPA for either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The stock "signal indicator" on the notification bar will never display 3G on the G2.
RTFM
I'm in the Tampa area, and I get 3-4Mbps d/l speeds. Occasionally I will get 8 or 9Mbps down. Upload speeds are consistently 1.5Mbps.
Nice article written today about this: Clearwire hints at LTE build with Sprint
Did not see this posted already.
Yep, Clear has been testing LTE for some time. Phoenix was their first base station tests back in January where they had theoretical speeds better than Verizon's...
http://waazzupppp.wordpress.com/201...and-best-buy-join-light-squareds-lte-network/
Great read! Thanks
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
blassilando said:
Nice article written today about this: Clearwire hints at LTE build with Sprint
Did not see this posted already.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
blassilando, thanks for sharing. Was an interesting read that still leaves a lot to speculate on.
I really hope that sprint and or clear move to LTE I just think it is a better tech than wimax LTE FTW!
rockypoo said:
I really hope that sprint and or clear move to LTE I just think it is a better tech than wimax LTE FTW!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you think that?
Sent from my spaceship!
A lot of people seem to think LTE is superior, and while I may be far from an expert, isn't the true limiting factor of WiMax performance right now the spectrum being used?
The 2500 MHz spectrum deployed right now is less than ideal for building penetration. Switching to LTE will not magically make the problems go away and we could be stuck with a different technology that is actually not very different, yet offers the same problems.
LTE works better with Verizon because of their 700 MHz spectrum, not to mention that their LTE just very recently deployed, the amount of LTE users compared to WiMax users is still very minimal.
I'm betting within a year, LTE speeds on Verizon will drop significantly. It'll still be faster than 3G and offer good speeds, but not the amazing speeds everyone seems to be experiencing right now.
Today on the tops news clear blows
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Android 17 said:
A lot of people seem to think LTE is superior, and while I may be far from an expert, isn't the true limiting factor of WiMax performance right now the spectrum being used?
The 2500 MHz spectrum deployed right now is less than ideal for building penetration. Switching to LTE will not magically make the problems go away and we could be stuck with a different technology that is actually not very different, yet offers the same problems.
LTE works better with Verizon because of their 700 MHz spectrum, not to mention that their LTE just very recently deployed, the amount of LTE users compared to WiMax users is still very minimal.
I'm betting within a year, LTE speeds on Verizon will drop significantly. It'll still be faster than 3G and offer good speeds, but not the amazing speeds everyone seems to be experiencing right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup all about the freq used. lower freq = better building pen. basically.
I mean LTE is the better tech right now, however, I was reading an article a few months ago... Sorry don't have a link... It state that LTE was going to be thee better tech right now, but WiMax ha more potential. Something like 50 Mbps down and 25 up would be about the max for LTE while WiMax has the potential to get to a point of 1 gb down and 500 Mbps up. If Sprint does move to LTE I hope they don't completely abandon WiMax since it appears to have more capability in the long run. I will try to find the link to the article.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
drgonzo712 said:
I mean LTE is the better tech right now, however, I was reading an article a few months ago... Sorry don't have a link... It state that LTE was going to be thee better tech right now, but WiMax ha more potential. Something like 50 Mbps down and 25 up would be about the max for LTE while WiMax has the potential to get to a point of 1 gb down and 500 Mbps up. If Sprint does move to LTE I hope they don't completely abandon WiMax since it appears to have more capability in the long run. I will try to find the link to the article.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again you can't make a blaket statement like that without some reason behined it. WiMax is opensourse i believe too.
All in all if you put LTE on the freq WiMax is on everyone has the same problems WiMax has now. Only solution is more towers on that freq. Though I think i was reading they could increase the power behined the signal to help coverage but doing so had its drawbacks as well. Could be wrong on that last part but I'm 99% sure there were 2 ways to help the signal issues.
Regardless they both have their adv and disadvantages somewhat and neither one is really "better tech" than the other.
I'm not a big fan of wimax at all. My can't even keep a wimax signal locked driving down a major freeway in a 4G city. The upload cap sucks as well. So if Sprint did go LTE the penetration wouldn't be any better than wimax is right now? I can hardly get wimax to work on the freeway let alone a building.
Sim-X said:
I'm not a big fan of wimax at all. My can't even keep a wimax signal locked driving down a major freeway in a 4G city. The upload cap sucks as well. So if Sprint did go LTE the penetration wouldn't be any better than wimax is right now? I can hardly get wimax to work on the freeway let alone a building.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its not WiMax your not a fan of its using the 2.5GHz freq for data and how its used that your mad at. Would make ZERO difference if they swapped out WiMax for LTE on that freq right now. You would get the same signal you do now.
Also there are no caps with WiMax that im aware of and LTE supposedly allows some more in depth throttling stuff from what ive read awhile ago too that WiMax does not.
In the end LTE is not the answer. the answer is getting WiMax provisioned and put on the 800MHz band OR putting LTE on that band, OR putting up many many many more towers.
The key here is that Clear would be building out their network within the framework of Sprints network vision plan. that would allow whatever technology network they build to run on whatever frequencies work best for the conditions at a given location and time. calls / data sessions would actually be moved from one frequency band to another dynamically to take advantage of all frequencies / bandwidth available. That'll make more difference than whether the network is WiMax than LTE in my opinion. At this point I think it's hard to say which technology is best currently and which one will prove to be the best going forward.
sgt. slaughter said:
Again you can't make a blaket statement like that without some reason behined it. WiMax is opensourse i believe too.
All in all if you put LTE on the freq WiMax is on everyone has the same problems WiMax has now. Only solution is more towers on that freq. Though I think i was reading they could increase the power behined the signal to help coverage but doing so had its drawbacks as well. Could be wrong on that last part but I'm 99% sure there were 2 ways to help the signal issues.
Regardless they both have their adv and disadvantages somewhat and neither one is really "better tech" than the other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is the link to the article about LTE vs WiMax. Wasn't really making a blanket statement, more just summing up the article simplistically.
http://www.intomobile.com/2010/05/18/lte-vs-wimax-the-4g-mobile-broadband-shootout/
Just to chime in, with the sprint vision plan being pushed wouldn't it make more sense to stay with wimax, being that wimax2 will be released second part of this year and it could utilize the 900 spectrum sprint has??
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
There are lots of ways this could go. Yes the 2.5GHz spectrum used limit penetration into buildings, however it is not just a matter of the frequency that is used, but also the number of bands that are available to the carrier. Most carriers can only provide 5-20 MHz of channels per sector, which limits that amount of bandwidth that the end user will see. WiMAX and LTE both depend on those channels to communicate, the more channels the more bandwidth.
The Clear network is limited due to capital, not the frequency that is used. Clearwire has enough spectrum to provide both WiMAX and LTE service from the same cell site with spectrum to spare. Which is where you can get into dual or muti-channel devices that can produce high bandwidth connections, one device that can connect to multiple frequency carriers at one time.
The trick is getting the signal to not interfere with each other and including guard bands to reduce that channel interference.
Anyway, I don't think you will see WiMAX go away any time soon. However you may see LTE added to the network.
sgt. slaughter said:
Though I think i was reading they could increase the power behined the signal to help coverage but doing so had its drawbacks as well. Could be wrong on that last part but I'm 99% sure there were 2 ways to help the signal issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see how boosting the signal at the WiMax site would help. You have to remember it's a two way street so the 2.5ghz freq doesn't just building penetration problems with cell to phone signal, but also phone to cell site.
I think the only way boosting the signal would work is if you boosted the site and phone, and I don't think the FCC would allow the phone's output to be increased. Also, if the phone's signal output were to be boosted, what's the battery life going to be like? It's terrible now, and using more power would only make it worse.
Repeaters might help, but how many repeaters can Sprint/Clearwire install? How many connections can a repeater handle?
Damn... The 2.5ghz frequency just sux!
Clear/LTE small difference
I know this thread is probably way dead by now but I have some info. I was just talking with some techs(called tiger team) installing ATT LTE in a cell site that we lease to ATT. He was saying that the difference between LTE and wimax are very small(installation wise). LTE uses fiber connection from radio's to antenna where clear uses coax. This connection difference is what helps LTE's speed over wimax. Also he had installed clear as well and says currently clears radio's take up such little space they could easily install the LTE radio in this same space. Then it would be just a switch out antenna and good to go. No one will probably see this but I thought I would at least put this out there directly from the installers mouth.