Related
Will Verizon Lte network have any effect on the Fascinate?
Nope. You would have to have a different radio to be able to pick up the signal. Sadly we can't do this through a software update.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
The effect it will have is sadness. That LTE is so fast and we are 3g!!!
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
As long as the LTE network isn't hooked up at the same places the current network is and they don't have to share any bandwidth between them, there won't be a difference. If one cable is carrying all the traffic from the current 3G system and the upcoming 4G network, there could be some slight slow down in data speeds, but that would be the only way it would affect you.
I live in the middle of nowhere, so LTE won't have an effect on any phone I buy for years to come.
If Verizon follows Sprint's lead, the fascinate may actually gain an advantage by not incurring the extra fees associated with LTE access (e.g. the EVO 4G)
I don't expect to see LTE penetration beyond the biggest urban markets for quite some time (remember how slow 3g spread?)
This is me just thinking, but the LTE rollout may actually help us a bit. My reasoning in this is that some of the load will be lifted off of 3g when people start moving to LTE, giving us more bandwidth. Thats just me thinking though.
theraptscallion said:
I live in the middle of nowhere, so LTE won't have an effect on any phone I buy for years to come.
If Verizon follows Sprint's lead, the fascinate may actually gain an advantage by not incurring the extra fees associated with LTE access (e.g. the EVO 4G)
I don't expect to see LTE penetration beyond the biggest urban markets for quite some time (remember how slow 3g spread?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Negative on that. Actually LTE is to cover 110 million people by the end of the year alone, and full penetration (97% of territory) by 2013. I see their efforts ramped up much more this time around
I'm the primary on my families plan so I just have to wait a year and I get to upgrade so hopefully by them 4G well be in my area and there still be some legit 4G phones to choose from.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
This is true indeed...probably would take some time to lighten bw loads, but caps would be raised eventually and 3g speeds would increase some
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
phoenx06 said:
This is me just thinking, but the LTE rollout may actually help us a bit. My reasoning in this is that some of the load will be lifted off of 3g when people start moving to LTE, giving us more bandwidth. Thats just me thinking though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, however this depends on how quickly they get phones rolling out, but I think by then we will also want to be on lte phones.
RacerXFD said:
Agreed, however this depends on how quickly they get phones rolling out, but I think by then we will also want to be on lte phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE phones will appear at earliest Feb or March of next year, and thats a best case scenario....
The new LTE network is ran on a seperate fiber from the current 3g network. 3g is T1 based, LTE is ethernet. One will not affect the other.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
snapounds said:
The new LTE network is ran on a seperate fiber from the current 3g network. 3g is T1 based, LTE is ethernet. One will not affect the other.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is "somewhat" true. Yes, LTE is on the ethernet backhaul network (requirement for LTE). But a good portion of the country also has EVDO on ethernet as well.
Bummer... I was hoping that much like the Tmobile network it would help our phones... Thank you for the information.
At CES T-mobile announce hspa+21 and 42 mbs speeds upcoming for thier new smartphones. Does anyone know if the G2 will be blessed with these speeds?
From my understanding it should be. Our phone connect to hsdpa+
Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk
I hope so. When I'm connected to WIFI, my speed tests give me 20-22mbs down. On network I get 2-3mbs in my area. I hope there is no limitations or locks to these proposed speeds.
The G2's cellular radio is only capable of 14 Mb/s down.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 running Cyanogenmod.
The phone only supports up to 14.4 mbps over the cell network (but faster over WiFi). This is a limitation of the Snapdragon platform, and all current Snapdragon phones have this limitation. The next generation 1.2 and 1.5 GHz Snapdragons (no phones with these yet) can handle cell data >14.4mbps.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=8324116&postcount=11
If I understand correctly, you will be compatible with the network, but capped by at 14.4 mbps.
The mobile network is limited to 14 mbps down. It won't get any better than that. The phone's hardware is limited to that.
They sure do keep you guessing on what they (Tmo) are gonna do next. No matter, their data network will always suck. They don't even have all their hspa+ network up yet and already talking about another.
Sent from my G2 using xda app
mdayjr said:
They sure do keep you guessing on what they (Tmo) are gonna do next. No matter, their data network will always suck. They don't even have all their hspa+ network up yet and already talking about another.
Sent from my G2 using xda app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
their data network will always suck? ha just 2 years ago they were still on edge. i think that going from edge to 3g to 4g in a couple years, is pretty damn impressive. sure its not verizon 3g impressive, but verizon has a hell of a lot more money to throw around because of the sheep that want phones that are so locked down its ridiculous. its almost my fifth year anniversary of customizing my phone now.
We don't really get anything higher then 8mbps, so once they raise the the bar maybe we could hit that 14.4
Note that they are only talking about 21, NOT 42. The place the 42 comes from is what is called "dual carrier".... basically, if you have two phones that are each capable of 21, then add them together and you have 42. Now just take the parts out of the two phones and slap then into a single cover. There you go... a phone capable of 42.
The Vision hardware is definitely only capable of SINGLE CARRIER.... which means that it can't possibly get 42.
Note: I wouldn't completely rule out 21. It *is* amazing what software can do... I also wouldn't *expect* it.
And for that matter, I couldn't care less. 14.4 is very fast. I doubt that there is any actual use in going over that.... mainly just bragging rights.
dhkr123 said:
Note that they are only talking about 21, NOT 42. The place the 42 comes from is what is called "dual carrier".... basically, if you have two phones that are each capable of 21, then add them together and you have 42. Now just take the parts out of the two phones and slap then into a single cover. There you go... a phone capable of 42.
The Vision hardware is definitely only capable of SINGLE CARRIER.... which means that it can't possibly get 42.
Note: I wouldn't completely rule out 21. It *is* amazing what software can do... I also wouldn't *expect* it.
And for that matter, I couldn't care less. 14.4 is very fast. I doubt that there is any actual use in going over that.... mainly just bragging rights.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about? HSPA+ 21 is already deployed. HSPA+ 42 is the same concept.
Its all part of LTHE - did you catch the CES demo they ran of the experimental ZTE data stick they were using that was HSPA+ 42? It was pulling 30Mbps down.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Well, either way 14.4 is good for me. Thanks for the replies
mdayjr said:
They sure do keep you guessing on what they (Tmo) are gonna do next. No matter, their data network will always suck. They don't even have all their hspa+ network up yet and already talking about another.
Sent from my G2 using xda app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree... T Mobile data does suck... Theres too many area still on E, or the Slower 3G. Im in a very popular state / city Nashville, TN and we barely have 4G here and the 3G are very slow and unstable, where as the other networks in my area have strong fast connection.
Even Cricket Wireless which to me is a cheap low end cell company has a faster more stable data connection in my area.
This is the Music Capitol of the country and barely got 4G / 3G here LOL...
They need to up it up in houston. It is very spotty. I get 4-5 sometimes but mostly 75% of the time i have 1mb and under. Not cool.
In hawaii I think they only have the hspa tower on honolulu so we all share in one tower, laggy and slow
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
I see the internet experts are weighing in with their knowledge of a cell network.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
I agree... they need to work on expanding 3G coverage and phasing out 2G before jumping to beyond HSPA+ 21. More 3G coverage would relieve overcrowded existing 3G towers and therefore increase speed without an upgrade to HSPA+ 42... HSPA+21 is fast enough when towers are equaled out. On a normal 3G tower, I average 7-11Mbps down. Plenty fast, imo.
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.
Looks like Sprint's getting ready to deploy LTE. What does everyone think?
http://www.bgr.com/2011/06/17/sprint-to-deploy-4g-lte-network-with-lightsquared/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-17/falcone-s-lightsquared-venture-reaches-a-15-year-network-deal-with-sprint.html
Last i heard, LightSquared was told by the FCC they weren't allowed to broadcast because they were overpowering civilian and aviation GPS units. Has this issue been resolved? A 15 year deal ain't worth squat if you can't turn on the juice!!
SilverStone641 said:
Last i heard, LightSquared was told by the FCC they weren't allowed to broadcast because they were overpowering civilian and aviation GPS units. Has this issue been resolved? A 15 year deal ain't worth squat if you can't turn on the juice!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, thats what I'm worried about, I wish/hope its as easy as a change of a frequency channel.
I"m sure they will iron those wrinkles before flipping the switch.
It would be like Sprint to throw its weight behind a technology that is failed, different or inferior. WiMAX isn't exactly inferior to LTE, but the 2.5 GHz band it relies on most certainly is inferior to the 700 MHz band that Verizon's LTE uses.
Ok, so lets say they deploy this 4g lte network... what happens to their 4g wimax network? From what little I know about wimax and lte chipsets, I dont think it would be possible for a firmware upgrade to turn wimax to lte. What happens to clear? One important thing to remember is that I didnt actually read the article so these questions may already be answered. haha.
Although, if my evo became a 3g only device, I would actually be ok with that if they drop the $10 a month surcharge
ZachPA said:
It would be like Sprint to throw its weight behind a technology that is failed, different or inferior. WiMAX isn't exactly inferior to LTE, but the 2.5 GHz band it relies on most certainly is inferior to the 700 MHz band that Verizon's LTE uses.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Words straight out of my mouth.
is there a resource that lists open frequency ranges?
Could the new radio(SMR) thats in the evo 3d work on this frequency and be a dual wimax/lte combo?
Sent from my PC36100
"The company can use LightSquared’s network to lessen the load on its own network as data demand has skyrocketed, an issue that has plagued other carriers. "
It sounds like they will be using them for backhaul, I don't see anything about Sprint using LTE. Right now backhaul is what Sprint is lacking so this will be a good thing for not just 4G but 3G speeds.
Cloyd said:
is there a resource that lists open frequency ranges?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here is a chart..
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf
I assume any potential move to lte will address wimax's inferior latency?
Sprint end users will NOT use LTE most likely ever. Sprint (the provider service) will utilize LTE strickly for back haul only. This is a very good thing for us the end user, basically means to us that we will have lots of bandwidth on tap. Wimax offers up to 12MB d/l transport speeds which most of us probably never see anyway. I personally get 7-8 around Baltimore/Annapolis areas of Maryland and this will hopefully allows us to have the bandwidth assuming more towers are deployed for our cell connectivity. This is a very good thing for us and the sooner the better!
sounds like lte will come later on firat is evdo rev o then rev a then rev b then do then do advance then lte
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
I have spoken to my sprint rep a lot about how Sprint works. He used to work for Samsung and distributed phones to carriers in the northeastern part of the united states. Because of this, he learned a lot about Sprint. One thing that he learned was that Sprint has the most bandwidth out of all the carriers, and it is one of the main reasons why theory data is truly unlimited.
Just throwing that out there.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
xHausx said:
"The company can use LightSquared’s network to lessen the load on its own network as data demand has skyrocketed, an issue that has plagued other carriers. "
It sounds like they will be using them for backhaul, I don't see anything about Sprint using LTE. Right now backhaul is what Sprint is lacking so this will be a good thing for not just 4G but 3G speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It talks about Sprint using LTE in the third paragraph of the Bloomberg article.
“LightSquared and Sprint will jointly develop, deploy and operate LightSquared’s 4G LTE network,” according to the letter. “Sprint will become a significant customer of LightSquared’s 4G LTE network.”
Yet more money wasted on Wimax and shoveled into another bad relationship (Clearwire) Stay comfy in number 3 because you're going to be seated here a while, Sprint. At the very least they woke up and realized LTE is the way to go.
However even after Clearwire's long gone. Those who already have Wimax 4g will still be supported until after their devices are long gone. The only ones who will be bit will be the ones that should have upgraded lone ago. Like the ones today who are still carrying around Cingular phones refusing to upgrade to AT&T So at least Sprint will keep their core customers happy to an extent.
Sprint desperate to jump into the LTE iPhone train next year?
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
What good is backhaul when the airwaves can't reach end users?
It's like having a download server capable of gigabit speed, along with an ISP who can deliver it to you. Except you're saddled with a 1991-vintage 10 Mbps ethernet card.
That's the problem I've been noticing with WiMAX. Sprint has one hell of a data network, but the airwaves used to deliver that network are congested and not well suited to the consumer's needs.
I wonder how likely it is that an upcoming Galaxy 2 or Photon 4G will be LTE / Wimax on Sprint...
Which service is best...
Sent from my HTC Sensation
It probably depends on the area. DC-HSPA on T-Mobile actually runs faster than Verizon LTE in some areas just because Verizon doesn't open it up enough or have enough capacity or something. The nice part is that DC-HSPA is really just a fast 3G, so even if your phone only hits 14.4 HSPA, it still goes pretty fast. T-Mobile will deploy LTE next year and if that has problems it will have DC-HSPA as a fallback.
I have T-mobile and I easily get 22mbps down, 2mbps up. My husband has Verizon and he gets 23mbps down, 7mbps up. The downlink speeds are comparable. The only difference is in the uplink speeds. Verizon has the edge here. However, I have used both phones side by side and for most tasks, there isn't a huge difference.
Snowflake approved this message....
4G Late?
4G LTE
-Destroys Battery life
-Sales Gimmick
4G HSPA+
-Fast enough
-Better battery life
Can anybody really distinguish, with the naked eye, which is faster? Whose testing website is really accurate? Besides bragging rights and marketing fanfare, does it make any difference?
Hi guys,
I do not need LTE due to those facts:
1) HSDPA is fast enough.
2) in common cell phone contracts over here in Germany your speed is reduced to 64kbit after you used up 300mb per month. If I had more than that we could talk about LTE.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Looneytoon98 said:
Can anybody really distinguish, with the naked eye, which is faster? Whose testing website is really accurate? Besides bragging rights and marketing fanfare, does it make any difference?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope.
Snowflake approved this message
LTE plans here are more expensive. That's a good reason.
Sent from my XT883 using xda app-developers app
LTE not Late
Mesaman2012 said:
Which service is best...
Sent from my HTC Sensation
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FYI there is no "Late 4G", it is called "LTE". Actually there are two types of 4G; LTE and WiMax.
LTE was first used by Verizon, but is now also used by ATT. Due to marketing "schemes" some believe the Apple iPhone 5 has 4g. False! it has HSPA+, not 4G/ Sure, HSPA+ is a ton faster than 3g, but it is still not 4G.
Sprint, and T-Mobile are now also starting to use LTE. Unfortunately I don't believe LTE is standard worldwide, meaning they use different frequency bands. Similar to how a GSM american phone, may or may not work in Europe
I'm sorry that I ever put up such a topic would you ladies and gentlemen please not respond to this stupid topic.I would like to apologize for spamming the thread with this ignorant topic. Takecare
Sent from my HTC one x
Either way, we won't be hitting 4G for another 5/10 years. Although, I can't imagine why the hell a phone needs 1Gbps down and 100Mbps up. Maybe 30 years from now those speeds will be standard.
LTE and WiMax are still 3G. They're marketed as 4G (read: FauxG). They're really 3.9G.
Only LTE-Advanced is a certified 4G tech. All the others are still 3G
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
times_infinity said:
LTE and WiMax are still 3G. They're marketed as 4G (read: FauxG). They're really 3.9G.
Only LTE-Advanced is a certified 4G tech. All the others are still 3G
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that was the case originally, but it's my understanding that the group behind the 4G standards was pushed enough to bend what it qualifies as 4G. Originally 4G was when you had a minimum of 100Mbps download, but now HSPA+, WiMax, and LTE are all considered 4G technologies.
geoff5093 said:
I know that was the case originally, but it's my understanding that the group behind the 4G standards was pushed enough to bend what it qualifies as 4G. Originally 4G was when you had a minimum of 100Mbps download, but now HSPA+, WiMax, and LTE are all considered 4G technologies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By name only. The carriers cried and whined for it, so the ITU caved. It's STILL "faux G" as far as many people are concerned.
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that it's still technically based on an older technology.
Snowflake approved this message....
Would prefer HSPA than 4G. On 4G, it's really a battery eater. However, the highest HSPA speed I've gotten was around 3mbps and around 1-2mbps upload compared to 30-45mbps download and ~20-30mbps upload.
Normally the HSPA speeds is almost the same as running on GPRS during peak hours until the three local telco was fined for providing below standard data speeds/coverage then it managed to peak around 4-5.
Clubbysupercharged said:
Would prefer HSPA than 4G. On 4G, it's really a battery eater. However, the highest HSPA speed I've gotten was around 3mbps and around 1-2mbps upload compared to 30-45mbps download and ~20-30mbps upload.
Normally the HSPA speeds is almost the same as running on GPRS during peak hours until the three local telco was fined for providing below standard data speeds/coverage then it managed to peak around 4-5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's your carrier. I've seen HSPA speeds hit 20Mb down and LTE speeds hit 60Mb down almost from seeing other speedtests.
MrObvious said:
That's your carrier. I've seen HSPA speeds hit 20Mb down and LTE speeds hit 60Mb down almost from seeing other speedtests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or his location (or the hardware limitation of the handset)
Hickory, Dickory, Dox...Snowflake approves of my HOX....
MrObvious said:
That's your carrier. I've seen HSPA speeds hit 20Mb down and LTE speeds hit 60Mb down almost from seeing other speedtests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, that's my carrier problem. Their HSPA speeds is really pathetic.
Thanks for sharing
LTE>HSPA+
My best friend bought the black Iphone five (64 gig) when he came down to Jax, and in town, we compared our speed test results.
Iphone five (lte on at&t) first test- 68 mbps down/16 mbps up
Htc Amaze (faux g) best result that day-23mbps down/3 mbps up
So, strictly speed wise, he consistently was able to pull high 60's down, while my phone that theoretically can hit 42 mbps, never reached 30's. So it seems that location is an important factor, but none the less, I cant kid myself, I rooted my phone and changed the values in the build.prop file to command the phone to max out the radio, while his was straight out of the box. Imagine if he were to jailbreak that monster, its capable of 80 mbps down. The only problem is that his screen is smaller than mine, and he has some crappy plan that wont let him tether, as oposed to us, we can hack out phones to utilize our signal on something easier on the eyes.
Now bear in mind, I am just commenting on data speed, and he is back in Greensboro, North Carolina, and he only gets 20mbps down at best. Then again, 20 mbps down would be my phone on a good day in the middle of the night.