Related
me(US T-MO) and my friend(sprint) wondering if any of u know if the HTC EVO 4G gonna have the worldphone compatability(GSM slot for gsm networks).my friend currently using the TOUCH PRO 2 from sprint and he has the ability to switch the phone to GSM carriers.jus wondering if the EVO gonna have the compatibilty.if yes defenetly dropping my HD2.
The Evo 4G is a CDMA phone it will not work on GSM and never will since it doesnt even come with a slot to insert a sim card.
yea i know that but the ones that u've seen on every website and videos r not the OFFICIAL EVO i think cuz they didnt even announced the official date but if its CDMA im out of luck and wish for a GSM version of the EVO.
GHOST99K said:
if its CDMA im out of luck and wish for a GSM version of the EVO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 100% CDMA w/no SIM slot. So I guess your out of luck
The big thing about the EVO 4G is the fact that it's a CDMA/Wi-Max. If it had a SIM slot, and you put it on a GSM network like T-Mobile, you wouldn't be able to connect to Sprint's 4G network and lose the one big advantage of this phone. Sure it's got 720p HDMI output and 8MP camera, but other than that and Wi-Max, it's got very similar specs to the HD2.
The other reason could be the fact that they wanted it to run Android, and I have yet to see any CDMA/GSM World Phones running Android natively so they may not have worked out the whole dual mode switching in Android - but I could be wrong about that one.
well.......i guess i have to be patient for something better by HTC on GSM carrier network with ANDROID 2.1.honestly i bought the HD2 and i've flashed custom ROM but still not satisfied at all with WM.i would get me NEXUS ONE but then again better phone will come out by HTC every 3-4 months.as far as 4G its not necessary for me at all.i will patiently wait till end of summer for the better.thanks guys
Look it up. GOOGLE IT ESPECIALLY WITH ANDROID
Sigh why do people get fooled by Sprint's cheap marketing... T-mobile's releasing HSPA+ 3G which is going to be faster than Sprints so called "4G"
Blackman778g said:
Sigh why do people get fooled by Sprint's cheap marketing... T-mobile's releasing HSPA+ 3G which is going to be faster than Sprints so called "4G"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude. wimax. shut up.
mountaindont said:
dude. wimax. shut up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sigh... When people don't know the facts.
http://www.cellphonesignal.com/t-mobile-hspa-vs-sprint-wimax-by-pcworld/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2359139,00.asp
Blackman778g said:
Sigh... When people don't know the facts.
http://www.cellphonesignal.com/t-mobile-hspa-vs-sprint-wimax-by-pcworld/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2359139,00.asp
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude....Let Sprint and everyone that is on Sprint enjoy the fact that SPRINT will have one (if not the best) of the best phones ever made for a little while until another one comes out. Tmo has the HD2...now is Sprints turn, chill out!
You got HSPA+? Good for you....we'll have 4G! Is that simple.
Blackcircle said:
Dude....Let Sprint and everyone that is on Sprint enjoy the fact that SPRINT will have one (if not the best) of the best phones ever made for a little while until another one comes out. Tmo has the HD2...now is Sprints turn, chill out!
You got HSPA+? Good for you....we'll have 4G! Is that simple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright I'll settle for that... just trying to make sure people don't fall for the marketing gimmick. I had every carrier and been a loyal customer to them all.... Some people will switch just for a single phone even if they don't have reception in their area. Make a smart move it'll last two full years.
Blackman778g;I had every carrier and been a loyal customer to them all.... [/QUOTE said:
really??
boys and girls.. can we all say "contradiction"?
had to do it to u...
all major carriers will come out with their own "4G" setup, that is to be expected. WHEN will it hit the market; is the real question. Sprint has WiMax and it is being rolled out aggressively.
As they saying goes.."one bird in hand.. is better than two in the bush"
that being said... I live in a WiMax area and have the Overdrive. It is faster than 3G but I can only get 20% signal in areas that I am most in.
I hope they get more towers up in my area!!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blackman778g said:
Alright I'll settle for that... just trying to make sure people don't fall for the marketing gimmick. I had every carrier and been a loyal customer to them all.... Some people will switch just for a single phone even if they don't have reception in their area. Make a smart move it'll last two full years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So when is this mythical HSPDA+ coming out? WiMax has already been out for over a year where I live, and I've not heard of a single person with WiMax-like speeds on any other carrier. T-Mobile is typically last to the game in that regard, but either way, you guys already have the HD2, which I'd rather have anyways.
WiMax is not certified 4G and will never be. I'm really shocked that Sprint hasn't been called out on this and hasn't had their false adverts of a "4G" network pulled.
march7th said:
WiMax is not certified 4G and will never be. I'm really shocked that Sprint hasn't been called out on this and hasn't had their false adverts of a "4G" network pulled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why would it have to be "certified 4G?" also, from what I've read from the beginning, is that WiMax and LTE are SO SIMILAR, that it wouldn't cost much for Clear/Sprint to fully convert. The even planned on having a combination of the two services.
methinks you doth protest too much.
ScrapMaker said:
why would it have to be "certified 4G?" also, from what I've read from the beginning, is that WiMax and LTE are SO SIMILAR, that it wouldn't cost much for Clear/Sprint to fully convert. The even planned on having a combination of the two services.
methinks you doth protest too much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wimax and lte use different freqs, converting would not only change the protocol(like software) but the antennas, transponders, receivers and transmitters (hardware)
then all the phones themselves would need new radios (hardware + software) It would be a huge mess, I highly doubt they will convert the technology, hope they just adopt LTE with Wimax and your phone supports both someday. As they already have chipsets that support both technologies at the same time with multiple radios and transceivers. But my money is the conversion of technology will not happen, it will just be integrated into the phones instead of the towers.
Now the wimax/4g thing, wimax has been branded 4g, 4g is a general term...(yes I know it's a stardard and has minimum req's) but the term works for it's purpose; recognition more than a actual "standard". evdo started getting called 3g when the 3g term got popular and was a "feature" and was easier to remember no actual feature was added for them to call it 3g.
The point is the idea gets across, as it is agreed they both generally mean the same thing, you know what it means, they know what it means, and making that kinda correction makes people sound like asses. Much like spelling correctors.
BAM! I knew I read that before.
ScrapMaker said:
BAM! I knew I read that before.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not everything on you read on the internet is true, but facts are facts.. look
Wimax operates on 2.5Ghz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX#Spectrum_allocation
LTE operates on 700Mhz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution#Frequency_bands_and_channel_bandwidths
the two operate on two extremely different frequencies, you can't magically change a phone that is built to operate on one freq to start using one that differently. It's just not physically capable of doing it. No amount of software is going to change that.
That article was written in september 09' sprint has moved forward with wimax, they have made their decision, once they put equipment out in customers hands, they will have to cut some customers off by making drastic changes at this point in the game. To jump back at this point would be insanity. The infrastructure is already being built, and in some cases already built.
johnsongrantr said:
not everything on you read on the internet is true, but facts are facts.. look
Wimax operates on 2.5Ghz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX#Spectrum_allocation
LTE operates on 700Mhz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution#Frequency_bands_and_channel_bandwidths
the two operate on two extremely different frequencies, you can't magically change a phone that is built to operate on one freq to start using one that differently. It's just not physically capable of doing it. No amount of software is going to change that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why is that? Radios can transmit on all sorts of frequencies... you have no idea how they designed their antennae or transmitters. If Clear says, themselves, that the technology is 80% identical, then it's fairly believable. I've been hearing that for years, anyhow.
Hell, just look at AT&T, they have 3G on all sorts of bands, and that didn't stop them people from using them. This argument is pointless. Clear could have hybrid modems in store, or possibly their devices can already use the spectrum to reference. All I'm saying is Sprint/Clear aren't really committing false-advertising. Comparing some mythical unicorn that T-Mobile *might* have in a few markets sometime soon, to WiMax, which has been out for quite some time, doesn't make much sense.
For now, it's 4G... the fastest, and I believe they have the right to call it that. It's Sprint's fourth-generation network. For years, the carriers bounced back and forth as to who had the fastest network, and you didn't see anyone renaming their from 3G.
ScrapMaker said:
Why is that? Radios can transmit on all sorts of frequencies... you have no idea how they designed their antennae or transmitters. If Clear says, themselves, that the technology is 80% identical, then it's fairly believable. I've been hearing that for years, anyhow.
Hell, just look at AT&T, they have 3G on all sorts of bands, and that didn't stop them people from using them. This argument is pointless. Clear could have hybrid modems in store, or possibly their devices can already use the spectrum to reference. All I'm saying is Sprint/Clear aren't really committing false-advertising. Comparing some mythical unicorn that T-Mobile *might* have in a few markets sometime soon, to WiMax, which has been out for quite some time, doesn't make much sense.
For now, it's 4G... the fastest, and I believe they have the right to call it that. It's Sprint's fourth-generation network. For years, the carriers bounced back and forth as to who had the fastest network, and you didn't see anyone renaming their from 3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no idea how they designed their transmitter? This is more or less true, I don't know the exact specifics of their radios, but I have a really really good idea. I used to fix radios for the army... I have an good general knowledge of radio technology.
I don't have the exact links but I've posted some to chipset makers in this forum. One is for the evo's chipset, and one for for a future phone's chipset. The future one has radios *note plural* built in that are capable of broadcasting on both the 700 and 2.5 frequencies. The EVO's is not capable of the 700mhz only the 2.5ghz (among others 800 & 1900 but not 700)
The reason you can tune civilian band and police radios to multiple frequencies is because of transistors. But you're talking a very small spectrum. A common span is like 1-50Mhz difference. The Bigger the gap the bigger and more elaborate the electronic circuitry is required. Having to tune amplifiers as well as antennas. I'm not going to give a lesson on radio broadcast technology cause, well I'm just not.
For antennas they have to be cut to exact length based off their wavelength to preform optimally. As the frequency increases the length gets shorter but the principal is still there. It has to be more or less exact, the more you deviate the less clear the signal will be with the higher freqs the more exact it needs to be. Fudging a difference that big will not work for a clear and precise digital signal.
SO... while a cell phone radio might change it's freqs slightly depending on open channels, the range is fairly close, a radio that operates on 700mhz might go as high or low as 725 for example but it will not, and I repeat will NOT do a 1800Mhz difference. Hopefully that sheds some light on this subject.
I can't go into how their backend protocol is worked, because I honestly haven't ever messed with it and would only be speculation on my part. So it might be correct, the software might be easily interchangeable, but the hardware is not, and clear/wimax even stated so in that article. They said they had equipment capable of both or options or something. But a change is needed for sure. The evo is sprint's flagship wimax phone, and it is not capable of the freqs lte currently uses.... end of story.
I'm a Cellular South user who's reallllly lusting after the Epic 4G -- sadly it looks like it's going to be the only Galaxy S slider released. Once the phone is released and rooted, would it be possible for the phone to work on non-Sprint carriers? I've currently got a HTC Hero, and I know for the longest time our ROMs were based off of the Sprint RUU.
Just curious if this is plausible, very likely, or not a chance in hell.
Thanks,
DrHogie
Sure it will be possible just like the Hero was. 4G won't be possible, but the phone will be able to at least make calls until you figure out any of the other stuff needed for data and market.
How compatible do you think this phone would be with MetroPCS? Also, I heard that LTE could be added with a firmware update on this phone, or at least phones like it. Is that true? If so, do you think it might work on other future 4G networks, like that of Verizon or Metro? Sorry for all the potentially silly questions, I've never shopped for a CDMA phone before.
LTE uses a SIM card I believe so without the hardware built into the pone, you couldn't use it on that kind of network.
I read a blog with an interview of a Sprint higher up saying that they could potentially change the technology of 4g quickly and cheaply in places that currently have 4g. However, I don't know if that means another set of GSM 3G vs CDMA 3G like we have now. Maybe it would be a CDMA LTE that doesn't use a SIM?
Hopefully they just leave well enough alone. I know the technology will be different at Verizon (LTE) and T-MO(HSPA+), but differences usually foster growth for the best to keep up. I guess that would also eliminate a roaming data possiblity.
Who knows...lots of questions.
LTE isn't CDMZA based, it is its own beast.
This is where I read about the SIM card http://gizmodo.com/5590530/leaked-documents-and-lte-sim-show-verizon-4g-launch-is-imminent
Wikipedia is more info if you search LTE about the technology.
Welp, looks like it's going that way...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/15/sprint-evaluating-switch-to-lte-over-the-next-four-to-six-months/
...thing is, there hasn't been any new WiMAX phone announced this year, so either they're relying on riding that EVO and Epic wave to get new WiMAX customers, or maybe they do have something up their sleeve.
In any event, I don't see that many new customers signing up for Wimax, so to LTE Sprint will go. Now what do we do with our Evo at that point?
Other than the shifts but if they give me a choice to choose a new phone I'm in
Sent from my gingerbread evo 4g
It's like sprint is playing the "you can't get mad at me, i'm not touching you" while holding hand in front of face game with all these changes that piss everybody off without letting them go etf-free
Oh, they would have to provide us with a LTE phone if they do switch. At least offer us a pretty hefty discount. Otherwise, I see a huge class-action lawsuit headed over their way. I'd love for this switch to happen. WiMax is just not cutting it.
From the user comments of the linked article:
They're still going to roll out WiMax and then just add LTE functionality later on. Again, It's just a baseband card swap and a software upgrade. The phones would probably use a dual-mode WiMax/LTE chip (like the one introduced last year by Beceem). Sprint did a pretty good job of future-proofing their network and WiMax was a better/cheaper choice for "4G"... Verizon was having some major 3G/4G handoff issues in mid-December and there's still no word of that being resolved. That's a major issue for Big Red and could slow or kill LTE adoption (imagine having to either wait about 2 minutes or even having to reboot your phone whenever you go from 4G back to 3G). I'm not even getting into AT&T and Verizon's LTE spectrum limitations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
m4rk0358 said:
From the user comments of the linked article: They're still going to roll out WiMax and then just add LTE functionality later on. Again, It's just a baseband card swap and a software upgrade. The phones would probably use a dual-mode WiMax/LTE chip (like the one introduced last year by Beceem). Sprint did a pretty good job of future-proofing their network and WiMax was a better/cheaper choice for "4G"... Verizon was having some major 3G/4G handoff issues in mid-December and there's still no word of that being resolved. That's a major issue for Big Red and could slow or kill LTE adoption (imagine having to either wait about 2 minutes or even having to reboot your phone whenever you go from 4G back to 3G). I'm not even getting into AT&T and Verizon's LTE spectrum limitations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But they would eventually have to actually flip the switch to LTE.. would they not have to pick one or the other?
As long as I got a huge discount on an LTE phone, I'd be okay with this. I like WiMAX, but for the dev community, LTE is going to be way better.
akarol said:
Oh, they would have to provide us with a LTE phone if they do switch. At least offer us a pretty hefty discount. Otherwise, I see a huge class-action lawsuit headed over their way. I'd love for this switch to happen. WiMax is just not cutting it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're facing this scenario now, if they turn off the iDen network to use LTE. Some speculate that Sprint will lose a lot of money on this, but all they have to do is sell the spectrum that wimax is on now. T-Mobile would buy it...
AbsolutZeroGI said:
As long as I got a huge discount on an LTE phone, I'd be okay with this. I like WiMAX, but for the dev community, LTE is going to be way better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm also curious about the stuff I've been reading recently regarding how tightly controlled LTE access can be by carrier. Presumably the same restrictions would apply when tethering?
they will have pry my evo from my cold dead hands....
cyanogen/evervol-acies flavored gingerbread
drbadass said:
But they would eventually have to actually flip the switch to LTE.. would they not have to pick one or the other?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really cause Wimaxx is just another channel or frequency. I mean they still have 2G/3G and now 4G, LTE will just be another channel that they will be able to accomidate
I say the only reason why the would make that switch is to keep up or ahead with the other carriers, t-mobile, att, Verizon so why not make the switch everyone gsm and running on sim chips mmm nice different phones on different networks sounds fun
Sent from my PC36100-EVO-using Tapatalk
drbadass said:
I'm also curious about the stuff I've been reading recently regarding how tightly controlled LTE access can be by carrier. Presumably the same restrictions would apply when tethering?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what scares me. I know LTE is faster than wimax. (Job I work at sells both Wimax capable cards and LTE broadband cards now and I have installed both on computers, and speedtest wise, LTE was pulling 15 down and 1.5 up. Wimax in our area usually does 5-7 down, and 1 up.
But I don't want Sprint to be able to decide that what I do with the data access I am provided isn't what they think I should. The fact they can block sites, charge rates for sites, and so forth is very bothersome. It is the same crap certain ISP carries are looking to do.
It is this reason (among data caps) that I decided not to wait for the LTE thunderstorm phone(or w/e its called, im kinda tired ) and go with verizon over sprint.
I just with their Wimax was better in the Cincinnati, OH area than it currently is. Map shows I should have 4G outside everywhere but my backyard. And I barely get it in my front lawn where I should have a perfect signal.
Does anyone have a link to the story of how carriers can control access to the web using LTE. I read it but don't remember where. This is very disturbing that the carriers will have this much power over our web viewing habits
Don't worry fellow evonauts, they (probably) won't block your fetish adult entertainment.
But seriously, better speeds would be awesome, better coverage would be great but the capability to throttle or block what i want to do with my "unlimited" connection is unacceptable.
Here's some things to remember before anyone gets up in arms over this:
1. Between the Sprint, Clear, Comcast, and Time Warner brands there are millions of users on the Clearwire WiMax network, many of whom are in contracts based on WiMax devices or services. They're not going to just flip a switch in a few months and suddenly none of us have 4G anymore. I would not expect to see much further WiMax development beyond what's known about at the time of any LTE announcement, but by the time the WiMax network goes dead anyone posting here will have moved on to a newer phone.
2. There's no reason at all that this would need to be done as an on/off type switch. They install the hardware bits needed for LTE, then switch channels of their available spectrum over as dictated by utilization. AT&T's migration from TDMA to GSM after the Cingular buyout took years to complete.
3. The Evo Shift just came out and the Blackberry Playbook with WiMax has been announced and given a rough street date. Like most of us existing users, these users will likely for the most part be in contracts, meaning if Sprint does anything that significantly impacts the usability of those devices (such as terminating WiMax service) they'll need to either give us cheap/free upgrades to LTE phones or let us out of contract ETF-free.
tl;dr version: LTE is probably coming, since Sprint's rapidly becoming the odd man out in the 4G cell world, but there's no reason for current WiMax users to panic.
edit:
drbadass said:
I'm also curious about the stuff I've been reading recently regarding how tightly controlled LTE access can be by carrier. Presumably the same restrictions would apply when tethering?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ghodzilla5150 said:
Does anyone have a link to the story of how carriers can control access to the web using LTE. I read it but don't remember where. This is very disturbing that the carriers will have this much power over our web viewing habits
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any ISP has about the same power. It has nothing to do with the last mile medium and LTE will change nothing about this.
Regarding tethering, there is no way to tell for certain by looking at the data transmitted whether a user is tethering or not when a modern smartphone is involved, since they're capable of doing anything a full PC could do with that data connection. Certain types of data may be suspicious and more likely to have come from a PC, but nothing could be proven to any reasonable standard as long as they have not loaded a "tattler" program in to the OEM ROM to explicitly identify tethering. Assuming a rooted phone, this could be removed and of course would not even be in AOSP-based ROMs.
Good rational post. Thanks.
wolrah said:
Here's some things to remember before anyone gets up in arms over this:
1. Between the Sprint, Clear, Comcast, and Time Warner brands there are millions of users on the Clearwire WiMax network, many of whom are in contracts based on WiMax devices or services. They're not going to just flip a switch in a few months and suddenly none of us have 4G anymore. I would not expect to see much further WiMax development beyond what's known about at the time of any LTE announcement, but by the time the WiMax network goes dead anyone posting here will have moved on to a newer phone.
2. There's no reason at all that this would need to be done as an on/off type switch. They install the hardware bits needed for LTE, then switch channels of their available spectrum over as dictated by utilization. AT&T's migration from TDMA to GSM after the Cingular buyout took years to complete.
3. The Evo Shift just came out and the Blackberry Playbook with WiMax has been announced and given a rough street date. Like most of us existing users, these users will likely for the most part be in contracts, meaning if Sprint does anything that significantly impacts the usability of those devices (such as terminating WiMax service) they'll need to either give us cheap/free upgrades to LTE phones or let us out of contract ETF-free.
tl;dr version: LTE is probably coming, since Sprint's rapidly becoming the odd man out in the 4G cell world, but there's no reason for current WiMax users to panic.
edit:
Any ISP has about the same power. It has nothing to do with the last mile medium and LTE will change nothing about this.
Regarding tethering, there is no way to tell for certain by looking at the data transmitted whether a user is tethering or not when a modern smartphone is involved, since they're capable of doing anything a full PC could do with that data connection. Certain types of data may be suspicious and more likely to have come from a PC, but nothing could be proven to any reasonable standard as long as they have not loaded a "tattler" program in to the OEM ROM to explicitly identify tethering. Assuming a rooted phone, this could be removed and of course would not even be in AOSP-based ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe I'm just misunderstanding something but I'm taking this switch from WiMAX to LTE as Sprint just has to change the cards on their ends and send us current WiMAX users a software update and we can use LTE.
rkjg24 said:
Maybe I'm just misunderstanding something but I'm taking this switch from WiMAX to LTE as Sprint just has to change the cards on their ends and send us current WiMAX users a software update and we can use LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Half right. The Wimax chip in the Evo is straight Wimax...no LTE capability.
Since the wiMax is actually from Clear as far as i know, Sprints choice shouldnt really matter in the long run. WiMax wont disappear so your "old" phone should work, and Sprint actually having its own 4G network means more than likely better battery life and better connection/coverage
In my opinion - T-mobile's faux 4g (HSPA+) is better (and I suppose AT&T has it as well, but AT&T sucks ) than LTE 4G, but I would like to know what you all think?
This thread is for the amiable placement of our opinions! I personally think that HSPA+ style technology is where the industry should be headed, but would like to hear other opinions!
I've put up my reasons for HSPA+ and will add reasons for both HSPA+ and LTE/real 4g as people weigh in. I'll try to give credit when I can to the original poster. So far, as I am a fan of HSPA+, I have no reasons for LTE/real 4g yet! I might get this moved to the Android General section eventually, as I think it would be interesting to see the overall viewpoint of the XDA Community!
Yes, I know that this might attract trolls/flaming, but lets all try something - don't feed them! Ignore them completely. This strategy has proven to work quite effectively. I think we could all get some insight from a good thread like this.
______________________________________________________________
Reasons for HSPA+:
1. So much cheaper for them to put into place.
2. Speeds (on 4g networks I have used - NY, Dallas, Portland, dozens of other places) are always north of 3 mbps down and 1 mbps up, all you really need for any kind of laptop tethering, and certainly more than you ever need for netflix on your phone, and definitely way more than you need for browsing sites on your phone (good websites nowadays even with plenty of pictures are small size).
3. It doesn't suffer from the constantly low signal issues of real 4g (i.e. no signal AT ALL inside of buildings - this is what I have seen from multiple people who have traveled with me - I have 4g when they have 2x or whatever the hell edge is for them).
4. Super cheap for our provider to upgrade, passing savings on to us in the long run - in some cases, all the tower needs is a firmware upgrade. At worst, fiber optics lines are needed in order to facilitate the faster speeds needed.
5. In "real" 4g phones, you have to turn something on to access your faster speeds? Really? I know, bit hypocritical coming from a guy who has rooted his phone and flashes roms, (for the record, I've only flashed G-lite after rooting!) but I bet the average consumer doesn't realize that they have to turn it on and never uses it. With HSPA+, it might not always be really "4G" when the icon says "4G," but at least we don't have to turn anything on - we just have to be in signal range! If you really want to know, you can get a widget (or modify the good ol' framework-res.apk ).
6. Furthermore, BATTERY. Need I say more? From the numerous people who have managed to get LTE signal I have traveled with, the BATTERY DRAINS LIKE WATER OUT OF A... SOMETHING WITH A HOLE IN IT. Ridiculous. Don't know about you guys, but even when I had low signal strength HSPA+ at work all day long, my battery would fall maybe 30% over 12 hours of light use on the stock unrooted rom.
7. Also, HSPA+ has freed up a lot of the 3G network for T-mobile - it is a fact that T-Mobile's 3G is now a bit faster than before. QUALIFIER - The same would technically apply to the real 4G networks, but remember, those networks see less time as users have to activate 4G on their phones to utilize 4G and therefore free up 3G.
Reasons for LTE/Real 4G:
skinien said:
- Theoretically, can achieve speeds faster than HSPA+
- LTE bands being used by at&t and Verizon are in the 700 MHz range.
I bolded the item that I feel is most important. The battery life issue will be a draw when LTE is more mature and chipsets become more efficient. However, the only comparable HSPA+ network to LTE is T-Mobile and they operate in the 1700/2100 MHz bands. The lower the frequency, the farther the signal can travel and the better the building penetration. The fact that the signal can travel farther means that carriers can upgrade/enhance networks faster and cheaper (less tower maintenance).
If battery life and speeds are equal, I want the best signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can someone confirm that LTE does currently have better building penetration? I have not seen this happen to my friends with LTE, though my experiences certainly are not a large enough sample size. This question is raised in the question section below.
dhkr234 said:
-LTE eliminates the dual-protocol nonsense required for carrying a voice channel simultaneously with a data channel. A properly implemented LTE network will rely on VoIP services to deliver voice communications, maintaining ONLY a data network connection.
-LTE eliminates (at least it can...) the link between voice services and network provider. A proper LTE implementation will allow you to select your voice carrier separately from your data network, so you could rely 100% on, for example, google voice or voip.ms, the network provider is turned into a simple data channel.
Regarding the signal drop you mentioned in LTE, this isn't a problem with LTE, but rather a problem in the DEPLOYMENT. It does take time and money to put up the equipment and get a properly balanced network. There can also be issues regarding the utilization and availability of spectrum -- are those signal drops by chance associated with running LTE over AWS? Or are they running it on much more robust 700 MHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the link between the voice service and network provider could disappear, that would be very interesting! The point was also raised that currently, because no voice runs over LTE, the 3G/2G/whatever radio has to remain constantly on in order to ensure that voice calls can be received/sent. This results in a faster drain of the battery, obviously, and may be a simple barrier to overcome.
______________________________________________________________
Questions!
The question still remains in my mind, however - is LTE (in its current state) still a huge battery hog even without both radios on at the same time? Because while I know as it matures, I'm sure radios may become more efficient - but you can only make things more efficient to a point.
dhkr234 said:
There can also be issues regarding the utilization and availability of spectrum -- are those signal drops by chance associated with running LTE over AWS? Or are they running it on much more robust 700 MHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
______________________________________________________________
Updates:
Some great responses here! I haven't checked back in a while but you all are putting out some really worthwhile stuff that has made me rethink things. I will keep my original opinions (should they one day change!) at the top, however, just so we have a full record of everything.
I am removing references to LTE as "Real 4G." I knew from the get-go that it was indeed not, but considering how far off that is from the cell phone market, I figured we might as well call it that. However now I am not!
I added current Questions/Updates sections.
I added some good reasons for LTE - I know these reasons have been listed more than once before, but these were put together the simplest! Keep giving your opinions, this is very useful data for people to know!
I totally agree with you, I've been tempted to move to an lte network but its all a money sucking strategy, yeah you get awesome speeds that make you drull but at the end you'll drain all that data package in what? 2 weeks if not less, since some people really download and abuse the network on their device, I rather have a steady HSDPA+ than a money/data sucking network
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk
Right now I'm on a wimax 4G network but sprint is going to switch to LTE soon like Verizon has and I heard the 4G is supposed to improve a lot more and cover a wider range on LTE. I'm hoping my next device will be LTE based so I can get good stong 4G coverage no matter where I go
I think LTE is only for cdma phones and HSPA is for GSM phones. I could be wrong but both Verizon and Sprint are cdma. I've used HSPA before and it's ok but nothing to really brag about. I can't really compare it to LTE because I have not owned a device that supports it yet.
sparksco said:
Right now I'm on a wimax 4G network but sprint is going to switch to LTE soon like Verizon has and I heard the 4G is supposed to improve a lot more and cover a wider range on LTE. I'm hoping my next device will be LTE based so I can get good stong 4G coverage no matter where I go
I think LTE is only for cdma phones and HSPA is for GSM phones. I could be wrong but both Verizon and Sprint are cdma. I've used HSPA before and it's ok but nothing to really brag about. I can't really compare it to LTE because I have not owned a device that supports it yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, LTE is sim based (gsm) just like the rest. You're thinking of wcdma which is different (aka UMTS and up) but still gsm tech. CDMA/EvDo/WiMAX is a dead technology soon enough.
I agree, tmobile should just stick with HSPA+ until LTE tech is improved. They can roll it out slowly and is an easier upgrade (smaller leap than 2G to 3G) for them. It's just a costly one. I heard that they are selling their towers and leasing them back for a short term cash solution. Not sure if it's to pay off some impending debt aquired by DT or to pay for LTE upgrades for tmousa...
My suggestion is stick with HSPA+ (3.9G), skip LTE (3.9G), and go straight for LTE-Advanced (Actual 4G). Both HSPA+ and LTE are not technically 4G, they are just marketed as such. LTE is a much better network technology than HSPA+, but it's not all there yet. LTE is much more efficient in using the frequency spectrum. Also you can only do data on LTE, no voice at the moment. Not sure about LTE-Advanced features but I would assume you can do VoLTE-Advanced just how Verizon is planning VoLTE.
I will agree AND disagree with you. LTE is not directly advantageous to the end user but its benefits are passed down through the operators which will take a few years to become apparent. Its more a technical upgrade with the operators back end network and towers. I'm pretty sure we had the same thoughts when UMTS and HSPA started deployment.
LTE is a shift into a different mobile telephony architecture. LTE will be completely packet switched so in the long run, the infrastructure and tower implementation will be simpler. Using different frequencies and radio modulation, it probably wont be as simple as put an LTE base on an existing tower so it going to take a while to sort out coverage. The end users advantage comes from the more efficient spectrum use increasing capacity with better handling of devices when under heavy load. Frequency chunks are variable so operators can tweak speed / capacity depending on location or cell size. Radios will eventually mature with battery life becoming better with every generation. I have no experience with LTE so am not sure how calls / data is handled or battery life.
HSPA is a mature technology with plenty of real world experience, radio's and towers that have been tweaked over years for speed, latency and battery life. It is also relatively cheap to deploy as the back end connections already exist and the tower kit is "mass produced" shall we say. However, HSPA is quite inflexible requiring 5Mhz frequency chunks which may limit capacity in urban areas. Battery life on HSPA is achieved mainly by cheating, handsets sit idle at UMTS (3G) until data is transferred and often calls are dropped to 2G when possible.
Being from the UK, its probably going to be 2014 / 2015 until we see LTE as they are still "conducting trials" and the licences are scheduled for 2013 i think.
Please feel free to correct me or add to this, I just wanted to add my opinion to the mix.
Craig
sino8r said:
Nah, LTE is sim based (gsm) just like the rest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon is cdma, so how is lte gsm only??
Sent from my HTC Vision using xda premium
Spastic909 said:
Verizon is cdma, so how is lte gsm only??
Sent from my HTC Vision using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon LTE phones also have CDMA chips in them. They use LTE for "4G" data and CDMA for voice and 3G data. They will be a GSM carrier once they drop 3G support and switch fully to LTE.
craiglay said:
I will agree AND disagree with you. LTE is not directly advantageous to the end user but its benefits are passed down through the operators which will take a few years to become apparent. Its more a technical upgrade with the operators back end network and towers. I'm pretty sure we had the same thoughts when UMTS and HSPA started deployment.
LTE is a shift into a different mobile telephony architecture. LTE will be completely packet switched so in the long run, the infrastructure and tower implementation will be simpler. Using different frequencies and radio modulation, it probably wont be as simple as put an LTE base on an existing tower so it going to take a while to sort out coverage. The end users advantage comes from the more efficient spectrum use increasing capacity with better handling of devices when under heavy load. Frequency chunks are variable so operators can tweak speed / capacity depending on location or cell size. Radios will eventually mature with battery life becoming better with every generation. I have no experience with LTE so am not sure how calls / data is handled or battery life.
HSPA is a mature technology with plenty of real world experience, radio's and towers that have been tweaked over years for speed, latency and battery life. It is also relatively cheap to deploy as the back end connections already exist and the tower kit is "mass produced" shall we say. However, HSPA is quite inflexible requiring 5Mhz frequency chunks which may limit capacity in urban areas. Battery life on HSPA is achieved mainly by cheating, handsets sit idle at UMTS (3G) until data is transferred and often calls are dropped to 2G when possible.
Being from the UK, its probably going to be 2014 / 2015 until we see LTE as they are still "conducting trials" and the licences are scheduled for 2013 i think.
Please feel free to correct me or add to this, I just wanted to add my opinion to the mix.
Craig
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting - you have a good point here, especially when comparing the maturity of the two types of networks. From what I've been reading here and everywhere else, "real" LTE is clearly the more advanced tech but just needs time to develop and in the long long run will be better. Hm.
craiglay said:
Battery life on HSPA is achieved mainly by cheating, handsets sit idle at UMTS (3G) until data is transferred and often calls are dropped to 2G when possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No wonder my phone hasn't been staying on full HSDPA (or HSPA+) when it's on idle and only goes on HSDPA ONLY when I'm using it and idles at UMTS when I'm not. I was wondering about that lol. Oh well knowing how HSDPA and HSPA+ is, it's probably a lot easier to transfer from HSDPA to UMTS to EDGE to GPRS than switching from LTE to 3G and 2G connection types.
I skimmed thru and someone already said it:
LTE is not "Real 4G". As of right now, a tech spec for 4G does not exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
If you consider that LTE is "Real 4G" then **** it, why talk about 4G? Lets talk about "Real 5G"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G
LTE(not 4g):
Don't have even a good card yet,
Still is not on total.
get signal lost sometimes
Speed is great but with the signal lost...
riahc3 said:
I skimmed thru and someone already said it:
LTE is not "Real 4G". As of right now, a tech spec for 4G does not exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
If you consider that LTE is "Real 4G" then **** it, why talk about 4G? Lets talk about "Real 5G"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your 5G link don't have almost any new information.
Lets talk about what was asked in this thread.
Sent from my MadTeam Galaxy 5
using Tapatalk
riahc3 said:
I skimmed thru and someone already said it:
LTE is not "Real 4G". As of right now, a tech spec for 4G does not exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From the Wiki article:
However in December 2010, the ITU recognized that current versions of LTE, WiMax and other evolved 3G technologies that do not fulfill "IMT-Advanced" requirements could nevertheless be considered "4G", provided they represent forerunners to IMT-Advanced and "a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed.
redpoint73 said:
From the Wiki article:
However in December 2010, the ITU recognized that current versions of LTE, WiMax and other evolved 3G technologies that do not fulfill "IMT-Advanced" requirements could nevertheless be considered "4G", provided they represent forerunners to IMT-Advanced and "a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
in othewords, it's akin to saying, "i'll let you call it 4G as long as you promise to make your technology reach the original specifications. Pinky swear k?"
mputtr said:
in othewords, it's akin to saying, "i'll let you call it 4G as long as you promise to make your technology reach the original specifications. Pinky swear k?"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really, there are saying "you can call it 4G as long as its better than 3G".
I agree its BS, and the ITU obviously caved to industry pressures. But based on this statement HSPA+ and WiMAX are technically "4G".
craiglay said:
Battery life on HSPA is achieved mainly by cheating, handsets sit idle at UMTS (3G) until data is transferred and often calls are dropped to 2G when possible.
Craig
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Suits me just fine - use the best available tool for the job, that's what I say! Voice calls and texts don't require a battery-sucking HSPA connection to work well
Where I live it's tmo 4g, or nothing. Literally there is no other 4g for my region. Nuff said
redpoint73 said:
Really, there are saying "you can call it 4G as long as its better than 3G".
I agree its BS, and the ITU obviously caved to industry pressures. But based on this statement HSPA+ and WiMAX are technically "4G".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup, i was pretty annoyed when the ITU caved to corporate pressure because they needed to rebrand 3G into something new...
Oh well.. I still call today's 4G standards as FauxG. probably wont consider it 4g until they meet the original requirements.
I just have really one question on this hspa+ <> 4G etc. I read that t-mobile is working on bringing HSPA+ .84, which I guess is 84mbps (theoretical limit). So if a 3G speed actually is the same speed as the current 4G speeds does it really matter what they call it? I would prefer they advertise the speed, because for me it is the speed not the tech behind the scenes.
After checking in to why this would not work I was told that it just isn't supported. You can use 4G and wifi data duringa call but not 3G. It's a little bit ofa draw back for me. I was just wondering what any one else's thoughts where on this?
I do like the phone so far other than this.
tman73 said:
After checking in to why this would not work I was told that it just isn't supported. You can use 4G and wifi data duringa call but not 3G. It's a little bit ofa draw back for me. I was just wondering what any one else's thoughts where on this?
I do like the phone so far other than this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm taking a chance on sounding silly, but that's just the way it is on CDMA networks. You can only do one or the other on 3G: voice or data. Being able to use voice and data simultaneously is a perk of 4G, LTE or wifi. Of course, if you have no LTE available where you are, or no wifi, it's voice or data. I know it's frustrating. I live in Minneapolis, Uptown area. We never did get very good Wimax at our house, especially indoors.
When the LTE phones came out, I was in no hurry to upgrade, as there was no LTE anywhere in the Twin Cities. No one could hazard a guess as to when it would be rolled out. The Evo LTE has been out for almost a year, and LTE is finally becoming available. It's still pretty spotty, though. The good thing is, even with a weak signal at my house, I still can get nearly 5000kbps down inside my house. That's a lot better than 3G for sure! Sprint is saying we'll have LTE pretty much throughout the city in the next couple of months. I'll believe that when I see it.
I like my S 4 pretty well. It's still strange getting used to Touch Whiz after Sense. I moved to the S 4 after having the original Evo and then the Evo 3D. I'm looking forward to rooting and being able to run custom ROMS on my S 4.
smarcin said:
I'm taking a chance on sounding silly, but that's just the way it is on CDMA networks. You can only do one or the other on 3G: voice or data. Being able to use voice and data simultaneously is a perk of 4G, LTE or wifi. Of course, if you have no LTE available where you are, or no wifi, it's voice or data. I know it's frustrating. I live in Minneapolis, Uptown area. We never did get very good Wimax at our house, especially indoors.
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not exactly accurate. Some phones can do simultaneous CDMA voice and data. However, it requires extra complexity in the phone (what's called "multiple paths") and with Sprint going to LTE, they decided to put a separate transmit path in the device just for LTE (and Wi-Fi).
smarcin said:
I'm taking a chance on sounding silly, but that's just the way it is on CDMA networks. You can only do one or the other on 3G: voice or data. Being able to use voice and data simultaneously is a perk of 4G, LTE or wifi. Of course, if you have no LTE available where you are, or no wifi, it's voice or data. I know it's frustrating. I live in Minneapolis, Uptown area. We never did get very good Wimax at our house, especially indoors.
When the LTE phones came out, I was in no hurry to upgrade, as there was no LTE anywhere in the Twin Cities. No one could hazard a guess as to when it would be rolled out. The Evo LTE has been out for almost a year, and LTE is finally becoming available. It's still pretty spotty, though. The good thing is, even with a weak signal at my house, I still can get nearly 5000kbps down inside my house. That's a lot better than 3G for sure! Sprint is saying we'll have LTE pretty much throughout the city in the next couple of months. I'll believe that when I see it.
I like my S 4 pretty well. It's still strange getting used to Touch Whiz after Sense. I moved to the S 4 after having the original Evo and then the Evo 3D. I'm looking forward to rooting and being able to run custom ROMS on my S 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no harm in sounding silly. :silly: We forgive you.
The Sprint S3 and Evo 4G LTE both do it, it's called SVDO, simultaneous voice and EVDO 3G data (and ofcourse simultaneous voice and LTE and or WiFi).
For some reason, Sprint decided to fore-go SVDO on LTE phones after those two (S3 and Evo 4G LTE) and instead focus on SVLTE. To be fair, in all the years i've been with Sprint (13) i never thought i would ever need or use that feature until i got the S3. The first time i unknowingly used it i didn't even realize that while on a call, i was playing WordFeud multiplayer. It's something i do all the time now, and definitely sad to see it gone on the newer phones.
As their LTE network gets more robust and mature, it won't be much of an issue, but as of now 3G is in more places than their LTE network is. So...
LordLugard said:
There's no harm in sounding silly. :silly: We forgive you.
The Sprint S3 and Evo 4G LTE both do it, it's called SVDO, simultaneous voice and EVDO 3G data (and ofcourse simultaneous voice and LTE and or WiFi).
For some reason, Sprint decided to fore-go SVDO on LTE phones after those two (S3 and Evo 4G LTE) and instead focus on SVLTE. To be fair, in all the years i've been with Sprint (13) i never thought i would ever need or use that feature until i got the S3. The first time i unknowingly used it i didn't even realize that while on a call, i was playing WordFeud multiplayer. It's something i do all the time now, and definitely sad to see it gone on the newer phones.
As their LTE network gets more robust and mature, it won't be much of an issue, but as of now 3G is in more places than their LTE network is. So...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks to both you guys for setting me straight. I was parroting what I'd always heard from the OG Evo (which I had) and then the 3D, which I just left. Of course, you couldn't do SVDO on either. On the 3D, though, you could do a call + data if on 4G (Wimax), which was and still is, pretty spotty here in Minneapolis-St Paul. Of course, Sprint has been rolling out LTE for a while now. It appears, then disappears a lot. Unfortunately 3G has been awful for months. I will be so thankful when LTE is finally and fully deployed!
No problem, welcome. We are all here to help and learn from each other along the way. :good:
smarcin said:
Thanks to both you guys for setting me straight. I was parroting what I'd always heard from the OG Evo (which I had) and then the 3D, which I just left. Of course, you couldn't do SVDO on either. On the 3D, though, you could do a call + data if on 4G (Wimax), which was and still is, pretty spotty here in Minneapolis-St Paul. Of course, Sprint has been rolling out LTE for a while now. It appears, then disappears a lot. Unfortunately 3G has been awful for months. I will be so thankful when LTE is finally and fully deployed!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those devices did not support SVDO. I know the S3 and EVO LTE support it, and possible the Nexus LTE (additionally, the newest Optimus maybe?). I really liked this feature when on the phone and being able to quickly check email or pull up traffic info without relying on WiFi.
The S4 does not support simultaneous voice+data, and I believe that anandtech/ars had good articles describing the data paths employed by the HTC One and S4.
What I found interesting is that when the 4G connection drops out and 3G connects, I can just send a text and get 4G back immediately instead of waiting to hop towers. I suspect that a phone call would serve the same purpose.
Also, toggling 4G off and on will get you back the same mobile IP address. This is not the case with 3G, which results in a new IP address being assigned. In order to get a new IP on LTE, you have to toggle airplane mode (which is likely why this is the first step in troubleshooting LTE connectivity).
Thought I'd help you all out to understand it since you all are sooooo new to having LTE on your phones and all (that was a joke, don't get bent out of shape over it....)
The LTE standard only supports packet switching with its all-IP network. Voice calls in GSM, UMTS and CDMA2000 are circuit switched, so with the adoption of LTE, carriers will have to re-engineer their voice call network. Three different approaches sprang up. Most major backers of LTE preferred and promoted VoLTE (Voice over LTE, an implementation of IP Multimedia Subsystem or IMS) from the beginning. The lack of software support in initial LTE devices as well as core network devices however led to a number of carriers promoting VoLGA (Voice over LTE Generic Access) as an interim solution.[13] The idea was to use the same principles as GAN (Generic Access Network, also known as UMA or Unlicensed Mobile Access), which defines the protocols through which a mobile handset can perform voice calls over a customer's private Internet connection, usually over wireless LAN. VoLGA however never gained much support, because VoLTE (IMS) promises much more flexible services, albeit at the cost of having to upgrade the entire voice call infrastructure. While the industry has seemingly standardized on VoLTE for the future, the demand for voice calls today has led LTE carriers to introduce CSFB (Circuit Switched Fallback) as a stopgap measure. When placing or receiving a voice call, LTE handsets will fall back to old 2G or 3G networks for the duration of the call.
Source
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to be a bit more clear, it was not a sprint decision it is based on Qualcomm's chip design. The s4 krait simply supported svdo out the box and the snapdragon 600 doesn't.
themuffinman said:
Just to be a bit more clear, it was not a sprint decision it is based on Qualcomm's chip design. The s4 krait simply supported svdo out the box and the snapdragon 600 doesn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure that is correct. First of all, the 600 is the CPU, not the modem - which is a separate component altogether. Secondly, I believe SVDO support is more a factor of the front end RF design being set up to feed multiple transmit paths to the modem, which in the case of the Qualcomm modem, I believe has the necessary additional ports to handle it. However, it would have necessitated a more complex RF design which Sprint and Samsung probably opted to forgo, given that Sprint's is already getting on the LTE bandwagon.
myphone12345 said:
I am not sure that is correct. First of all, the 600 is the CPU, not the modem - which is a separate component altogether. Secondly, I believe SVDO support is more a factor of the front end RF design being set up to feed multiple paths to the modem, which in the case of the Qualcomm modem, I believe has the necessary additional ports to handle it. However, it would have necessitated a more complex RF design which Sprint and Samsung probably opted to forgo, given that Sprint's is already getting on the LTE bandwagon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are absolutely correct but wouldn't that be dependent on whether the modem supported that design?
themuffinman said:
You are absolutely correct but wouldn't that be dependent on whether the modem supported that design?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My best guess is that the advanced modem in the S4 could handle it, but to add it on top of SVLTE along with the newer MIMO antenna configurations and multi-band transceivers and switches found in the latest LTE capable handsets would require the addition of another RF chain in the device and thus significantly raise the complexity of the design to a degree that doesn't make it worthwhile for Samsung to implement it.
It's not going to happen.... It's a USA cdma limitation it has NOTHING to do with the phone
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda premium
hyelton said:
It's not going to happen.... It's a USA cdma limitation it has NOTHING to do with the phone
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, for the most part, cdma devices has never been able to do voice and 3g data simultaneously but there is something called svdo which allows supported devices to do just that. The HTC thunderbolt on verizon was one of the first phones to support svdo(simultaneous voice and data over 3g on a cdma network). Getting it to work has absolutely nothing to do with the network but how the phone is designed. Now I am a sprint customer so I don't know what other devices supported it on verizon since but I do know that both sprint and verizon's gs3 both support svdo as well as sprints evo lte and a few other devices.
hyelton said:
It's not going to happen.... It's a USA cdma limitation it has NOTHING to do with the phone
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. There have been several devices that could do it.
myphone12345 said:
Not true. There have been several devices that could do it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh theres plenty!! of devices that support it!! Its the NETWORK that does not.
hyelton said:
Oh theres plenty!! of devices that support it!! Its the NETWORK that does not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You keep talking like the network is preventing it from being possible, yes there are technical obsticals but obviously there are ways around it. So the botton line is, can you have a phone thats on a cdma network that can do voice and 3g data at the same time? That answer is yes
Seriously, why are we arguing this much about this? Simultaneous voice AND 3G on Sprint, yes, period. S3 and Evo LTE do it, S4 doesn't. Let's move on to other things.