Related
OK so I just payed my bill at my local T-mobile store, and I saw a poster saying 16 tmobile devices will have 4g capability or something in those words... So I asked the tmobile employee what the poster is all about. He said there are 16 devices that tmobile will be updating so they can have faster 3g or 4g speed.... He said for vibrant the 3g should get faster but its not going to be 4g sicnce it doesnt have the capability to be 4g...... plus Vibrant was one of those phones on the poster as well as other smart phones.
No Im not trying to spam or create new rumors. Im actually a newb in these threads and was curious if anyone heard of this.... Or if it has anything to do with second update that some people are receiving?
As the employee said expect ota update that would increase the speed
they're updating the network, not the actual devices. the vibrant is technically capable of 7.2Mbps downloads, but you can only find those speeds in a few places right now
lolcopter said:
they're updating the network, not the actual devices. the vibrant is technically capable of 7.2Mbps downloads, but you can only find those speeds in a few places right now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well im pretty confused by all this myself but.. Since they have the tmobile official posters in their tmobile stores it means it has to be pretty soon.. w.e it is...
I just went and tested my speed with speedtest.net app and it shows 2284kbps download and 1337 upload.... is it suppose to be even faster soon?
I may be wrong but I believe you guys are misunderstanding the posters.
I think this is what T-Mobile is trying to say.
All current 3G phones will get a speed boost once your area has been fully upgraded to HSPA+ Although most phones that T-Mobile currently carries are not HSPA+ except for the G2 and MyTouch 4G, these non-HSPA+ phones will still benefit from HSPA+ network upgrades.
Make sense?
Also T-Mobiles 4G network is NOT 4G, False advertising. Same with Sprint Wimax.
SamsungVibrant said:
Also T-Mobiles 4G network is NOT 4G, False advertising. Same with Sprint Wimax.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to ITU, none of the American carriers have 4G. Go search engadget for ITU for the source (would post the link, but I don't have enough posts yet).
HSPA+ is capable of the same download speeds as the "true 4G" networks, of which there are NONE in the US. It's not false advertising, it's perfectly honest advertising.
Either way...no one is promising 4g speed to vibrant... Just faster 3g... Did anyone great of this? Coz I dont want to start a thread where people are arguimg what 4g is and what its not... And I live in NYC... So I believe 4g towers are set up here already.. Tmobile rep confused the crap out of me... As they usually do... Can't even understand their own advertisement
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
thats interesting because at my work for the last year I could only get about 900kbps down and 300 up. For some reason for the last 3 weeks I could not keep a solid connection even though the 3g symbol was present. I thought it was my vibrant or the rom I had flashed the night before (rom junkie) but two of my employees have Tmobile as well and they were experiencing the same thing. All of a sudden as of Saturday I am now getting speeds in the 4mb range and its freaking awesome. I have another employee with a 4g Evo and I kill him everytime. Go Tmobile! Vibrant w/4g speeds and now froyo and wifi calling= the best Android phone on the market.
Your statements contradict eachother!
Thegreatheed said:
According to ITU, none of the American carriers have 4G. Go search engadget for ITU for the source (would post the link, but I don't have enough posts yet).
HSPA+ is capable of the same download speeds as the "true 4G" networks, of which there are NONE in the US. It's not false advertising, it's perfectly honest advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said any of the US carriers currently have 4G. In fact, I said exactly what you stated. I said neither Sprint's Wimax, nor T-Mobiles HSPA+ is 4G.
Also your statements contradict each other. You claim according to the ITU, no us carrier has 4G, yet T-Mobile advertising as the "largest 4G network" in the nation is honest advertising? HUH? LOL, do you not see the contradiction in your own statements?
How can you be the largest 4G network, if according to you, the ITU says no US carriers have 4G at the current moment. As a result, any carrier claiming they have 4G would be falsely advertising such said information.
I'm sorry but it shocks me when people overlook the obvious, how can you write a statement and contradict yourself?
btw hspa+ SPEEDS are not true 4G speeds.
short answer, they upgrade network we benefit.
Thegreatheed said:
According to ITU, none of the American carriers have 4G. Go search engadget for ITU for the source (would post the link, but I don't have enough posts yet).
HSPA+ is capable of the same download speeds as the "true 4G" networks, of which there are NONE in the US. It's not false advertising, it's perfectly honest advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is absolutely FALSE advertising. 4G networks are IMT ADVANCED based, which includes LTE Advanced and WiMax Advanced. This means that ABSOLUTELY zero networks in the world are, and in the next year or two, ever will be 4G. To be a 4G solution, it has to be a 100% IP (aka packet switched with absolutely NO circuit switched voice) based solution. Also, do I need to mention that the "true" 4G speeds you are talking about, are slow in comparison to what IMT Advanced based architectures will be.
AlexSochi8 said:
Either way...no one is promising 4g speed to vibrant... Just faster 3g... Did anyone great of this? Coz I dont want to start a thread where people are arguimg what 4g is and what its not... And I live in NYC... So I believe 4g towers are set up here already.. Tmobile rep confused the crap out of me... As they usually do... Can't even understand their own advertisement
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As mentioned they are not 4G. Plain and simple. T-Mobile has made it VERY clear that they are not currently seeking any LTE plans for the very near future, and as such, are rolling out HSPA+ in an effort to increase the speeds at a (relatively) low cost. Due to the fact that Sprint is using the 4G moniker, and advertising speeds similar to what T-Mobile will have on offer (using HSPA+), they are doing the same bull**** marketing that Sprint is.
If you want me to cite some info, I can.
lolcopter said:
they're updating the network, not the actual devices. the vibrant is technically capable of 7.2Mbps downloads, but you can only find those speeds in a few places right now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So as soon as they fully install the faster network in New York City then i will be able to get up to 7.2mbps on vibrant?
I kinda doubt that since now at very best I get 2.2mbps in a very tower rich city
That would make vibrant internet speed upto 3.5 times faster? Is that really likely?
If that is then Froyo + faster internet is all i can dream of!
AlexSochi8 said:
So as soon as they fully install the faster network in New York City then i will be able to get up to 7.2mbps on vibrant?
I kinda doubt that since now at very best I get 2.2mbps in a very tower rich city
That would make vibrant internet speed upto 3.5 times faster? Is that really likely?
If that is then Froyo + faster internet is all i can dream of!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are reports of getting as high as 15Mbps in areas with a good HSPA+ coverage on the G2. I presume that 7Mbps, or near there should be very achievable on our phones.
gehzumteufel said:
There are reports of getting as high as 15Mbps in areas with a good HSPA+ coverage on the G2. I presume that 7Mbps, or near there should be very achievable on our phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats pretty amazing then... then I wouldnt complain about some phones having "4G" speed
gehzumteufel said:
It is absolutely FALSE advertising. 4G networks are IMT ADVANCED based, which includes LTE Advanced and WiMax Advanced. This means that ABSOLUTELY zero networks in the world are, and in the next year or two, ever will be 4G. To be a 4G solution, it has to be a 100% IP (aka packet switched with absolutely NO circuit switched voice) based solution. Also, do I need to mention that the "true" 4G speeds you are talking about, are slow in comparison to what IMT Advanced based architectures will be.
As mentioned they are not 4G. Plain and simple. T-Mobile has made it VERY clear that they are not currently seeking any LTE plans for the very near future, and as such, are rolling out HSPA+ in an effort to increase the speeds at a (relatively) low cost. Due to the fact that Sprint is using the 4G moniker, and advertising speeds similar to what T-Mobile will have on offer (using HSPA+), they are doing the same bull**** marketing that Sprint is.
If you want me to cite some info, I can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you in one respect, ITU ruled that HSPA+ is not a 4G network. However, what with Sprint and their false advertising, it's easy to see why T-Mobile would label their data network as 4G for one reason. The same towers that are being upgraded to the theoretical max of 21mbps have the capacity for even higher speeds. Up to 168mbps actually, if you want to get specific. All on the towers they already have. Pretty much explains their decision to forgo LTE for the time being huh? So while yes, their network isn't a "true" 4G network, no one can argue that they're lying about achieving 4G and higher speeds (even higher than WiMax).
well i hope the reception will be better. i'm fine with a download speed of 2-3 mbps as long as it's stable. I have to stay on one corner of our house to have a 3G.
Homestar1217 said:
I agree with you in one respect, ITU ruled that HSPA+ is not a 4G network. However, what with Sprint and their false advertising, it's easy to see why T-Mobile would label their data network as 4G for one reason. The same towers that are being upgraded to the theoretical max of 21mbps have the capacity for even higher speeds. Up to 168mbps actually, if you want to get specific. All on the towers they already have. Pretty much explains their decision to forgo LTE for the time being huh? So while yes, their network isn't a "true" 4G network, no one can argue that they're lying about achieving 4G and higher speeds (even higher than WiMax).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are absolutely lying. You can't achieve, from a device, anything above a theoretical maximum of 84Mbps with bonding AND MIMO. Otherwise, you are stick at 42Mbps with JUST boding, and 21.5 with no bonding or MIMO. 4G is officially designated at 100Mbps while moving at high speed and 1Gbps while static. You aren't going to see bonding and MIMO at all, because that requires a HUGE increase in the backhaul capabilities (100GbE minimum), and all new antennas and base stations. This is just not happening.
iynfynity said:
well i hope the reception will be better. i'm fine with a download speed of 2-3 mbps as long as it's stable. I have to stay on one corner of our house to have a 3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile has been significantly improving their coverage area over the last 5 years, and it is far better than when I first had it. In due time, they will cover most of the US.
yeah, Edge is good for me but of course 3G is what i'm paying for so i hope that the reception will be better in my place.
My speed on my stock Vibrant seems to have improved just recently. Sitting inside my house in the Seattle area tonight the Speedtest.net app gave results of: 5.3-5.4 Mbps down and 1.6-1.7 Mbps up. That was the range for several successive trials. The weird thing was that when I laid the phone down on my desk, the speed dropped down to about 3.2 Mbps down and 0.70 Mbps up. When I picked it up and held it in my hand again, the speed climbed right back up to the higher range, which I verified several times. Coincidence, or could there be some body-phone-antenna thing going on?
ZX3ZX4 said:
My speed on my stock Vibrant seems to have improved just recently. Sitting inside my house in the Seattle area tonight the Speedtest.net app gave results of: 5.3-5.4 Mbps down and 1.6-1.7 Mbps up. That was the range for several successive trials. The weird thing was that when I laid the phone down on my desk, the speed dropped down to about 3.2 Mbps down and 0.70 Mbps up. When I picked it up and held it in my hand again, the speed climbed right back up to the higher range, which I verified several times. Coincidence, or could there be some body-phone-antenna thing going on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, your phone is probably cycling through two different towers. Check to see if your CID changes (Ever) in your home.
AlexSochi8 said:
So as soon as they fully install the faster network in New York City then i will be able to get up to 7.2mbps on vibrant?
I kinda doubt that since now at very best I get 2.2mbps in a very tower rich city
That would make vibrant internet speed upto 3.5 times faster? Is that really likely?
If that is then Froyo + faster internet is all i can dream of!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By my old place in Brooklyn I was getting up to 5Mbs down back in July, but my apartment was like a Faraday Cage, by my folks in Brooklyn I am constantly getting up to 5.5Mbs, and at my new place in South Brooklyn I am back to harsh reality with 1.1Mbs at best.
These are the download speeds, upload is usually stays the same at around 1.3Mbs
Many of us are so geeked about 4G speeds....the mytouch 4G sprouting about its HSPA+ network which is supposed to make this a better phone and such, but it's all hogwash. I found the article below very interesting and rather revealing as to how these carriers manage to soup us up and get us to believe what they want us to believe, true or not. Sad, but very enlightening.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- You've seen the 4G advertisements from T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon, bragging about a much-better wireless network with blazing fast speeds.
Here's the secret the carriers don't advertise: 4G is a myth. Like the unicorn, it hasn't been spotted anywhere in the wild just yet -- and won't be any time in the near future.
The International Telecommunication Union, the global wireless standards-setting organization, determined last month that 4G is defined as a network capable of download speeds of 100 megabits per second (Mbps). That's fast enough to download an average high-definition movie in about three minutes.
None of the new networks the carriers are rolling out meet that standard.
Sprint (S, Fortune 500) was the first to launch a network called 4G, going live with it earlier this year. Then, T-Mobile launched its 4G network, claiming to be "America's largest 4G network." Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500) plans to launch its 4G network by the end of the year, which it claims will be the nation's largest and the fastest. AT&T (T, Fortune 500) is expected to unveil its 4G network next year.
Those networks have theoretical speeds of a fifth to a half that of the official 4G standard. The actual speeds the carriers say they'll achieve are just a tenth of "real" 4G.
So why are the carriers calling these networks 4G?
It's mostly a matter of PR, industry experts say. Explaining what the wireless carriers' new networks should be called, and what they'll be capable of, is a confusing mess.
To illustrate: Sprint bought a majority stake in Clearwire (CLWR), which uses a new network technology called WiMAX that's capable of speeds ranging from 3 Mbps to 10 Mbps. That's a different technology from Verizon's new network, based on a standard called Long Term Evolution (LTE), which will average 5 Mbps to 12 Mbps.
Seeing what its competitors were up to, T-Mobile opted to increase the speed capabilities of its existing 3G-HSPA+ network instead of pursuing a new technology. Its expanded network -- now called 4G -- will reach speeds of 5 Mbps to 12 Mbps.
No matter what they're called, all of these upgrades are clear improvements -- and the carriers shelled out billions to make them. Current "3G" networks offer actual speeds that range from between 500 kilobits per second to 1.5 Mbps.
So Sprint and Verizon have new, faster networks that are still technically not 4G, while T-Mobile has an old, though still faster network that is actually based on 3G technology.
Confused yet? That's why they all just opted to call themselves "4G."
The carriers get defensive about the topic.
"It's very misleading to make a decision about what's 4G based on speed alone," said Stephanie Vinge-Walsh, spokeswoman for Sprint Nextel. "It is a challenge we face in an extremely competitive industry."
T-Mobile did not respond to a request for comment.
One network representative, who asked not to be identified, claimed that ITU's 4G line-in-the-sand is being misconstrued. The organization previously approved the use of the term "4G" for Sprint's WiMAX and Verizon's LTE networks, he said -- though not for T-Mobile's HSPA+ network.
ITU's PR department ignored that approval in its recent statement about how future wireless technologies would be measured, the representative said. ITU representatives were not immediately available for comment.
"I'm not getting into a technical debate," said Jeffrey Nelson, spokesman for Verizon Wireless. "Consumers will quickly realize that there's really a difference between the capabilities of various wireless data networks. All '4G' is not the same."
And that's what's so difficult. The term 4G has become meaningless and confusing as hell for wireless customers.
For instance, T-Mobile's 4G network, which is technically 3G, will have speeds that are at least equal to -- and possibly faster -- than Verizon's 4G-LTE network at launch. At the same time, AT&T's 3G network, which is also being scaled up like T-Mobile's, is not being labeled "4G."
That's why some industry experts predict that the term "4G" will soon vanish.
"The labeling of wireless broadband based on technical jargon is likely to fade away in 2011," said Dan Hays, partner at industry consultancy PRTM. "That will be good news for the consumer. Comparing carriers based on their network coverage and speed will give them more facts to make more informed decisions."
Hays expects that independent researchers -- or the Federal Communications Commission -- will step in next year to perform speed and coverage tests.
Meanwhile, don't expect anyone to hold the carriers' feet to the fire.
"Historically, ITU's classification system has not held a great degree of water and has not been used to enforce branding," Hays said. "Everyone started off declaring themselves to be 4G long before the official decision on labeling was made. The ITU was three to four years too late to make an meaningful impact on the industry's use of the term."
I understand all that. But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Call it 10G if they like its just a name, I dont care as long as the speed meets my need at a reasonable price.
because our phones are only capable 7 mbps while the g2 and the mytouch4g can go to about 14 mbps (not even 21) ... but yeah thats why ... its hardware related
spookini said:
I understand all that. But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are backward compatible, for example HSPA+ will give vibrant which does not support HSPA+ a speed boost, just not fully benfitted. Same story with USB 3.0 and 2.0
4G is 100 mbps and TMobile will be 21mbps. None of these networks will have 4G speeds and all in fact are upgraded 3G speeds. AT&T will be usding the same HSPA that TMobile will be using and eventually they also will be at 21 mbps.
How any of these carriers can call themselves 4G is beyond me.
Actually the 4G spec calls for 1 Gbps stationary speed, the 100 mbps is the minimum while mobile so it will be 5 years before you really see that.
T-mobiles current "4G" Network is currently running at 21 mbps, with 42 mbps a software upgrade away. So while they don't meet the true 4G speed threshold, neither does sprints current 10 mbps wimax, or verizons 12 mbps LTE. When sprint and verizon first launched their "3G" networks they didn't meet the requirements for at least a couple years, and we are not any worse off due to that flexibility.
I still roll with a 7.2 mbps vibrant and I will be honest, there has not been any time where I had good 3G speed that I needed anything more.
spookini said:
I understand all that. But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
think back to USB 2.0
when USB 2.0 came out it allows for higher speed transfers etc....
You will only get 2.0 speeds on a 2.0 port.
The USB 2.0 device will work in a 1.0/1.1 port, but it will not give you 2.0 speeds.
if you want, just replace USB 2.0 with HSPA+
and replace 1.0/1.1 with HSPA7.2
Let me try to shed some light on things for you.
spookini said:
But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. Without getting all technical, it has to do with how the data is compressed and encoded on the different channels that the phone and cell towers use.
HSPA+ is an improved version of HSPA. HSPA is an addition to UMTS 3G which allows for faster data transfer rates than just regular UMTS 3G.
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You won't find one unless you do some real digging and learn enough to understand some basics of UMTS. True 4G does a lot more than just give faster data rates. The entire back-end of how the cell towers and core network route information is different. The way the radios in the cell phones work is different and the way the cell towers organize data is different. The benefit is more efficient mobile communication service.
The way things are with 3G, it is difficult to balance voice traffic with the ever-increasing demand for data traffic and maintain QoS for a large number of users simultaneously. Anyone who has tried to use AT&T 3G at a football game or concert can tell you how crappy the service gets when the towers get loaded.
Yes But Marketing.......
All that tarzanman said is correct but the larger picture is just perception and controlling it.
Basically, we really do not have 3g unless you really get somewhere close to 7mg speed consistently........We do not and i am ok with my 2-3mg speed it is plenty good enough for my needs.
Here is a good analogy......when front wheel drive car first came on the market they were hailed as a breakthrough in making a car handle better allowing more room in the car and being safer. The fact is only a little more room is the real benefit and the rest....well, it is just cheaper and easier to mass produce. The car handles poorer than a rear wheel car or 4-wheel. But, they convinced most of the dopey-ignorant customers/masses and even to this day people still think they are better. Moral of the story.........control the message and control the spin, and to hell with facts........ because most don't care they just want the latest "craze jargon" on their lips so they feel cool...(sorry for the rant)
I have had a cell phone now for 27 years.......and here is my advice:
here in the USA --go with T mobile for now watch the business trends and when they start acting like Verizon and Att then look for the next up and coming carrier and then go with them.. That is the only way to have decent, reliable and fast connection speeds for a reasonable prices.
Who cares? As started in the article ITU's decisions hold no water. They have no authority and their definition is arbitrary. I'm in the product development industry, and when our end product goes through a redesign or significant optimization it gets a generation bump. We're now up to third generation. Product looks the same for the most part, but performance increased as a result of engineering changes.
For the wireless industry, all carriers are implementing significant performance increases through network upgrades. These upgrades are not 100% compatible with current generation devices. As far as I'm concerned that's worthy of a generation bump. People are splitting hairs for no reason. It's quite silly. If I were an engineer for any of the major carriers right now I would be pretty annoyed with this ITU business by now.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
It is easy,
HSDPA+ (TMO), EV-DO(Verizon), LTE(Verizon) and 802.16e Wimax(Sprint) are considered 3G Transitional.
LTE Advanced and 802.16m (WiMax "Advanced" if you want to call it that) are 4G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP
Go to the bottom of the page and view the chart.
t1n0m3n said:
It is easy,
HSDPA+ (TMO), EV-DO(Verizon), LTE(Verizon) and 802.16e Wimax(Sprint) are considered 3G Transitional.
LTE Advanced and 802.16m (WiMax "Advanced" if you want to call it that) are 4G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP
Go to the bottom of the page and view the chart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon can call their LTE whatever they want but the fact is it isnt as fast as TMobiles HSPA+
i rather have true unlimited 3G than some bologni 4G with a 5Gb cap. May be is too much to ask for.
Remember, Most tout 4G more or less as 4th Generation rather than true 4G. Although marketing says otherwise. It's a ploy to get your service, just like spray painting your head makes you look like you have more hair. I don't care what they call it, as long as it benefits my speeds.
For companies that have actual caps. its stupid that they are increasing the speeds that you hit your cap. So you may have better speeds to do more, but really you are just hitting your cap faster so you can pay them more money.
t1n0m3n said:
It is easy,
HSDPA+ (TMO), EV-DO(Verizon), LTE(Verizon) and 802.16e Wimax(Sprint) are considered 3G Transitional.
LTE Advanced and 802.16m (WiMax "Advanced" if you want to call it that) are 4G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP
Go to the bottom of the page and view the chart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol are you serious. wikipedia is not even a credible source and ANYONE can go in and change the info.
Actually, that wikipedia article is pretty spot on.
Tarzanman said:
Actually, that wikipedia article is pretty spot on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
indeed it is. And unless you want to read a few 700 page books on the differences between UMTS/WCDMA/HSPA, and LTE/LTE-a, that's about as good of a source as is available at this point.
And as to the OP - it's all about marketing. Technically speaking, 1xRTT and EDGE are both 3g technologies. But cell companies hyped up EvDO and UMTS as 3g, to simplify it for the American consumer.
And so they're marketing their next generation of networks as "4g", even though that doesn't meet up with what the ITU defines as 4G on technical terms.
Again, this is all because cell phone companies know that people buy into the hype rather than concern themselves with the details.
But in the end, who gives a damn? It's significantly faster than what people used to expect from 3g (ie 1-2mbps), so as long as the results are better, they can call it 9000G for all I care.
All of this 4G related discourse is exactly what the carriers want. Four gee shmoor gee. I'm just happy I get 3-5 mbps down where I live.
In the end, we are all just stupid pawns
Tarzanman said:
Actually, that wikipedia article is pretty spot on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't matter, wiki bashing is in vogue even if one doesn't have a clue if the article is accurate or not.
Wikipedia 4TL!
My email to her is below. But here is her response. So just hold it out people. It is coming. The phone supports it. AT&T just needs to "Turn it on"
Hi Donnie,
This means that the 4g Atrix is going to be ABLE to use the 4G service once it is available however, we do not have the service alive yet therefore you will not get those speeds at this time. We are proactively working on getting the network upgraded. Houston is a HOT spot for this project so I know it will not be long.
Thank you,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Email i sent to my at&t rep who handles my corp account of about 150 phones.
According to ATT Website the Atrix, supports “4G” By using HSPA+. Houston is a HSPA+ market, but we have been unable to HSPA+ service.
We contacted CS and they said it was prolly a down tower. But I do a lot of driving and know that one tower would not affect all of Houston. So we hit up Google, and the results are disturbing. Motorola says it does not support HSPA+. Yet att website says it does. Many sites say that AT&T has disabled it. We need to know the truth. We bought this phone because it is listed as a 4G phone, but it seems we were misled. If you would please research this and shed some light on the matter.
https://supportforums.motorola.com/message/331802#331802
http://www.att.com/network/assets/maps/Houston.html
Thanks,
Donnie
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More BS from AT&T.
HSUPA is DISABLED on this device and i don't care how many lies at&t will try to push to cover this up.
Hey Donnie,
Had pretty much the same question for my Rep yesterday. Let me go ahead and say that I've yet to go to a market that is HSPA+ with my Atrix; my rep doesn't have one yet, she has an Inspire. She has been in "4G" market coverage where her phone shows 4+, the indication for 4G, and it's faster than her IP3 but not 2x as fast as 4G is supposed to be.
She told me that some markets are "4G" but only in the sense that they are running at 3.1 Mbps, which according to the FCC qualifies, hence At&t saying they have no 4G coverage. 4G being 7.2 Mbps.
She also informed me that At&t is not pushing 4G upgrades so much as they are pushing LTE upgrades, which according to her can run 5x as fast as 4G?
Sorry for the rambling, but I thought you might like that information.
clubtech said:
More BS from AT&T.
HSUPA is DISABLED on this device and i don't care how many lies at&t will try to push to cover this up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again at&t will enable it when they want to go live with it. Point is Atrix, supports it. And will when the network is ready.
Not sure what counts as hspa+ speeds but im getting 4.5 mbps down where im sitting right now
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
DrakenAlTi said:
Hey Donnie,
Had pretty much the same question for my Rep yesterday. Let me go ahead and say that I've yet to go to a market that is HSPA+ with my Atrix; my rep doesn't have one yet, she has an Inspire. She has been in "4G" market coverage where her phone shows 4+, the indication for 4G, and it's faster than her IP3 but not 2x as fast as 4G is supposed to be.
She told me that some markets are "4G" but only in the sense that they are running at 3.1 Mbps, which according to the FCC qualifies, hence At&t saying they have no 4G coverage. 4G being 7.2 Mbps.
She also informed me that At&t is not pushing 4G upgrades so much as they are pushing LTE upgrades, which according to her can run 5x as fast as 4G?
Sorry for the rambling, but I thought you might like that information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow really? Theyre not pushing 4g, theyre pushing lte? LTE is 4g. What att is calling 4g now is not 4g its 3g with overhaul. 7.2 mbps? The iphone 3gs could theoretically achieve these speeds but not on att. I like the atrix bht i didnt buy it for (4g) speeds. NO NETWORK HAS TRUE 4G!!!!!!
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
donniesd said:
Again at&t will enable it when they want to go live with it. Point is Atrix, supports it. And will when the network is ready.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We are talking about basic 3g they are disabling here ....nothing to do with hspa+.....
But you can believe whatever you want if it makes you feel better.
I know we're not getting HSPA+ speeds, but there's something even more. I have yet to see someone get more than 400Kbps UPLINK.
This is not just on AT&T.
Can someone ask an AT&T Rep about THAT!
Odd how my Captivate has HSUPA speeds yet my brother's Atrix doesn't... So much for the speeds not being available...
clubtech said:
More BS from AT&T.
HSUPA is DISABLED on this device and i don't care how many lies at&t will try to push to cover this up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HSPA+ *IS NOT* HSUPA. They're separate services. When AT&T enables HSPA+ across the country they'll also most likely send out a patch to enable HSUPA on the devices. Settle down on the conspiracy theories.
HSPA+ isn't enabled because the system isn't finished. We *all* knew this. When it is (in the next month or 2, most likely) they'll enable it and you'll see the difference overnight. My dad's worked for AT&T for 42 years as a repair tech (one of the 2 in this state that upgrade a majority of the HSPA+ and LTE hardware) and said the rough estimate looks like late March or very early April for HSPA+ and LTE in fall.
MarcMaiden said:
Not sure what counts as hspa+ speeds but im getting 4.5 mbps down where im sitting right now
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that is great speeds... im in an area where there is no H+ yet, in greensbroo NC but Charlotte NC has it and we a re the next to get it in NC... and i am getting 3.8 but without the HUSPA, we are getting .3/.4 uploads... no matter how fast our DL's are without an upload to match it... those speeds are kinda pointless
"HSPA+ *IS NOT* HSUPA. ...
HSPA+ isn't enabled because"
Well, my phone shows "H+" up top, indicating it is enabled in this area. But AT&T has some clever ideas about hardware deployment. When I called to ask about some problems last year the rep said "Oh, I see there are a number of degraded towers in your area, that could be the problem." "Is there anything else I can help you with today?"
I said "Yes, can you give me Verizon's number? I'd like to ask them how there towers are." <WEG>
Hey, I know one's no better than the other in the big picture. But lord, does the FTC need to make the cellcos ALL COME CLEAN and stop the lies.
Apparently the H+ doesn't necessarily signify HSPA+. Covers 3G and their "4G".
"Question:
What is this "H+" icon on my phone's screen?
Answer:
The "H+" icon is a network indicator. When present, it lets you know that your phone is operating on our 3G or 4G network (where available). "
"Question:
How will I know if I'm on the 4G network vs. your 3G network? Is there any visual indicator on the phone's screen itself?
Answer:
While there is no visual indicator on the phone's screen that differentiates the difference between 3G and 4G data speeds, when experiencing 4G speeds your videos and streaming movies will download/play even faster, web sites will load even faster, and large files will download faster. "
"Question:
Will that "H+" icon ever change to something else? If so, what other icons might I expect to see and what do they mean?
Answer:
The H+ icon will remain lit while connected to either our 3G mobile broadband or 4G network (where available). Should you travel outside of those coverage areas and/or experience extreme network congestion, the icon may display EDGE or E while on our 2G data network or, in some instances, it will display GSM. "
Att rep for our company confirmed that they are working together with verizon to "pull the trigger" on 4g running at full throttle within the next couple of weeks. He showed me some emails and charts showing that they have installed verizon's hardware in their towers and are debugging it now. I did not see that "partnership" coming at all to be honest lol Keeping fingers crossed ))
Hawk375 said:
Apparently the H+ doesn't necessarily signify HSPA+. Covers 3G and their "4G".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed this up here after doing this MOD. Before the mod the notification bar only showed H+ all of the time. Now it bounced between 3G and H (not sure about H+). I am assuming the display I am getting now is correct.
hotleadsingerguy said:
HSPA+ *IS NOT* HSUPA. They're separate services. When AT&T enables HSPA+ across the country they'll also most likely send out a patch to enable HSUPA on the devices. Settle down on the conspiracy theories.
HSPA+ isn't enabled because the system isn't finished. We *all* knew this. When it is (in the next month or 2, most likely) they'll enable it and you'll see the difference overnight. My dad's worked for AT&T for 42 years as a repair tech (one of the 2 in this state that upgrade a majority of the HSPA+ and LTE hardware) and said the rough estimate looks like late March or very early April for HSPA+ and LTE in fall.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay that makes sense but why is it though that other devices like my unlocked streak or nexus one get much higher upload speeds than the atrix? Is it something in their rom that is allowing them to get good upload and the atrix rom not allowing it to? Trying to make sense of it all.
Dell Streak powered by Streakdroid 1.8.1
Video with proof
It's obvious to everyone now, but I made a video that can easily be shown to anyone who doesn't believe the ATRIX has slower speeds than something like the iPhone.
Show this to AT&T and then they'll shut their mouth about "possibly a defective device."
www[dot]youtube[dot]com/watch?v=X5YMJT08N64&hd=1
I'm sick of this bs. Why cant this company live up to their promises?
the atrix isn't even an HSPA+ device, it has an HSDPA cat 10 modem...
The Atrix is supposed to have the HSPA+ transceiver in it. Whether it is disabled or does not work because the network blocks access since HSPA+ is not fully deployed is a question heavily discussed in other threads in these forums. However, you should realize the LTE requires a different transceiver, which reviews have indicated the Atrix does not have.
So even if LTE is deployed this fall, the best the Atrix will be able to do is HSPA+, not LTE. Supposedly, LTE-capable smartphones are supposed to be announced this summer sometime.
Wanna wait?
wrayrb said:
So even if LTE is deployed this fall, the best the Atrix will be able to do is HSPA+, not LTE. Supposedly, LTE-capable smartphones are supposed to be announced this summer sometime.
Wanna wait?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, when I see the disaster with Verizon's first LTE phone the HTC Thunderbolt (still not released)....I wanna wait even a bit longer.....I don't wanna be the guinea pig for AT&T.
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...
You've seen the 4G advertisements from T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon, bragging about a much-better wireless network with blazing fast speeds.
Here's the secret the carriers don't advertise: 4G is a myth. Like the unicorn, it hasn't been spotted anywhere in the wild just yet -- and won't be any time in the near future.
The International Telecommunication Union, the global wireless standards-setting organization, determined last month that 4G is defined as a network capable of download speeds of 100 megabits per second (Mbps). That's fast enough to download an average high-definition movie in about three minutes.
None of the new networks the carriers are rolling out meet that standard.
Sprint (S, Fortune 500) was the first to launch a network called 4G, going live with it earlier this year. Then, T-Mobile launched its 4G network, claiming to be "America's largest 4G network." Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500) plans to launch its 4G network next week, which it claims will be the nation's largest and the fastest. AT&T (T, Fortune 500) is expected to unveil its 4G network next year.
Those networks have theoretical speeds of a fifth to a half that of the official 4G standard. The actual speeds the carriers say they'll achieve are just a tenth of "real" 4G.
So why are the carriers calling these networks 4G?
It's mostly a matter of PR, industry experts say. Explaining what the wireless carriers' new networks should be called, and what they'll be capable of, is a confusing mess.
To illustrate: Sprint bought a majority stake in Clearwire (CLWR), which uses a new network technology called WiMAX that's capable of speeds ranging from 3 Mbps to 10 Mbps. That's a different technology from Verizon's new network, based on a standard called Long Term Evolution (LTE), which will average 5 Mbps to 12 Mbps.
Seeing what its competitors were up to, T-Mobile opted to increase the speed capabilities of its existing 3G-HSPA+ network instead of pursuing a new technology. Its expanded network -- now called 4G -- will reach speeds of 5 Mbps to 12 Mbps.
No matter what they're called, all of these upgrades are clear improvements -- and the carriers shelled out billions to make them. Current "3G" networks offer actual speeds that range from between 500 kilobits per second to 1.5 Mbps.
So Sprint and Verizon have new, faster networks that are still technically not 4G, while T-Mobile has an old, though still faster network that is actually based on 3G technology.
Confused yet? That's why they all just opted to call themselves "4G."
The carriers get defensive about the topic.
"It's very misleading to make a decision about what's 4G based on speed alone," said Stephanie Vinge-Walsh, spokeswoman for Sprint Nextel. "It is a challenge we face in an extremely competitive industry."
T-Mobile did not respond to a request for comment.
One network representative, who asked not to be identified, claimed that ITU's 4G line-in-the-sand is being misconstrued. The organization previously approved the use of the term "4G" for Sprint's WiMAX and Verizon's LTE networks, he said -- though not for T-Mobile's HSPA+ network.
ITU's PR department ignored that approval in its recent statement about how future wireless technologies would be measured, the representative said. ITU representatives were not immediately available for comment.
"I'm not getting into a technical debate," said Jeffrey Nelson, spokesman for Verizon Wireless. "Consumers will quickly realize that there's really a difference between the capabilities of various wireless data networks. All '4G' is not the same."
And that's what's so difficult. The term 4G has become meaningless and confusing as hell for wireless customers.
For instance, T-Mobile's 4G network, which is technically 3G, will have speeds that are at least equal to -- and possibly faster -- than Verizon's 4G-LTE network at launch. At the same time, AT&T's 3G network, which is also being scaled up like T-Mobile's, is not being labeled "4G."
That's why some industry experts predict that the term "4G" will soon vanish.
"The labeling of wireless broadband based on technical jargon is likely to fade away in 2011," said Dan Hays, partner at industry consultancy PRTM. "That will be good news for the consumer. Comparing carriers based on their network coverage and speed will give them more facts to make more informed decisions."
Hays expects that independent researchers -- or the Federal Communications Commission -- will step in next year to perform speed and coverage tests.
Meanwhile, don't expect anyone to hold the carriers' feet to the fire.
"Historically, ITU's classification system has not held a great degree of water and has not been used to enforce branding," Hays said. "Everyone started off declaring themselves to be 4G long before the official decision on labeling was made. The ITU was three to four years too late to make an meaningful impact on the industry's use of the term."
By David Goldman, staff writerFirst Published: December 1, 2010: 8:42 AM ET
Cracked just had an article that talked about this too. I think it said the t-mo has the fastest 42Mbps but none of their phones can come close to using that much bandwidth.
Sort of from left field, but thanks for the copy+paste.
But the ITU has since conceded that lte, wimax and certain "evolved" 3g technologies can now be called 4G regardless of speed.
fearmonkey said:
Sort of from left field, but thanks for the copy+paste.
But the ITU has since conceded that lte, wimax and certain "evolved" 3g technologies can now be called 4G regardless of speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this. "evolved 3g" being hspa+.
uh. thanks?
By David Goldman, staff writerFirst Published: December 1, 2010: 8:42 AM ET
Your point?
Thanks for sharing the article.
PJcastaldo said:
Your point?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the point is don't believe the **** on tv.
mrrobc97 said:
I think the point is don't believe the **** on tv.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly.. not what i met by asking for the point of this.. Its faster than it what is was..they can call it what ever the F**K they want to.. no one really cares.