Database Users

Reception on the Leo

Haaaiiiii everybody!
Firstly, what a spectacular device. It's gorgeous, the screen is awesome, the performance is great (huge improvement over my last handset (tytn II) - not that i didn't love it like my own child mind), and love the sense UI wrapper thingy for winmo.
I bought the phone from mobiles.co.uk (is this just carephone warehouse? The invoice i got just looks like the ones you get from the shop itself) and i'm guessing it's the stock rom/unlocked, since i'm on t-mobile (UK) and i have the youtube app, co-pilot etc. And it asked me to set the network preset myself when i first turned it on.
My question is related to reception/signal strength. How are you all finding it? I've moved from orange to t-mobile, so i did expect to experience a slight reduction in the quality of coverage - perhaps simply because the urban folklore is that orange have the best coverage. However, it seems to be depressingly poor. My orange handset is pretty much 3 or more bars of HSDPA everywhere in my house. By comparison, the new HD2 is mostly just G (GPRS), very ocasionally 3G or H, and only ever 1 or 2 bars of whatever bandwidth it settles on.
Moreover, it seems to fluctuate strangely. My mental model for mobile signal strength - informed entirely by experience - is that it's related almost entirely to where you're stood. Once you find a decent spot, it tends to remain pretty consistent. However, sometimes with the leo, I'll stick it down on my desk and leave it for a few minutes, in which time it'll build up to perhaps 2 bars of 3G, but as soon as i pick it up, it tends to decrease gradually back down to 1 or 2 bars of G.
According to the t-mobile site i'm in a "Good" signal area for both 2 and 3g - i live near a big town (bolton), not out in the sticks. So i am somewhat disappointed so far. Is there any possibility i have a dodgy handset? or perhaps is this an issue with the radio part of the software install? Can i expect it to get better with future radio releases?
All this is indoors, but i did have a wander around outside for a few minutes earlier today, and the best i could get it up to was 2 bars of 3g.
A friend of mine also has t-mobile, and told me he seems to remember getting pretty good signal at my house, so i'm getting him to bring his android HTC (touch maybe?) round later so we can swap sims about and compare like with like. I'll have a better idea of what's going on then. I'm also aware that orange and t-mobile are almost certainly going to be merging rather soon, and they expect their networks to be one as of next summer, so i'll hopefully be back with my old coverage then, although this is a long time to wait. On a similar note, another reason this is worse than expected, is that i was under the impression t-mobile had more or less completed merging their 3g network with 3, which has the best 3g coverage in the country. Anyone aware of the status of this project? is it behind schedule?
Cheers for taking the time to read this all!
Simon

One other thing i forgot to mention, is that in some cases, it tries to switch between networks so frequently that web-browsing or any other data task is completely impossible. Last night i was lying in bed attempting to surf the web, and it kept changing between 1 bar of H, then dropping down to 0, then changing to 1 bar of 3g, then changing back to H. It was doing this every few seconds at one point.

I dont know where you got the idea that urban folklore says Orange has best network coverage! They are shockingly bad imo...
I actually ended up in a legal battle with Orange due to their extremely bad service/coverage... they were claiming around £70,000 pounds from me/my company after we refused to pay due to MANY shortcomings. Long story short.... i/we won. They didnt get a penny and we got to keep all of our hardware also.
T-Mobile have an extremely fast HSDPA network but again i find their overall coverage to be less then satisfactory.
I am under the impression that both T-Mobile and Orange use higher frequencies in their network and this results in their signals being alot worse at penetrating walls etc when compared to Vodafone and O2. Perhaps more knowledgable peeps could confirm this?
Anyway... back on point... with my HD2 (using Vodafone SIM) i am getting coverage in areas where previously no one on any network got a signal. In one particular restaurant i frequent... everyone else on my table had no coverage what so ever yet i was sitting there browsing the internet.

One other thing to note that may help you with your situation... the antenna for the HD2 is situated at the BOTTOM of the device. Other users have reported fluctuating signals when holding the dvice in their hand although i have no such experience myself.

Audio Oblivion said:
I dont know where you got the idea that urban folklore says Orange has best network coverage! They are shockingly bad imo...
I actually ended up in a legal battle with Orange due to their extremely bad service/coverage... they were claiming around £70,000 pounds from me/my company after we refused to pay due to MANY shortcomings. Long story short.... i/we won. They didnt get a penny and we got to keep all of our hardware also.
T-Mobile have an extremely fast HSDPA network but again i find their overall coverage to be less then satisfactory.
I am under the impression that both T-Mobile and Orange use higher frequencies in their network and this results in their signals being alot worse at penetrating walls etc when compared to Vodafone and O2. Perhaps more knowledgable peeps could confirm this?
Anyway... back on point... with my HD2 (using Vodafone SIM) i am getting coverage in areas where previously no one on any network got a signal. In one particular restaurant i frequent... everyone else on my table had no coverage what so ever yet i was sitting there browsing the internet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Audio Oblivion said:
One other thing to note that may help you with your situation... the antenna for the HD2 is situated at the BOTTOM of the device. Other users have reported fluctuating signals when holding the dvice in their hand although i have no such experience myself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the response! Interesting story about orange there. I think urban folklore is one of those things that varies from one urban environment to the next. Needless to say, orange has always been pretty strong for me here at home, so i am slightly disappointed with the performance of T-Mobile so far. I'll get my friend down here with his handset and see what the comparison is like, and i'll bear that antenna tip in mind!
I was considering vodafone, but their 3g coverage didn't seem to be as expansive as t-mobiles. Who knows, perhaps they'd have been as bad in my area if not worse? Another thing that swung me in the direction of t-mobile was the data packages. The guy at vodafone told me they offered no increased usage packages for mobiles. Whereas with t-mobile, for an extra fiver a month, i can - at any time, and for any number of months at a time - upgrade from 1gb fair usage to 3. And they will NEVER charge me for going over anyway, just cap bandwidth.
EDIT: forgot to mention the indoors thing. Yeah i'm a physicist by trade, so it did occur to me that operating frequency could be to blame for poor coverage in doors.

I'm waiting for my phone to arrive tomorrow (fingers crossed) so I can't comment on that, but I live in Atherton (which is just down the road for everyone else). My house and around my street is bad for all mobile reception. Currently I am on vodafone with a i900. If I leave my phone on the table I will get 2 bars but when I pick it up it usually disappears all together. I had a HTC Diamond for a day on Orange and that was worse. My friends are on O2 and they seem to get ok signal here, and a few years ago I was on Three which gave me the best signal in my house but was generally worse elsewhere.
I have an old Nokia as a works phone on Orange and that continually out performs my omnia for signal strength.
I was hoping the signal strength in this phone would be good. After flashing my radio in my Omnia many times it made no difference and I did not know the annettene on this was at the bottom of the phone (just like the Omnia). It seems strange to do this.

I can't comment on T-Mobile's coverage (although I did leave Orange a few years ago because of their shocking coverage) but I get generally excellent reception on 3 here in London. Unfortunately, the only place where the reception is bad is at one of the offices that I spend half my week at but 3 have marked that as a network blackspot on their website
If it helps, someone at another site I work at was amazed that I am able to make phone calls standing in the central stairwell of the building which is in the City. He can barely make a call when standing right next to the windows but he's using an iPhone on O2

I have seen no difference in indicated signal strength between my HD and my new HD2. However, what is clear is that the phone sound quality is better on this HD2 - even for the same location and same signal strength - something that is easy to judge at home.
I would guess your issue is to do with the T-Mobile strength in your house, versus the old Orange network signal, rather than the handset. When you do a comparison with your friends handset on T-Mobile do not go only by the indicated signal strength on the handset. It would be worth looking at the band switching issue by direct comparison and also to measure the actual download speed when data connected.
Regarding your H (HSDPA) and 3G switching - I think that you will find that HSDPA only kicks in when you actually have data being exchanged (actual exchange not demand). On all of my recent devices the H only shows when (for instance) a web page is actually in the process of downloading - what you report is not strictly band switching. However, some people do see performence issues when the device keeps truly switching bands (2G/G, and E, to 3G/H). Although a pain some find it better to force the device into a particular band to avoid such an issue - but there is always a consequent possibility of loosing all signal.
I'll be interested to hear how the comparison goes.

chris_lyon82 said:
I'm waiting for my phone to arrive tomorrow (fingers crossed) so I can't comment on that, but I live in Atherton (which is just down the road for everyone else). My house and around my street is bad for all mobile reception. Currently I am on vodafone with a i900. If I leave my phone on the table I will get 2 bars but when I pick it up it usually disappears all together. I had a HTC Diamond for a day on Orange and that was worse. My friends are on O2 and they seem to get ok signal here, and a few years ago I was on Three which gave me the best signal in my house but was generally worse elsewhere.
I have an old Nokia as a works phone on Orange and that continually out performs my omnia for signal strength.
I was hoping the signal strength in this phone would be good. After flashing my radio in my Omnia many times it made no difference and I did not know the annettene on this was at the bottom of the phone (just like the Omnia). It seems strange to do this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Funnily enough, my phone mistakenly thought i was in atherton the other day - gps indoors being the cause. Interested to hear how you get on when the phone arrives.
jakem said:
I can't comment on T-Mobile's coverage (although I did leave Orange a few years ago because of their shocking coverage) but I get generally excellent reception on 3 here in London. Unfortunately, the only place where the reception is bad is at one of the offices that I spend half my week at but 3 have marked that as a network blackspot on their website
If it helps, someone at another site I work at was amazed that I am able to make phone calls standing in the central stairwell of the building which is in the City. He can barely make a call when standing right next to the windows but he's using an iPhone on O2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it's probably just a case of orange having better reception around my local area than t-mobile unfortunately. All this said, it's not too much of a bother, since obviously i can just use the wireless network for data access whilst at home. Not really gone out and about with the phone yet as i'm waiting for my number to port across.
tony.wheeler said:
I have seen no difference in indicated signal strength between my HD and my new HD2. However, what is clear is that the phone sound quality is better on this HD2 - even for the same location and same signal strength - something that is easy to judge at home.
I would guess your issue is to do with the T-Mobile strength in your house, versus the old Orange network signal, rather than the handset. When you do a comparison with your friends handset on T-Mobile do not go only by the indicated signal strength on the handset. It would be worth looking at the band switching issue by direct comparison and also to measure the actual download speed when data connected.
Regarding your H (HSDPA) and 3G switching - I think that you will find that HSDPA only kicks in when you actually have data being exchanged (actual exchange not demand). On all of my recent devices the H only shows when (for instance) a web page is actually in the process of downloading - what you report is not strictly band switching. However, some people do see performence issues when the device keeps truly switching bands (2G/G, and E, to 3G/H). Although a pain some find it better to force the device into a particular band to avoid such an issue - but there is always a consequent possibility of loosing all signal.
I'll be interested to hear how the comparison goes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting - thanks for the info! Yeah i'm leaning towards just relatively poor T-M reception locally as the explanation now myself. I'll bear those tips in mind when testing. My plan was to choose a location in the house where i know my own phone will only maintain something relatively poor, like a single bar on the GPRS band. Then leave the phones side by side in this location and see what they both settle down to. Then swap sim cards around - if they are different - and repeat. Are conventional bandwidth testing sites appropriate for mobiles? or do they involve the transfer of comparatively large amounts of data? Is there an alternative you can suggest if so?
Ah perhaps that's a winmo6.5 difference? I know on my old kaiser, the H is there all the time, even when i've used kaiser tweak to disable the internet/data connection. By that i mean the large H, as opposed to the small letter which appears above the signal bar when the data connection has actually been established. I have wondered why modern phones differentiate between H and 3G, since we're told they are, in reality, the same band. Haven't most providers just upgraded all their 3g transmitters? I'd have thought phones would have always believed themselves to be connected to "H" - in 3g zones - and it would simply be a case of signal determining the sort of bandwidth which can be sustained.
Not sure when i'll get chance to do the test, but i will post back in this thread once it's completed!

Hi,
I know it's an obvious statement but I would imagine it's just down to location. I live in South London, have an HD2 on T-Mobile and get pretty much consistent 3G/HSDPA coverage throughout the house. Downloads are quick and email and weather syncing very prompt.
I've had contracts with pretty much all major service providers and I must say that T-Mobile probably has the best coverage of them all along with '3'...

Ok, so the friend who's also on t-mobile popped round this evening. Didn't have time to do any testing in my own home, as we had an errand to run. However, during the journey i had the phones side by side to make a direct comparison, and also had time to do this briefly once we'd arrived at our destination. No time for bandwidth comparisons yet - just looking at indicated signal strength and band. Important to note that his handset is a G1, running android, so as indicated before, comparing actual "bars" of signal is perhaps somewhat arbitrary and fruitless - who knows what differences there are between the way microsoft and google calculate signal strength.
First thing to note is the H/3G indicator issue. One of the previous posters does indeed seem to have it quite right in saying that 3G only changes to an H whilst a transfer is actually in progress. My handset does sometimes seem to flick from 3g to H whilst i'm not directly making data calls, but i imagine this is some auto sync in the background, either from the weather app, or the facebook app, or the facebook-linked contacts. Whilst browsing, it says 3G all the time, until a link is clicked, in which case it changes to H for the time it takes the page to load, then back to 3G. Not sure if this is just a change in winmo from the last version i had to this or, or an HTC customisation.
In terms of signal/banding the phones were more or less the same, with a couple of notable exceptions. Firstly, at one point during the 30 minute journey, my phone had switched to a full GPRS signal, whereas his was still on 3g, with a fairly weak signal (1 bar). This lasted for about 30 seconds at 30mph, and then the HD2 went back up to 3G. I wouldn't read anything into this, as the two platforms no doubt have totally different strategies when it comes to maintaining network connections and the criteria for switching up to a higher band etc.
The only other interesting occurrence was after we'd arrived. Sat side by side on the couch, my phone was reading 3g with 1 bar of signal strength, occasionally 2, whereas his was a pretty consistent 3. Outside the building we were both more or less full signal. Now, i'm not sure whether we can compare these reported signal levels - as i said above i'd have thought each platform did it a different way, unless there's some standard they all have to conform to. Also, i opened up opera to check something offline, and occasionally my connection dropped down to zero bars. However, this did not disrupt browsing. Didn't even seem to slow it down. Still read H when loading pages, and it was still fast and smooth, and at now point did it drop to GPRS or lose a connection entirely. Interesting because on my old kaiser, zero bars was quickly followed by the searching for connection graphic. In other words, nothing would work with zero signal. Now, i'm not sure whether the signal strength thingy is just calibrated differently on the HD2 (maybe 0 is the new 1) or perhaps the software does a better job these days of maintaining a connection - who knows.
However, only thing to report so far is that indoors, in this particular location anyway, the HD2 seemed to be reading a lower signal on it's indicator than the G1 IF the two can be compared as directly as this.
All pretty qualitative so far, so i'm going to have a go at some bandwidth tests and band comparisons in the more challenging areas of my house when he's next over.
gargon01 said:
Hi,
I know it's an obvious statement but I would imagine it's just down to location. I live in South London, have an HD2 on T-Mobile and get pretty much consistent 3G/HSDPA coverage throughout the house. Downloads are quick and email and weather syncing very prompt.
I've had contracts with pretty much all major service providers and I must say that T-Mobile probably has the best coverage of them all along with '3'...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that's certainly the primary factor at work here. What i was mainly concerned with, was whether the handset itself was under-performing - i.e. would other phones with t-mobile sims achieve better reception. Strangely, in the past i had always dismissed "signal" as a property of the network rather than the handset. Obviously though, with a few minutes thought, it's easy to see how the hardware is also an important factor. Not all receivers are born equal - even though i imagine these days it's pretty much a solved problem, from an engineering perspective - just like all software to interpret radio signals and hold connections isn't either.

I also went orange to t-mobile, and the speed is way faster. Just your luck really.

arfster said:
I also went orange to t-mobile, and the speed is way faster. Just your luck really.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not really too bad. But yeah, bad luck that really i can only use it for voice calls at home. Even half a mile closer to town though, it holds a full 3G signal, and i too have been really impressed with the speed whilst browsing - much faster than my old orange connection. In truth, it's not important that the data calling stuff works at home, since i have a wireless network. The same is true of all my friends, so i can just connect to theirs whilst over. The data calling is more important when out and about, and in this respect the phone seems to perform really well
So far no sms bug either, but i'm not taking this for granted.

Hmm, voice quality is nicer but reception's worse I reckon compared to my Touch HD with the 1.16 radio. Instead of getting "H" for HSDPA reception all the time at work it's flicking between 3G and H.
Also have data connection problems after roaming between 2G (GSM) and 3G (3G / HSDPA) - WM will refuse to connect online until I manually force Flight Mode on and off.
On the 1.48 rom. Looks like they have several bugs they need to fix in the Radio...

aussiebum said:
Hmm, voice quality is nicer but reception's worse I reckon compared to my Touch HD with the 1.16 radio. Instead of getting "H" for HSDPA reception all the time at work it's flicking between 3G and H.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see that also, but only when not using it. When it's connected, it sticks on H ......and it's really, really fast - quickest mobile data I've ever seen. Yesterday I'd switched off wifi by mistake, and didn't even realise.

_tangent said:
as indicated before, comparing actual "bars" of signal is perhaps somewhat arbitrary and fruitless
i'm not sure whether we can compare these reported signal levels - i'd have thought each platform did it a different way..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An analysis I can't really fault. OK,I know my N95 8GB runs off symbian but quite often I'll attempt to place a call when its showing 3 or more bars of "signal strength" for it to drop the call instantly followed by an onscreen message of "network error" which equates to "I have no signal" as its suddenly not showing any signal at all even though my location hasn't changed at all (and yes,I am aware that the signal travels via a "cell" which may have suddenly had to cope with more traffic than its capable of and as a result dropped one of its clients-me!).
I too live in an area where reception is far from ideal (phone works best if I go outside and balance it on top of a fence post behind my shed lol ) and as I travel a lot (HGV driver) I need a network that's pretty robust and o2 seems to be the best I've used so far.
Have you tried using something like a broadband speed test (personally I'm not sure how accurate these are, as you tend to get quite a spread of results if you carry out repeated tests, although in theory you could average them out) such as this one here :http://www.broadbandspeedchecker.co.uk/ which may help you find a baseline for the actual performance on your current network?
Final point to make,again maybe no relation but might be worth mentioning..I play a lot with various sat-navs and have found in the past that it can be possible for one to effect the performance of another one by being in close proximity to it ie: one will get a full lock on sats but the other wont as device A seems to hog any signal and only when A is turned off will B be able to get a lock onto any sats...a situation like that may hamper the initial observations you've made so far over to you

_tangent said:
Funnily enough, my phone mistakenly thought i was in atherton the other day - gps indoors being the cause. Interested to hear how you get on when the phone arrives.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been playing around with my phone now for 2 days and I am happy as my signal is a lot better than my Omnia 1. I even managed to have a phone call yesterday whilst sat down on my couch I do still have the problem though that when I pick up my phone the signal will drop 1 or 2 bars down and if I hold it long enough it will loose signal all together. But like I say it is a lot better than my Omnia and this only happens in my house which has poor signal anyway.
Overall I'm happy with the signal strength so far. I'll see how I get on with it over the next couple of weeks though.

I have just upgraded from a diamond to HD2 and I have found the reception to be much worse in my house than the diamond. The phone keeps fluctuating from 4 bars to 1 and often looses the network all together. My diamond was pretty stable in the same places. Is it possible to tweak the performance or do we need to wait for the next ROM? I have updated to 1.48 UK ROM.

GPS

Do these things have a gps issue? I just came from an Evo, and gps reception on these sucks compared to Evo.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

herzzreh said:
Do these things have a gps issue? I just came from an Evo, and gps reception on these sucks compared to Evo.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bwahahahaha!! The answer to your question is that all the Galaxy S variants have GPS issues!

Some people claim they have trouble
On my epic google maps takes a long time to lock
But on google navigator and sprint navteq it locks on no more than 20 seconds it usually locks on in 5 to 10 seconds
What's weird ,is that to use google navigator. You have to use google maps to get to google navigator
Open google maps type place or address then hit drive directions then it switches on to google navigator then instantly gps locks on
If you just open google maps and turn the gps on and hit my location the gps takes a while to lock....but not when u start google nav.
I have no problem since when i use google maps, I never use my location.
I look up address and for driving directions via google navigator.

The problem with the GPS is that the cache doesn't update unless you reboot the phone. The longer the phone has been on the worse it gets. If you follow the instructions below it cause the GPS to update the cache over 3G whenever you fire up a GPS App. It only takes a few seconds to do this and then you get a fast lock after that. The only problem is if you are in an area with no signal and try to use the GPS. If that is going to be the case then follow the instructions again and change it to Warm Boot. Here are the instructions:
Enter GPS debug/settings application by typing *#1472365#
click "Setup" tab
click "position mode"
Click "starting mode
Enable "Cold Start"
Back out.

Ah... well, my problem wasn't the lock-on. That was normal. It's the accuracy and ability to hold signal. Again, comparing it to the Evo... this phone had that huge circle of inaccuracy while driving and Evo did not at the same time. Slightest obstruction and this would lose the signal while the other phone would not. Very frustrating.

herzzreh said:
Ah... well, my problem wasn't the lock-on. That was normal. It's the accuracy and ability to hold signal. Again, comparing it to the Evo... this phone had that huge circle of inaccuracy while driving and Evo did not at the same time. Slightest obstruction and this would lose the signal while the other phone would not. Very frustrating.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
for lockon issues, which due to a bug in the cache system and will affect all users who don't cycle the phones cache, use the cold start as indicated above.
For accuracy issues it is important to remember to make sure to leave "use wireless networking" off.

aero1 said:
for lockon issues, which due to a bug in the cache system and will affect all users who don't cycle the phones cache, use the cold start as indicated above.
For accuracy issues it is important to remember to make sure to leave "use wireless networking" off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought we were supposed to leave that on.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

acegolfer said:
I thought we were supposed to leave that on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That advice is disinformation from Sprint customer service. They are trying to cover up the fact that the GPS has problems, so they advise users to enable the non-GPS location by cell towers, which is not as accurate.

aero1 said:
For accuracy issues it is important to remember to make sure to leave "use wireless networking" off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried that, still not too accurate compared to the other phone. What I noticed is that it IS accurate right after a hard reset, but then half an hour later it goes back to showing the circle.

herzzreh said:
I tried that, still not too accurate compared to the other phone. What I noticed is that it IS accurate right after a hard reset, but then half an hour later it goes back to showing the circle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the Galaxy S variants have a problem with SNR. Basically, the antenna has issues getting a strong GPS signal and some are worse then others; some can't even achieve a lock! Low signal = bad accuracy....
As for a fix, I'm not sure if Samsung can really fix it, if it's a design issue. On the Galaxy Forum, there was a guy that said it was possible to fix a low signal hardware flaw with software. Me, I'm highly doubtful it can be done where a Galaxy S GPS will ever be as good as the other Android phones currently on the market. I think they will eventually get it to the point where Nav will work most of the time, but not to where others are using there Android phones for Geo caching.

Didn't they fix it on fascinate?
sent from my epic 4g with no 4g

churro7 said:
Didn't they fix it on fascinate?
sent from my epic 4g with no 4g
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope... Just do a search on the Fascinate forum and you'll find it's got GPS problems too.
Rogers in Canada said their version of the Galaxy S (Captivate) will have the GPS fixed, but we'll know when it hits the market in a few days. It might take a couple weeks before we start seeing the reports roll in.... If they truly have a Galaxy S phone with a working GPS, I'd like to see the mainboard. If it's the same as other versions of the Galaxy S, then maybe they were able to fix it with software. If it's a hardware design change .... Well, then the rest of the Galaxy S owners may be SOL.

GPS on Epic = Epic FAIL
Shame on Samsung for releasing the Epic with a half assed implementation of a GPS.
It is just one of those "what were they thinking" situations.

I mean didn t they release a patch
sent from my epic 4g with no 4g

crabjoe said:
Nope... Just do a search on the Fascinate forum and you'll find it's got GPS problems too.
Rogers in Canada said their version of the Galaxy S (Captivate) will have the GPS fixed, but we'll know when it hits the market in a few days. It might take a couple weeks before we start seeing the reports roll in.... If they truly have a Galaxy S phone with a working GPS, I'd like to see the mainboard. If it's the same as other versions of the Galaxy S, then maybe they were able to fix it with software. If it's a hardware design change .... Well, then the rest of the Galaxy S owners may be SOL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The GSM versions of the Galaxy S, which includes the Captivate, Vibrant and International I9000, have one GPS chip -- the relatively new Broadcom BCM4751. The CDMA versions, the Epic and the Fascinate , use another -- the multipurpose Qualcomm QSC6085 radio that has been in use for three years. As far as the GPS is concerned, these are really two different devices: Different hardware. Different firmware. Different bugs. Different symptoms. (I have owned Vibrants and an Epic, and have tested the GPS rigorously on both. They behave very differently. The GPS bugs on the Epic are unique to the Epic as far as I know, although it is difficult to tell about the Fascinate from anecdotal reports and Verizon slapped a confusing user interface on the settings for location services and GPS.)
The only thing the two general designs have in common is general incompetence. Samsung managed to foul up two different GPS designs in two different ways.
But it is folly to try to make inferential comparisons between the two types.

churro7 said:
I mean didn t they release a patch
sent from my epic 4g with no 4g
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but it didn't work.

boomerbubba said:
The GSM versions of the Galaxy S, which includes the Captivate, Vibrant and International I9000, have one GPS chip -- the relatively new Broadcom BCM4751. The CDMA versions, the Epic and the Fascinate , use another -- the multipurpose Qualcomm QSC6085 radio that has been in use for three years. As far as the GPS is concerned, these are really two different devices: Different hardware. Different firmware. Different bugs. Different symptoms. (I have owned Vibrants and an Epic, and have tested the GPS rigorously on both. They behave very differently. The GPS bugs on the Epic are unique to the Epic as far as I know, although it is difficult to tell about the Fascinate from anecdotal reports and Verizon slapped a confusing user interface on the settings for location services and GPS.)
The only thing the two general designs have in common is general incompetence. Samsung managed to foul up two different GPS designs in two different ways.
But it is folly to try to make inferential comparisons between the two types.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're correct that the GPS hardware is different and personally, I don't think either GPS chips are the problem. I think the problem is hardware design, as in placement or size of the GPS antenna.
It's like in the old days before cable was popular and everyone had rabbit ears on tops of the TV. Regardless of how good or bad the TV tuner was, the type or placement of the antenna made a huge difference. I remember putting tin foil on the antennas to try and get a better signal. I also remember my dad telling me to stand in a funny position or place, with the antenna in my hand, so he could watch his football. LOL...
I really think Samsung designers goofed, just like Apple did, on the antenna. Bad antenna = bad signal.

crabjoe said:
You're correct that the GPS hardware is different and personally, I don't think either GPS chips are the problem. I think the problem is hardware design, as in placement or size of the GPS antenna.
It's like in the old days before cable was popular and everyone had rabbit ears on tops of the TV. Regardless of how good or bad the TV tuner was, the type or placement of the antenna made a huge difference. I remember putting tin foil on the antennas to try and get a better signal. I also remember my dad telling me to stand in a funny position or place, with the antenna in my hand, so he could watch his football. LOL...
I really think Samsung designers goofed, just like Apple did, on the antenna. Bad antenna = bad signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must say that I have zero accuracy issues whatsoever. I *do* have stale ephemeris data problems like nobody's business - cold-start mode won't help either if I'm connected to WiFi or 4G (though 4G seems to have better luck.) The software-reported accuracy issues are a hard-coded datum, which in the Captivate has now been removed.
If I don't exclusively sit on 3G, then either Hot-start or Cold-start are unreliable. If I *am* on 3G, then Hot-start pinpoints me exactly, and almost instantly. With cold-start, it takes a bit to narrow in, though the *initial* lock is often faster. Other times, I'll see (in GPS Status) that it has found all 10 satellites, but not locked - the ephemeris bug all over again. Disappointing to say the least. BTW, this is not fixed on Captivate - it cannot get a lock while on WiFi. This has got to be a software problem. Neither my Epic nor Captivate have any issues actually sticking to the satellites. If this were software, then the GPS itself would be unreliable *during* operation; not just initial lock.

crabjoe said:
You're correct that the GPS hardware is different and personally, I don't think either GPS chips are the problem. I think the problem is hardware design, as in placement or size of the GPS antenna.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SNR levels on the Epic do seem moderately lower than what other phones report. Theroretically this could be due to antenna design. The SNR level itself is a complex estimate by the GPS chip, not an objective reality being metered. So another possible explanation is that the SNR calculation is buggy. The estimated accuracy calculation is obviously buggy, always reported at 30.0 meters as if it is hard-coded. So there could also be a bug in the calculation of SNR, too. As for antenna design, I don't even assume that the Epic has the same antenna design as other Galaxy S phones, because its form factor is completely different.
In any case, signal sensitivity cannot explain the locking behavior, which has been isolated by user testing to be caused by bad handling of the cache of GPS almanac and ephemeris data. This is a bug.
Poor signal sensitivity could explain problems with actual accuracy. But like APOLAUF, I don't think there is a problem with actual actual accuracy on the Epic. The way to test that empirically is by plotting the recorded tracks in software such as My Tracks. If have done that with my Epic, for both driving and walking tracks, simultaneously with benchmark tracks captured by a known good device. I used my venerable G1, which has excellent GPS performance. The actual accuracy of the Epic is just as good.
The other GSM-based Galaxy S devices have had problems with actual accuracy, verified by many tests with My Tracks. But they are wholly different devices.
It is hard to tell from anecdotal reports in forums how accurate GPS performance is. Some reports of poor accuracy can be explained by poor locking. Some can be explained by pilot error. It takes controlled testing to get at the facts. Unfortunately, most commenters in forums, including this one, haven't a clue how to test the GPS rigorously.

IMO
First I have a co-worker who has been working with a developer and can get a GPS lock on his captivate super quick. To aide he is using the cell towers to get him a list of applicable satellites to his approximate location and gets a massive list of responding sats.
The next point is that I think that there is likely an issue with the Antenna . . but I do not think that is exclusively the issue. If this were strictly a HW issue then the issue would not be alleviated after a restart of the phone. There are multiple accounts that this is what is occurring.
Personally (and perhaps because this is my first true GPS phone) it is a minor inconvenience and doesnt bother me too much. . . . but is annoying and something that I would expect Sammy to go after. . . or at least acknowledge

Weak WiFi Signal

(Search feature is down but I don't remember seeing anything about this)
It seems like the wifi signal is really weak on my Nexus S (stock, MoDaCo rX, and Cyanogen alpha). The only time I get full bars is if stand right in front of the router. Sometimes it will drop a bar or two even when I am in the same room as the router.
I'm out of the country at the moment and unable to test it with my network at home to compare performance to the N1 or MT4G I used to have. Can I get some feedback from other users about their wifi strength? I might have to find a way to return/exchange the phone from here before the end of the remorse period if it's a problem unique to my device.

c_licious said:
(Search feature is down but I don't remember seeing anything about this)
It seems like the wifi signal is really weak on my Nexus S (stock, MoDaCo rX, and Cyanogen alpha). The only time I get full bars is if stand right in front of the router. Sometimes it will drop a bar or two even when I am in the same room as the router.
I'm out of the country at the moment and unable to test it with my network at home to compare performance to the N1 or MT4G I used to have. Can I get some feedback from other users about their wifi strength? I might have to find a way to return/exchange the phone from here before the end of the remorse period if it's a problem unique to my device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually have it listed as a known issue in the FAQ after seeing an article pop up from Androidcentral.com shortly after launch.
But, yes, I can confirm this. I'm literally sitting right next to my router and have a full three bars. If I move to the couch, it'll switch between 2-3 and if I go into my bedroom, it'll do it from 1-2. I'm in a relatively small apartment, btw lol.
Interestingly enough, while the graphic displays a weaker signal and testing from market apps does indeed show a weaker signal, I don't really notice much in the way of speed loss or instability.

Yap, same here.
If i go to about 30 ft away, i'm done...no wifi!

unremarked said:
Actually have it listed as a known issue in the FAQ after seeing an article pop up from Androidcentral.com shortly after launch.
But, yes, I can confirm this. I'm literally sitting right next to my router and have a full three bars. If I move to the couch, it'll switch between 2-3 and if I go into my bedroom, it'll do it from 1-2. I'm in a relatively small apartment, btw lol.
Interestingly enough, while the graphic displays a weaker signal and testing from market apps does indeed show a weaker signal, I don't really notice much in the way of speed loss or instability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, just read your thread (slapping myself on the wrist for posting too soon). Unfortunately, it does seem to cause some instability for me as it occasionally disconnects completely due to the low signal.
Do you think this is the same for all devices and has just gone unnoticed for those who don't heavily rely on wifi. Or would an exchange be my best option at this point? Not sure how much of a hardware vs software fix this would be...

No issues here. The reception isn't great, but it's a phone. Small WiFi card. Maybe my expectations are too low, but I feel like 30-50 feet through the walls and/or floors of a house/apartment is pretty reasonable for a device like this. Of course, as always, the more obstacles (physical barriers and electronic interference) the signal has to go through to get to your phone, the worse the reception will be at any given distance, so there are a lot of potential influencing factors.

zorak950 said:
No issues here. The reception isn't great, but it's a phone. Small WiFi card. Maybe my expectations are too low, but I feel like 30-50 feet through the walls and/or floors of a house/apartment is pretty reasonable for a device like this. Of course, as always, the more obstacles (physical barriers and electronic interference) the signal has to go through to get to your phone, the worse the reception will be at any given distance, so there are a lot of potential influencing factors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why it's such a handicap not being able to test it on my home network at the moment where I could compare it to my experience with my previous android devices.

alot of routers no longer have external antennas reducing the possible range. just an idea but who knows

c_licious said:
Yea, just read your thread (slapping myself on the wrist for posting too soon). Unfortunately, it does seem to cause some instability for me as it occasionally disconnects completely due to the low signal.
Do you think this is the same for all devices and has just gone unnoticed for those who don't heavily rely on wifi. Or would an exchange be my best option at this point?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure either way, actually. It may be something that can be fixed with a software update or tweak considering that the Nexus One(which has a noticable stronger signal) and the Nexus S seem to be pretty close in model number(BCM4329EKU86 Nexus One vs BCM4329GKUBG Nexus S).
I couldn't find a tear down that detailed the WiFi chip found in the Galaxy S devices which would be more useful for a comparison. So, I guess, my point is that it may be something a relevantly unnoticed flaw in the device itself and exchanging it might not do anything.
I guess this is our trade off for a working GPS unit?

I dont think its based off of root, i'm on stock, and the same thing happens to me!!

The Nexus S uses a low power wifi chip, which is thought to be the cause of this (VERY well known) weak wifi reception issue. Google "Nexus S weak wifi".
You can verify it easily by running a wifi sniffer (e.g. "Wifi Analyzer" from the market). The NS's reception drops quickly with distance from router. This isn't the router's fault.

ravidavi said:
The Nexus S uses a low power wifi chip, which is thought to be the cause of this (VERY well known) weak wifi reception issue. Google "Nexus S weak wifi".
You can verify it easily by running a wifi sniffer (e.g. "Wifi Analyzer" from the market). The NS's reception drops quickly with distance from router. This isn't the router's fault.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Definitely isnt the routers fault. I have two MTS, my original G1 and N1, Two Laptops a PS3 and a PSP.
This is the only device that struggles to find a signal.

jspookss said:
Definitely isnt the routers fault. I have two MTS, my original G1 and N1, Two Laptops a PS3 and a PSP.
This is the only device that struggles to find a signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am a former G1 guy myself, it had a very strong signal, Nexus S not so much. It is making me a bit irritated. It is an important feature sine I prefer to use wifi instead of 3G. It's much faster.

I have the same issue. When I turn on wifi the status icon takes about 20 seconds to turn from grey to green and on top of that even in the same room I don't get full bars. This really blows.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App

Atrix Data Speed Vs iPhone 4 / LG Vortex

I know all Atrix users are having problems with slower data connections than using, say the iPhone 4. So I went ahead and did a quick video of, iPhone 4 and Verizon LG Vortex to show the speed difference. Clearly you can see that the Atrix is very slow in uploading, but overall was pretty close in download speeds with the iPhone 4. I have been averaging around 2.2 Mps down and .31 upload. Overall when using the Atrix phone to look up anything in the Market place or web browsing, and or using a app that requires data, it feels much faster overall. Could be that the Dual-Core is helping in this. My next video will be, comparing on the phone browsing and using data apps to compare.
Here is the link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA72kfo856w

Ya shouldn't run both ATT phones at the same time.

zephxiii said:
Ya shouldn't run both ATT phones at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why its a fair real work comparison that way. No one is going to be the only one running a connection at any give time.
Sent from my Delorean using a flux capacitor!

compumasta said:
Why its a fair real work comparison that way. No one is going to be the only one running a connection at any give time.
Sent from my Delorean using a flux capacitor!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are interested in testing the device's ultimate speed, you shouldn't be running the test at the same time right next to each other period. That causes channel interference (if on same carrier) which degrades performance, not to mention you are cutting available air interface resources in half in on the same channel/sector. That is not going to tell you jack **** about how the device performs (as far as above average potential) in comparison to another device on the same network...it only really shows how each device handles data in a crappy signal situation....interestingly ATT was better than VZW.
It has been demonstrated that the Atrix lacks HSUPA and will generally not perform as well as iPhone4 (or other HSUPA enabled device) until this problem is resolved.

zephxiii said:
If you are interested in testing the device's ultimate speed, you shouldn't be running the test at the same time right next to each other period. That causes channel interference (if on same carrier) which degrades performance, not to mention you are cutting available air interface resources in half in on the same channel/sector. That is not going to tell you jack **** about how the device performs (as far as above average potential) in comparison to another device on the same network...it only really shows how each device handles data in a crappy signal situation....interestingly ATT was better than VZW.
It has been demonstrated that the Atrix lacks HSUPA and will generally not perform as well as iPhone4 (or other HSUPA enabled device) until this problem is resolved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you misunderstood what he's saying. In the real world, you could be standing next to someone else using an AT&T phone, so that interference isn't unexpected. How the device handles that kind of interference is absolutely relevant information.

Ririal said:
I think you misunderstood what he's saying. In the real world, you could be standing next to someone else using an AT&T phone, so that interference isn't unexpected. How the device handles that kind of interference is absolutely relevant information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the real world, he probably isn't running a speedtest right when you are.
It's still pointless as if you are trying to compare device speeds on the network, you need to give them ideal conditions....otherwise you aren't comparing the devices really. This is obvious because it isn't showing the Atrix's crippled network interface.

zephxiii said:
In the real world, he probably isn't running a speedtest right when you are.
It's still pointless as if you are trying to compare device speeds on the network, you need to give them ideal conditions....otherwise you aren't comparing the devices really. This is obvious because it isn't showing the Atrix's crippled network interface.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not even sure I understand what you're arguing. Someone next to you is not using a data connection if they're not running a speedtest? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying. The speed of the phone next to you is irrelevant. A phone pulling down 1000Mbps as opposed to 100Mbps won't magically decrease the surrounding signal. In modern devices, channel interference like that isn't really a problem anyway.

Ririal said:
I'm not even sure I understand what you're arguing. Someone next to you is not using a data connection if they're not running a speedtest? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying. The speed of the phone next to you is irrelevant. A phone pulling down 1000Mbps as opposed to 100Mbps won't magically decrease the surrounding signal. In modern devices, channel interference like that isn't really a problem anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on that statement, it looks like you really don't understand how WCDMA (or CDMA based) networks work. Channel noise, noise floor, neighboring interference etc. plays a huge part in network performance. So yes, even though signal receive strength may be very good, performance can suffer from channel noise...and I see it all the time in cell overlap areas (I live in one even).
And when you have two devices like that operating right next to each other using the same ARFCN, especially if one is in the upload portion of the test, it's going to create additional noise that the other device is going to have to fight through....then throw on top that both devices are fighting for whatever is left of free resources on the site..which is basically cutting whatever is left in half....if they are on the same sector/channel.

zephxiii said:
Based on that statement, it looks like you really don't understand how WCDMA (or CDMA based) networks work. Channel noise, noise floor, neighboring interference etc. plays a huge part in network performance. So yes, even though signal receive strength may be very good, performance can suffer from channel noise...and I see it all the time in cell overlap areas (I live in one even).
And when you have two devices like that operating right next to each other using the same ARFCN, especially if one is in the upload portion of the test, it's going to create additional noise that the other device is going to have to fight through....then throw on top that both devices are fighting for whatever is left of free resources on the site..which is basically cutting whatever is left in half....if they are on the same sector/channel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand the theory, I've just never seen it affect a device in practice to any noticeable degree. I might get 3.15 down with no other devices nearby, and 3.14 down with several others running at once (GSM and CDMA devices).
Living in an area with several carriers fighting for the airways can impact performance, but again, I've never seen a big enough difference to care. Maybe you've just been in areas with outdated hardware or poor filtering. This is all from personal experience, however, and I live in Chicagoland where there is no shortage of service from any carrier.

I know some have said that having all 3 devices and running the test can affect the performances when running data. I was hoping to try to run a test that could show what would happen if you were out and happen to be close to other smartphones that might be accessing data.
I will post another video showing how the data performance is, by running the speed test one at a time. I did try that today, and I can say that whether I had all three running at the same time or run speed test one at a time, the speeds didn't not change much; maybe only .04 difference. So having all three running the speed test would only affect around .04 to .06 difference in download speed.
I will also do a test to compare the speed to open browser and going to websites.
Also when I was doing the speed test today with my Atrix, I was using it as a mobile hot spot to provide internet to my Samsung Galaxy Tab, and the download speeds on the Atrix was very good. I got around 3.0 Mbps down and .29 Mbps upload; which is very slow compared to my iPhone 4. Hopefully soon this will be fixed.

So in real world situations if others around me are using their phones/data I shouldn't judge how my phone performs based on that? Individual testing is fantastic, but I'm rarely the only person in the room with an AT&T smartphone so it's not practical. Everyday use throughout the day (speedtest app or not) is the only real way to judge data performance in my book.
Besides, the speedtest app can go from 1.2 to 3.4 to .08mbps in 3 consecutive tests. It's all over the place.
For browsing the Atrix should open pages quicker because the processor will help out along with the network speeds.

[Q] boosting signal on g2 is it possible?

So being me ive done took my g2 apart To see how its built. Seeing as im right there with the antennas for the mobile radio, the wifi radio is the any way to make a mod to get better reception? Here at the house i have 0 to 1 bars signal but great lte speeds but where i work i have 2 to 5 bars but only get 3 g which all face it sprint has the meanest 3 g network may extend the wires out. More im pretty technical so it sounds like an expierment coming on i would apreciate any input on thiis one

TheMadScientist420 said:
So being me ive done took my g2 apart To see how its built. Seeing as im right there with the antennas for the mobile radio, the wifi radio is the any way to make a mod to get better reception? Here at the house i have 0 to 1 bars signal but great lte speeds but where i work i have 2 to 5 bars but only get 3 g which all face it sprint has the meanest 3 g network may extend the wires out. More im pretty technical so it sounds like an expierment coming on i would apreciate any input on thiis one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
interesting...
1.) an antenna with better gain than the one currently being used.
2.) Some type of signal amplifier between antenna and receiver with a filter to help cut out interference that may be amplified as well ( would also need an amp for transmitter as well )
With this one it would interesting if there would be a way to utilize the original hardware in the phone and via software, tweak it in order to push a stronger signal, as far as receiving goes not sure if that would be possible if there isn't some type of amp in there already. This may also raise issues though with starting to interfere with other mobile/wireless devices depending on how much the transmission signal was amplified.
3 Signal booster.
Probably the easiest route to go, simply acts like a tower, just on a smaller scale,

Well the antenna is in the back of the phone. Hypothetically the battery Cover. But what about a repeater but on a smaller scale of coarse. I built one to.do wifi in high school had about. 400 ft range though. Bu this was back in 02

That's basically what a signal booster Is doing for you. Completely external from the phone. Most use some type of directional antenna for comms back and forth with the tower, which feeds an amp. That amp has an Omni directional antenna on the backside in order to communicate with your device. Depending on what type of coverage you want(3g/lte) and what coverage area you are looking for depends on the price.
Sent from my LG-VS980 using xda app-developers app