Related
http://www.businessinsider.com/t-mobile-usa-might-sell-to-sprint-2011-3
Saw this today and thought I'd share.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA Premium
I don't see how that merger would work. I personally don't like sprints coverage.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA Premium App
First off, I highly doubt that the US gov't would let a merger like this go down.
Second, I wouldn't be surprised that IF it happened, they would stay as 2 separate companies at the consumer level, but connected via management. It just doesn't make sense for 1 company to offer both GSM and CDMA concurrently. Are they just going to start only taking on handsets that operate with both CDMA and GSM? I just don't find this likely.
I sure hope that this doesn't happen. CDMA really needs to die, and I personally have seen the light of GSM and of T-mobiles slightly more customer-friendly approach. More than likely because their subscriber numbers are dwindelling, but the fact that they openly offer no-contract plans, cheap plans, and are flexible on many different things, I just hope they stick around the way they are. I know this isn't the most profitable business model (but it is still profitable) compared to Verizon, but its one that is necessary for those of us who see the ridiculousness of what the other carriers are charging.
I don't want Sprint + T-mobile to turn into another Verizon. It will just give them more ability to start charging $110 for unlimited plans like Verizon and AT&T do. Choices are good! People like Verizon, and their service is great, but I like my money more than I like Verizon.
Sprint sucks. Tmo would die like nextel is this happened. And I would be ****ed having to run back to verizon
From my permarooted 1209mhz G2 with CM7 nightly 6
This has nothing to do with a single company implementing both GSM and CDMA. This is because SPRINT WANTS GSM, and tmobile already exists.
In upgrading to GSM, there are precisely two options; either implement it yourself (Canada/Belus), or buy one that's ready made.
dhkr234 said:
This has nothing to do with a single company implementing both GSM and CDMA. This is because SPRINT WANTS GSM, and tmobile already exists.
In upgrading to GSM, there are precisely two options; either implement it yourself (Canada/Belus), or buy one that's ready made.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is definitely interesting, but it makes sense. WiMAX sucks compared to the other technologies available, and GSM is just better overall too.
I read that an industry analyst said this is likely T-Mobile selling their towers to Sprint and Sprint leasing them back.
I dunno if I believe that either, but that seems more likely to me than a straight up merger.
martonikaj said:
First off, I highly doubt that the US gov't would let a merger like this go down.
Second, I wouldn't be surprised that IF it happened, they would stay as 2 separate companies at the consumer level, but connected via management. It just doesn't make sense for 1 company to offer both GSM and CDMA concurrently. Are they just going to start only taking on handsets that operate with both CDMA and GSM? I just don't find this likely.
I sure hope that this doesn't happen. CDMA really needs to die, and I personally have seen the light of GSM and of T-mobiles slightly more customer-friendly approach. More than likely because their subscriber numbers are dwindelling, but the fact that they openly offer no-contract plans, cheap plans, and are flexible on many different things, I just hope they stick around the way they are. I know this isn't the most profitable business model (but it is still profitable) compared to Verizon, but its one that is necessary for those of us who see the ridiculousness of what the other carriers are charging.
I don't want Sprint + T-mobile to turn into another Verizon. It will just give them more ability to start charging $110 for unlimited plans like Verizon and AT&T do. Choices are good! People like Verizon, and their service is great, but I like my money more than I like Verizon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about Cingular and At&t? They were allowed to merge along with Sirius and XM... apparently the goverment doesn't care about monopolies. Excuse my spelling lol! Heck, at&t is back as mama bell. They were broken up but they're back now
sino8r said:
What about Cingular and At&t? They were allowed to merge along with Sirius and XM... apparently the goverment doesn't care about monopolies. Excuse my spelling lol! Heck, at&t is back as mama bell. They were broken up but they're back now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True - any opposition from the gov quit when they took M$ to court and they realized that they had more money to spend on lawyers then the government could ever muster.
After this exon mobile merged, making the largest company ever known to man and there has never been a peep about monopoly since.
Since the government is pretty much funded by public enterprise at this point I wouldn't expect them to step in.
PS **** Sprint - they blow - the rumor before this one was that they were going to abandon all of their Clear 4G WiMax ancient bull**** and go to LTE ... so whatever
I've been a tmo customer for 10+ years (well, Omnipoint, voicestream and then T-Mo.) Overall, I've been pretty happy with them.
I was also a Sprint customer, briefly. There wasn't anything wrong with the service, the phone selection (for back then, pre smartphone) was OK, and they had coverage where I needed it.
However, it seems every bill, they messed something up and I had to spend 1-2 hours on hold and dealing with their crap customer service to get it fixed.
Every. Goddamn. Month.
That got old quick.
This was a while ago, perhaps things have changed, I don't know. I did swear "never again" when I finally gave up in disgust and cancelled.
I sincerely hope this doesn't happen.
I have been with T-Mobile over 14 years (Powertel, Voicestream, T-Mobile) and the only time I had issues was back in 2004 when I was stationed at Camp Pendleton. They didn't have towers on the base, therefore no reception, but as soon as I drove off, full bars the whole way. If T-Mobile was to merge with AT&T, and AT&T be the dominate company, I'm gone!
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA Premium App
Looks like #2 and #4 are going to merge. I guess the talk that Sprint might buyout T-Mobile didn't pan out. Looks like they will discontinue those ads where they make fun of AT&T's network.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fiw-att-deutsche-telecom-20110320,0,1733883.story
What does this mean for us?
This is the worst news I've ever heard lol
Jayavarman said:
What does this mean for us?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nothing short term, but this could change the face of the u.s. wireless indusry.
also, already being discussed.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=12242001#post12242001
I definitely think the FCC will prevent it from happening, it would create a GSM monopoly in the US.
why would it matter if it was a gsm monopoly? there are still other carriers regardless, so i dont see it as being a monopoly. you can still buy gsm devices from anywhere and pop yuour sim card in and go if thats what the big deal about gsm is all about.
The problem with a GSM monopoly (or any monopoly really) is that it prevents competition, for instance people who travel frequently and therefore need a GSM handset are left with only one real option (sure there are Verizon and Sprint world phones but that is besides the point)
I blame T-Mobile Girl.
063_XOBX said:
The problem with a GSM monopoly (or any monopoly really) is that it prevents competition, for instance people who travel frequently and therefore need a GSM handset are left with only one real option (sure there are Verizon and Sprint world phones but that is besides the point)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how does only having one gsm provider in the us prevent competition? there are still several other cell providers in the u.s. the reason you state one needs a gsm handset would be to be able to use it while traveling (im assuming you mean abroad) where you would use a local sim card any way. if your using att's minutes to talk over seas, you can do that with sprint and verizon too. they all have international roaming. not being able to use a phone overseas is not related at all to being a monopoly.
austin420 said:
how does only having one gsm provider in the us prevent competition? there are still several other cell providers in the u.s. the reason you state one needs a gsm handset would be to be able to use it while traveling (im assuming you mean abroad) where you would use a local sim card any way. if your using att's minutes to talk over seas, you can do that with sprint and verizon too. they all have international roaming. not being able to use a phone overseas is not related at all to being a monopoly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He's talking about in the broad sense. You had a choice in between AT&T and Tmobile which didn't have the best phones but had fair prices. Now that they're merged people are stuck with the high priced cheap phones without anyother choice for GSM carriers.
Sent From my CyanogenEpicMod 7G
This smells of a monopoly. 3 real major wireless carriers left in the US. It would be like the oil industry. They dont have to buy each other up. They can raise the prices on everyone now and who you going to complain to. They can also slow progress on any new developments in the wireless phone industry. Has anyone given this any thought. Just look at the history of all industry in the United States. There have been monopolies and just a couple of companies left in this country. They always do what they wanted to the consumer.
tmobile had cheap phones? odd and and here i thought half their lineup was android... stupid smartphones...
Alright I think finally there are enough threads on this.
Sent from my Incredible with the XDA Premium App.
So who is gonna release Google experience devices now? AT&T? I doubt it.
muyoso said:
So who is gonna release Google experience devices now? AT&T? I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm holding out hope Verizon will eventually release even just ONE.
Sent from my Incredible with the XDA Premium App.
This is kinda like Intel and AMD. They're the only two major CPU players left. Now if AMD dies off then we'd all be screwed but I doubt it'll ever happen since AMD always have few aces up their sleeve.
Now AT&T bought out T-Mobile will be the only GSM player in this country but this time it's a little different. Far as FCC and SEC are concerned it's not monopoly. We still have choices of different carriers such as AT&T, Verizon and Sprint. I know the latter two don't offer GSM but it doesn't matter much since GSM will eventually be going away and replaced with new standards in a few short years anyway.
Now with so many ticked off T-Mobile users I wouldn't be surprised they will switch to either Verizon or Sprint soon. So basically AT&T just wasted a pileload of cash for nothing. Great business sense they've made. So instead of spending money on improving their network they just buy out the competiton.
AT&T's way of doing things belong in the dinosaurs age and we all know what happened to that.
Darkk
muyoso said:
So who is gonna release Google experience devices now? AT&T? I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is where Sprint should step up their game (and many more places) and release a Google dev/experience device.
We are so screwed!!!!
Darkk69 said:
This is kinda like Intel and AMD. They're the only two major CPU players left. Now if AMD dies off then we'd all be screwed but I doubt it'll ever happen since AMD always have few aces up their sleeve.
Now AT&T bought out T-Mobile will be the only GSM player in this country but this time it's a little different. Far as FCC and SEC are concerned it's not monopoly. We still have choices of different carriers such as AT&T, Verizon and Sprint. I know the latter two don't offer GSM but it doesn't matter much since GSM will eventually be going away and replaced with new standards in a few short years anyway.
Now with so many ticked off T-Mobile users I wouldn't be surprised they will switch to either Verizon or Sprint soon. So basically AT&T just wasted a pileload of cash for nothing. Great business sense they've made. So instead of spending money on improving their network they just buy out the competiton.
AT&T's way of doing things belong in the dinosaurs age and we all know what happened to that.
Darkk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FCC and SEC won't do anything anyways because our government sold the people out along time ago. I don't think they would even stop a Vezion, Sprint and A.T&T merge however improbable that may seem. They would let it happen. This is really bad news. I was hoping to goto T-mobile if sprint started raising there prices. Maybe that is why A.T&T decided to restrict their internet because if people did decide to change carriers they would be stuck with A.T&T. This is a good move for A.T&T and now they can boost they have the fastest 4G network and Sprint will have the slowest 4G network.
Darkk69 said:
Now AT&T bought out T-Mobile will be the only GSM player in this country but this time it's a little different. Far as FCC and SEC are concerned it's not monopoly. We still have choices of different carriers such as AT&T, Verizon and Sprint. I know the latter two don't offer GSM but it doesn't matter much since GSM will eventually be going away and replaced with new standards in a few short years anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure about that because I was under the impression that non GSM services were the odd ones out?
Sent from my Incredible with the XDA Premium App.
Is LTE a big deal for you? Do you even live in the US ? What are your conditions regarding speeds in your area.
Yes LTE is a better technology... but in practice... HSPA is much more established and will give more than sufficient results:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/T-Mo...ter-than-Verizons-4G-LTE-in-11-cities_id31387
I'm not saying I'm glad the device doesn't have LTE, just that it doesn't really affect me in any way at this point in time.
I live in Vancouver, Canada where LTE is readily available and I don't use it. HSPA+ gets me plenty of speed for the /whopping/ 30 minutes a day my phone is on mobile data (commute to and from work; 15m each way). HSPA+ in Canada is from all providers and has great coverage. I regularly get 10-12Mbps. I've been testing a lot lately and I've managed to get 22Mbps and 25Mbps at certain points/times as well on HSPA+. I have zero need for anything faster than that as all I do is stream radio while walking.
I really hate how the American bias towards LTE, because your providers seem to suck, is affecting this phone. By all accounts in the reviews out there "If you don't live in the US, LTE isn't a big deal and this phone is amazing". That's enough for me. I'm on wifi for 95% of my usage anyways. 100Mbps line at home and 250Mbps line at work. Screw LTE.
Pragmata said:
I live in Vancouver, Canada where LTE is readily available and I don't use it. HSPA+ gets me plenty of speed for the /whopping/ 30 minutes a day my phone is on mobile data (commute to and from work; 15m each way). HSPA+ in Canada is from all providers and has great coverage. I regularly get 10-12Mbps. I've been testing a lot lately and I've managed to get 22Mbps and 25Mbps at certain points/times as well on HSPA+. I have zero need for anything faster than that as all I do is stream radio while walking.
I really hate how the American bias towards LTE, because your providers seem to suck, is affecting this phone. By all accounts in the reviews out there "If you don't live in the US, LTE isn't a big deal and this phone is amazing". That's enough for me. I'm on wifi for 95% of my usage anyways. 100Mbps line at home and 250Mbps line at work. Screw LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see your point, but US providers don't "suck" lol. People are bashing LTE on this phone because so many carriers on the US already provide it.
Don't care about lte
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
iAndropple said:
I see your point, but US providers don't "suck" lol. People are bashing LTE on this phone because so many carriers on the US already provide it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get that, but all the major carriers in Canada provide LTE too. The difference is all of our major carriers provide HSPA+ AND LTE so the absence of one simply means the use of the other and speeds on both are phenomenal for a bloody phone. xD I've never understood the necessity for residential internet speeds on your phone. I have a 100Mbps line at home so I can download Steam games really fast. What do people do on their phones that require LTE anyways?
My point about the "seem to suck" comment (which I admit I did say 'seem' because I don't have experience with them) is that from what I have learned, Verizon doesn't have HSPA so the lack of LTE means that the speeds then drop to 3G speeds for them? If that's accurate, a major provider not having both HSPA+ and LTE seems a bit sucky to me. I really guess I just don't understand what people need LTE for or how it affects your phone use. In terms of pure network, LTE is like getting a ferrari when you drive for maybe 5 minutes a day. HSPA+ does everything LTE does at more than acceptable speeds. If the issue is because some of the US networks coverage of HSPA+ is absent or limited, that should reflect upon the providers and not the phone.
I'm not too bothered about LTE either. Though it's available in the UK city in which I reside term-time, which is most of the time, it isn't available in my hometown where my family home is. Sure, by the time I'm done in my student city, LTE will most likely be available at "home" but by then the Nexus 4 will be old and in need of a replacement. I don't need it right now, so DC-HSPA is fine for me. More than fine, actually. Plus my phone is on WiFi most of the time anyway. ;D
TeRRa4 said:
I'm not too bothered about LTE either. Though it's available in the UK city in which I reside term-time, which is most of the time, it isn't available in my hometown where my family home is. Sure, by the time I'm done in my student city, LTE will most likely be available at "home" but by then the Nexus 4 will be old and in need of a replacement. I don't need it right now, so DC-HSPA is fine for me. More than fine, actually. Plus my phone is on WiFi most of the time anyway. ;D
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed
I live in the US but LTE doesn't exist within about a 250 mile radius of where I live so HSPA+ is fine by me!
I live outside the US and LTE is just starting here. I live in the second town of my nation and the first 4G antennas will start to emit here for the public on 1st quarter 2013. Google made the Nexus S 4G, then the Verizon Galaxy Nexus 4G, so why not a Nexus 4 4G tomorrow ?:highfive:
There is a good amount of LTE in my area (SF + the surrounding area), but I suppose I don't NEED it. I've been perfectly fine without it (currently with a Motorola Atrix). However like most of you here, you want the best you can get for your area.
Pragmata said:
.... The difference is all of our major carriers provide HSPA+ AND LTE so the absence of one simply means the use of the other and speeds on both are phenomenal for a bloody phone.....What do people do on their phones that require LTE anyways?
I really guess I just don't understand what people need LTE for or how it affects your phone use.
If the issue is because some of the US networks coverage of HSPA+ is absent or limited, that should reflect upon the providers and not the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. It's the idea that Google is pushing consumers to rely more on the cloud, yet "cripple" the phone's ability to CONNECT TO the cloud by not providing LTE. I live in San Diego - we have LTE here and it works great on all my friends' IPhone 5s.
2. While LTE is certainly NOT COMMONPLACE, it is non-negotiable that it is the infrastructure of the future. HSPA+ represents the pinnacle of it's infrastructure, while LTE is the infancy stage of the a newer, higher throughput technology. As a result, you're paying however much for a phone that is not really very future proof. Regardless of how good of a deal this phone is in the near term, you kind of lose out in the long term, especially when viewed in regards to item 1.
3. Since there is no CDMA version of the Nexus 4, it won't work on Verizon or Sprint in the US anyways. T-mobile has ONLY HSPA+ and AT&T has LTE and HSPA+, with HSPA+ coverage being greater than LTE (in San Diego anyways). LTE coverage, however, is expanding, and will be much more available within the next 2 years. Therefore it's not neccessarily that HSPA+ is limited, its that LTE is limited and that's why Google has chosen to omit it from their device, which may be smart in the near term, but again limits the long term relevance of the phone.
4. As a corollary to 3, Google is really just doing the same thing LG has done with the Optimus G but in a different form. Google doesn't provide LTE, so in 2 years you really will need to buy a new phone if you want to transfer large files to and from your cloud, which you will have to do because your phone only has 8GB or 16GB of on-board storage. LG forces you to buy a new phone because they haven't provided updates to their phone since it's release on day 1 and your phone is horribly laggy and bloated and it's bootloader is locked.
This resonates much like Apple's philosophy, which we all bash them for, yet we defend Google vehemently when it does the same in a more inconspicuous way.
I'm a complete loss for what to do now because I really need a new phone lol.
I live in the USA near Washington DC and I live in strong LTE coverage by Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint (allegedly). I've used LTE and while it's nice, I don't require it. In addition, I like being able to use a SIM card in any country I visit. HSPA+ is more than sufficient for me.
It doesn't bother me. I currently have Verizon and have a Galaxy Nexus. My plan for two lines and unlimited data on LTE costs me 180 USD a month. My same plan, but with more minutes would cost me 100 USD on T-Mobile. Almost double check the cost just for LTE speeds? My contract is up in January. So long, Verizon! Your business practises suck. Hspa+ isn't so bad that it's a steep departure. Half the price plus my phone is unlocked so I can switch carriers if T-Mobile starts to play games with my bill? Awesome.
I'm on TMo and there is no LTE.
So, I can care less atm.
TeRRa4 said:
I'm not too bothered about LTE either. Though it's available in the UK city in which I reside term-time, which is most of the time, it isn't available in my hometown where my family home is. Sure, by the time I'm done in my student city, LTE will most likely be available at "home" but by then the Nexus 4 will be old and in need of a replacement. I don't need it right now, so DC-HSPA is fine for me. More than fine, actually. Plus my phone is on WiFi most of the time anyway. ;D
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Has anyone actually tested the ee network in the real world yet? Here in the UK LTE has finally started to rollout but at the launch event the speeds were not that impressive anyway. Anyway at £26 a month for 500mb i think LTE won't be that popular here for some time when three are offering decent speeds with all you can eat data for £10
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2
dontdo_that said:
1. It's the idea that Google is pushing consumers to rely more on the cloud, yet "cripple" the phone's ability to CONNECT TO the cloud by not providing LTE. I live in San Diego - we have LTE here and it works great on all my friends' IPhone 5s.
2. While LTE is certainly NOT COMMONPLACE, it is non-negotiable that it is the infrastructure of the future. HSPA+ represents the pinnacle of it's infrastructure, while LTE is the infancy stage of the a newer, higher throughput technology. As a result, you're paying however much for a phone that is not really very future proof. Regardless of how good of a deal this phone is in the near term, you kind of lose out in the long term, especially when viewed in regards to item 1.
3. Since there is no CDMA version of the Nexus 4, it won't work on Verizon or Sprint in the US anyways. T-mobile has ONLY HSPA+ and AT&T has LTE and HSPA+, with HSPA+ coverage being greater than LTE (in San Diego anyways). LTE coverage, however, is expanding, and will be much more available within the next 2 years. Therefore it's not neccessarily that HSPA+ is limited, its that LTE is limited and that's why Google has chosen to omit it from their device, which may be smart in the near term, but again limits the long term relevance of the phone.
4. As a corollary to 3, Google is really just doing the same thing LG has done with the Optimus G but in a different form. Google doesn't provide LTE, so in 2 years you really will need to buy a new phone if you want to transfer large files to and from your cloud, which you will have to do because your phone only has 8GB or 16GB of on-board storage. LG forces you to buy a new phone because they haven't provided updates to their phone since it's release on day 1 and your phone is horribly laggy and bloated and it's bootloader is locked.
This resonates much like Apple's philosophy, which we all bash them for, yet we defend Google vehemently when it does the same in a more inconspicuous way.
I'm a complete loss for what to do now because I really need a new phone lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You make great points and I definitely understand where you are coming from, I would still argue that the speeds HSPA+ provides are more than enough for at least the next year and whether your carrier supports that or not is more on them and less on the manufacturer.
That said, I do have a couple follow-ups cause I think you raised some good points and I'm interested in getting your thoughts.
A) At (max) 350$, do you feel that you really wouldn't be opposed to upgrading in a years time when there could potentially be a new Nexus with LTE? For me 350$ is a steal when I regularly buy a new phone every year for 600+. I know not everyone upgrades on a yearly cadence, but if present and future Nexi were priced around that point, I think it might be something more widely adopted. Perhaps this isn't meant to be a "long-term" phone? Obivously the base argument is that you would want something to last, but if it's affordable why not speed up the upgrade cycle?
B) If we disregard carrier failings and just pit HSPA+ against LTE, I don't see how HSPA+ would be such a deprecated technology that it will be irrelevant within 2 years. Sure, LTE will be bigger and better by then with more coverage, but by no means is HSPA+ something to scoff at. A potential 42Mbps on your phone EASILY gives you all the Cloud throughput you need. I had a 50Mbps residential line for my home internet before upgrading to 100Mbps and I can tell you thinks moved seamlessly. 42Mbps is hardly something that won't let you push and pull content on the Cloud. So you might say that you don't get nearly that on X's network, but that isn't reflective of the technology itself. Maybe X just needs to improve their HSPA+ networks while working on LTE.
I kind of see it like the CPU progress on desktop computers. HSPA+ represents a Dual Core/Quad Core CPU that can be clocked at 4Ghz. Even in mainstream computing today most games/apps/programs barely take advantage of a full optimized Dual Core high clock CPU, yet manufacturers are pushing out Hexa- and even Octo-Core CPU's at low clock rates. Those are like LTE. It's going to be a WHILE before we can properly use 16 threads and 4Ghz of speed on a CPU. And just because those CPU's exist, doesn't mean someone should not buy a Dual/Quad Core CPU. Sure, you can't add more cores to it so it's not "future-proof", but we don't even take full advantage of it yet...
C) I'm still curious at what LTE users like yourself are pushing that you feel pressured in the near future that HSPA+ won't provide (again disregarding shortcomings of providers). Myself, I don't do any media use on my phone so I'm obviously the opposite, but even imagining if I was streaming video and pushing lots of media, I can't forsee the need for a connection faster than what I have to my home. The only possible thing I was able to think of is someone with an unlimited data plan (doesn't exist in Canada) that uses their cell connection as their internet connection and tether their computer through it 100% of the time. Just pure curiosity as per what LTE people push.
I suppose most of this all comes down to the provider limitations and as such necessity for LTE, but I'd be more upset at my provider than the manufacturer. Google has built a worldwide product that can reach amazing speeds on HSPA+ networks. I know America is a powerhouse, but you aren't the be-all-end-all in deciding how a phone should be made. LTE has a lot of reach in Canada on all major providers, but they all also have HSPA+ with great coverage. Only people on smaller or piggyback providers are losing out on LTE, but everyone has HSPA. Maybe the American providers should stop fighting with each other over proprietary LTE spectrums.
If you are hankering for a new phone and don't want this, I'd probably say the Razr Maxx or One X+. Those are my runner ups (Once they finally hit Canadian borders) Since you are on these forums I'll disregard suggesting the locked bootloader Optimus G.
I don't understand this.
LTE is available only in USA and a small amount of other countries as a whole. the world isn't only USA and the 10% places. They've made our such a big issue for everyone, and all the reviewers are complaining about no LTE like every country in the world has it.
There is world outside USA you know...
I don't care for LTE and micro SD slot. I just want this phone in my hands already!
UK here. 4G on just one network in only 10 cities. The lack of 4G means nothing to us Brits!
Ok. Most of the team's and members in this community or on xda either know me or have least seen my name. Whether that is my perception or a fact I am hoping you understand the spirit behind this post.
Foe the past 2 years I have either used a vzw gnex or vzw gs3. I loved the support that the gnex had and the almost google experiance of the galaxy nexus.
One thing I always noticed was the amount of roms that the gsm community had over gnex. It became understood that while many devs and teams tried support both only a hand full or two kept with it. the ones that did were very generous and I am grateful f or all your work and time!!!?
So when i was consideringmy next phone it seemed that a gsm phone would be the way to go to get access to the most devs talent.
So I told vzw to go skip!!!$$$$&&:;;;
Now I broke my contract, paid the fee and signed up with tmobile. Now I have this beast of a phone and the first half dozen aosp roms are built but for verizon not a gsm variant,
I am shocked how the switch happened and fast. I am not complaining just wanted to see the community way in on this. Obviously the development is picking up and might balance out. I also am aware that vzw variant came out earlier in US, however over seas gsm g2's have been out for just as long or longer than vzw.
So please give me your thoughts,
Thanks again to all tje devs and teams no matter if u are currently supporting our not!!!!!
Sent from my LG-D801 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
I had the VZW GNex for almost 2 years and had it unlocked and rooted on day 1. I can't speak to the number of GSM ROMs available, but there was certainly no shortage of development for the LTE variant. I had 4.3 on it 6 months ago. The G2 just got that yesterday...
Just my opinion, but the root-head needs to consider WAY more than past developer support when deciding on a new device. Device popularity fuels development. Like it or not, VZW phones tend to sway the market pretty heavily. The VZW variant of a given device is bound to be one of the most numerous on the planet. Add to that the fact that the previous VZW Nexus devices started falling off contract last month and you have all those people looking to move forward...and likely intending to stay with VZW.
Last I read, The Nexus 5 wasn't likely to be seen any time soom on VZW...but the big brother (the G2) is already out. That puts the VZW G2 in the bulls eye for hot development.
IMHO...
Thanks for your opinion!
Sent from my LG-D801 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
The Toro was probably the most dev supported phone I've ever owned.
Verizon is huge it only figures a great device would get beat dev support.
The worst part about your switch is the substandard network you're now on.
Toro support was good but compared to gsm thread not even close. The network coverage here is better for my home and work. At work 3g sometimes with vzw or nada. Which kills battery. T-Mobile 4g all day, so there is no universal better, that depends on your location. So i had the best network with no data at work all day.
Sent from my LG-D801 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
fr4nk1yn said:
The Toro was probably the most dev supported phone I've ever owned.
Verizon is huge it only figures a great device would get beat dev support.
The worst part about your switch is the substandard network you're now on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean substandard for where you work/live/play, right? I don't think you'd be dumb enough to suggest that T-Mobile is substandard for everyone, right? Right? I mean, I have 3 lines, unlimited everything, with 30Mbps LTE everywhere that I work/live/play, and I pay 140 dollars a month. I always have service, I always have data, and I don't drop phonecalls. Is that considered substandard to you?
Let me give you a pro tip, that you should follow at all times. Network service is location dependent. I completely understand the need to justify paying 250 dollars for 3 phones with limited data, etc, on VZW by saying at least the network is great, but lets face it. The vast, vast majority of people don't wander too far from home that often. The vast majority of people are not traveling the countryside from coast to coast all year long, and they don't give a rat's behind that bumstick Idaho has LTE coverage on the VZW map. I used to think I needed VZW, I'm glad I broke the spell that they hold over their customers about how every other network is garbage, because it's simply not true.
Can someone clarify is there is 3G coverage on Verizon? Also, what do people think about the much slower 19Mb vs normal 55Mb speeds the pixel gets? Do you think whatever may be causing the slower speed could also impact coverage area? I went from pretty hyped to pretty skeptical after reading the xda article covering Verizon use. If this worked flawlessy on Verizon it'd be a no brainier purchase but it seems like it won't.
The version Oneplus is offering directly has every band capable of covering each carrier.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
audiophizile said:
Can someone clarify is there is 3G coverage on Verizon? Also, what do people think about the much slower 19Mb vs normal 55Mb speeds the pixel gets? Do you think whatever may be causing the slower speed could also impact coverage area? I went from pretty hyped to pretty skeptical after reading the xda article covering Verizon use. If this worked flawlessy on Verizon it'd be a no brainier purchase but it seems like it won't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 6T will cover all LTE bands needed to work on Verizon and it has been certified by Verizon to work as a bring your own device.. It does not have the CDMA bands for Verizon 3g service. A few reviews mention no issues with Verizon service.
nrage23 said:
The 6T will cover all LTE bands needed to work on Verizon and it has been certified by Verizon to work as a bring your own device.. It does not have the CDMA bands for Verizon 3g service. A few reviews mention no issues with Verizon service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to the Oneplus 6T spec page on the Oneplus website it does indeed have CDMA bands 0 and 1. It should work with legacy 3G Verizon coverage. This doesn't mean it does, but it should be able to...
https://www.oneplus.com/6t/specs
Thanks for all of the replies but nobody has touched on xda's report of it getting 19Mb down on Verizon when the pixel got 55Mb down and the same op6t got 78down on T-Mobile. Is that not a cause for concern? Maybe I should wait for more in depth reviews?
I guess I'll find out next week when mine arrives! Been waiting for these phones to be compatible with Verizon so jumped right on ordering one.
clabern said:
According to the Oneplus 6T spec page on the Oneplus website it does indeed have CDMA bands 0 and 1. It should work with legacy 3G Verizon coverage. This doesn't mean it does, but it should be able to...
https://www.oneplus.com/6t/specs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also from their website.
nrage23 said:
Also from their website.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe that list only shows the LTE bands supported. Maybe I'm wrong but wouldn't it also list out the regular GSM bands supported for AT&T/T-Mobile if it included legacy connections (3G, etc)? I guess once more Verizon people have the phone and test we'll find out.
I ordered one this morning at 9 am to try. They have a 15 day return policy so if it only gets one band or signal sucks or something I will just return and call it a wash!
oneandroidnut said:
I ordered one this morning at 9 am to try. They have a 15 day return policy so if it only gets one band or signal sucks or something I will just return and call it a wash!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think there is 15% restocking fee on returns...
I am in to see reviews for this phone through Verizon as well.. I am either going to get the OnePlus 6T or the Google Pixel 3. I was really excited that the OnePlus 6T would work on Verizon. But, as the OP mentioned. My excitement got dampened by the confusion if 3G will work on the OnePlus (as also mentioned OnePlus website shows bands 0 and 1 are on the phone but people are mentioning that 3G will not work) and the XDA article about much slower download speeds on Verizon with the OnePlus.
Very interested to hear hand on reviews with this phone through the Verizon network.
Ordered for Verizon so we'll see. No need for CDMA here.
Sent from my [device_name] using XDA-Developers Legacy app
Same as many others. Currently, waiting to see reviews on how the OP6T works on VZW.
mjnoles1 said:
I am either going to get the OnePlus 6T or the Google Pixel 3. .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was extremely excited about the pixel 3 non-xl even though the bezels are larger than almost every $800+ phone released in 2018. I forgave that as stereo speakers can be nice. Then they put the nail in the coffin by only having 4GB of RAM. I have had app refresh issues on every 4GB phone I've owned (every Android phone actually and have been using them since the OG Droid). This year was looking promising with phones having 6 and 8GB. When I heard the pixel was only going to be 4 I seriously considered buying an iPhone. I'm honestly very upset. It should be pixel 3 non-xl: 128GB with 6GB for $800 and 256 with 8GB for $900. They could even have gone $900 & $1000 or $1000 & 1100 and I would've bought one. 4GB is a deal breaker unless it was more like $500 or 600. Then I could justify buying one and just upgrading the second something better comes out.
The size of the 6t is my only downside. Love the small bezels but wish is were a 5.8-6" screen with the same resolution and bezels. Have to shrink the battery a bit too obviously.
The 6T does have CDMA. Wheter or not it works with VZW is another question.
I will know how it works with Verizon on Monday. It Shipped today with delivery of 11/5.
Ordered for Verizon today.
We'll see how it works.
I'm not that worried it should work as good as the Essential that I'm going to replace.
Ordered mine on 11/1. Should be here Tuesday but I’m hoping Monday. I think I’m more concerned about the few things I’ve read about no VoWiFi which I use a good bit during holidays with my wife’s family in the sticks.
Real world users of the 6T on Verizon are getting network speeds in the 30s and 40s, which is fine for me.
I've never done better than that on Samsung nor LG phones.