I searched the forums and didn't see a post like this......
So I have talked to a couple representatives from T-Mobile and it has been confirmed that T-Mobile will be acquiring LTE service sometime next year. One rep told me next spring, the other one told me they don't know.
So I'm just going to wait until the day T-Mobile gets LTE then use my upgrade on an LTE phone.
I honestly can't wait!
Have you ever heard of the concept of diminishing returns? At some point increasing the speed of data will give an increase of experience that is so tiny that you won't notice it.. the biggest bottleneck in our data speed is the app that we use to access that data, and the system itself.
With a few build.prop tweaks I consistently get over 18mbs download and 3mbs upload - how much faster can it get? Will a page loading .03 a second faster at higher speeds be worth the battery drain of TRUE lte? Unless the browsing app and the system itself get better, faster data speeds won't do anything you're gonna notice - it is 99.9999999% hype to sell you a new phone or service.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
Silentbtdeadly said:
Have you ever heard of the concept of diminishing returns? At some point increasing the speed of data will give an increase of experience that is so tiny that you won't notice it.. the biggest bottleneck in our data speed is the app that we use to access that data, and the system itself.
With a few build.prop tweaks I consistently get over 18mbs download and 3mbs upload - how much faster can it get? Will a page loading .03 a second faster at higher speeds be worth the battery drain of TRUE lte? Unless the browsing app and the system itself get better, faster data speeds won't do anything you're gonna notice - it is 99.9999999% hype to sell you a new phone or service.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what you mean, but if the speeds are higher, then theoretically, they would be able to support more users.
Look at it this way. You have a water hose that is 1 inch in diameter, and you have a splitter that splits the hose 4 ways. On the 4 ends, the rate of flow would be lower than if it was just 1 end. This is our current 4G service.
And now, the LTE. A hose that is 3 inches in diameter. Now, it can split it 4 ways, and get about 3x more performance in each hose (Which as you mentioned, is probably unnecessary, since we probably wouldn't notice the difference)... OR you could split it 12 ways and you would get the same performance with 1 inch hose that was only split 4 ways. It now can support 3x more hoses, while delivering the same amount of throughput.
It's not always about speed
At this point I really don't care for LTE specially if it drains my battery faster then what my current juice sucking Amaze does. I do think it's all hype at this point. Also I've been wondering weather I really need a juice sucking tripe/quad CPU on my cell.
There is only so much you can do on a cell phone before its over kill. At the moment I have to carefully manage my 4G, Cell phone signal, WIFI, Bluetooth, Air Plane mode, and have a few well placed chargers at home, car and work just to get through the day with my cell.
I'm not sure what I'm going to doing with a Quad Core or Tegra processor cell phone if I got one. Unless I was playing games on my cell phone which is not that great since it doesn't have a physical keyboard a la Xperia play or Droid 2.
I guess that if you watch a lot of videos online the extra speed might be a plus but then again the screen is kind of small and it would kill the battery quick. Right now even a quick game of angry birds or Zombies vs plants zaps the battery life. I guess that if you tether your cell phone and watch videos on a laptop or a tablet then maybe I can see the positive of having LTE.
I wish T-mobile would instead expand their coverage. At my job they have internal antennas throughout the whole campus for Verizon and AT&T, Metro PCS, Sprint. I asked one of the IT project managers if T-mobile would ever get in on the game and add their hardware so that we could have a better T-mobile signal. He laughed at me and said that T-Mobile doesn't play nice and there was no chance. Good thing we have WIFI at work and I use grooveIP and Google voice as my main communication tools.
At this time I'm more then happy with my Amaze 4G speeds. It seems to be about as fast as my home WIFI. It's definitely faster then work WIFI.
I would much rather see improved battery technology and a better screen. I guess I would have to try out LTE just to see if it was worth it but I highly doubt it. Heck right now seeing full bars on my cell is a big plus and cause for celebration.
A note from a AT&T user:
L
T
E
I
S
B
S
Lte reminds me of another acronym: cai which stands for cold air intake.
Yes while lte (and somewhat I have read it's not even true lte???) May be faster on paper, I can tell you its barely noticeable.
Just like a cai, you may be technically gaining a few horses but you won't notice it. I honestly see very little difference between lte and hspa . If any thing else the speed is very inconsistent which attributes to minimal notability in speed.
And after reading how it's not even true lte I am convinced it's just b.s.
Has anyone noticed how call quality has stayed the same for the past 5 years or so?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
rustyxj6 said:
At this point I really don't care for LTE specially if it drains my battery faster then what my current juice sucking Amaze does. I do think it's all hype at this point. Also I've been wondering weather I really need a juice sucking tripe/quad CPU on my cell.
There is only so much you can do on a cell phone before its over kill. At the moment I have to carefully manage my 4G, Cell phone signal, WIFI, Bluetooth, Air Plane mode, and have a few well placed chargers at home, car and work just to get through the day with my cell.
I'm not sure what I'm going to doing with a Quad Core or Tegra processor cell phone if I got one. Unless I was playing games on my cell phone which is not that great since it doesn't have a physical keyboard a la Xperia play or Droid 2.
I guess that if you watch a lot of videos online the extra speed might be a plus but then again the screen is kind of small and it would kill the battery quick. Right now even a quick game of angry birds or Zombies vs plants zaps the battery life. I guess that if you tether your cell phone and watch videos on a laptop or a tablet then maybe I can see the positive of having LTE.
I wish T-mobile would instead expand their coverage. At my job they have internal antennas throughout the whole campus for Verizon and AT&T, Metro PCS, Sprint. I asked one of the IT project managers if T-mobile would ever get in on the game and add their hardware so that we could have a better T-mobile signal. He laughed at me and said that T-Mobile doesn't play nice and there was no chance. Good thing we have WIFI at work and I use grooveIP and Google voice as my main communication tools.
At this time I'm more then happy with my Amaze 4G speeds. It seems to be about as fast as my home WIFI. It's definitely faster then work WIFI.
I would much rather see improved battery technology and a better screen. I guess I would have to try out LTE just to see if it was worth it but I highly doubt it. Heck right now seeing full bars on my cell is a big plus and cause for celebration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, but with quad core, you can be in control, and the way it handles processes is more efficient anyways.. and technically there are five cores, and that fifth smaller core can really help make things more efficient.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
LTE sounds nice and I thought the same about 4G neither which are running where I live. I still have to rely on Edge(2G) for my data. AT&T, Sprint, nor Verizon have their LTE/4G services where I live. So T-mobile can say all they want about their network but that won't be selling me any phones anytime soon.
I think T-mobile should focus on strengthening their signal and offering better speeds in all areas before going LTE. In my recent trip to Florida I basically had to stand in one corner of one room of the house I was staying at to get one bar. I ended up just using my BIL's WIFI the entire time. My MIL has an AT&T old school phone and had fine signal everywhere in the house. It was the same way in the parks.... service going in and out constantly while I saw other ppl on their phones just fine. Not to mention that while I am at work I get 2G at best whilst my AT&T coworkers get 4G. One co-worker just switched from T-mobile to AT&T and said he cannot believe the speed difference. I love T-mobile's customer care, and I have had a great experience with them so I hate to leave but if the signal doesn't improve soon I'm going to be forced to make the switch.
rachelm920 said:
I think T-mobile should focus on strengthening their signal and offering better speeds in all areas before going LTE. In my recent trip to Florida I basically had to stand in one corner of one room of the house I was staying at to get one bar. I ended up just using my BIL's WIFI the entire time. My MIL has an AT&T old school phone and had fine signal everywhere in the house. It was the same way in the parks.... service going in and out constantly while I saw other ppl on their phones just fine. Not to mention that while I am at work I get 2G at best whilst my AT&T coworkers get 4G. One co-worker just switched from T-mobile to AT&T and said he cannot believe the speed difference. I love T-mobile's customer care, and I have had a great experience with them so I hate to leave but if the signal doesn't improve soon I'm going to be forced to make the switch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
Yeah I also am more concerned with consistent service. Where I live I can get anywhere from 10kbs, yes kbs down, and pretty much nothing up. To about 5mbs down. But about 7 miles from here I get consistent speeds of 28mbs down I'd much prefer that being the norm since that's plenty fast. I'm told the technology that everyone is hoping to move to is more economically sound and should save the user money theoretically. Now whether the companies will pass that savings to us... Who knows. But I'd much rather get service where I currently don't. And data where I only have service like when I camp certain areas
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
Also rather see them increase signal with Hspa+ rather than make the LTE switch. I am already getting craptastic battery life and my service is so spotty! I currently have 4G where I work at outside, but I walk 50 yards rather outside or inside the building I get full bars of EDGE. Always a good signal, just completely different speeds.
Have a friend on Verizon and he has an LTE phone and his speeds off the network are crazy fast, but it isn't like off the wall crazy different when I am in a strong 4G area. I have hit mid 20's download and almost 4 upload.
Marketing at its finest IMO.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using Tapatalk 2
mznatnat said:
I searched the forums and didn't see a post like this......
So I have talked to a couple representatives from T-Mobile and it has been confirmed that T-Mobile will be acquiring LTE service sometime next year. One rep told me next spring, the other one told me they don't know.
So I'm just going to wait until the day T-Mobile gets LTE then use my upgrade on an LTE phone.
I honestly can't wait!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While lte will eventually take over hspa+ is more than sufficient and in my case here in San Diego it's faster.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda premium
Keylogger_0 said:
I understand what you mean, but if the speeds are higher, then theoretically, they would be able to support more users.
Look at it this way. You have a water hose that is 1 inch in diameter, and you have a splitter that splits the hose 4 ways. On the 4 ends, the rate of flow would be lower than if it was just 1 end. This is our current 4G service.
And now, the LTE. A hose that is 3 inches in diameter. Now, it can split it 4 ways, and get about 3x more performance in each hose (Which as you mentioned, is probably unnecessary, since we probably wouldn't notice the difference)... OR you could split it 12 ways and you would get the same performance with 1 inch hose that was only split 4 ways. It now can support 3x more hoses, while delivering the same amount of throughput.
It's not always about speed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That analogy is actually kind of weak. Firstly, not all phones will be LTE. Second, just like other spectrums, the more people use it, the slower it will be. I'm all for LTE however, as more use it, the faster 4g signal will be. But if you do aa cost benefit analysis(yes, a science-y term), the amount of extra battery consumption for the negligable amount of increased performance would be bad. Until we have things that require those speeds(maybe torrents), you simply wont notice gains worth the extra consumption.
rachelm920 said:
I think T-mobile should focus on strengthening their signal and offering better speeds in all areas before going LTE. In my recent trip to Florida I basically had to stand in one corner of one room of the house I was staying at to get one bar. I ended up just using my BIL's WIFI the entire time. My MIL has an AT&T old school phone and had fine signal everywhere in the house. It was the same way in the parks.... service going in and out constantly while I saw other ppl on their phones just fine. Not to mention that while I am at work I get 2G at best whilst my AT&T coworkers get 4G. One co-worker just switched from T-mobile to AT&T and said he cannot believe the speed difference. I love T-mobile's customer care, and I have had a great experience with them so I hate to leave but if the signal doesn't improve soon I'm going to be forced to make the switch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I live in Florida, used to be Daytona(central florida area), and now jacksonville.. there are a few miles in between that I lose 4g, but I can testify that the east coast down to Miami actually has pretty great coverage. Jacksonvilles signal strength has been amazing everywhere(biggest city in the u.s. by square miles) except for where I just moved, which is the ffirst time I've Ever experienced drops in signal from 4g to 2g to no signal in a few feet.. but that likely has to do witg the interferance from the very close power grid.
While LTE is a great technology with a lot of potential, and it will lessen the burden on other bandwidth spectrums.. the usefulness at the moment is comparable tto the concept of anything more than a quad core(which isn't fully realized) or more than a gig of ram.. diminishing returns. At this point they need new, bigger, and faster features to sell us new phones, just like rom develpers need new features to make new roms worth downloading. I say if it isn't broke, don't fix it. If you like hype.. buy buy buy. At some point it is like buying a new phone that the only difference is that it has siri(I had to throw that in, lol. All hype )
Edit: software is one of the biggest upgrades at the moment. Upgrading from gingerbread to ics will give a bigger performance boost that a faster processor, more cores, or more ram. Everything from the browser on up will be faster than an upgrade to data speed. Or the hardware specs that are neglected on mobile phones that matter just like a computer. How many threads can the processor handle? What's the NM rate of the processor? What is the sspeed of the ram rather than the total? Or how about upgrades to the gpu rather than Number of cores or the amount of ram?
Specs we see are expressed so simple for the consumer to think it matters. Oh, this phone has a 1.7ghz quad core, it must be better than the 1.5ghz. Oh, two gigs of ram, twice as much as the last one! While the smaller harder to understand specs are completely forgotten.
LTE! Bah!
Sent from my NookColor using XDA
Silentbtdeadly said:
Have you ever heard of the concept of diminishing returns? At some point increasing the speed of data will give an increase of experience that is so tiny that you won't notice it.. the biggest bottleneck in our data speed is the app that we use to access that data, and the system itself.
With a few build.prop tweaks I consistently get over 18mbs download and 3mbs upload - how much faster can it get? Will a page loading .03 a second faster at higher speeds be worth the battery drain of TRUE lte? Unless the browsing app and the system itself get better, faster data speeds won't do anything you're gonna notice - it is 99.9999999% hype to sell you a new phone or service.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am admittedly a bit of a noob. But I would be interested in learning some about build.prop and what lines can be edited. I guess there is always trial and error, but if someone could point me on the right direction that would be cool.
Edit: nm had time to do a bit of searching
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
jaytee20 said:
I am admittedly a bit of a noob. But I would be interested in learning some about build.prop and what lines can be edited. I guess there is always trial and error, but if someone could point me on the right direction that would be cool.
Edit: nm had time to do a bit of searching
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I can save you a bit of searching.. no rom in our development section uses the max speeds(except maybe speedrom), but all of these lines exist in any rom and the stock rom's build.prop - if you have different settings, you are getting lower speeds(higher speeds may be possible, these are just the highest I've tested without reducing battery life that I know work):
ro.ril.hsxpa=5
ro.ril.gprsclass=14
ro.ril.enable.dtm=1
ro.ril.hsdpa.category=32
ro.ril.hsupa.category=7
There are tons and tons of lines you can edit or add to the build.prop.. here are some recent ones from the s3 forums that explain what they actually do http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1769458
There are also some lines in most of our roms that have #comments before them explaining what they do, like disabling checkin services to htc and google, etc.. definitely worth learning tho
The day that data speeds over 5 mbs is "that" important to me is the day i beat myself to death with my own phone
No tweaks and I get average 28 megabits in Austin Texas
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda app-developers app
I'm confused about our phone a bit. I thought I had seen that our phone says something about lte in the kernel or somewhere. Why? And I remember faux saying he had disabled it I think
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda premium
fcpelayo said:
I'm confused about our phone a bit. I thought I had seen that our phone says something about lte in the kernel or somewhere. Why? And I remember faux saying he had disabled it I think
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does have LTE listed, you can even find it in the APN settings, but it's completely pointless without the hardware, which our device doesn't have, reason being why faux disabled it.
Dark Nightmare said:
It does have LTE listed, you can even find it in the APN settings, but it's completely pointless without the hardware, which our device doesn't have, reason being why faux disabled it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So why would we even have it on the software level?
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using xda premium
Related
I currently have the EVO (great phone) but I have trouble using the 4G (WIMAX), I live in a 4G area that doesn't have 4G, lol and and work I have a lot of concrete around, so 4G doesn't work there either, so I'm wondering if I should try the TB 4G on LTE, I use 3g at work no problem but its still too slow. I hardly never have the 4G turned on my EVO which Im kinda upset about, so far WIMAX has really kinda sucked. Does anyone have experience with both radios? and do you think LTE might penetrate the concrete at my work?
It should do better. The way i understand it, higher frequencies (Wimax being 2.5 -3.5 GHz range) are more easily deflected. Like a bouncing ball.
LTE runs at 700 MHz and does penetrate better. Like a dodgeball.
arkshel said:
I currently have the EVO (great phone) but I have trouble using the 4G (WIMAX), I live in a 4G area that doesn't have 4G, lol and and work I have a lot of concrete around, so 4G doesn't work there either, so I'm wondering if I should try the TB 4G on LTE, I use 3g at work no problem but its still too slow. I hardly never have the 4G turned on my EVO which Im kinda upset about, so far WIMAX has really kinda sucked. Does anyone have experience with both radios? and do you think LTE might penetrate the concrete at my work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody can really say because we don't have a LTE phone yet. You might want to test one when they come out.
Sent by my Droid Incredible
jbh00jh said:
Nobody can really say because we don't have a LTE phone yet. You might want to test one when they come out.
Sent by my Droid Incredible
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks I will try it and ill keep my fingers crossed.
LTE will penetrate buildings better than WiMAX. The question is whether your specific spot is in good coverage and only you can test that.
I've been ordering 4G LTE usb modems for my company's new hires and had one of the other IT guys do some bandwidth tests. (I ordered one of his new hires the 4G modem and he promptly had me switch it into his name and gave his new hire his old 3G model). Anyway, he got 4.55 Mb/s down and 3.13 Mb/s up compared to 1.75 Mb/s down and 0.53 Mb/s up on his 3G modem. This was in NYC. Indoors, but with good reception. This is very fast indeed.
LTE is vastly superior to wimax. I can write more details out later, but you can put your faith in it.
Worked on the infrastructure!
Quite simply, Wimax sucks. I can only get it downtown. I can get it for thirty seconds at my job and I can't get it at all in my home. I can't even get it if I step outside. Sprint has really dug a hole for themselves tacking on 10 dollars under the title of "Premium Data." They later tacked on a premium data charge for all smartphones; they would have been better off simply saying that they were raising prices to offset the costs of being able to provide unlimited data... These things led to Sprint having record lows on their quarterly report. Having a new Nintendo DS-like non-4G enabled phone isn't gonna help their sales much more... Making the decision to switch to Verizon to get the Thunderbolt because I will be able to get the best service. In my neighborhood, Verizon is the only carrier that gets full bars and doesn't drop calls. They charge a lot but you can't say that you don't get what you pay for. I'm certain that Verizon's LTE will be superior to Wimax. Verizon is all about having services and devices that are superior to their competition.
Sent from my PG06100 using XDA App
Amen !
Sent by my Droid Incredible
bobbysteels216 said:
Quite simply, Wimax sucks. I can only get it downtown. I can get it for thirty seconds at my job and I can't get it at all in my home. I can't even get it if I step outside. Sprint has really dug a hole for themselves tacking on 10 dollars under the title of "Premium Data." They later tacked on a premium data charge for all smartphones; they would have been better off simply saying that they were raising prices to offset the costs of being able to provide unlimited data... These things led to Sprint having record lows on their quarterly report. Having a new Nintendo DS-like non-4G enabled phone isn't gonna help their sales much more... I making the decision to switch to Verizon to get the Thunderbolt because I will be able to get the best service. In my neighborhood, Verizon is the only carrier that gets full bars and doesn't drop calls. They charge a lot but you can't say that you don't get what you pay for. I'm certain that Verizon's LTE will be superior to Wimax. Verizon is all about having services and devices that are superior to their competition.
Sent from my PG06100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said. The thunderbolt/Verizon is definitely ahead of the curve at this moment, and probably will be through 2011.
Sent from my DROIDX using XDA App
karnovaran said:
LTE will penetrate buildings better than WiMAX. The question is whether your specific spot is in good coverage and only you can test that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically, its the frequency being used (700mhz vs 2.5ghz), rather than the technology (LTE vs WiMax).
Higher frequency (2.5ghz) can't travel as far (so you need more towers per square mile), and has a harder time penetrating solid objects compared to lower frequencies (700mhz).
Nc area. Speeds have took a serious drive. Only at like 3am my speeds are descent.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I get 5-6 on average and 9-10 at like 1 am
Me too. But what do I get during the day, when u actually use your phone. Something has changed. Is sprint throttling bandwidth?
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
JaY iZz BaKk said:
I get 5-6 on average and 9-10 at like 1 am
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where in NC are you b/c here in south raleigh they blow. i get MAX PEEK at like 4-5am and thats only about 0.8Mbps, and then by 9-10am the speeds drop off to roughly 0.25Mbps. I've seen many many times that by 4pm they drop off to 0.04Mbps. this of course is on 3G.
When i spoke to one of the techs on their forum he looked up and actually spoke with the Raleigh/Durham network market manager who said "switch upgrades scheduled for this weekend, BSC migrations, and optimization changes are scheduled to all take place by November 3. Site level solutions are in the pipeline with an ETA of 12/31 for noticeable market improvement"
Thanks for the update!!! I'm closer to the knightville area. I was really thinking about changing carriers but ill wait to after 12/31..
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I work in downtown Raleigh and 3g speeds have dropped significantly since last year. It can be unbearable at times.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
I'm at fort bragg and my speeds haven't changed much they have been a steady .3. I take trips up to chapple hill quite often and the 4g there is a steady 8megs and peaks at 10megs. But that's with speed test i still load YouTube faster than ATT and Verizon phones.
Sent from my phone
wow sorry I have T-Mobile >_>
I forget the 3D is a sprint phone mostly in the states
you guys make it sound like sprint has ever had fast 3G speeds, its always been well below other carriers and well below 1mbps
bloodrain954 said:
you guys make it sound like sprint has ever had fast 3G speeds, its always been well below other carriers and well below 1mbps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get around 800-1.2 sometimes higher... but no 4g... and I live in a town of 60k so its not well "developed" but getting better than T-Mobile in my area
MIUI Powered Shooter
welcome to sprint
I think the point has been well made (its always been bad). Their 3G network has been way way over sold. The decrease in speed lately is likely due to increased traffic of the holiday season. Also as it gets colder in all parts of the country more people spend more time in doors and the network gets even more use. Obviously as it gets later at night/early morning you see speeds increase slightly because less traffic.
This isn't something you will see get drastically better until many people are moved onto the LTE network, with very wide coverage, and a huge percentage of users have hardware capable of accessing that LTE network. This of course is if the LTE upgrade actually happens the way they say it will. People can say "oh it will work, you will see" all they want. That's great if it does, but don't count on everything working out the way they say it will. Hope it does, but don't count on it. It is highly dependent on third party funding, third party building up the network, not going bankrupt, their partners and investors not having funding problems, FCC approval, etc. All it takes for this to turn out like Wimax is for anyone of those things to go wrong.
Sprint has made the same promises with the same conditions they had when they tried to roll out Wimax. Clear had financial trouble, and the whole roll out stopped completely.
Well.. my 3G has always been between 2.0 - 2.5MB. My slowness until a few months ago. Some users say they are throttling because of the number of iPhone users. Don't know..
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I'm in Garner NC and I get decent speeds usually .78mbps download on 3g I can't pull more than 1mbps until late night. On 4G i can get around 2-4 download and 1 to 1.6 upload.
bloodrain954 said:
you guys make it sound like sprint has ever had fast 3G speeds, its always been well below other carriers and well below 1mbps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not true, as of a few years ago sprint customers on average got higher 3g speeds than all the other carriers but since then everyone else has upgraded their networks while sprint has been on a steady decline.
Sad Panda said:
I think the point has been well made (its always been bad). Their 3G network has been way way over sold. The decrease in speed lately is likely due to increased traffic of the holiday season. Also as it gets colder in all parts of the country more people spend more time in doors and the network gets even more use. Obviously as it gets later at night/early morning you see speeds increase slightly because less traffic.
This isn't something you will see get drastically better until many people are moved onto the LTE network, with very wide coverage, and a huge percentage of users have hardware capable of accessing that LTE network. This of course is if the LTE upgrade actually happens the way they say it will. People can say "oh it will work, you will see" all they want. That's great if it does, but don't count on everything working out the way they say it will. Hope it does, but don't count on it. It is highly dependent on third party funding, third party building up the network, not going bankrupt, their partners and investors not having funding problems, FCC approval, etc. All it takes for this to turn out like Wimax is for anyone of those things to go wrong.
Sprint has made the same promises with the same conditions they had when they tried to roll out Wimax. Clear had financial trouble, and the whole roll out stopped completely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While most of what you say is true here the part about it not getting better till LTE is not likely true. Sprint has oversold their network but from what I've been told they are having to increase the switch capacity at the towers as they all bottleneck there on top of adding more T1 lines to.the stations. I was shown via email a screen shot of the work approved to add T1 line to my tower here and the guy said I had no idea how bad of a problem it is now, and they finally after all these years of seeing this happen are starting to get around to fixing it.
Just know come 2015 stuff here will be all good and most being complete by 2013. The thing I'm more mad about with sprint is the premier program going away.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
sgt. slaughter said:
While most of what you say is true here the part about it not getting better till LTE is not likely true. Sprint has oversold their network but from what I've been told they are having to increase the switch capacity at the towers as they all bottleneck there on top of adding more T1 lines to.the stations. I was shown via email a screen shot of the work approved to add T1 line to my tower here and the guy said I had no idea how bad of a problem it is now, and they finally after all these years of seeing this happen are starting to get around to fixing it.
Just know come 2015 stuff here will be all good and most being complete by 2013. The thing I'm more mad about with sprint is the premier program going away.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I definitely agree with the premier opinion. Using a T1 line to improve performance, that's a terrible idea in my opinion. I hope you were misinformed about that part, because in todays age using a T1 line from tower to backbone would be creating a bottleneck in and of itself. While a full T1 has bandwidth on its side it doesn't have throughput speed on its side. A full T1 has a mere 1.44mbit of throughput. That's a huge handicap. Todays' RESIDENTIAL coaxial cable lines are being fed by fiber optics and the throughput speed has effectively no technical limitations. We are seeing both DSL and cable at people's homes running at 50mbit, and as equipment keeps getting upgraded raising that number almost twice a year for Pennies cost of the ISP. So both the bandwidth and throughput of DSL and cable have far out preformed T1 lines and far cheaper to run and maintain.
Sprint has OC 192 lines for the backbone, and in many places have upgraded to OC 768. We are talking Terabits per second at the backbone level. 3G is capable of double or more throughput than T1's measly 1.44mbit, so that T1 just ends up creating bottle necks. If sprint was real cheap they wouldn't even be using full T1, but fractional and that 1.44 mbit gets cut into pieces. So....I really hope their solution to the bottle necks are not T1. If you were in fact correct, we basically won't ever see fast 3G
Sad Panda said:
I definitely agree with the premier opinion. Using a T1 line to improve performance, that's a terrible idea in my opinion. I hope you were misinformed about that part, because in todays age using a T1 line from tower to backbone would be creating a bottleneck in and of itself. While a full T1 has bandwidth on its side it doesn't have throughput speed on its side. A full T1 has a mere 1.44mbit of throughput. That's a huge handicap. Todays' RESIDENTIAL coaxial cable lines are being fed by fiber optics and the throughput speed has effectively no technical limitations. We are seeing both DSL and cable at people's homes running at 50mbit, and as equipment keeps getting upgraded raising that number almost twice a year for Pennies cost of the ISP. So both the bandwidth and throughput of DSL and cable have far out preformed T1 lines and far cheaper to run and maintain.
Sprint has OC 192 lines for the backbone, and in many places have upgraded to OC 768. We are talking Terabits per second at the backbone level. 3G is capable of double or more throughput than T1's measly 1.44mbit, so that T1 just ends up creating bottle necks. If sprint was real cheap they wouldn't even be using full T1, but fractional and that 1.44 mbit gets cut into pieces. So....I really hope their solution to the bottle necks are not T1. If you were in fact correct, we basically won't ever see fast 3G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll double check my emails tomorrow as it did sound wired to me for them to be running T1 lines into the towers. He said most are adding more T1 lines in to boost capacity and all.
Like i said i thought it was wired bc my previous work hell we ran DS3 connection...
Edit:double checked and it is a T1 line for voice and another T1 for EVDO capacity because my tower near my home is overflooded like most are evidently. This is also aside from the actual switch upgrades he said were planned soon too. All of this has zero to do with the network vision rollout unfortunately for me. Lol
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
sgt. slaughter said:
I'll double check my emails tomorrow as it did sound wired to me for them to be running T1 lines into the towers. He said most are adding more T1 lines in to boost capacity and all.
Like i said i thought it was wired bc my previous work hell we ran DS3 connection...
Edit:double checked and it is a T1 line for voice and another T1 for EVDO capacity because my tower near my home is overflooded like most are evidently. This is also aside from the actual switch upgrades he said were planned soon too. All of this has zero to do with the network vision rollout unfortunately for me. Lol
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ugh dude....this terrifies me. I hope he is trying to say they are adding more T1 lines. I think there is a way to combine multiple T1 lines to one tower. I'm not an expert on T1 lines, because that technology is getting very old (50+ years). T1 and T3 are the same thing. Basically T3 is just multiple T1 channels multiplexed, so you get close to 50 times the throughput. Even still there are so many cheaper alternatives I have no idea why they would choose this topology. Now, hopefully what they are really doing if they are using the technology is using many many T1 lines and multiplying the channels. However even a T5 only gets around 400 mbit. Again something like cable fed by fiber would be capable of that. I don't honestly have the expertise to guess whether it has enough bandwidth to keep speed high for 100+ people.
I just don't know enough to understand why they are doing it this way. Even if they were really using T3 it just wouldn't have enough bandwidth to hold very many people at high speed. Anymore than what they already have anyway. Someone with more knowledge needs to explain this to me.
Sad Panda said:
Ugh dude....this terrifies me. I hope he is trying to say they are adding more T1 lines. I think there is a way to combine multiple T1 lines to one tower. I'm not an expert on T1 lines, because that technology is getting very old (50+ years). T1 and T3 are the same thing. Basically T3 is just multiple T1 channels multiplexed, so you get close to 50 times the throughput. Even still there are so many cheaper alternatives I have no idea why they would choose this topology. Now, hopefully what they are really doing if they are using the technology is using many many T1 lines and multiplying the channels. However even a T5 only gets around 400 mbit. Again something like cable fed by fiber would be capable of that. I don't honestly have the expertise to guess whether it has enough bandwidth to keep speed high for 100+ people.
I just don't know enough to understand why they are doing it this way. Even if they were really using T3 it just wouldn't have enough bandwidth to hold very many people at high speed. Anymore than what they already have anyway. Someone with more knowledge needs to explain this to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea obv its adding more T1 lines. Not saying they are running their first line to the tower.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Hello!
I am coming in from years of HD2 use, running gingerbreadish as droid.
Happy with my hardware, goodness the camera is awesome!
But the software is kinda bleh.
My HD2 running droid almost seemed faster, both on 3g, and internally with switching apps or even pictures. Of course I understand the handicapping that T-Mobile curses their phones with, but is anyone else having 3.5g issues?
Do the current custom ROMS produce better radio reception?
I'm in no hurry to flash, everything else is slick, exactly what I needed in a phone...but the weak data stream (10mbps fluctuating to 0.01 mbps and back during downloads) is irritating.
WiFi is not an option, I simply want a steadier data connection.
EDIT: My entire usage footprint is bright T-Mobile pink indicating awesome "4g" (yeah yeah I know, there's no such thing?)
kidrythm said:
Hello!
I am coming in from years of HD2 use, running gingerbreadish as droid.
Happy with my hardware, goodness the camera is awesome!
But the software is kinda bleh.
My HD2 running droid almost seemed faster, both on 3g, and internally with switching apps or even pictures. Of course I understand the handicapping that T-Mobile curses their phones with, but is anyone else having 3.5g issues?
Do the current custom ROMS produce better radio reception?
I'm in no hurry to flash, everything else is slick, exactly what I needed in a phone...but the weak data stream (10mbps fluctuating to 0.01 mbps and back during downloads) is irritating.
WiFi is not an option, I simply want a steadier data connection.
EDIT: My entire usage footprint is bright T-Mobile pink indicating awesome "4g" (yeah yeah I know, there's no such thing?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just got my Amaze a few weeks ago... and I do believe this phone was promised to have a great connection... "HSPA+ 42" .... Mine works OK... but I live in Chicago. Sometimes it all depends on where you live..... if you live in a major city then you shouldn't have too many signal problems.
I found a T-Mobile customer support link you might wanna check out....
Tell me if this works for you...
http://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-3294
Not sure I understand what your issue is, but if you're less than chuffed with the software, stay tuned.... Amaze is one of the models that HTC has confirmed as getting ICS in "early 2012" (probably more like Q2, perhaps Q3). Whether it will get Sense 4.0 hasn't been documented, but I presume it will. I don't believe Gingerbread (2.3.4) or Sense 3.0 were optimized for the dual-core S3, so ... perhaps the update will bring snappier performance. (Hands-on reports of Sense 4 indicate it's pretty slick, a major improvement.)
From what I've been told, T-Mo's HSPA+ network is spotty ... great in some spots, so-so in others. I'm supposed to be in a prime spot, and I think I'm in line-of-sight of my local tower ... but in my second story bedroom, I can only get 17MBPS down (with Ookla Speedtest.net). (shrug)
And a week ago, AT&T (I canceled with them in December) turned on LTE in my section of town. Oops.[1]
_____________
[1] Update: ... And this week AT&T announced the end to even the grandfathered unlimited data plans (like I had from 2006).
honestly can you even tell? to browse on your phone i dont think you need a better connection than 10mb/s i get 2 because of the area im in (WIND is the Equivalent of T-Mobile USA) and im happy with it lol ( speeds are supposed to be 5-12 mb/s
ChromeJob said:
Not sure I understand what your issue is, but if you're less than chuffed with the software, stay tuned.... Amaze is one of the models that HTC has confirmed as getting ICS in "early 2012" (probably more like Q2, perhaps Q3). Whether it will get Sense 4.0 hasn't been documented, but I presume it will. I don't believe Gingerbread (2.3.4) or Sense 3.0 were optimized for the dual-core S3, so ... perhaps the update will bring snappier performance. (Hands-on reports of Sense 4 indicate it's pretty slick, a major improvement.)
From what I've been told, T-Mo's HSPA+ network is spotty ... great in some spots, so-so in others. I'm supposed to be in a prime spot, and I think I'm in line-of-sight of my local tower ... but in my second story bedroom, I can only get 17MBPS down (with Ookla Speedtest.net). (shrug)
And a week ago, AT&T (I canceled with them in December) turned on LTE in my section of town. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AT&T doesn't have good plans... My boyfriend has LTE ... he has the SGSII SKYROCKET.... he only gets 2GB of data... then after he exceeds... they give him AOL DIAL UP SPEEDS... and he has the UNLIMITED PLAN.... and he pays $115 / mon.
I pay $85 / mon and get 5GB of data on the HSPA+ 42 network.... hmmmmm
I WIN. (and so do you.... )
I get 10-12mbit connections, compared to my hd2 which got me 1-2mbit. there is a difference. Also, I feel like the amaze is slightly better, since the hd2's network capability is horrible, after 1 hour of being in a dead spot, it won't try to re-establish a network when I'm back in a signal zone. The only way to get it again is to restart. Tried it with multiple radios/roms.
ChromeJob said:
Not sure I understand what your issue is, but if you're less than chuffed with the software, stay tuned.... Amaze is one of the models that HTC has confirmed as getting ICS in "early 2012" (probably more like Q2, perhaps Q3). Whether it will get Sense 4.0 hasn't been documented, but I presume it will. I don't believe Gingerbread (2.3.4) or Sense 3.0 were optimized for the dual-core S3, so ... perhaps the update will bring snappier performance. (Hands-on reports of Sense 4 indicate it's pretty slick, a major improvement.)
From what I've been told, T-Mo's HSPA+ network is spotty ... great in some spots, so-so in others. I'm supposed to be in a prime spot, and I think I'm in line-of-sight of my local tower ... but in my second story bedroom, I can only get 17MBPS down (with Ookla Speedtest.net). (shrug)
And a week ago, AT&T (I canceled with them in December) turned on LTE in my section of town. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tmo towers are getting updated this year. In some spots I already get 20-27 mb/s in the Twin Cities MN
Sent from my Energized HTC Ruby using XDA-Premium or Tapatalk
My hd2 gave me about 2-3mbs, my amaze gives me 12-15mbs and peaks of 18-22
Glorious!!!!
Sent from my HTC Amaze 4G using XDA App
Yeah, when I am in good 4G coverage I can hit 20 download and 5 upload. It is actually faster on 4 G than on my WiFi, lol!
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using Tapatalk
Make sure you update the SIM card to the new "4G" SIM cards. I used to work at T-Mo and you need the new SIM card to have better connection.
JesseMT4G said:
Yeah, when I am in good 4G coverage I can hit 20 download and 5 upload. It is actually faster on 4 G than on my WiFi, lol!
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually prefer 4G over my WiFi. But I don't wanna get throttled -__-
Sent from my HTC Amaze 4G using XDA App
I did the sim switch, which seemed odd because I used the sim in the box.
I was throttled down to 0.06 mbps, consistent until about an hour ago since 3/1...voice cleared at exactly 12 am...data throttle cleared later (imho, this is wrong and should be illegal under an unli mited contract).
FYI: I maxed out at 14g during one billing cycle before the caps...I am not the enemy...I blew up my data just to see what it could do, all on the hd2, no tether/hot spot.
My head hurt for a week.
So, fixed the light bleed, got the sim, found light slivers creeping from both lower sides of the screen...but only when the capacitives are on, and soon to be rooted etc.
But seriously, your speeds are depressing me...I average 4 down, .23 up in Kansas City...home of Sprint.
Shouldn't be too long, I'll have it purrrrring.
kidrythm said:
I did the sim switch, which seemed odd because I used the sim in the box.
I was throttled down to 0.06 mbps, consistent until about an hour ago since 3/1...voice cleared at exactly 12 am...data throttle cleared later (imho, this is wrong and should be illegal under an unli mited contract).
FYI: I maxed out at 14g during one billing cycle before the caps...I am not the enemy...I blew up my data just to see what it could do, all on the hd2, no tether/hot spot.
My head hurt for a week.
So, fixed the light bleed, got the sim, found light slivers creeping from both lower sides of the screen...but only when the capacitives are on, and soon to be rooted etc.
But seriously, your speeds are depressing me...I average 4 down, .23 up in Kansas City...home of Sprint.
Shouldn't be too long, I'll have it purrrrring.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure you'll get better download speeds then if you already have the latest sim card. The amaze has yet to get a way to flash different radios...
Coming from the Hd2 your going to be rather disappointed with the development here. If only we could pull Tytung over here.
kidrythm said:
Hello!
I am coming in from years of HD2 use, running gingerbreadish as droid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Were twins. I had the hd2 before the amaze too! :3
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA
craigtut said:
I'm not sure you'll get better download speeds then if you already have the latest sim card. The amaze has yet to get a way to flash different radios...
Coming from the Hd2 your going to be rather disappointed with the development here. If only we could pull Tytung over here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed!
At least the development here isn't born of pure frustration like it was for the HD2.
The countless denials and misdirection from T-Mobile, my 6 years of problem free history ended when I activated the powerful nightmare (all cell giants have accepted the dark side by now).
It was a year and a half before I felt comfortable using an sd Rom.
I still don't trust the hardware for a full wipe...
knifeproz said:
Were twins. I had the hd2 before the amaze too! :3
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are your initial thoughts?
Imho, this is the HD3...
My thoughts? Hmm....I love this device far more than than the hd2 for the sole purpose that things work. As in its android from the box and I don't need to take wp6.5 off resulting in bad battery. The hd2 is a great device and I love it and this is kind of like it except no hardware buttons and less devs. But so far with what I've seen with the 5 days I've had this phone its amazing, and it was a great move to switch from the hd2.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA
knifeproz said:
My thoughts? Hmm....I love this device far more than than the hd2 for the sole purpose that things work. As in its android from the box and I don't need to take wp6.5 off resulting in bad battery. The hd2 is a great device and I love it and this is kind of like it except no hardware buttons and less devs. But so far with what I've seen with the 5 days I've had this phone its amazing, and it was a great move to switch from the hd2.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The addition of the forward facing camera, dedicated camera/vid button, and a larger market (pathetic, anemic, sorry assed Windows marketplace, and the millions of harsh unknown sources offering buggy ugly 'apps' for 6.5) is really all I needed in the Leo to make it 100%...
I'm not in any hurry to tweak this phone, it's pretty much where my Leo was, save for the obvious refinements.
The process is a bit more involved on this unit, so we'll see.
ICS looks pretty good too.
But for now, yeah, I made the right choice over the Samsung GSII and I am happy overall.
No restarts, dead pixels, overheating issues on either unit.
Couldnt have said it better. Although I do recommend to root your phone and flash a diff rom + kernel - its a battery saver
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA
Okay, when people have sigline images that are 4 times the height of the post, it's time to turn off signatures. C'mon people, be respectful of those with limited bandwidth, or ... who want to read your words, not ogle your MSPAINT skills.
My "4G" speeds are erratic as heck. One minute I get 2.7mbps, the next I get 188kbps. Welcome to the ISDN era...
Could this be because I dropped in the SIM card from my old HD2? What voodoo is in the SIM card makes that much difference? I thought the new SIM card was just for WiFi calling...
If you do, does it KILL your battery life?
I am currently using HSPA+ (not sure if that's 4G or 3.5G, but whatever)
On a full charge, I eeked out 13-14 hours with heavy usage during the day, with brightness on just under half (40-45%).
I am sick of loading times on facebook and even when browsing so I'm pondering enabling LTE.
I disabled LTE on the premise that it isn't good for battery life.
Thoughts?
It definitely won't help battery, but if you have strong LTE signal in your area it's not that bad. The drain is HORRIBLE however when you are getting less than two bars (roughly -98 dB or higher).
You should still be able to manager 11-12 hours HEAVY usage, with around 3-4 hours onscreen time with LTE.
It should be noted however that if you want to maximize battery life and use LTE, stick with gb and custom kernels that can undervolt. LTE and ics is a b**ch, it KILLS my battery
just my 2c
portable charger, extra battery...
why buy a super phone, and not use all its premium features??
If There's No LTE Yet..
So in my area of Long Island LTE is not running yet (probably not until late 2012) so will I get extra battery life by switching to using only GSM/HSPA?
That's on GB
Here in Bakersfield CA we are on hspa and i get about 7.5 down no lte though but i get about 15+ hours but i cant really use my ohone at work so thats why i get good battery life lol. I havent gone to L.A. To try out lte but im pretty happy with hspa. (i was a sprint user.... Sad)
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717
docfreed said:
So in my area of Long Island LTE is not running yet (probably not until late 2012) so will I get extra battery life by switching to using only GSM/HSPA?
That's on GB
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely, battery life will greatly increase
wase4711 said:
portable charger, extra battery...
why buy a super phone, and not use all its premium features??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...i agree. Plus, if someone is able to use LTE then that means he or shred is already paying for it. It's kind of stupid to pay for something you dont to use.
I simply wish I could turn off LTE when not needed and just use hspa+. It def drains the battery hardcore. I use wifi when at all possible.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
erick161 said:
I simply wish I could turn off LTE when not needed and just use hspa+. It def drains the battery hardcore. I use wifi when at all possible.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah if only it were possible...
-Once you go NOTE, you'd say 4 inches a Joke
SKyRocKeting727 said:
Yeah if only it were possible...
-Once you go NOTE, you'd say 4 inches a Joke
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well apparently if you flash certain roms they have that capability (the switch). IMO it should be integrated into the stock build
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
I get it at work. After 12 hours my phone is down to 60-70% depending on how much I screw around at lunch. LTE isn't as bad a drain as people would have you believe. The screen will always be the selling point and the battery drain on this thing
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
If you are stock, there isn't an option on whether or not to use LTE if it's available in your area. I live in the Washington, DC suburbs, and we have a very strong LTE network. I don't have the option to not use LTE ... it's in fact my only option. I am not used to this. With Sprint, I was able to turn off my 4G WiMax and use 3G. I wish I could do so with AT&T. It doesn't matter all that much. I don't notice significant battery drain and I use WiFi whenever I'm at home or whenever it's available on the go.
fbauto1 said:
...i agree. Plus, if someone is able to use LTE then that means he or shred is already paying for it. It's kind of stupid to pay for something you dont to use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I live in Houston and have great LTE service, except in my house of course but I use my wifi instead. I never turn off my LTE nor do I want to, I went from an iphone with 3g to this and don't want to go back! When I purchased the phone I bought a spare battery/charger set before I left the store. Just looking at the screen, plus the LTE radio screemed battery eater. I was using Saurom with Juice Defender with a custom setup and set cpu to over/underclock and my battery life greatly increased. Now i'm back on DAGr8's alpha 2 ICS with the tablet mod and have not had enough "regular" use to see how the battery life is.
erick161 said:
Well apparently if you flash certain roms they have that capability (the switch). IMO it should be integrated into the stock build
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed
Send from the Noteorious BIG 5.3" Bell Canada
Two things, LTE isnt a battery drain on AT&T because it isnt the same technology as used on CDMA (Verizon or Sprints' 4g network).
Cellular data however IS a battery drain when you dont have a strong signal.
If your scratching your head, here is the distinction. Lets say you dont have LTE in your area and your 3g signal is weak, THIS will drain the battery. If you DO have LTE but again the signal is weak, this will ALSO hurt your battery life.
The reason is, your phone will push more power to the antenna in order to get you enough signal to get a reasonably decent connection on the best available connection available.
LTE uses the SAME ANTENNA as the 3g antenna on GSM networks that use HSPA, THIS is 'the'e distinction between Sprint & Verizon CDMA networks which use a different antenna for their 3g and another antenna for their '4g', power has to be provided for BOTH antennas whereas GSM networks have ONE antenna.
If you are suspecting LTE is killing the battery, its either going to be a weak signal OR a rogue app (possibly using your cellular data connection). My suggestion is to start with looking at your signal strength, if it is relatively strong, you need to start looking at other potential battery drains. It isnt LTE.
Hope this helps.
Want to know more?
http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/110711-what-is-lte/1
Its a massive 7 page article explaining exactly what LTE is and how it works. If you want to jump ahead to the section dealing specifically with battery life, go to page 5 (change the '1' in the link I provided above to a '5').
littlewierdo said:
Two things, LTE isnt a battery drain on AT&T because it isnt the same technology as used on CDMA (Verizon or Sprints' 4g network).
Cellular data however IS a battery drain when you dont have a strong signal.
If your scratching your head, here is the distinction. Lets say you dont have LTE in your area and your 3g signal is weak, THIS will drain the battery. If you DO have LTE but again the signal is weak, this will ALSO hurt your battery life.
The reason is, your phone will push more power to the antenna in order to get you enough signal to get a reasonably decent connection on the best available connection available.
LTE uses the SAME ANTENNA as the 3g antenna on GSM networks (currently, LTE is only available on GSM), THIS is 'the'e distinction between Sprint & Verizon CDMA networks which use a different antenna for their 3g and another antenna for their '4g', power has to be provided for BOTH antennas whereas GSM networks have ONE antenna.
If you are suspecting LTE is killing the battery, its either going to be a weak signal OR a rogue app (possibly using your cellular data connection). My suggestion is to start with looking at your signal strength, if it is relatively strong, you need to start looking at other potential battery drains. It isnt LTE.
Hope this helps.
Want to know more?
http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/110711-what-is-lte/1
Its a massive 7 page article explaining exactly what LTE is and how it works. If you want to jump ahead to the section dealing specifically with battery life, go to page 5 (change the '1' in the link I provided above to a '5').
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's interesting, I've never read that before. However, if ATT uses the same antenna for 3g/4g/LTE, why does it matter what processor it uses?
ATTs HTC OneXL with the S4 supports LTE because the tegra3 does not, but if the same antenna is being used...why is this the case?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
erick161 said:
That's interesting, I've never read that before. However, if ATT uses the same antenna for 3g/4g/LTE, why does it matter what processor it uses?
ATTs HTC OneXL with the S4 supports LTE because the tegra3 does not, but if the same antenna is being used...why is this the case?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your statement (second paragraph) is not accurate. The S4 AND the Tegra 3 'can' use LTE (if the hardware - ie. antenna, exists). However, the Tegra 3 is not optimized for use with LTE. Right now, you will run into many issues with trying to use the Tegra 3 (primarily battery life issues and slow/sluggish performance over cellular data). It also costs more to build the Tegra 3 with this compatibility. OS updates are also a problem.
This person said it better than I could so I quote Draiko's entire post which answers your exact question (if you look at the very first post in the thread - link at the bottom, the same exact question you asked is there, this is a users response).
"The Tegras are not incompatible with LTE radios. They don't integrate the radios like the S4 does (yet) which makes a device with the Tegra 3 SoC and the separate 2G/3G/4G radios more expensive to build and maintenance (OS updates) trickier. The battery life also suffers a bit compared to an integrated solution and the main board is bigger.
nVidia bought Icera last year and they'll be integrating the Icera softmodem into future Tegras in order to better compete at the phone level (which will actually make the Tegra very versatile). They couldn't get Icera tech integrated fast enough for Tegra 3 (since the Tegra 3 was already sampling before they bought Icera).
The S4 has fewer faster CPU cores and integrated radios but a slower GPU. The Tegra 3 is a better non-phone solution which is more power efficient in a wifi-only loadout. Hardcore mobile gamers aside, most users won't notice a difference.
Bottom line: It's business, not a hardware limitation."
Source: (Post #3)
http://androidforums.com/motorola-photon-4g/531481-food-thought-quad-cores-lte.html
so sprint has always been kinda sluggish near me with my evo 4g. i would think my 3g speeds would get a little faster on the 4g lte. i ran about 10 tests and the max i got was..
278 download
500 up
but that was kinda a random spike in it because all the other test are like 100 download and 100 up
I'm getting about 60 down/up, although I was on my og evo too...
It'll be nice once we get the 3g tweaks in roms
Sent from my EVO using XDA
For me it was just the tower closest to my house that sucks. At work I am getting 1800/900
JoshHuman said:
For me it was just the tower closest to my house that sucks. At work I am getting 1800/900
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine is that way as well close to home speeds suck at work they are good lol. either place doesn't matter to much as both have WiFi but it sucks when I'm driving around soon tho soon all will be better....
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Warrior 3000 said:
so sprint has always been kinda sluggish near me with my evo 4g. i would think my 3g speeds would get a little faster on the 4g lte. i ran about 10 tests and the max i got was..
278 download
500 up
but that was kinda a random spike in it because all the other test are like 100 download and 100 up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the network is ****ty why would the phone change that?
Just saying.
I pre-ordered from wirefly but since i'm not scheduled to have LTE until later this year I'm debating if I should cancel my order since I would be stuck with only 3G speeds which suck in most places on Sprint. We need roam only like never before.
five40 said:
If the network is ****ty why would the phone change that?
Just saying.
I pre-ordered from wirefly but since i'm not scheduled to have LTE until later this year I'm debating if I should cancel my order since I would be stuck with only 3G speeds which suck in most places on Sprint. We need roam only like never before.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what we are trying to figure out. There are people saying the new evo has better 3g speeds maybe due to a new antenna design or something. The phone named after a fruit is supposed to do better on sprints junky 3g network also. ( i don't wish to called a troll). Think about it, on certain types of other devices,a better antenna can make difference. Can this help on a phone also? I just use a phone and am not an engineer.
woody296 said:
That's what we are trying to figure out. There are people saying the new evo has better 3g speeds maybe due to a new antenna design or something. The phone named after a fruit is supposed to do better on sprints junky 3g network also. ( i don't wish to called a troll). Think about it, on certain types of other devices,a better antenna can make difference. Can this help on a phone also? I just use a phone and am not an engineer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Me either, just common sense.
While a better antenna may help I wouldn't expect to see drastic improvements.
Sprint 3G is just plain crap right now, in most locations anyway.
Surprisingly at work I get over 2megs down sometimes, nowhere else though.
I am getting slightly better speeds than my EVO3D when using speed test, web sites and other pieces open much quicker though although I think that is a combination of things including just being a more powerful phone.
indiscriminant said:
I am getting slightly better speeds than my EVO3D when using speed test, web sites and other pieces open much quicker though although I think that is a combination of things including just being a more powerful phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point exactly. I got slightly better speeds with the Photon over the Evo 3D but it seems some people are expecting to see dramatic improvements.
indiscriminant said:
I am getting slightly better speeds than my EVO3D when using speed test, web sites and other pieces open much quicker though although I think that is a combination of things including just being a more powerful phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am seeing the same.
Yeah, in Louisville KY Sprint's service is seriously abysmal. Our city is large and relatively spread out, and the towers that are here are just totally overloaded. Data speeds are slow,coverage is unreliable, connections are frequently dropped. This has literally been happening for years now, and it has only gotten worse.
othersteve said:
Yeah, in Louisville KY Sprint's service is seriously abysmal. Our city is large and relatively spread out, and the towers that are here are just totally overloaded. Data speeds are slow,coverage is unreliable, connections are frequently dropped. This has literally been happening for years now, and it has only gotten worse.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As much as I hate to say this..here in North Houston, the speeds are BAD. I would also be remiss if I didn't mention that I'd never gotten as many dropped or failed 3G connections on my OG Evo as I'm getting with this phone. Could be b/c NV is working itself out..but it's quite frustrating to watch the 3G signal keep disappearing and reappearing.
Because of that, I started fiddling with some old settings and found a way to boost SIGNAL strength but not 3G speeds..see link below and hopefully someone can figure something out..
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=26549367#post26549367
I was searching the forums for info on this... but I feel my EVO got slower after I rooted it...
I don't remember experiencing this when I rooted my first EVO (non lte).
Anyone else seen this?
Tokynet said:
I was searching the forums for info on this... but I feel my EVO got slower after I rooted it...
I don't remember experiencing this when I rooted my first EVO (non lte).
Anyone else seen this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be honest rooting your phone has nothing to do with your 3g connection ect... it dont efect it in anyway..
woody296 said:
That's what we are trying to figure out. There are people saying the new evo has better 3g speeds maybe due to a new antenna design or something. The phone named after a fruit is supposed to do better on sprints junky 3g network also. ( i don't wish to called a troll). Think about it, on certain types of other devices,a better antenna can make difference. Can this help on a phone also? I just use a phone and am not an engineer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The phone with the fruit doesn't have faster 3G speeds. It does have a higher priority on Sprint's cell sites, so if a router has a lot of traffic, the fruit phone gets higher priority, so it seems like their antenna is working better, but in reality it's not that much different.
babbit said:
The phone with the fruit doesn't have faster 3G speeds. It does have a higher priority on Sprint's cell sites, so if a router has a lot of traffic, the fruit phone gets higher priority, so it seems like their antenna is working better, but in reality it's not that much different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is not even remotely true. If you feel the need to argue it, throw written proof in your reply.