Jump to content

Samsung GS4 SPH-L720T [TRI-BAND] (was "Sprint GS4 with Tri-Band support this Fall Official Thread")


Ascertion

Recommended Posts

 

And what is the relevance of this to the Sprint Galaxy S4 variant with tri band LTE?

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, according to rumor, GS4 LTE Advanced is being launch THIS month in South Korea.  Apparently, it will have S800 chip along with expanded (speedier) LTE service.  Hopefully, Sprint will get it (if it is even compatible).  I can only hope.

 

On a separate note, HTC Butterfly S will be launch in 2 days...and is rumored to be on Sprint for sure.  Will it support tri-band?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, according to rumor, GS4 LTE Advanced is being launch THIS month in South Korea.  Apparently, it will have S800 chip along with expanded (speedier) LTE service.  Hopefully, Sprint will get it (if it is even compatible).  I can only hope.

 

On a separate note, HTC Butterfly S will be launch in 2 days...and is rumored to be on Sprint for sure.  Will it support tri-band??

 

this is confirmed

 

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-Galaxy-S4-smartphone-with-4G-LTE-Advanced-to-launch-in-June_id44142

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what is the relevance of this to the Sprint Galaxy S4 variant with tri band LTE?

 

AJ

The sprint variant of that phone was discussed in this thread. Shows that it is close to release and that phone is supporting multiple bands.

 

Don't need to get defensive because another company is releasing a phone before sprint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's keep in mind that Sprint announced that its first LTE capable phones would go on sale in June 2012. However, they ended up going on sale early in April 2012.

 

So even though tri-band phones have been said to come out this early Fall, it would not shock me if it turned out to be Mid Summer. We should watch every upcoming device closely.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sprint variant of that phone was discussed in this thread. Shows that it is close to release and that phone is supporting multiple bands.

Posting a bare URL with no elaboration does not explain the relevance. That is why I asked.

 

FYI, AT&T LTE devices have always been multi band. So, the AT&T variant reveals nothing regarding any upcoming Sprint variant.

 

Don't need to get defensive because another company is releasing a phone before sprint.

Questioning is not the same as being defensive. But Robert has already warned you that your problematic username pegs you as a potential troll. So, expect to have your motives questioned.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My upgrade is august 1....

 

I really hope a tri band is out by then.

 

And that its the active.

 

The active has a replaceable battery right? Is the processor same as the standard G4 or is it gimped?

 

I was told by a Samsung rep that the Galaxy S4 Active was an AT&T exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posting a bare URL with no elaboration does not explain the relevance. That is why I asked.

 

FYI, AT&T LTE devices have always been multi band. So, the AT&T variant reveals nothing regarding any upcoming Sprint variant.

 

 

Questioning is not the same as being defensive. But Robert has already warned you that your problematic username pegs you as a potential troll. So, expect to have your motives questioned.

 

AJ

Link = troll got it. Try not to be so petty. To make that claim that AT&T's variant reveals nothing regarding Sprint's is extremely short sighted. Do you know everything about every upcoming Sprint phone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone that is surprised by AT&T getting a Samsung product first, isn't paying much attention. AT&T is the de facto 3GPP carrier in the US which puts them in line to be first for a lot of devices. It takes less to alter devices for AT&T than any other carrier here. If the Active is successful, and it probably will be, then it will work to VZW, Sprint, and T-Mobile.

 

Why anyone would try to use this as a point to bludgeon Sprint, confuses me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

My upgrade is august 1....

 

I really hope a tri band is out by then.

 

And that its the active.

 

The active has a replaceable battery right? Is the processor same as the standard G4 or is it gimped?

 

 

I was told by a Samsung rep that the Galaxy S4 Active was an AT&T exclusive.

our rep said the same thing and it is already active in the system for AT&T, same price as the regular s4

 

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As much as I'd love to have a S4 with tri-band LTE, I decided not to wait for one as it's not critical to me since I don't use cellular data all that much (got wi-fi at home, school, work, and around town through Comcast). I hope it does come eventually though so some of the data traffic is offloaded from the one current PCS carrier.

 

I'm also worried that in order to cram all that LTE in there that some of the GSM/UMTS bands will be sacrificed (like they were in the HTC One). Right now the only other CDMA model of the S4 that also supports GSM is VZ's, and that's just dual-band LTE. Quad-band GSM/UMTS/HSPA+, tri-band CDMA/EVDO, tri-band LTE, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, etc seems like a bit much to cram in, but I hope for all you waiting that they can do it!

 

A bit off-topic, but I was curious if the current S4 would support LTE in the PCS H block (assuming Sprint bids for and wins that spectrum). If not, why not? How about A-F refarmed from voice/3G?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit off-topic, but I was curious if the current S4 would support LTE in the PCS H block (assuming Sprint bids for and wins that spectrum). If not, why not?

 

The FCC just put forth the PCS/AWS-2 H block rules at the end of last week.  No current devices support those standards, nor could they have anticipated those standards.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No current devices support those standards, nor could they have anticipated those standards.

 

AJ

 

Well that's disappointing. You'd think all the PCS blocks would follow the same rules. How hard could it have been to extend the radio from 1850-1995Mhz an extra 5Mhz up to 2000 (seeing as the 1915-1920 half is already between portions of existing G and A)? Oh well.

 

I do believe though that the S4 would support LTE in Sprint's existing A-F holdings, so probably the best approach would be to refarm one or two EVDO carriers into 5x5 FDD LTE (or even move all voice but one legacy carrier to SMR), and merge G & H into a 10x10 channel for newer phones (or keep it at two 5x5's until I upgrade again  B) ) Yea 10x10 is only better for top speeds but speed tests are important for the ads and all those "who has the fastest LTE" articles (which help generate some buzz), since they're not going to be deploying 2.6Ghz TDD everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's disappointing. You'd think all the PCS blocks would follow the same rules. How hard could it have been to extend the radio from 1850-1995Mhz an extra 5Mhz up to 2000 (seeing as the 1915-1920 half is already between portions of existing G and A)? Oh well.

How hard?  Try illegal.  Neither infrastructure nor devices are allowed to transmit in spectrum that has yet to be licensed.

 

Furthermore, the PCS/AWS-2 H block rules and regulations released last week are more stringent in order to mitigate downlink interference with the AWS-4 A block uplink and uplink interference with the PCS A block downlink.  Like it or not, that potentially relegates the PCS/AWS-2 H block to a new band unto itself.

 

Some of you want devices to be more future proof than they are ever going to be.  If you want to stay current, get used to buying a new device at least once per year.  Those are the breaks.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't suggesting that it transmit in that spectrum! Obviously that'd be impossible and pointless if that wasn't being broadcast from the tower anyway. I just thought it's be able to support a connection to it when it did come online from Sprint.

 

I knew there was some interference issues around 2000Mhz with Dish's spectrum (that I know the FCC ruled in favor of the H block in terms of preference), but I wasn't aware of the issues with the A block . Thanks for mentioning that.

 

If I'm paying $600 for a fairly recently released flagship phone off-contract I don't think it's too much to ask for it to be "future proof" for at least a 24 month period, but as I've said, I don't use cellular data that much so whatever. It's not like Sprint's going to have all 3 bands of LTE everywhere they want them to be until around 2015 or later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't suggesting that it transmit in that spectrum! Obviously that'd be impossible and pointless if that wasn't being broadcast from the tower anyway. I just thought it's be able to support a connection to it when it did come online from Sprint.

 

A "connection" is both reception and transmission.  If either fails, then there is no "connection."

 

So, a current mobile device future proofed for PCS/AWS-2 H block would have to receive 1995-2000 MHz.  No problem.  The FCC does not regulate receivers.  But the same mobile device would also have to transmit 1915-1920 MHz.  And that has not yet been licensed nor standardized.  Big problem.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So there's no way to software-block a PCS radio from transmitting in particular frequency ranges unless/until it's been approved by the FCC? It's all that radio supports or nothing? Sorry if I sound like a noob on this. It's just like that seems like a plausible thing to be able to do (just like Sprint could enable/disable certain UMTS radio bands via software).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How hard?  Try illegal.  Neither infrastructure nor devices are allowed to transmit in spectrum that has yet to be licensed.

 

Furthermore, the PCS/AWS-2 H block rules and regulations released last week are more stringent in order to mitigate downlink interference with the AWS-4 A block uplink and uplink interference with the PCS A block downlink.  Like it or not, that potentially relegates the PCS/AWS-2 H block to a new band unto itself.

 

Some of you want devices to be more future proof than they are ever going to be.  If you want to stay current, get used to buying a new device at least once per year.  Those are the breaks.

 

AJ

As soon as electronics hit the shelf there outdated.  Something else Is soon to follow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm paying $600 for a fairly recently released flagship phone off-contract I don't think it's too much to ask for it to be "future proof" for at least a 24 month period, but as I've said, I don't use cellular data that much so whatever. It's not like Sprint's going to have all 3 bands of LTE everywhere they want them to be until around 2015 or later.

 

Unfortunately in this day and age, it is too much to ask. With the explosive growth of data, new bands and blocks are being added all the time for all carriers. This is not unique to Sprint. If you want a device that works on all possible bands and blocks at all times, you will need to buy a new device annually.

 

I just had to buy a new hotspot for Verizon so I could use AWS LTE, even though my other hotspot is only one year old. Such is life.

 

I could have just kept the old one, without much impact. But I wanted access to the new band. It was a personal choice. And that preference cost me money.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So there's no way to software-block a PCS radio from transmitting in particular frequency ranges unless/until it's been approved by the FCC? It's all that radio supports or nothing? Sorry if I sound like a noob on this. It's just like that seems like a plausible thing to be able to do (just like Sprint could enable/disable certain UMTS radio bands via software).

 

Nope, that analogy does not fly.  The software blocks you refer to are put there to disable certain hardware capabilities OEMs include as a matter of course.  But no current hardware supports the PCS/AWS-2 H block because it has not yet even been standardized by 3GPP.  So, the complete lack of hardware capability in this case renders the software block irrelevant.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately in this day and age, it is too much to ask. With the explosive growth of data, new bands and blocks are being added all the time for all carriers. This is not unique to Sprint. If you want a device that works on all possible bands and blocks at all times, you will need to buy a new device annually.

 

I just had to buy a new hotspot for Verizon so I could use AWS LTE, even though my other hotspot is only one year old. Such is life.

 

I could have just kept the old one, without much impact. But I wanted access to the new band. It was a personal choice. And that preference cost me money.

 

Robert from Note 2 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I'm edging toward getting a new Verizon hotspot myself, but I'm waiting for a global model with AWS LTE onboard and active.

 

The "good news" on Sprint's front is that unless Sprint decides to bid on AWS-3 spectrum too, Sprint's spectral portfolio will remain the same for at least 24 months after the AWS-2 auction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • I posted this in the Nebraska Premier thread last week, but just wanted to share in this thread the progress that T-Mobile has made in filling in the great coverage gap known as Nebraska. Between late last year and this year, they have added 28 new expansion sites filling in the coverage hole, plus 11 Sprint site conversions in eastern Nebraska and far western Iowa. Notably, in the last month n41 coverage was added on over a dozen expansion sites in western Nebraska that were added to the network last year. For comparison, here is the very first map that I created in October of 2022 after we noted expansion sites outside of Sprint conversion in Lincoln and Omaha. It doesn't show any western parts of the state, but just know there was nothing besides roaming coverage and a little B12 coverage leaking down from South Dakota to the west of Valentine, NE.
    • Sent a copy of my DB in an e-mail just now.  Couldn't leave the house today but can hopefully get a screenshot when I'm out on another cell site tomorrow.
    • 76MB Google Play System update after that, bringing the date up to 3/1 from prior 2/1 date. 
    • April security patch is already out - 738.30 MB download. 
    • What do you see with the latest alpha/ beta version?
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...