Google Galaxy S4

[Paynefanbro]

There is a new Galaxy S4 from Google just announced at I/O today! Coming June 26th for 649.99! But only on AT&T and T-Mobile. No CDMA, just GSM/WCDMA and LTE.

[Fraydog]

There is a new Galaxy S4 from Google just announced at I/O today! Coming June 26th for 649.99! But only on AT&T and T-Mobile. No CDMA, just GSM/WCDMA and LTE.

 

Sad part is, with the entire debacle with CDMA AOSP support getting pulled out, and then getting semi-put back in a half-baked fashion, you probably won't see a CDMA Nexus or a CDMA Play Store stock device.

 

Blame Verizon because they were the bad actor who started a lot of the AOSP CDMA crap.

[lynyrd65]

At least our Galaxy S 4 has an unlocked bootloader (unlike all the others), so we just have to wait whatever minimal time the devs need to port the Google SGS 4 builds back to the Sprint version.

 

Also, the Sprint version is subsidized, so I would argue that Sprint users have it the best when it comes to carrier dev support. Other carriers require you to buy "Developer Edition" devices or these Google edition unsubsidized devices to get official unlocked bootloaders, (even T-Mobile now!) but not Sprint!

[GoWireless]

...

Also, the Sprint version is subsidized, so I would argue that Sprint users have it the best when it comes to carrier dev support. Other carriers require you to buy "Developer Edition" devices or these Google edition unsubsidized devices to get official unlocked bootloaders, (even T-Mobile now!) but not Sprint!

 

Actually this argument doesn't apply to T-Mobile anymore since under their new pricing model they no longer subsidize devices and in return they've lowered the price of their plans. Therefore, it does you no harm with them to buy a device from someone else and use on their network (your "benefit" is the lower price of the plan in lieu of device subsidy). So given that they are GSM, under this new model, they are probably the most third party purchase friendly carrier because you get the benefit of the lower priced plan regardless of where you bought the device, plus you are not bound to a contract like with other carriers.

[lynyrd65]

Actually this argument doesn't apply to T-Mobile anymore since under their new pricing model they no longer subsidize devices and in return they've lowered the price of their plans. Therefore, it does you no harm with them to buy a device from someone else and use on their network (your "benefit" is the lower price of the plan in lieu of device subsidy). So given that they are GSM, under this new model, they are probably the most third party purchase friendly carrier because you get the benefit of the lower priced plan regardless of where you bought the device, plus you are not bound to a contract like with other carriers.

 

T-Mobile's device is still both network and carrier locked. You still owe the company money after cancelling service. No, it isn't different.

[Fraydog]

I thought the boot loader for the T-Mobile GS4 was unlocked, but the GSM SIM slot was locked if you take EIP to obtain a GS4. Pay full price, it gets unlocked.

[GoWireless]

T-Mobile's device is still both network and carrier locked. You still owe the company money after cancelling service. No, it isn't different.

 

It IS different because with T-Mobile you get the benefit of the subsidy (which with T-Mobile now means a lower wireless plan cost in lieu of a device subsidy/lower device cost) regardless of where you buy the device, which applies specifically to a device like the one the OP is talking about (i.e. a device not purchased from the carrier). With the other three wireless companies however, the ONLY way to receive the benefit of a subsidy or equivalnet is to buy the device from the carrier. So yes, it is different; with T-Mobile's new pricing scheme the subscriber has more flexibility in choosing from where they get their device without losing out on the subsidy (or equivalent thereof).

 

Also, T-Mobile has changed their policy recently whereby they will under certain circumstances unlock the device even before it is fully paid for: http://www.tmonews.com/2013/05/t-mobile-updates-sim-unlock-policy-to-allow-exceptions-for-international-travelers/

Edited May 17, 2013 by GoWireless

[lynyrd65]

 

It IS different because with T-Mobile you get the benefit of the subsidy (which with T-Mobile now means a lower wireless plan cost in lieu of a device subsidy/lower device cost) regardless of where you buy the device, which applies specifically to a device like the one the OP is talking about (i.e. a device not purchased from the carrier). With the other three wireless companies however, the ONLY way to receive the benefit of a subsidy or equivalnet is to buy the device from the carrier. So yes, it is different; with T-Mobile's new pricing scheme the subscriber has more flexibility in choosing from where they get their device without losing out on the subsidy (or equivalent thereof).

 

Also, T-Mobile has changed their policy recently whereby they will under certain circumstances unlock the device even before it is fully paid for: http://www.tmonews.com/2013/05/t-mobile-updates-sim-unlock-policy-to-allow-exceptions-for-international-travelers/

 

The device still has carrier bloatware and IS boot loader locked and encrypted.

 

Playing chicken with T-Mobile CS to unlock the device is different than it was before in a bad way. It used to be any T-Mobile account that was in use for at least 90 days (prepaid or postpaid) was eligible to unlock its device. Now you have to bs your way through some sort of loophole.

 

Tmobile's service without a subsidy apples to apples with Sprint is $70 a month vs the $79.99 plan that includes q subsidy or if you aren't an idiot the same $70 a month through the employee referral program anyone can use.

 

So I pay 86 to 90 a month through T-Mobile for my unlimited service and a subsidy which reduces to $70 after the device is paid for

 

Or.....

 

I pay $70 a month for Sprint postpaid through the employee referral program. Sure it doesn't reduce after 2 years but its the same price as T-Mobile's Unsubsidized plan for the whole contract and my device is boot loader unlocked!

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Mondays In Flames]

Personally, I see this as a mistake. Sure the GS4 is a great phone, but what also helps make that phone great is also the ton of features (although too many) that it has. The phone aesthetically has received such a negative critic, and going from the Nexus 4, I don't think it will sell that well.

 

Maybe there are other reasons why they chose the S4.

 

 

-Luis

[Paynefanbro]

One can only hope that the HTC One gets this Nexus Experience soon. Maybe this will become a common thing with Google, releasing their flagship and then a Nexus experience phone to go along with it.

 

I feel like the HTC One should outsell the GS4, though I know it won't happen because the One just isn't a household name among regular consumers. The day the HTC One came out, there wasn't a stir, but when the GS4 came out, my 50 year old Aunt knew immediately and she is not tech savvy. People are now noticing the One because of its aggressive marketing now and reviews are telling people to get the HTC One instead of the GS4.

[Deval]

One can only hope that the HTC One gets this Nexus Experience soon. Maybe this will become a common thing with Google, releasing their flagship and then a Nexus experience phone to go along with it.

 

I feel like the HTC One should outsell the GS4, though I know it won't happen because the One just isn't a household name among regular consumers. The day the HTC One came out, there wasn't a stir, but when the GS4 came out, my 50 year old Aunt knew immediately and she is not tech savvy. People are now noticing the One because of its aggressive marketing now and reviews are telling people to get the HTC One instead of the GS4.

 

Really? I was at my cousins house a few days ago, and no one knew what the One was. Everyone wanted to see the S4.

 

So you tell me?

 

 

 

Sent from my Sprint iPad using Tapatalk HD

[GoWireless]

...

 

Tmobile's service without a subsidy apples to apples with Sprint is $70 a month vs the $79.99 plan that includes q subsidy or if you aren't an idiot the same $70 a month through the employee referral program anyone can use.

...

Sorry, but this is not an Apples to Apples comparison because $70 on TMO includes unlimited talk. The same publicly available plan on Sprint costs $110 which is significantly more! 900 minutes is $100, also more.

 

As for "special" pricing like EPRP... Fist of all, not everyone knows about it and second, I believe what's available to the public now is $80 for 1000 minutes + $10 magic data fee = $90 which is $20 more than T-Mobile, which is about the average subsidy out there. Plus, this doesn't count any workplace, association or other discounts a person may have on T-Mobile.

Edited May 17, 2013 by GoWireless

[avb]

Sorry, but this is not an Apples to Apples comparison because $70 on TMO includes unlimited talk. The same publicly available plan on Sprint costs $110 which is significantly more! 900 minutes is $100, also more.

 

Sprint has unlimited mobile to any mobile, so for 95% of the population it is essentially unlimited minutes at the lowest rate plan. I don't think I've used more than 20 any time minutes in any given month the last few years.

[Mondays In Flames]

Really? I was at my cousins house a few days ago, and no one knew what the One was. Everyone wanted to see the S4.

 

So you tell me?

 

 

 

Sent from my Sprint iPad using Tapatalk HD

I have to agree, even though the ONE garners much attention, people always ask "What phone is that?" But if you take out an S3 or S4 people immediately know that it's a Samsung, regardless of which one, they know. It all comes from marketing to be honest.

 

 

-Luis

[S4GRU]

The most minutes we have ever used in our 1500 minutes per month Sprint plan is 300 for four devices. 1500 is unlimited in our circumstance. And is for 95% of customers.

 

Robert via Nexus 7 with Tapatalk HD

[hescominsoon]

so i take it we won't see the s4 nexus on sprint if i read this thread correctly?

[iansltx]

so i take it we won't see the s4 nexus on sprint if i read this thread correctly?

 

Yep. Though I'm sure that, if you root, you'll be able to flash AOSP onto the S4 soon enough.

[Serious]

Let's say we dont get a developer edition like Verizon. Does anyone know if there will be a truly stock rom on the Sprint version? Everything I've seen so far are just mods.

[Ascertion]

Sad part is, with the entire debacle with CDMA AOSP support getting pulled out, and then getting semi-put back in a half-baked fashion, you probably won't see a CDMA Nexus or a CDMA Play Store stock device.

 

Blame Verizon because they were the bad actor who started a lot of the AOSP CDMA crap.

I'm not trying to argue or anything - but why is it unreasonable for carriers to manufacture a CDMA based Nexus, when CDMA isn't a deterrent when it comes to multi-carrier GS4s, GS3s, GS2s, HTC devices (One), etc.?  I wouldn't necessarily blame Verizon even though their Galaxy Nexus wasn't very good (nor was Sprint's for that matter), but if Sprint actually invested some money into making a decent Nexus device for their carrier, I'd bet it would sell well.   

[GiantJay]

 

 

 

 

Sad part is, with the entire debacle with CDMA AOSP support getting pulled out, and then getting semi-put back in a half-baked fashion, you probably won't see a CDMA Nexus or a CDMA Play Store stock device.

 

 

Blame Verizon because they were the bad actor who started a lot of the AOSP CDMA crap.

 

 

I'm not trying to argue or anything - but why is it unreasonable for carriers to manufacture a CDMA based Nexus, when CDMA isn't a deterrent when it comes to multi-carrier GS4s, GS3s, GS2s, HTC devices (One), etc.? I wouldn't necessarily blame Verizon even though their Galaxy Nexus wasn't very good (nor was Sprint's for that matter), but if Sprint actually invested some money into making a decent Nexus device for their carrier, I'd bet it would sell well.

I don't expect to see a Nexus CDMA phone anytime soon. Google doesn't like companies to try and control their open products and software. And it's the carriers fault no one else.

 

Sent from my Sprint Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2