Jump to content

Qualcomm to develop chip that supports 7 LTE bands


ericdabbs
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is good news for future LTE devices in late 2012 and 2013 phones. I don't know exactly the 7 LTE bands that it will support, but I guess that it will be the 700 MHz, 800 MHz ESMR, 850 MHz Cellular, 1700/2100 MHz AWS, 1900 MHz PCS, 2500 Mhz EBS/BRS and maybe 1800 MHz international band.

 

Manufacturers will start getting samples of the chip in July 2012.

 

http://www.slashgear.com/qualcomm-developing-lte-chip-that-supports-7-spectrum-bands-06232628/

 

http://www.intomobile.com/2012/06/06/qualcomm-has-figured-out-support-multiple-700-mhz-4g-lte-networks/

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualcomm is really winning the LTE game with their chips. As much as I want to see competition drive innovation, Qualcomm certainly doesn't appear to be taking their foot off the gas and allowing the rest of the field to catch up.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy crap, might LTE get the US carriers to the point the rest of the world is were I can take the same phone between carriers?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now they just need a way to pack all those antennas and other supporting components of each band in a handset.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

 

Very good point, I forgot about the antenna for each different band. Next thing to develop is a tiny universal antenna that covers all bands ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the division of Band 12 and Band 17 will eventually be undone.

 

Either when AT&T realizes they need to work with USCC on rural LTE deployment, or when the FCC realizes Band 17 has just been a big bluff.

 

The issues of division on Band 12 and Band 13 are much more significant.

Edited by Fraydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was Band 17 created separately from Band 12 anyway? Was it that much cheaper/efficient to drop support for the A Block, or was it mostly AT&T deciding it didn't want its phones to be interoperable with regional carriers' LTE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was Band 17 created separately from Band 12 anyway? Was it that much cheaper/efficient to drop support for the A Block, or was it mostly AT&T deciding it didn't want its phones to be interoperable with regional carriers' LTE?

 

Some of it was that and some of it was interference in the A block which has been curtailed somewhat since the creation of that band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Why was Band 17 created separately from Band 12 anyway? Was it that much cheaper/efficient to drop support for the A Block, or was it mostly AT&T deciding it didn't want its phones to be interoperable with regional carriers' LTE?

 

All of it because AT&T did not want to pay more money to have basestations and handsets with steeper filter cutoffs. It would have been cheaper to purchase the channel 51 broadcasters and put them out of their misery. They just polute the airways with all that shlock and commercials!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

All of it because AT&T did not want to pay more money to have basestations and handsets with steeper filter cutoffs. It would have been cheaper to purchase the channel 51 broadcasters and put them out of their misery. They just polute the airways with all that shlock and commercials!

 

Gotta have those local channels though. Millions and millions of folks use them everyday.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta have those local channels though. Millions and millions of folks use them everyday.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

 

I personally don't know anyone who uses over the air television anymore. I know they exist. I just don't know them. :)

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I personally don't know anyone who uses over the air television anymore. I know they exist. I just don't know them. :)

 

Robert

 

We used an ota antenna for almost a year. My wife was grumbling the entire time. The final straw was after we rearranged the living room and we could no longer pick up the local NBC or PBS affiliates. I called verizon shortly thereafter and got fios TV back. But it was great not to pay for cable for a while.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I personally don't know anyone who uses over the air television anymore. I know they exist. I just don't know them. :)

 

Robert

 

We canceled DirecTV awhile back and are living on OTA & Roku (Netflix, Amazon prime, hulu).

 

Sent from my CM9 Epic 4g Touch using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I personally don't know anyone who uses over the air television anymore. I know they exist. I just don't know them.

 

Robert

 

Millions of satellite users and cable television users watch OTA signals everyday. Some never know it. It's much cheaper to throw up a couple of antennas at one site to capture all the local channels in full HD then pipe them via one fiber to wherever they need to go.

 

If you hook up an antenna and put it indoors, don't expect good results unless you live a few miles from the transmitter.

 

I use OTA with my satellite DVR as my outdoor antenna gets my locals on HD plus I get the locals from another market as well over satellite.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Millions of satellite users and cable television users watch OTA signals everyday. Some never know it. It's much cheaper to throw up a couple of antennas at one site to capture all the local channels in full HD then pipe them via one fiber to wherever they need to go.

 

If you hook up an antenna and put it indoors, don't expect good results unless you live a few miles from the transmitter.

 

I use OTA with my satellite DVR as my outdoor antenna gets my locals on HD plus I get the locals from another market as well over satellite.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

 

There is no way in the world I could get a signal at my house. We are off the TV grid. :lol:

 

bliss_xp_tract_desolate_desert.jpg

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is no way in the world I could get a signal at my house. We are off the TV grid.

 

bliss_xp_tract_desolate_desert.jpg

 

Robert

 

Never say never. And I know better than that. If Sprint has a tower there then there is a signal to be had :). OTA covers more than probably any cell carrier.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never say never. And I know better than that. If Sprint has a tower there then there is a signal to be had :). OTA covers more than probably any cell carrier.

 

Sent from my C64 w/Epyx FastLoad cartridge

 

Yeah, but I live in a steep valley. No signals are getting in unless they are broadcast here. There are two TV translators in Espanola, but they are pointed the wrong way for me...and there is a hill between us. Not that I would use it anyway.

 

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Added, and 2 more estimated sites: T-Mobile eNB 876480. Looks like its located at (40.62210996397784, -73.97627312607108), as the tower looks like a Sprint setup. T-Mobile eNB 875632. Both this site and Sprint eNB 9022 seem to be located at (40.61640722407462, -73.96985178560767).
    • Many of these sites I am uploading are for sites that do not exist, yet.  Although, I suppose I could go into NR only mode every time I connect to a new site, and then switch back, allowing all the TAC NR trails that occur to now have a home. Ideally, I would love to ne able to add the TAC's myself.  I have the NR Trails CSV file downloaded, and I see all the TAC-less NR entries.  Is there any way I can edit and manually upload them myself?  Maybe create a portal for such an upload?  Or at least give me a way to create at least one manual entry for every new site? Robert
    • Could we send the TAC as -1 if it’s invalid? Then, if there’s and existing site that matches the other info, I could match the web data entry up with it (despite the TAC being absent). 
    • Mine has been enabled.  And they show up in my device logs with the TAC null. Robert
    • If the TAC is missing, an entry is still recorded in the log, but it would not be included in uploads.. so you could probably manipulate a trail log export to add the data to the map if you were able to nail down the sites without the TAC. EDIT: Sites with a missing TAC are only recorded in the log if the option to do so is enabled (Logger > Log Sites with Missing TAC).
  • Recently Browsing

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