Jump to content

iPhone 5 frequencies + HD voice


iansltx

Recommended Posts

No comment on that one. <digi puts his index cards of iphone disadvantages away>

 

lol. Sorry, my Viper started overheating by itself today again. I'm not happy with it, so this announcement is kind of convincing for me to get it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....

Version #2 (A1429 CDMA) is the Sprint + Verizon edition. 2100, 1800, Cellular, upper 700, PCS+G

This is the most interesting model of the three IMO. Despite SpectrumCo, there's no AWS here for Verizon. There is, however, support for a band that Verizon probably won't launch for several years: LTE in Cellular. I'm sure this was due to KDDI needing the band, but it's entertaining nonetheless. And of course Sprint's current LTE deployment is fully supported, though LTE in SMR or 2500 isn't.

 

...

 

Does this mean it might be possible, if you bought a Verizon or Sprint iPhone 5, to one day take it to the other carrier and have it activated? Not that I'd want to do that, or even that I'd want an iPhone 5. Just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean it might be possible, if you bought a Verizon or Sprint iPhone 5, to one day take it to the other carrier and have it activated? Not that I'd want to do that, or even that I'd want an iPhone 5. Just curious.

 

Yes if you can get the prior service provider to unlock the phone from its network restrictions. Theres also a device you can use with the 4S to unlock the phone for any carrier in the world, its just a different sim card tray

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I have looked and looked but cannot find in the FCC filings any clear indication of SVDO capability. Take that for what you will.

 

AJ

 

In my opinion, it would be kind of retarded if it didn't, seeing as how the mdm9615 is the most advanced lte modem on the market.

They also posted on engadget that a sprint spokesperson stated that it won't be compatible with HD voice because its HD voice implementation uses wcdma and the iPhone doesn't have 1xa...but this statement is also retarded to me, because it seems the 9615 can do EVERYTHING except wimax...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just the chipset that has to support SVDO, the phone itself will have to support it with a separate receive/transmit path for EVDO and 1x voice. It does have SVDO capabilities between 1x and LTE.

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with LTE bands 1, 3 and 5 included, once LTE roaming gets set up, the Sprint and Verizon iPhones are actually superior international devices (except for Canada) than AT&T's iPhone :lol: ! That's a radical departure from the norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just the chipset that has to support SVDO, the phone itself will have to support it with a separate receive/transmit path for EVDO and 1x voice. It does have SVDO capabilities between 1x and LTE.

 

You are right. I just hope that even if HD voice is not supported, SVDO is, because all of sprints new LTE hands support it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's SVLTE guys as Robert pointed out. SVDO is Voice/EVDO. SVLTE is more likely to be supported as there is not an extra cost as there will already be separate antennas for 1x/evdo and LTE.

 

Also regarding HD Voice, as you've probably seen the Iphone 5 does not support Sprint/CDMA HD Voice. This is due to the fact that the Iphone does not support the EVRC-NW codec. They do support the gsm AMR-WB HD Voice codec, however.

 

I wish that Sprint's HD Voice used the AMR-WB codec, but Qualcomm probably doesn't support that over their cdma chips. Another nice option would be for ios to include support for EVRC-NW.

 

Maybe VoLTE will bring AMR-WB to Sprint, but VoLTE might be a long ways off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even SVLTE is in doubt. AnandTech's Brian Klug and I discussed it on Twitter last night.

 

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I crazy or doesn't the Rev B1 HAC RF Test Report document list Voice over digital transport and concurrent single transmission for CDMA+LTE, in table 5.2?

 

The footnote seems to say the rating was not based on concurrent voice/data mode because non-concurrent represented the worst-case rating?

 

edit: I guess this is the hearing-aid test to make sure it doesn't interfere with them and that would make sense that CDMA 1xRTT is the worse-case for interference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even SVLTE is in doubt. AnandTech's Brian Klug and I discussed it on Twitter last night.

 

https://twitter.com/...067790690279425

 

AJ

 

Can you imagine the fallout from this now that people expect this feature on LTE devices? I can't think of a single CDMA handset that cannot do SVLTE...that would be crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From having a look at the FCC docs myself, I can't find any mention of SVDO/SVLTE, other than running VoIP and data simultaneously (no VoLTE). Definitely disappointing if the omission means a lack of support.

 

Ian, I will be traveling today, but feel free to get in touch if you have any questions while you work on the iPhone 5 FCC authorization write up. I am more than happy to consult. And thanks for taking on this article.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ/Ian: I seemed to recall that the MDM9615 chip supported both FD and TD for LTE, but it seems that these radios in iPhone 5 will not support CLWR's band class (nor others using 2.5/2.6ghz), so despite the processor being capable for TD-LTE these versions of iPhone are unlikely to support Sprint devices on CLWR when it gets its hot spot TD-LTE network up. Is that a correct conclusion?

 

Of course, since Apple introduced 3 versions already, it doesn't preclude a 4th or 5th flavor to come subsequently, I guess.

 

Am I also reading correctly that this iPhone 5 will in fact support Sprint 1xCDMA 800 for voice coverage when it's rolled out for NV?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ/Ian: I seemed to recall that the MDM9615 chip supported both FD and TD for LTE, but it seems that these radios in iPhone 5 will not support CLWR's band class (nor others using 2.5/2.6ghz), so despite the processor being capable for TD-LTE these versions of iPhone are unlikely to support Sprint devices on CLWR when it gets its hot spot TD-LTE network up. Is that a correct conclusion?

 

Of course, since Apple introduced 3 versions already, it doesn't preclude a 4th or 5th flavor to come subsequently, I guess.

 

Am I also reading correctly that this iPhone 5 will in fact support Sprint 1xCDMA 800 for voice coverage when it's rolled out for NV?

 

Just because the chip supports TD-LTE (along with SVDO/SVLTE) doesn't mean Apple supports it in the device construction or iOS. Sure, they could co-opt the WiFi antenna for 2500MHz TD-LTE and it would probably work just fine, but since Sprint hasn't even begun certifying devices for that band class, it ain't gonna happen this time around.

 

The phone does have CDMA (1xAdvanced or EvDO Rev. A) on SMR though. So it will be able to use that component of Sprint's network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I get impression from this thread that iPhone 5 Version 2 supports LTE on 850(800)/AWS/1900 but it has no CDMA on AWS band at all.

 

Query, how does Cricket sell a prepaid iPhone in those of its markets with AWS where it doesn't have 1900 CDMA? I am scratching

my head, unless I guess it's running iPhones in those markets on Sprint as an MVNO - or simply not selling an yiPhones except where it has 19000 band CDMA.

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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
  • Recently Browsing

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