Jump to content

If lte is gsm, then what's the CDMA 4g?


Recommended Posts

Technically the hypothetical UMB was CDMA's (3GPP2's) answer to LTE. WiMax and WiMax Advanced was a whole different industry grouping.

 

LTE is an evolution (hence the "E") of the ideas behind GSM and UMTS (W-CDMA, including HSPA etc.), but airside it's yet another incompatible thing, so it's not really GSM except that pretty much everyone in the GSM camp went GSM->UMTS->LTE and in the US SIM cards have mostly been associated with GSM carriers but not with CDMA carriers (CDMA SIMs do exist but no carrier in the US uses them - even on Verizon, the user-removable SIM only does LTE and sometimes GSM roaming).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically the hypothetical UMB was CDMA's (3GPP2's) answer to LTE. WiMax and WiMax Advanced was a whole different industry grouping.

 

LTE is an evolution (hence the "E") of the ideas behind GSM and UMTS (W-CDMA, including HSPA etc.), but airside it's yet another incompatible thing, so it's not really GSM except that pretty much everyone in the GSM camp went GSM->UMTS->LTE and in the US SIM cards have mostly been associated with GSM carriers but not with CDMA carriers (CDMA SIMs do exist but no carrier in the US uses them - even on Verizon, the user-removable SIM only does LTE and sometimes GSM roaming).

 

There's absolutely nothing GSM abt LTE. Not the air protocol nor the backend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LTE is to GSM as German is to English or Latin is to Spanish. Am I right?

 

LTE has more in common with WiMAX and 802.11n WiFi than it does with W-CDMA or GSM. Heck, it has more in common with iDEN than it does with GSM.

 

The big reason LTE is associated with GSM, bigger even than the fact that both techs always use SIMs, is that both LTE and GSM/UMTS/HSPA came from the same standards body: 3GPP. WiMAX came from IEEE, like WiFi. CDMA is a Qualcomm tech, but its standards branch has wound up as 3GPP2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LTE has more in common with WiMAX and 802.11n WiFi than it does with W-CDMA or GSM. Heck, it has more in common with iDEN than it does with GSM.

 

The big reason LTE is associated with GSM, bigger even than the fact that both techs always use SIMs, is that both LTE and GSM/UMTS/HSPA came from the same standards body: 3GPP. WiMAX came from IEEE, like WiFi. CDMA is a Qualcomm tech, but its standards branch has wound up as 3GPP2.

 

I know Qualcomm's licensing revenues are doing very nicely seeing as 3G EVDO/CDMA tech is still heavily used and will be around for quite a while (especially in other parts of the world) but... in the future it must hurt them that they have no 4G tech to collect licensing revenue from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Qualcomm's licensing revenues are doing very nicely seeing as 3G EVDO/CDMA tech is still heavily used and will be around for quite a while (especially in other parts of the world) but... in the future it must hurt them that they have no 4G tech to collect licensing revenue from.

 

I think they'll be okay. There's this little think called Snapdragon that they've been making for awhile. I don't see that going out of style any time soon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they'll be okay. There's this little think called Snapdragon that they've been making for awhile. I don't see that going out of style any time soon.

 

I agree they've done a good job diversifying... also picking up ATI's mobile graphics division was excellent. I don't think the margin on the processors is near as nice as on licensing tech though! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I don't.

 

This article might explain things better than I can.

 

http://m.networkworl...mobify-bookmark

 

Haha, I just found the same article. Looks like Samsung/Qualcomm and Intel have solid portfolios. Intel did a good job acquiring patents from other players it looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why exactly was UMB development axed? Was it because they "projected" LTE to be more popular. Wasn't it cancelled along time ago?

 

Mainly it died on the vine because Verizon chose LTE and Sprint was already committed to WiMax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how difficult would be to upgrade to Rev B? It is not just a software update I take.

 

EV-DO Rev B single carrier is likely just a software upgrade, as it adds in 64-QAM DRCs. But EV-DO Rev B multi carrier is a hardware upgrade, since the number of carrier channels is scalable, and those multiple carrier channels have to coordinate data throughput.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

EV-DO Rev B single carrier is likely just a software upgrade, as it adds in 64-QAM DRCs. But EV-DO Rev B multi carrier is a hardware upgrade, since the number of carrier channels is scalable, and those multiple carrier channels have to coordinate data throughput.

 

AJ

It would shut all of the HSDPA+ fanboys up if there was a CDMA carrier that had revB. Isn't revB friendly to battery too? I'm just assuming its not very cost efficient for Sprint, otherwise we'd probably have it.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the problem is not cost efficiency but the fact that everything is to be replaced by NV hardware so why bother with getting new hardware just for rev B. Not to mention... I doubt it'd help that most sprint towers are over capacity and bogged down thanks to the T1 lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the problem is not cost efficiency but the fact that everything is to be replaced by NV hardware so why bother with getting new hardware just for rev B. Not to mention... I doubt it'd help that most sprint towers are over capacity and bogged down thanks to the T1 lines.

Sprints adding back haul to every tower and depending on the type of RevB (as AJ mentioned), it could be software upgrade. Sprint will definitely have the right amount of back haul if the site is sporting lte speeds.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprints adding back haul to every tower and depending on the type of RevB (as AJ mentioned), it could be software upgrade. Sprint will definitely have the right amount of back haul if the site is sporting lte speeds.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

I'm taking about people yelling for ReV. B last year before NV upgrades began. I remember people were complaining everywhere to upgrade to Rev B and idiots cancelling contracts because they didn't. Good times. It was all based on rumors and conjectures iirc.

 

Nowadays, sprint towers with NV and upgraded backhaul has the potential to do a lot more things than just a year before so rev B is definitely possible.

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

    • I just pulled up my trails and they all have TACs listed. So no nulls, zeroes or -1's. But there is huge swaths of trails missing. It doesn't appear to log or at least keep any NR driving data unless it is NR only. If it's mixed NR/LTE, then the only thing appearing in the trails is LTE. I am also getting this error.  So it is seeing invalid TAC values, but then when I look at logs, it's like it's deleting them.  Robert
    • I wanted to get on with Genesis, but waited too long.  Just moved my line to BM and another to RP this week.  Experience switching to BM was fantastic though.  Hopefully through them I can at some point get a new sim, or go esim to ride on the Dish network when it exists.
    • Do you see the TAC displayed as -1 in the exported file or is it blank/0? I took a look at your upload on Monday at roughly 12:30 and I’m not seeing any non-valid TAC values - not even -1s, 0s or blanks…
    • Hey @mikejeep - I just shot you a diagnostic from my new Galaxy Flip last night. I’m not able to see Verizon n5 in-app when connected to a midband anchor. 
    • I'm having issues during a WiFi call where the caller can here me but I can't hear them. There are a few bug trackers on Google, but the problem appears to date back to at least early 2021. Appears to maybe also be a T-Mobile specific issue. I'd guess it's technical issues like this that caused them to discourage bringing the Pixel 5 onto their network. And why they didn't even sell it through T-Mobile in the first place. Anyone still here with a Pixel 5? Ever see this issue? Anyone with knowledge of the problem or insight? I'm about to just buy a different phone. Probably won't be a Pixel.
  • Recently Browsing

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