Jump to content

Galaxy S 4 hits FCC


lynyrd65

Recommended Posts

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=640611&fcc_id=A3LSPHL720

 

Band 25 only from what I can tell. Not unexpected, but I would have loved to be surprised.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I beat you to it by 2 minutes. Post #124

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/3395-the-galaxy-s4-gets-announced-today-are-you-excited/page__st__120

 

"Looks like bad news for the Sprint Samsung Galaxy S4. The Sprint version went through the FCC today and from looking at the FCC documents, it only contains Band 25 (1900 MHz A-G block) LTE support and supports only 5 MHz bandwidths.

 

I am very sad about the lack of multi-band LTE support but at the same time I am not surprised about this given the HTC One only contains Band 25 (1900 MHz A-G block) LTE support as well. I just really hope the 2H 2013 LTE phones like the LG Optimus G 2, Galaxy Note 3, Moto X (rumored), Nexus 5, etc contain tri-band LTE support.

 

I'll be looking forward to AJ's article for further analysis on the Sprint Galaxy S4 FCC documents.

 

Engadget article about Sprint Samsung Galaxy S4 hits FCC.

http://www.engadget....d-sprint-forms/

 

 

Sprint Galaxy S4 FCC filing

https://apps.fcc.gov...c_id=A3LSPHL720 "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, crap. I have been checking the FCC ULS every few hours for the last several weeks. Of course, it would have to be the afternoon that I have a doctor's appointment that the Galaxy S4 hits the database, and I get scooped.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, crap. I have been checking the FCC ULS every few hours for the last several weeks. Of course, it would have to be the afternoon that I have a doctor's appointment that the Galaxy S4 hits the database, and I get scooped.

 

AJ

 

Looking forward to reading your analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Havent we always been told not to expect the other bands to be included in a release until "late 2013"?

Sure but it doesn't mean we can't be disappointed in the strategy itself.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Havent we always been told not to expect the other bands to be included in a release until "late 2013"?
Indeed. I was still hoping to see a phone support tri-band out sooner than later.

 

Especially with the Galaxy S4, which according to Samsung can support up to twenty different LTE bands. /le sigh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. I was still hoping to see a phone support tri-band out sooner than later.

 

Especially with the Galaxy S4, which according to Samsung can support up to twenty different LTE bands. /le sigh

 

Keep in mind that the 20 LTE band support was on the exynos 5 octa core chip and not the qualcomm 600 chip. The qualcomm 600 chip will be used on all USA variants of the S4. Now the qualcomm chip can support the 800 and 2500 mhz band classes but that doesnt mean it has to be added to the device. Sprint and samsung would have to agree on what LTE band classes it wants to support and would need to add the additional antennas needed to support those band classes in the device.

 

Personally..like you i would have expected all 2013 LTE phones to have tri-band LTE support but when i saw the htc one support 1900 mhz LTE only, i had a bad feeling that the S4 was going to have the same fate. Hopefully the iphone 5s, galaxy note 3 or lg optimus g 2 will be the first tri-band LTE phone this year.

 

What i hope for the galaxy note 3 is for sprint and samsung to request testing the LTE in 5 and 10 mhz bandwidths. Samsung is notorious for only testing 5 mhz bandwidths for LTE in the S3, Note 2 and S4 thus far.

 

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that the 20 LTE band support was on the exynos 5 octa core chip and not the qualcomm 600 chip. The qualcomm 600 chip will be used on all USA variants of the S4. Now the qualcomm chip can support the 800 and 2500 mhz band classes but that doesnt mean it has to be added to the device.

 

The Snapdragon 600 aka APQ8064T is just a processor. It does not contain a baseband modem on chip. So, actually, it has no effect on LTE band capability.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that the 20 LTE band support was on the exynos 5 octa core chip and not the qualcomm 600 chip. The qualcomm 600 chip will be used on all USA variants of the S4. Now the qualcomm chip can support the 800 and 2500 mhz band classes but that doesnt mean it has to be added to the device. Sprint and samsung would have to agree on what LTE band classes it wants to support and would need to add the additional antennas needed to support those band classes in the device.

 

Personally..like you i would have expected all 2013 LTE phones to have tri-band LTE support but when i saw the htc one support 1900 mhz LTE only, i had a bad feeling that the S4 was going to have the same fate. Hopefully the iphone 5s, galaxy note 3 or lg optimus g 2 will be the first tri-band LTE phone this year.

 

What i hope for the galaxy note 3 is for sprint and samsung to request testing the LTE in 5 and 10 mhz bandwidths. Samsung is notorious for only testing 5 mhz bandwidths for LTE in the S3, Note 2 and S4 thus far.

 

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2

Indubitably.

 

I don't meant to harsh on Sprint, but even Verizon is supporting their non-existant AWS LTE tech on their Galaxy S4 variant [source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/29/samsung-galaxy-s-4-for-verizon-swings-through-the-fcc/]. We probably won't see Verizon's AWS LTE network until late 2013 or even into 2014... and Verizon is usually conservative on this kind of stuff.

 

Just wish Sprint was a little bit more forward including support for their forthcoming LTE networks. They've been selling handsets that support 800MHz CDMA voice since sometime in 2012...

 

And for Samsung, I don't know why they continue to put out the Galaxy S line in the USA with Qualcomm chips. I'd happily take a Exynos 4+4 core (or as the lazy tech PR mouthpieces have been calling it an octocore) here. =)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Snapdragon 600 aka APQ8064T is just a processor. It does not contain a baseband modem on chip. So, actually, it has no effect on LTE band capability.

 

AJ

Good to know. Was under the impression the Snapdragon chip line had the modems integrated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to know. Was under the impression the Snapdragon chip line had the modems integrated.

 

Some do, but others do not. For most of last year, the chipset du jour was the Snapdragon S4 MSM8960, which is a full SoC with integrated baseband. Later this year when the Snapdragon 800 aka MSM8974 becomes available, the high end chipset will again have an onboard baseband.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't meant to harsh on Sprint, but even Verizon is supporting their non-existant AWS LTE tech on their Galaxy S4 variant [source: ."]http://www.engadget....ough-the-fcc/]. We probably won't see Verizon's AWS LTE network until late 2013 or even into 2014... and Verizon is usually conservative on this kind of stuff.

 

I would not give VZW much credit in this regard. VZW has held AWS spectrum for six years and has offered LTE handsets for two years, yet VZW is just now getting around to including band 4 LTE capability. That would be akin to Sprint not adding band 26 LTE and/or band 41 TD-LTE capability until this time next year.

 

AJ

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not give VZW much credit in this regard. VZW has held AWS spectrum for six years and has offered LTE handsets for two years, yet VZW is just now getting around to including band 4 LTE capability. That would be akin to Sprint not adding band 26 LTE and/or band 41 TD-LTE capability until this time next year.
I forgot that Verizon bought a ton of AWS spectrum during the 2006 auction. [source: http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=99&p=1495 ]

 

Geez, that was a lot of spectrum to just sit on until the SpectrumCo swap and T-mobile sale last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Verizon does deserve critique for not deploying dual band LTE phones thus far. When the SpectrumCo spectrum deal was approved last August, I would have been expected that that was the green light they needed to begin deploying dual band LTE phones since they would have enough spectrum nationwide to deploy AWS LTE. But it appears Verizon is now turning a new leaf starting to deploy dual band (700 and AWS) LTE support with the S4 and I expect all Verizon LTE devices from here on out to include dual band LTE support.

 

For now I'll give Sprint the benefit of the doubt since they have not deployed 800 or 2500 MHz LTE as of yet. However later on this year, Sprint has announced 800 MHz LTE will begin deploying in Q4 and Sprint should be using Clearwire LTE which is currently in active deployment. If Sprint does not include tri-band LTE phones for its 2H 2013 LTE phones, they should deserve critique for not trying to future proof their LTE devices.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Sprint is going to deploy the 800 MHz LTE but not sell a phone that can use it is a real mystery. They were selling LTE phones before they had any LTE so I don't know why they'd hold back in this situation. Frustrating. I really wanted the S4. I wonder if Sprint will get a Nexus 5?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Sprint is going to deploy the 800 MHz LTE but not sell a phone that can use it is a real mystery. They were selling LTE phones before they had any LTE so I don't know why they'd hold back in this situation. Frustrating. I really wanted the S4. I wonder if Sprint will get a Nexus 5?

I doubt that 800mhz will be 100% in a year. I think sprint learned not to sell something before there lovely network can support it. Aka Wimax and LTE when the phones first came out. Hahaha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Wish I would have known about your site before my wife got me the S4 for Father's Day.  Was super disappointed when I realized that I couldn't get 4g on my brand spanking new S4 but had it on what I thought to be antiquated EVO.  Crap...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wish I would have known about your site before my wife got me the S4 for Father's Day. Was super disappointed when I realized that I couldn't get 4g on my brand spanking new S4 but had it on what I thought to be antiquated EVO. Crap...

 

huh? S4 gets 4g. 1900 4g lte. They just won't be able to get 800 MHz lte. when it comes out later on. The new s4 is just future proofing.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

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

  • Posts

    • My understanding is the MNO carriers are the one who have objected to the use of cell phones in commercial planes.  I understand that it ties down too many cell phones at once, thus I can not see this changing. However this depends on how it is structured. Use of a different plmn for satellite service might make it possible for planes only to connect with satellite. Private pilots have been using cellphones in planes for many decades. Far fewer phones at a lower altitude.
    • 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.
  • Recently Browsing

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