Jump to content

Google Nexus 5 by LG Preview (LG D820)


MacinJosh

Recommended Posts

I would pick this over the galaxy note 3 if this is actually coming to sprint. Fingers crossed

Especially with a $299 price point from the Google play store. I'd be all over it.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an updated comparison! Didn't expect this to blow up when I was in class!
1ETQzow.jpg

 

 

Oh and guys remember when Google filed to use BRS / EBS frequency for a private wireless network earlier this year? Now we know why! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So far Engadget, Verge, DroidLife, phandroid, phonedog, anandtech and Mobilesyrup has given s4gru credit for the story. Everyone else gave it to Engadget (which is fine since they credited back here)

 

http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/05/lg-nexus-5-fcc/

 

http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/5/4699734/the-lg-nexus-5-with-lte-may-have-appeared-at-the-fcc

 

http://www.droid-life.com/2013/09/05/lg-made-possible-nexus-5-hits-fcc-model-name-d820/

 

http://mobilesyrup.com/2013/09/05/lg-nexus-5-possibly-sneaks-into-the-fcc-packing-lte/

 

http://phandroid.com/2013/09/05/lg-d820-fcc-nexus-5/

 

http://www.phonedog.com/2013/09/05/lg-d820-appears-in-the-fcc-with-wide-range-of-lte-support-may-be-google-s-new-nexus-phone/

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7283/potential-nexus-5-fcc-disclosure-reappears-lgd820

 

I tipped off the tier 1 blogs and made sure to prominently mention S4GRU, so I'd hope they give proper credit. Dieter Bohn was particularly classy in mentioning S4GRU in the second sentence. Engadget was the first to act just a few minutes after I gave them the tip so they seem to have the most linkbacks.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope they don't hold the trend with the same garbage baseband chipsets.

It's made by LG, so I hope they won't use the crappy VIA chipsets.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2300mah batter seems pretty small especially for the screen size and the fact that its not removable

I agree, but Nexus batteries have always been small. Gotta get the bill of materials down to meet that $300 price point I guess... ;-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the dimensions are way off for the size of the device seen in the video.

By comparison the Nexus 4 is 133.9 x 68.7 mm

The LG D820 alleged Nexus 5 is 131.9 x 68.2 mm

 

Is it common practice for manufacturers to send prototypes to the FCC and make changes to the final design?

As long as they do not change internals in the way that would require devices to be recertified by the FCC ie operating bands or whatever else the FCC looks for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the dimensions are way off for the size of the device seen in the video.

By comparison the Nexus 4 is 133.9 x 68.7 mm

The LG D820 alleged Nexus 5 is 131.9 x 68.2 mm

 

Is it common practice for manufacturers to send prototypes to the FCC and make changes to the final design?

As long as they do not change internals in the way that would require devices to be recertified by the FCC ie operating bands or whatever else the FCC looks for.

Oh yeah look at that. Well I hope it is really the smaller size.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, MSM8974.

 

...aka Snapdragon 800 to the commoners.

 

;)

 

AJ

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LGOG is 131.9 mm x 68.9 mm so this would be actually slightly narrower & exactly the same height.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 4

I think your missing my point.

The device leaked in the KitKat video looked to be similarly sized as Optimus Pro / Note 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wall may crumble under the load.  Our article is getting over 500 hits per hour tonight.  We may top 4000 views by midnight MDT.

 

AJ

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wall may crumble under the load. Our article is getting over 500 hits per hour tonight. We may top 4000 views by midnight MDT.

 

AJ

Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Or both?

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your missing my point.

The device leaked in the KitKat video looked to be similarly sized as Optimus Pro / Note 2.

Yeah I hadn't seen your post when I posted... I agree, I thought from the picture it would be using the panel from the G Pro but evidently not. Or something doesn't add up.

 

Sent from my LG-LS970 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I was dead set on the Note 3.. up until this surfaced. Anxious to see what gets announced!

 

Edit: Some one at MacRumors put the dimensions together and put out a quick drawing. Looks completely plausible and enticing.

 

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=17839114&postcount=66

Edited by sddabrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wall may crumble under the load.  Our article is getting over 500 hits per hour tonight.  We may top 4000 views by midnight MDT.

 

AJ

No AJ, that's your article (with credit given to Tim Yu, as well). Thank You, Sir!  :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I was dead set on the Note 3.. up until this surfaced. Anxious to see what gets announced!

 

Edit: Some one at MacRumors put the dimensions together and put out a quick drawing. Looks completely plausible and enticing.

 

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=17839114&postcount=66

I was set on the LG G2 but, this through a wrench in my gears. However, I'm glad to have this (tough) decision to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?
  • Recently Browsing

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