Jump to content

Samsung Galaxy S4T L720T [Trimode] User Discussion Thread


lilotimz

Recommended Posts

Daily? That seems a bit excessive.

Well, not on the weekends... but we're not a small store. We're on a first-name basis with the FedEx and UPS drivers.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DigiClaws

Will you be able to talk and surf on the tri-band S4 like you can now with the single band S4? Or is it going to be like the S4 mini, one or the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will you be able to talk and surf on the tri-band S4 like you can now with the single band S4? Or is it going to be like the S4 mini, one or the other?

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-356-teaser-samsung-galaxy-s4-2-3/

 

To head off the obvious questions in the meantime, no SVDO, no SVLTE, as expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry. Not familiar with SVDO and SVLTE. I'm going to look them up. Thanks.

That means no simultaneous data and voice with EVDO and LTE.

 

It's cool that it had all three radios enabled without any update needed. Just waiting for my G2 to be updated. As much as I am not thrilled with the Spark icon, I cannot wait to see it in my notification bar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DigiClaws

Ok. So am I to assume the reason for no SVLTE is cost or power consumption or both? Wouldn't SVDO and SVLTE be a good thing and a selling point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. So am I to assume the reason for no SVLTE is cost or power consumption or both? Wouldn't SVDO and SVLTE be a good thing and a selling point?

 

High costs and the time to develop it is not worth it as less and less people are using voice calls each year. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as SignalCheck goes, I have some disappointing news.. unless Tim's phone is unique, it looks like Samsung is still not reporting any 'extra' LTE data, such as GCI, PCI, and TAC. I had high hopes that this specific device would change that, but that is not the case, at least not on the initial release. More disturbing is that it also reports 310-120 to Android even when the enginerring screen (can't believe they haven't fixed that yet either) says 311-490.

 

I've never been able to get in contact with anyone useful at Samsung, but I'm going to make a push tomorrow to bark up the right tree. The incorrect MCC-MNC reporting is going to goof up other things besides my cute little app.

 

-Mike

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as SignalCheck goes, I have some disappointing news.. unless Tim's phone is unique, it looks like Samsung is still not reporting any 'extra' LTE data, such as GCI, PCI, and TAC. I had high hopes that this specific device would change that, but that is not the case, at least not on the initial release. More disturbing is that it also reports 310-120 to Android even when the enginerring screen (can't believe they haven't fixed that yet either) says 311-490.

 

I've never been able to get in contact with anyone useful at Samsung, but I'm going to make a push tomorrow to bark up the right tree. The incorrect MCC-MNC reporting is going to goof up other things besides my cute little app.

 

-Mike

 

They would certainly sell more phones to S4GRU users ;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a S5 will follow soon.

 

Chang Dong-hoon, Samsung VP and head of its design group has reportedly suggested the S5 will make its debut at Mobile World Congress, held annually in Barcelona during February.

 

FromZDNET DNET

 

Sent from my SPH-L900

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a S5 will follow soon.

 

Chang Dong-hoon, Samsung VP and head of its design group has reportedly suggested the S5 will make its debut at Mobile World Congress, held annually in Barcelona during February.

 

FromZDNET DNET

 

Sent from my SPH-L900

I'm not buying what that dude is selling, both the S3 and S4 held separate events. Why compete with MWC news when you are big enough to make an entire day/event of your news?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, how's reception so far with this S4T?  Just curious if it's similar to or slightly worse than the N5 in terms of LTE/3G connectivity.

 

Taken all at the same spot...

 

Samsung Galaxy S4T [L720T]

 

UZkMSHg.png?1

 

LTE B41

 

CkU42sG.png?1

 

Nexus 5 

 

pqbqxWY.png?1

 

B25 LTE [stuck on it... Spark update required for B41 spotting..]

 

9qrEzFN.png?1

 

LG G2

 

Z0snxnl.png?1

 

B41

 

fjXIIg9.png?1

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taken all at the same spot...

 

Samsung Galaxy S4T [L720T]

 

 

LTE B41

 

 

 

Nexus 5 

 

 

 

B25 LTE [stuck on it... Spark update required for B41 spotting..]

 

 

 

LG G2

 

 

 

B41

 

 

G2 is looking pretty bad compared to those numbers.  Disappointed with the B41 performance on it, too.  We'll see what the spark update does though.  Thanks for the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G2 is looking pretty bad compared to those numbers.  Disappointed with the B41 performance on it, too.  We'll see what the spark update does though.  Thanks for the post.

Yeah, I know my G2 is pretty bad. That's why I bought a Samsung GN3 to hold me over until 800 MHz LTE lights up in Harrisburg.

 

The GN3 holds onto LTE very well. It doesn't take too much to have poor LTE reception with the G2.

 

I was really hoping the L720T was going to be a great performer!

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...