Jump to content

Google Nexus 6 by Motorola (Was "Nexus X talk leaked?")


smorcy11

Recommended Posts

Do the released FCC docs show the lab RF performance? I'm getting the implication that the lab performance is poor?

They don't show poor. They show promising but everything comes down to real world testing. Not lab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do the released FCC docs show the lab RF performance? I'm getting the implication that the lab performance is poor?

 

Prima facie...

 

Band 2:  good performance (~25 dBm)

Band 4:  excellent performance (~26 dBm)

Band 5:  good performance (~19 dBm)

Band 12:  excellent performance (~21 dBm)

Band 13:  excellent performance (~22 dBm)

Band 17:  good performance (~20 dBm)

Band 25:  good performance (~25 dBm)

Band 26:  good performance (~19 dBm)

Band 41:  good performance (~25 dBm)

 

AJ

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prima facie...

 

Band 2: good performance (~25 dBm)

Band 4: excellent performance (~26 dBm)

Band 5: good performance (~19 dBm)

Band 12: excellent performance (~21 dBm)

Band 13: excellent performance (~22 dBm)

Band 17: good performance (~20 dBm)

Band 25: good performance (~25 dBm)

Band 26: good performance (~19 dBm)

Band 41: good performance (~25 dBm)

 

AJ

Interesting that 12 and 17 aren't both listed the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that 12 and 17 aren't both listed the same.

 

Nope, there are modest RF output discrepancies between band 2 and band 25, band 12 and band 17, and band 5 and band 26.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, there are modest RF output discrepancies between band 2 and band 25, band 12 and band 17, and band 5 and band 26.

 

AJ

Wow.. With that bad of a test report then the real world tests will be interesting.

 

Edit.. As in the fcc should have done a better job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.. With that bad of a test report then the real world tests will be interesting.

 

Edit.. As in the fcc should have done a better job.

 

I am not sure what you mean.  The FCC does not conduct the testing.  Certified labs submit the authorizations.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They signed off on it and put it on their site. Their problem.

 

How is it a "problem"?  Not for the FCC.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prima facie...

 

Band 2: good performance (~25 dBm)

Band 4: excellent performance (~26 dBm)

Band 5: good performance (~19 dBm)

Band 12: excellent performance (~21 dBm)

Band 13: excellent performance (~22 dBm)

Band 17: good performance (~20 dBm)

Band 25: good performance (~25 dBm)

Band 26: good performance (~19 dBm)

Band 41: good performance (~25 dBm)

 

AJ

Does anyone know how these numbers compare to the Nexus 5 numbers?

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how these numbers compare to the Nexus 5 numbers?

 

Yes, someone knows.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Moto X does have a Motorola-designed antenna tuning system that measures capacitance across the antenna/antennae. My understanding is that their implementation has twin benefits: first to optimize the antenna's Standing Wave Ratio (SWR) over a wide range of bands and secondly to counteract "death grip". See:

 

http://anandtech.com/show/8491/the-new-moto-x-intial-impressions-and-hands-on/2

http://anandtech.com/show/8523/the-new-motorola-moto-x-2014-review

 

 

Whether or not the same is implemented on the nexus 6 will likely have to wait for a tear down. Because the N6 and X(2014) share antenna designs, my bet is that it too will have a similar tuning system.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does any of you know if Sprint will be carrying the 32 and 64 GB version?

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Anyone correct me if I am wrong, you can activate either the 16 or 32 Nexus 5 on Sprint. So my thought is that both sizes of the Nexus 6 will also work on Sprint. The way I understand it is that each Nexus 5 and 6 is not locked to a particular carrier, but can be used on anyone of them. Note, i believe Verizon passed on the Nexus 5.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone correct me if I am wrong, you can activate either the 16 or 32 Nexus 5 on Sprint. So my thought is that both sizes of the Nexus 6 will also work on Sprint. The way I understand it is that each Nexus 5 and 6 is not locked to a particular carrier, but can be used on anyone of them. Note, i believe Verizon passed on the Nexus 5.

Any model you buy from the play store will work on Sprint. Last year when I purchased my nexus 5 from Sprint they only carried the 16Gb black model.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any model you buy from the play store will work on Sprint. Last year when I purchased my nexus 5 from Sprint they only carried the 16Gb black model.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

I now understand your question. I doubt that Sprint will carry the 64 u less they saw a large number of the 32 brought in to be activated. I believe that they attempt to err on the side of caution. Better to have minimal stock instead of a surplus of phones.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I now understand your question. I doubt that Sprint will carry the 64 u less they saw a large number of the 32 brought in to be activated. I believe that they attempt to err on the side of caution. Better to have minimal stock instead of a surplus of phones.

I want to get a 64gb but I don't want to pay $700 from the play store because of my money at the moment. I'm hoping sprint will carry the 64gb so I can purchase it on easy pay.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to get a 64gb but I don't want to pay $700 from the play store because of my money at the moment. I'm hoping sprint will carry the 64gb so I can purchase it on easy pay.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

 

I'm really hoping we will know when Sprint is planning on directly offering the phone and with which options before the preorder on the Play store go's live.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After, playing around with the Moto X 2014 at the AT$T store. I'm definitely sold on the Nexus 6. I love the screen, the design, and the soft touch material on the back. So I know that the Nexus 6 will be a great device. Maybe I can ditch my tablets once I pick up the Nexus 6.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After, playing around with the Moto X 2014 at the AT$T store. I'm definitely sold on the Nexus 6. I love the screen, the design, and the soft touch material on the back. So I know that the Nexus 6 will be a great device. Maybe I can ditch my tablets once I pick up the Nexus 6.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5

I'm pretty sure I want the 64 GB version.  I'm glad to hear your impressions of the 2014 Moto X were so favorable.  I'm just a little hesitant to order on the 29th as I would like to see how it goes for the early adopters.  :)

 

Is anyone going to place their order on the 29th?

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...