Jump to content

Anyone surprised Sprint hasn't announced the Galaxy Nexus release date/preorder date yet?


ericdabbs

Recommended Posts

Pre-order sold out! Our Galaxy Nexus pre-order inventory has been spoken for. Check back on April 22 for the national launch.

 

Amazed they sold out...

 

That was fast!

 

Sent from Joshs Evo Shift using Forum Runner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pre-order sold out! Our Galaxy Nexus pre-order inventory has been spoken for. Check back on April 22 for the national launch.

 

Amazed they sold out...

 

I would have preordered it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the Sprint version will have the qualcomm radio?

 

My phone does say "qualcomm 4G" on the bottom near the charging port. Is that on the Verizon version?

 

Yes, after a quick google search, qualcomm 4g sticker is on the verizon version as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read that Samsung was using an off-brand radio and and a good chunk of Verizon users were complaining about reception issues. There was some debate on other sites that Samsung would use a different radio to fix the issue. Perhaps that was lumped in with the other rumors about the Gnex getting an uprated processor and camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read that Samsung was using an off-brand radio and and a good chunk of Verizon users were complaining about reception issues. There was some debate on other sites that Samsung would use a different radio to fix the issue. Perhaps that was lumped in with the other rumors about the Gnex getting an uprated processor and camera.

 

yeah, it uses a VIA CDMA chip and a Samsung LTE chip

 

Not sure why they have to put a qualcomm sticker on every phone...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, it uses a VIA CDMA chip and a Samsung LTE chip

 

Not sure why they have to put a qualcomm sticker on every phone...

Qualcomm invented CDMA and anybody's CDMA modem must pay Qualcomm royalties. It's one of the reasons CDMA didn't take over globally despite its superiority over GSM. It's bad news that the Sprint version still has that VIA chip-- it gives poorer CDMA connections in marginal (-90 dBm and below) signal areas. There were numerous complaints with the Verizon version, but Sprint has even more marginal to poor signal areas since its 1x carriers are all on PCS (right now at least) instead of Cellular 850.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualcomm invented CDMA and anybody's CDMA modem must pay Qualcomm royalties. It's one of the reasons CDMA didn't take over globally despite its superiority over GSM. It's bad news that the Sprint version still has that VIA chip-- it gives poorer CDMA connections in marginal (-90 dBm and below) signal areas. There were numerous complaints with the Verizon version, but Sprint has even more marginal to poor signal areas since its 1x carriers are all on PCS (right now at least) instead of Cellular 850.

 

I'd like to see the proof that the LTE chip actually gets poorer CDMA connections. Sounds like rumormongering.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the proof that the LTE chip actually gets poorer CDMA connections. Sounds like rumormongering.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

It's not the LTE chip that is an issue-- the Nexus uses Samsung's CMC221 for that task... it is the CDMA (1x/EVDO) 3G chip that has an issue. And a friend of mine who works for Verizon confirmed that they did have slightly more reception issues with the GNex on 3G / 1x versus the HTC and Moto handsets. Compare your 3G CDMA signal strength with an HTC or Moto handset on Verizon in the same spot and you'll see a couple (1 - 5) dBm worse signal on average.

 

The LTE chip (CMC221) has nothing at all to do with your CDMA connections. On the GNex that comes from the Via Telecom CBP 7.1 which provides the 3G EVDO and 1x CDMA voice connection. This chip was also used on the Droid Charge and both handsets have a ton of posts documenting user issues with the CDMA signal quality on these handsets-- this is old news. The LTE performance of the GNex is top notch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her CDMA RSSI was slightly higher but I suspect it was from a higher Ec/Io number on the nexus. Also, it almost looked like we were connected to different towers.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her CDMA RSSI was slightly higher but I suspect it was from a higher Ec/Io number on the nexus. Also, it almost looked like we were connected to different towers.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

Do more comparisons in many other places side-by-side. On average, you'll find the Samsung will tend to have a lower signal strength on CDMA / 3G. Perhaps not ALWAYS, but typically. I really wanted to get a GNex over my RAZR MAXX, but there is NO way I'll ever have a non-Qualcomm chip handling my calls-- the LTE data I'm not as particular about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do more comparisons in many other places side-by-side. On average, you'll find the Samsung will tend to have a lower signal strength on CDMA / 3G. Perhaps not ALWAYS, but typically. I really wanted to get a GNex over my RAZR MAXX, but there is NO way I'll ever have a non-Qualcomm chip handling my calls-- the LTE data I'm not as particular about.

 

Totally agree on that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do more comparisons in many other places side-by-side. On average, you'll find the Samsung will tend to have a lower signal strength on CDMA / 3G. Perhaps not ALWAYS, but typically. I really wanted to get a GNex over my RAZR MAXX, but there is NO way I'll ever have a non-Qualcomm chip handling my calls-- the LTE data I'm not as particular about.

 

I'll try to remember

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

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

    • In the conference call they had two question on additional spectrum. One was the 800 spectrum. They are not certain what will happen, thus have not really put it into their plans either way (sale or no sale). They do have a reserve level. Nationwide 800Mhz is seen as great for new technologies which I presume is IOT or 5g slices.  T-Mobile did not bite on use of their c-band or DOD.  mmWave rapidly approaching deadlines not mentioned at all. FWA brushes on this as it deals with underutilized spectrum on a sector by sector basis.  They are willing to take more money to allow FWA to be mobile (think RV or camping). Unsure if this represents a higher priority, for example, FWA Mobile in RVs in Walmart parking lots working where mobile phones need all the capacity. In terms of FWA capacity, their offload strategy is fiber through joint ventures where T-Mobile does the marketing, sales, and customer support while the fiber company does the network planning and installation.  50%-50% financial split not being consolidated into their books. I think discussion of other spectrum would have diluted the fiber joint venture discussion. They do have a fund which one use is to purchase new spectrum. Sale of the 800Mhz would go into this. It should be noted that they continue to buy 2.5Ghz spectrum from schools etc to replace leases. They will have a conference this fall  to update their overall strategies. Other notes from the call are 75% of the phones on the network are 5g. About 85% of their sites have n41, n25, and n71, 90% 5g.  93% of traffic is on midband.  SA is also adding to their performance advantage, which they figure is still ahead of other carriers by two years. It took two weeks to put the auction 108 spectrum to use at their existing sites. Mention was also made that their site spacing was designed for midrange thus no gaps in n41 coverage, while competitors was designed for lowband thus toggles back and forth for n77 also with its shorter range.  
    • The manual network selection sounds like it isn't always scanning NR, hence Dish not showing up. Your easiest way to force Dish is going to be forcing the phone into NR-only mode (*#*#4636#*#* menu?), since rainbow sims don't support SA on T-Mobile.
    • "The company’s unique multi-layer approach to 5G, with dedicated standalone 5G deployed nationwide across 600MHz, 1.9GHz, and 2.5GHz delivers customers a consistently strong experience, with 85% of 5G traffic on sites with all three spectrum bands deployed." Meanwhile they are very close to a construction deadline June 1 for 850Mhz of mmWave in most of Ohio covering 27500-28350Mhz expiring 6/8/2028. No reported sightings.  Buildout notice issue sent by FCC in March 5, 2024 https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/letterPdf/LetterPdfController?licId=4019733&letterVersionId=178&autoLetterId=13060705&letterCode=CR&radioServiceCode=UU&op=LetterPdf&licSide=Y&archive=null&letterTo=L  No soecific permits seen in a quick check of Columbus. They also have an additional 200Mhz covering at 24350-25450 Mhz and 24950-25050Mhz with no buildout date expiring 12/11/2029.
    • T-Mobile Delivers Industry-Leading Customer, Service Revenue and Profitability Growth in Q1 2024, and Raises 2024 Guidance https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/t-mobile-q1-2024-earnings — — — — — I find it funny that when they talk about their spectrum layers they're saying n71, n25, and n41. They're completely avoiding talking about mmWave.
    • Was true in my market. Likely means a higher percentage of 5g phones in your market.
  • Recently Browsing

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