Jump to content

Pixel and Pixel XL Preview (was "Fall 2016 Nexus | HTC Sailfish, Marlin Rumors")


Nrbelex

Recommended Posts

Higher end to start at $350? That's not too bad. Are the rumors still pointing to both being made by HTC?

 

Yes, the rumors say both will be made by HTC and will be nearly identical, but for their physical dimensions. But I would expect the price to be higher.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Higher end to start at $350? That's not too bad. Are the rumors still pointing to both being made by HTC?

S1 is the rumored lower end device...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The rumor regarding body materials came from a totally unproven site. No real reason to believe that given Android Police's track record and statement that "As far as we know, these phones are aluminum body, not polycarbonate." (Emphasis in original).

 

Also, nowhere have I read the phones will have different processors.

 

As for price, if the price is proportionate with the quality, I don't mind paying a little more.

AP has come out with some new pictures, looks like the S1 will be metal as well...

 

http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/08/14/exclusive-photos-of-the-2016-nexus-sailfish-in-the-metallic-flesh/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pretty early for it to stop by the FCC for authentification does that mean this might be released earlier than October

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, If so, no 3xCA on B41 for sprint.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

It doesn't mention any explicit CA combinations actually so it doesn't necessarily mean it's not supported! I'll take omission based on the fact that it is carrying possibly a Qualcomm 820 chipset. And keep my fingers crossed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't mention any explicit CA combinations actually so it doesn't necessarily mean it's not supported! I'll take omission based on the fact that it is carrying possibly a Qualcomm 820 chipset. And keep my fingers crossed

 

 

I wouldn't go and say that, same set as HTC 10

 

Sent from my 2PQ93 using Tapatalk

 

 

It actually does.

 

Page 23 of SAR report.

 

WHAbo9Q.png

 

Of course FCC does not mandate full disclosures down link operations so it may possibly be a latent capability but that possibility doesn't look to bright as HTC (for once in their lives) disclosed the CA combinations in the FCC filing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It actually does.

 

Page 23 of SAR report.

 

 

u killed me! I died a lil inside just now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually Google rolls out its next Android release such that the new Nexus (or Nexuses) gets it first; since at least one third-party device is advertising a September release with Nougat, that suggests the next Nexuses should be out in September too, if not late August.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually Google rolls out its next Android release such that the new Nexus (or Nexuses) gets it first; since at least one third-party device is advertising a September release with Nougat, that suggests the next Nexuses should be out in September too, if not late August.

I saw an article that seemed to indicate the LG V20 would be the first N device.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the FCC document for both Marlin and Sailfish were recently released.  Will we see one of the excellent RF performance write-ups for these and the Note 7?  I'm hankering for an upgrade!  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uplink RF for both 2016 Nexus handsets looks just fair, nothing special.  Low band max ERP generally runs about 17 dBm, mid/high band max EIRP around 20 dBm.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uplink RF for both 2016 Nexus handsets looks just fair, nothing special.  Low band max ERP generally runs about 17 dBm, mid/high band max EIRP around 20 dBm.

 

AJ

Thanks, AJ.  I thought I must have been reading the report wrong because the numbers seemed far too low.  Disappointing to say the least.  Looks like I'll be skipping this round and crossing my fingers for the next batch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uplink RF for both 2016 Nexus handsets looks just fair, nothing special.  Low band max ERP generally runs about 17 dBm, mid/high band max EIRP around 20 dBm.

 

AJ

hmm...

 

Those are disappointing numbers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the FCC document for both Marlin and Sailfish were recently released.  Will we see one of the excellent RF performance write-ups for these and the Note 7?  I'm hankering for an upgrade!  

I'd like to join the chorus of those hoping for an RF performance preview. Those analyses set S4GRU apart from the countless other Android blogs and forums. Thanks!

 

S4GRU is honored at the request, and we appreciate the praise.  However, an FCC OET tested RF article probably is not forthcoming.  For several reasons, the article series largely has been put to bed.

 

Our FCC OET articles used to attract easily over 10,000 readers.  That number has since dropped by around 75 percent, making the time and effort put into the articles seem less worthwhile.

 

And then on certain articles, people have gone on to say that we are "wrong," that handset X has strong or weak real world performance.  S4GRU cannot control the uplink RF figures submitted to the FCC.  To have people argue with them or dismiss them based on their personally biased experiences questions the reasons for writing the objective articles in the first place.

 

Finally, the gist of the RF measurements and capabilities (e.g. 3x CA, VoLTE, etc.) usually gets written into a preview or user thread anyway.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
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

  • Similar Content

  • 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...