The rumor mill has fully geared up, so it seems time for a thread in which the potential HTC-made 2016 Nexus phones can be discussed.
Rumors suggest two phones: a 5" device codenamed Sailfish, and a larger device codenamed Marlin. Both are thought to be produced by HTC. [There's also a report that Google is making its own phone, without an OEM partner--along the lines of a Pixel phone--but that report has been largely discounted.]
Android Police has claimed it knows with 8/10 certainty some specs of the smaller device--Sailfish:
Manufactured by HTC
5" 1080p display (~440PPI)
Quad-core 2.0GHz 64-bit processor (model unknown)
32GB storage (unknown if multiple models will be available, or even if this is the base storage level)
12MP rear camera, 8MP front
Rear-mounted fingerprint scanner
USB-C port (bottom)
Bottom-firing speaker or speakers (unknown if dual)
Top-mounted headphone jack
Any thoughts on these devices? The last several Nexus devices have been Sprint compatible; is there any reason to think these won't be? Any hints in regulatory filings? How is HTC's radio performance, generally? Will Sprint sell them directly, and even if they do, will it still be preferable to buy directly from Google?
I see both Verizon and AT&T are getting this. Has anyone heard rumblings for a Sprinter variant? I was hoping since they at least have a CDMA version that Sprint would be able to get their bands on it also.
So the official complete render as per ev leaks has been leaked http://androidandme.com/2014/05/news/htc-m8-prime-m8-ace-image-leaks-show-backsides-of-unannounced-phones/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=htc-m8-prime-m8-ace-image-leaks-show-backsides-of-unannounced-phones
Looks not like what I anticipated I really hope that is an early design and color scheme.
Copy and pasted from androidcentral.com
These leaks come courtesy of none other than @evleaks, and considering that the came out in a spat with Jeff Gordon (HTC's Senior Global Online Communications Manager, not the race car driver), they should be taken with a bit of a skeptical eye. It's also worth considering that, like the Galaxy S5 Prime, we don't expect that any One M8 Prime device would be a replacement for the One M8. Think of it more as a next generation HTC One Max. So on to the leaks:
Quad-core 2.5GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 processor
5.5" 1440x2560 QHD display
Cat. 6 LTE
Those specs, while open to change, would be in line with what we might expect from a phone like this, and they line up with an earlier leak out of China. There's one more leak, and this one we're strapping on our skeptic helmets: it's made out of "a composite of aluminum and liquid silicone."http://www.androidcentral.com/htc-one-m8-prime-rumored-exotic-material-composition-faster-lte
So I figured out there is a way to check if a phone is using Calling+ or VoLTE without root. If engineering (not SCP) reports the PLMN as 310120, then it is not VoLTE. VoLTE only runs on 312530. That being said, a phone can be on 312530 but not use VoLTE (Pixel 2 for example). So being on 312530 is not sufficient to say that it is using VoLTE, but being on 310120 IS sufficient to rule out VoLTE being used. As for the "flag" Sprint uses to enable/disable it on supported devices, I suspect that they use the TAC. I think there is a hardcoded whitelist of TACs where it will be enabled. So they can change the TACs for a market to "enable" it, but by default it's "disabled". If this is the case, then Magic Box TACs are simply not whitelisted yet, even though it works fine on them. I've verified that VoLTE works on a Magic Box with at least the 440a firmware, and possibly earlier versions as well. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
You're referring to this: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/04/lawsuit-atts-directv-now-is-a-flop-and-att-lied-to-investors-about-it/
That's not beyond the realm of possibility for Sprint... especially given how any lawsuit would occur subsequent to the alleged "lying".
Sprint's FCC Filing is supported by empirical and highly confidential data on its adds/losses, churn, etc. throughout the report. I believe it shows a serious situation. Even more so, Sprint says in the Filing that its investor statements noting certain accomplishments shouldn't detract from the seriousness of its current predicament.
See Pages 36-42 of the FCC Filing, which includes this:
"The recent improvements in some financial metrics simply cannot, and do not, overcome these fundamental challenges:"
On balance, I'm more willing to believe the information in the FCC Filing which specifically references and dismisses the investor statements than in the investor statements alone. If the redacted "highly confidential" information in the Filing was made available to investors, I believe Sprint stock would be substantially impacted... as that information reflects the ground truth of what's happening with Sprint.