Jump to content

Google Pixel 2 XL by LG Preview/User Thread


skid71

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, lilotimz said:

Fcc document afaik states support 4x4 on B2/25/4/66/38/41.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

Thanks for clearing up the confusion. I wonder why Google's spec page doesn't show the same thing. It seemed a little ridiculous to me that they could make 4x4 work on 2 but not 25...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing up the confusion. I wonder why Google's spec page doesn't show the same thing. It seemed a little ridiculous to me that they could make 4x4 work on 2 but not 25...

Just like how ridiculous it was for them to disable 3xCA on OG pixels with tmobile Sims until just this past summer.

 

Google does what Google does.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have the Pixel 2 device link? (Not XL)
There isn't one unless you want to make one. I don't think a lot of people were enthusiastic about it.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, lilotimz said:

There isn't one unless you want to make one. I don't think a lot of people were enthusiastic about it.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

Specs wise it is about as good as the XL right?  Less excitement comes from the smaller size?  I am leaning towards the 2 versus the XL just because i like being right around the nexus 5x size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 10:49 AM, swintec said:

Specs wise it is about as good as the XL right?  Less excitement comes from the smaller size?  I am leaning towards the 2 versus the XL just because i like being right around the nexus 5x size.

All of the core specs are identical except for the size-dependent ones (battery, display size, resolution) I think a lot of the hype for the 2 XL vs the 2 is how much better the design of the Pixel 2 XL is as opposed to the regular Pixel 2... obviously talking about bezels and the curved display. You can't go wrong with the smaller Pixel, it has all the same features as the 2 XL and a better (Samsung) display.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got the devices myself and there is noticably blue tint at angle, and it definitely does crush the black in low light setting after about 35% and less. Other than that. None of the grain, and burn as others have experienced yet. I want to wait and see if the screen production improves before I contemplate RMA. As none of the other issues with speaker or call quality over the network.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got mine yesterday and have to RMA it. I'll be out of town for 2 weeks so I may just return it and order it again when QC issues are sorted out. Graininess isn't bad, and the blue tint is only bad when it's on my desk. But I have a dead pixel in the middle of the screen, a pulsing high pitched noise in the earpiece only while on a call (including Hangouts) which seems to be synced with wifi traffic on 5 ghz, awful wifi handoffs (it drops the AP and won't see it again for over a minute even with active scanning), and the phone won't use any GLONASS satellites, so location accuracy takes a hit (7 vs 16 satellites total on my Pixel 1 XL).

I do like the way it feels though, it has a nice weight and shape, and the camera is nice. It's a bit snappier than my Pixel XL.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yikes, my phone is arriving tomorrow.  How sure are we that my Pixel 1 sim from Sprint won't work in Pixel 2? 
Any hope of picking up the sim at your local friendly sprint store?
My local store had plenty of them...go check in person and bring the sim information and not just ask, most don't know and need to look up sim information.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please let us know how radio performance is in comparison to your current device/usual locations.
Picked up there pixel 2 xl as stated.... Came from the essential phone and v30.

Had the essential phone for about a month and a half and the v30 for a week.

Really liked both phones hardware, both had software issues....

The essential phone is a beautiful phone and feels great in the hands. Essential has been pushing many updates out and states Oreo coming soon and the phone has improved immensely from release. The camera is being updated often and is improving.

The v30 is an awesome phone and works great when issues with signal on Sprint. Front myself and a few others we had some signal issues and believe it to just be radio/software issues the should be correctable via an update.
I didn't feel like keeping a device waiting for the first update when the Pixel 2 xl was coming out because that's a lot of money to wait for an update.

I decided to return the v30 and keep my preorder of the 2 xl and no regrets at all. Yes, have some blue at an angel but in my day to day, it doesn't really affect me. I received a unit with no screen issues and I'm very happy. I'm getting better signal over both phone and it's the smoothest device I've used (Android/iOS/) in a long time.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DurhamHusker said:

I don't see a thread for the Pixel 2. Am I missing it or has one just not been started?

One has not been started.  I think you are free to do so though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, imex99 said:

I enjoy my pixel 2 XL, thanks though!

You cannot play that card with me.  I have a Pixel 2 XL.  It is an odd duck.  Unattractive appearance, finish, and feel.  And that does not even address the second class OLED screen.  Not worth $900+.

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot play that card with me.  I have a Pixel 2 XL.  It is an odd duck.  Unattractive appearance, finish, and feel.  And that does not even address the second class OLED screen.  Not worth $900+.
AJ
Them return it and get over it....one of the best phones out!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, imex99 said:

Them return it and get over it....one of the best phones out!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

I had the 2 XL and ended up returning it and getting a smaller 2.  Same performance (better RF on Verizon by 4-8 dBm in a number of low signal places). No issues with the OLED like I had on the 2 XL and a slightly more manageable for factor (yes the bezels are a little much). 

 

I like it though. I was able to get it for $550 (Best Buy had a sale) vs the $850 for the XL. The XL is definitely not worth $300 more than the smaller 2. Probably not even worth the $200 premium. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, WiWavelength said:

You cannot play that card with me.  I have a Pixel 2 XL.  It is an odd duck.  Unattractive appearance, finish, and feel.  And that does not even address the second class OLED screen.  Not worth $900+.

AJ

how's the radio in the XL2 in your opinion?

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

    • 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...