Jump to content

Google Nexus 5 by LG Preview (LG D820)


MacinJosh

Recommended Posts

On August 2nd, 2013, LG received FCC approval for a device known as the LG D820. It received approval for LTE on Band 25 (Sprint LTE on 1900G), Band 26 (Sprint LTE on 800SMR), Band 41 (Sprint LTE on BRS/EBS. In addition, it also received approval for LTE on 706.5 - 713.5 & 709 - 711, and maybe 1710.7 - 1754.3 (& subsets 1712.4 - 1752.6 & 1720 - 1745). However, before anyone really had a chance to view anything, LG put in a paper to dismiss the approval of the device, citing confidentiality reasons, and stated that they would re-apply closer to the date of launch. This is really strange of them to do such a thing, but I guess this device is now the new mystery device of this year. Details are speculation at this point, but hopefully we will know more details soon.

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So....Nexus 5? Or Optimus G Pro?

I'm thinking a tablet of some sort because historically, Sprint LTE branded LG phones have been carrying the LS model designator, except the Optimus F3 for Boost (it carried the LG model designator).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking a tablet of some sort because historically, Sprint LTE branded LG phones have been carrying the LS model designator, except the Optimus F3 for Boost (it carried the LG model designator).

 

Hmm...i have not seen an LG tablet before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...i have not seen an LG tablet before.

Remember, I'm only guessing based on the FCC band certifications. The 1700 bands it's certified for leave a big open space because AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile all use those bands for LTE. And AT&T, C-Spire, and US Cellular use the lower 700 blocks. The amount of LTE band support on this device is great, and I don't know if they could pull this off in a phone. If it turns out to be a phone, then I'm assuming it'll be at least a 5" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting! I wonder what it could end up being.

 

Nexus S 4G was Samsung though. So that doesn't mean anything.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if this is the first device that supports an agreement (as yet unreached) between Sprint, USCC and C-Spire to allow LTE roaming between each other's networks. Probably a tablet, but bonus points if it's a hotspot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nexus S 4G was Samsung though. So that doesn't mean anything.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if this is the first device that supports an agreement (as yet unreached) between Sprint, USCC and C-Spire to allow LTE roaming between each other's networks. Probably a tablet, but bonus points if it's a hotspot.

I don't expect LG to release a hotspot. But I really think it's a tablet. And the idea of a Sprint, USCC, and C-Spire inter-roaming agreement would be awesome to compete against Verizon. We shall see soon enough once the docs show back up in the FCC database.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Oh my god.... you know what it looks like?

 

. . .

 

Google LG Nexus (5?) for Sprint?!>?!

 

 

AJ

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Triband was so yesterday. Pentaband is where its at!  :hah:

 

And just to head off the question posse, no, this mystery handset does not support SVDO nor SVLTE.

 

AJ

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question: given the hedging on the meaning of the band certifications (quoted below), what are the odds this will be a Sprint device? Are any of these bands unique to Sprint and unlikely to be in a non-Sprint phone? Is this device intended to work across all carriers?

 

Interpretation from the more knowledgeable is appreciated!

 

 

Remember, I'm only guessing based on the FCC band certifications. The 1700 bands it's certified for leave a big open space because AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile all use those bands for LTE. And AT&T, C-Spire, and US Cellular use the lower 700 blocks. The amount of LTE band support on this device is great, and I don't know if they could pull this off in a phone. If it turns out to be a phone, then I'm assuming it'll be at least a 5" screen.

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

    • This site is built but not live. eNB 41150 is still live. eNB 41188 is decommissioned but as far as I can tell the site at 200 West 55th is not built yet. This site is live gNB 1346302. This site is live gNB 1092074 This site is live gNB 1371671 This site is live gNB 1371860 — — — — — Sprint eNB 6156 -> T-Mobile gNB 1349260 Sprint eNB Unknown -> T-Mobile gNB 1325016 — — — — — Bonus T-Mobile 5G small cell, gNB 1348688 in Queens:  
    • FTTH JVs are city by city as well, so it's not going to really be sector by sector. It sounds like TMo wants to be able to sell everyone home broadband, but if that requires building additional infrastructure that infra will take the form of FTTH builds rather than mobile densification. Which involves tradeoffs, but the product is better than e.g. what AT&T is doing for me right now, which is offering only Internet Air in an area where they have 100/20 DSL available but not (yet) fiber.
    • Hopefully they do not wait until these sectors get so overloaded that they start getting nasty reviews and people abandon them. Getting fiber coverage to the area of a overloaded sector can take a year or more. I also question if this can all be managed.  Lots of sectors all over the country can get congested fairly quick.  Lots of work and money to get fiber installed and there goes the profitability on the venture.
    • MoffetNathanson Conference This is a conference where the CFO talks telecom financial analysts so obviously it takes a return on investment approach.  Broadly T-Mobile divides there world into top 100 markets (60%) and small town/rural (40%). They ultimately want to have at least 1/3 market share in rural. They also look at demographics like 50+ and Hispanic.  Reputation is now starting to help them with CIOs.  Did mention c-band buildout beginning in major cities as well as continued band migration to 5g. IMO they may become more aggressive at offering 5g phones to LTE holdover and 5g users without VoNR at a future date. mmWave not discussed. Price increases not discussed iirc. Did mention spectrum purchases from speculators. $9 billion all goes through same ROI process. FWA is down to hexagonal patterns by sector of fallow spectrum. Fiber JVs will go where sectors are overloaded.
    • I am lucky to be served by an excellent fiber ISP and that is the only reason I haven't tried TMOs FWA. Once you go fiber, it is REALLY hard to go back. The choice of sub-10ms ping times is a very artificial bucket, FWA will seldom get much below 10ms ping times but fiber regularly gets me 1-3ms ping times. Basically, at around those times, the speed of light and the distance you are from the server become the limiting factors. As an aside, my internet provider, ZiplyFiber, has been awesome. They peer like crazy at all the major IX in the area and, as a result, you end up with what essentially amounts to direct fiber connections to the vast majority of major data sources. While it isn't sexy, it makes my 1Gb/1Gb connection load pages significantly faster than my works 10Gb/10Gb connection. On the "sexy" side, they are also fastest ISP in the nation. They offer up to 50Gb/50Gb via a direct fiber connection to the router, albeit for an eye watering $900/mo.
  • Recently Browsing

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