WiWavelength

As a joke, I would say that the Galaxy Nexus is not "optimized" for anything. It is too much of a Frankenstein phone cobbled together from lesser chipsets. But, in all seriousness, it does have its lowest measured EIRP at Sprint's 1912.5 MHz LTE center frequency. AJ

Great question. The Galaxy S3 was "optimized" in that its highest EIRP was at Sprint's PCS G block LTE 1900 center frequency. The Note 2 was not; in fact, its LTE EIRP was worst in the PCS G block. So, take that for what you will... AJ

I believe the -3 dB RSRQ maximum is accurate for two reasons. One, I have never encountered anything greater than -3 dB. Two, my admittedly basic understanding of RSRQ is that it measures only one spatial channel. Thus, with 2x2 downlink MIMO, the unmeasured spatial channel puts the measured spatial channel at best at -3 dB (half power) in reference to the total power in both spatial channels . AJ

For your sake, I am sorry to say this, but the Galaxy Nexus is kind of a turd. As you know, it does use separate chipsets for CDMA2000 and LTE. This is what allows the Nexus to monitor both EV-DO and LTE simultaneously. Unfortunately, the CDMA2000 chipset is an off brand part from VIA Telecom and is known for its poor performance. Additionally, the multiple, older chipsets for processor, CDMA2000, and LTE definitely exact a hit on the Nexus' battery life. AJ

Up on The Wall, read away... http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-343-a-short-time-from-now-in-a-galaxy-not-far-away/ AJ

My article is up on The Wall... http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-343-a-short-time-from-now-in-a-galaxy-not-far-away/ AJ

The answer to your first question is: no. The answer to your second question is: yes. Data scheduling is based on signal strength. Unless throttled or traffic shaped, a data hog with strong signal will be allocated a disproportionate share of Resource Blocks compared to other users with lesser signal strength on the same site. AJ

by Andrew J. Shepherd Sprint 4G Rollout Updates Thursday, March 28, 2013 - 10:10 AM MDT Update: The Samsung review embargo has been lifted overnight, and Galaxy S4 reviews are being published around the Web today. Thanks to one of our favorite, highly thorough reviewers, Brian Klug at AnandTech, we can confirm that the Galaxy S4 follows the recent HTC One in providing a removable micro-SIM. So, while two data points do not necessarily a trend make, the One and Galaxy S4 do suggest that removable SIMs for Sprint LTE handsets are here to stay. Arguably the most hotly anticipated handset of the year, rivaling even the next iPhone, the Samsung Galaxy S4 in its Sprint variant popped up in the FCC OET (Office of Engineering and Technology) database late yesterday, meaning that the next Galaxy is now authorized to operate in the US and is likely just a few weeks away from a Sprint street date. Not a revolutionary overhaul of the very successful Galaxy S3 platform of last year, the Galaxy S4 maintains a strong family resemblance to its older sibling but does generally and for Sprint specifically add a number of evolutionary enhancements, such as a larger 1080p display, world roaming capability, wireless charging cover functionality, and some transmit power increases. Thus, adding to S4GRU's long standing series of articles on the FCC OET authorizations for the HTC EVO 4G LTE, Samsung Galaxy S3, Motorola Photon Q 4G, LG Optimus G, Samsung Galaxy Note 2, and HTC One is our run through of the RF capabilities of the Galaxy S4: CDMA1X + EV-DO band classes 0, 1, 10 (i.e. CDMA1X + EV-DO 850/1900/800) LTE band 25 (i.e. LTE 1900; PCS A-G blocks) LTE 5 MHz FDD carrier bandwidth LTE UE category 3 W-CDMA bands 2, 5 (i.e. W-CDMA 1900/850) GSM 850/1900 802.11a/b/g/n/ac Wi-Fi 802.11n MCS index 7, 40 MHz carrier bandwidth 802.11ac MCS index 9, 80 MHz carrier bandwidth SVLTE support, including SVLTE and simultaneous 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi tether RF ERP/EIRP maximum: 25.39 dBm (CDMA1X/EV-DO 850), 23.25 dBm (CDMA1X/EV-DO 1900), 24.62 dBm (CDMA1X/EV-DO 800), 22.83 dBm (LTE 1900) NFC antenna integrated into battery cover CDMA1X/EV-DO Rx antenna diversity Antenna locations: (see FCC OET diagram below) Simultaneous transmission paths: (see FCC OET diagram below) Breaking down the RF specs, honestly, the Galaxy S4 may come across as a disappointment to many. That is primarily, though, because the reality could hardly live up to the expectations. First, the Galaxy S4 does not support band 26 LTE 800 nor band 41 TD-LTE 2600. Reports are that Sprint will not release any dual band LTE devices and will skip straight to tri band. Those devices, however, are still at least six months off, so like all Sprint LTE devices before it, the Galaxy S4 is limited to band 25 LTE 1900 on the native Sprint network. Additionally, the Galaxy S4's band 25 LTE 1900 is limited to 5 MHz FDD bandwidth. This seems to be largely a Samsung quirk, as Sprint LTE devices from other OEMs are tested and authorized for 10 MHz FDD (or greater) as well. That being said, this will likely be of no consequence, as all Sprint LTE FDD deployment for at least the next several years is apt to remain based on 5 MHz FDD carriers. Also, unlike the recent HTC One, the Galaxy S4 does not appear to be particularly optimized for the Sprint LTE network. Using the FCC OET authorization documents, we can gauge a device's RF prowess by examining its maximum transmit ERP/EIRP and at what frequency that max occurs. This is by no means a perfect simulacrum for both transmission and reception, but we can say that Galaxy S4 LTE is at its max RF wise in the traditional PCS A-F blocks, not the PCS G block 1912.5 MHz center frequency where Sprint is deploying its initial LTE carrier nationwide. Staying on ERP/EIRP discussion, the Galaxy S4 looks to be a rather strong performer on roaming CDMA1X/EV-DO 850 and the now being deployed Sprint native CDMA1X 800. Both show quite high ERP. On the flip side, the EIRP for CDMA1X/EV-DO 1900 is good, too, but oddly less than the ERP of the CDMA2000 airlinks below 1 GHz that enjoy significant propagation advantages. With most other handsets, the transmit power relationship is reversed, CDMA1X/EV-DO 1900 transmit power being greater to compensate for its greater path loss. Furthermore, ERP/EIRP was tested with both the standard battery cover and the wireless charging cover. A definite caveat, the wireless charging cover reduces ERP/EIRP by up to 6 dB. Most likely, the induction coil in the wireless charging cover absorbs some of the transmitted RF, thus reducing the radiated power. For some users, the convenience of wireless charging may outweigh the hit to wireless performance. But S4GRU cannot generally recommend wireless charging due to its inefficiency (much power is wasted as heat) and detriment to RF. As for simultaneous voice and data, the Galaxy S4 does support SVLTE but is the latest in a long line of Sprint LTE handsets now to forgo SVDO. Realistically, this comes as no great surprise, as we have not seen SVDO capability in any new handset since last summer. Either this is a limitation of the Qualcomm MDM9615 baseband modem that has become standard equipment or SVDO is no longer a strong priority as Sprint LTE coverage grows weekly. Regardless, CDMA1X and EV-DO share a transmit path (indicated in the FCC OET diagram above); hence, simultaneous CDMA1X voice and EV-DO data is not supported. As S4GRU has reported in the past, the FCC OET authorization documents are not required to disclose world phone capabilities because those bands are not in use in the US. However, the presence of GSM 850/1900 and W-CDMA bands 2, 5 (i.e. W-CDMA 1900/850) is strongly indicative of the inclusion of international roaming capabilities, too. Indeed, other outlets are reporting that all variants of the Galaxy S4 include at a minimum quad band GSM 850/900/1800/1900 and W-CDMA bands 1, 2, 5, 8 (i.e. W-CDMA 2100+1900/1900/850/900) -- the latter supporting DC-HSPA+ on the downlink and HSUPA on the uplink. While we cannot confirm these reports at this time, they certainly do seem plausible. What also remains unconfirmed at this point is the SIM situation: embedded or removable. As soon as this info comes to light, we will update the article. Source: FCC

Well, crap. I have been checking the FCC ULS every few hours for the last several weeks. Of course, it would have to be the afternoon that I have a doctor's appointment that the Galaxy S4 hits the database, and I get scooped. AJ

Become a sponsor to follow the mapped progress of CDMA1X deployment. AJ

Thank you for clarifying, but that does not totally absolve you. One, you seemingly posted that total data usage for its shock and awe value. That is akin to posting your company's cash on hand as the total in your personal account. Too many people view their excessive data usage as some silly badge of honor. Two, you would need to have at least one hundred lines on that account to legitimize that level of data usage. I do not care that it is "unlimited" or on VZW. Nothing in a closed ecosystem is truly unlimited. VZW may kowtow to you because of the number of lines on your account. But that just does a disservice to numerous other subs and is another great example of big business screwing the small consumer. AJ

Nope. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure... AJ

Eh, not really. In areas where a carrier has poor coverage, subs are going to be spending a lot of time off LTE and on whatever is the fallback to LTE. That is where T-Mobile's HSPA+ 21 or DC-HSPA+ 42 comes in as advantage -- even though the LTE/W-CDMA combo is a decidedly inefficient use of spectrum. AJ

I do not completely buy the "Karl Bode" conspiracy theory approach to data caps. It is not so much about overages and profit as it is about responsible management of the network that actually exists. Now, you can argue that a better, higher capacity network should exist, but that is not reality. That is pie in the sky that we a when we stupidly allowed capitalists and oligopolists to build out our broadband infrastructure. Robert works in management of state government construction, and I hope that I am not revealing too much, but he has said that seemingly ample tax dollars invite waste and corruption. Seemingly "unlimited" data does likewise. AJ

I love making these kinds of references to my own articles. It is a bit like saying, "Well, if you read my third book, you would know that..." AJ

Is that real? You have used 319 GB of data in half of your billing cycle? If so, you are a data abuser and a jerk to your fellow Sprint subs. You are violating your Ts and Cs, and I hope that Sprint terminates your account with extreme prejudice. AJ

No, not at all. Sprint is a service company. It consists of a body of subscribers even more so than it does a body of employees or shareholders. Abuse of employees or shareholders or the company itself is not the issue. But some subs do abuse other subs by using disproportionately far more than their fair share of "unlimited" data, thereby limiting the ability of other subs to use data. AJ

I never knew that. AJ

As I recall, the first T-Mobile LTE tests for the tech press in NYC about a week or two ago utilized the Note 2 on an isolated, private 10 MHz FDD LTE cell. But T-Mobile's actual macro network in NYC will be 5 MHz FDD LTE for the time being. Now, I will not put any stakes on it, but I bet that the Note 2 metrics come from those aforementioned tests, while the iPhone 5 and One metrics come from the announcement, which was in NYC, correct? AJ

Abused women often stay with and even defend men who abuse them simply because the women lack other means of support. But that does not make the abuse right or acceptable. Sprint sells itself to abusers and allows abuse out of financial necessity. That does not mean, though, that bystanders cannot castigate that abuse in either situation. My utmost hope is that Sprint's situation improves enough that Sprint can retire "unlimited" data or impose throttling/traffic shaping on those who use far more data than what they have paid for. Then, the abusers will have to own up to the reality that they cannot use as much data as they want, as fast as they want, anywhere that they want, all the time. AJ

This is not a response to anyone or any post in particular. But I would like to offer some facts and opinions. As others have reported, the iPhone 5 A1428 variant has all along physically supported W-CDMA 2100+1700 (i.e. AWS HSPA+). Apple, however, locked out that capability via software in capitulation to AT&T. Apple is not alone in that regard. Look at most AT&T Android devices -- they support LTE 2100+1700 but lock out W-CDMA 2100+1700 as well to reduce their portability to T-Mobile. So, place blame accordingly on both Apple and AT&T. Like it or not, Apple and AT&T, as the original iPhone carrier, still act like BFFs. (And, by "BFFs," I mean big ******* *******.) AJ

Using data is not the same as a dog crapping the park, but abusing data is similar, as both actions negatively affect others who share that resource. Now, if the dog crapping analogy does not work for you, try this one. You bring your large pack of dogs to the dog park and let them run wild to the detriment of the other dogs and owners trying to use the dog park. That is very similar to overuse of "unlimited" data. You are making an unwarranted assumption. Did I ever say that over 500 MB was "excessive" use? No, I said that I would appreciate a 500 MB base tier, and those who use above and beyond 500 MB should pay for their additional usage. AJ

Hey, if the shoe fits, wear it... Absolutely, I have the right to judge, as that is merely a statement of my opinion. And I did not insult anyone. Wireless data is a shared resource. If, for example, you take your dog to park, let it crap all over the lawn, and the authorities do nothing to stop you, do not be surprised when I confront you about your abuse of a shared resource. AJ

My point is this: I would welcome a 500 MB base data allotment on Sprint. I am a very frequent, productive wireless data user, but that does not mean that I am a heavy user. And heavy users should pay for what they use. I am a long time Sprint sub, much longer than most anyone else here. History, locality, sentiment, and inertia keep me in the fold. But if T-Mobile is going to become the "uncarrier" while Sprint stays the "abused carrier" by keeping unlimited data while speeds slow to a crawl again due to overuse, then I will likely have to leave in the next few years. AJ

I was hopeful that the unwashed masses of iPhone users would be kept off SMR 800 MHz because Apple's arrogant stubbornness would make it unwilling to incorporate CDMA1X 800 capability. But this is almost as good... AJ