WiWavelength

I wonder whether or not the next generation iPhone for Sprint will include support for band 12 & band 41 (the iPhone 5s & 5c seem to have other bands covered.)  The Nexus 5 is even better as it seems as if it is only missing band 12.

That is, no doubt, up to Apple.  AT&T and Apple still seem a bit too cozy, and AT&T has no need for band 12.  That stymied USCC and even caused it to switch directions from band 12 to band 5.  But T-Mobile now needs band 12, and the first supported devices started to gain FCC authorization a few weeks ago.  So, we will have to wait and see if the next iPhone(s) this fall support band 12 or if that capability will not come until the next refresh a year later, as usual.

AJ

Hells yeah! I was really worried that Carolina West couldn't participate due to LTEiRA, so this is great news! I'm sure that the ASU students will be happy to have LTE for the first time.

They might also be happy to be referred to as Appalachian State, since "ASU" de facto means Arizona State -- one of the largest universities by enrollment in the entire country.

AJ

True, it's better to get the latest and greatest, but this phone is being specifically catered to beginning buyers and very possibly the WiMax replacement program. I really feel that's the primary reason for re-certification.

Josh, let us be clear.  This is not "recertification."  That would be a Class II Permissive Change filing for the original Galaxy S III.  This is a completely different handset.

AJ

Great article. Why is it that HTC's RF has always sucked compare to other devices? I love HTC but when I'm out with friends Samsung is far better at holding a LTE signal.

Careful.  You make a sweeping generalization and ask a loaded question.

In my article, I did not make any comparisons with other non HTC handsets.  We cannot speak to the real world RF performance of this HTC handset until it is in the hands of end users.

So, do not jump the gun.  And take that as neither an endorsement nor a caveat.

AJ

Then I would expect it to be named "data saver" rather than "download booster" in order to drive that point.

Or just be done with it and call it the "E-Penis Enlarger" -- because that is what it is.  Far too many buffoons out there are obsessed with MOAR SPEED!

AJ

but but but how will compare to LGs next line up of devces, namely G3 and G PRO2??

Well, let Madam WiWavelength look into his crystal ball...

AJ

Im curious, If sprint isn't concerned about loading with it (by not disabling it) then why are we? I understand responsible use of the network but it doesn't appear at the moment that there is any concern about it from sprint.

We do not want these comments to turn into a heated debate about "unlimited" data abuse.  Those never end well.

But to respond to your question, Sprint has little market power right now to show any concern for or disable Download Booster.  As chappo2000 points out, the "grin and bear it" strategy may be Sprint's only tenable option right now.

For illustration at S4GRU, we like to use the all you can eat buffet analogy.  If one or two people are being rude by hogging far more than their fair share while the restaurant is doing nothing to stop it, that does not prevent the other patrons from confronting the "unlimited" food abusers.  And that is basically what we are doing at S4GRU when we highlight current or potential problems with "unlimited" data, such as use of Download Booster.

AJ

This might be premature, but is it possible for the network to deny packages over LTE using "Download Booster" based on network conditions? Or at least make them a low priority? I would think this feature would be nice to have when network congestion isn't an issue.... although I would hope the network has some control over the manner in which it's used.

Not really.  The macro network has no means to determine that some of the packets are being delivered over Wi-Fi, some over LTE.  This is our cause for concern.  Download Booster can or will increase macro network loading in exchange for slightly faster data speeds.

AJ

How does Band 26 output look like? Better than the S4T?

If Part 90 SMR 800 MHz testing includes only conducted power, that tells us little about radiated power.  So, it is not a valid basis for comparison.  And we can report only the data provided to the FCC.

Sorry...

AJ

Hope that battery is a trooper.

My Trooper has a battery.  Does that count?

You guys could serve hard time for battery on a trooper.

AJ

Thanks for the simple explanation.  I knew I was missing something...

Also, the distinct band 41 antenna pair is not out of the ordinary.  We have seen that on most, if not all of the tri band handsets so far.  The key point, though, is that the main antenna pair is not distinct between CDMA2000 and LTE.

AJ

I must be missing something, but is the B41 LTE antenna different than the main antenna or only in picture?  You state in the article no SVLTE, but it would look like otherwise for B41 and 1x.  I'm going to re-read the article again...

Separate CDMA2000 and LTE antennas are required for SVLTE, but they do not enable SVLTE.  That requires separate RF paths, which this handset does not have.

AJ

Crappy housings. Get rid of the metal housings. Give us real antennas. I'd like to see 3 dB or more out of a phone.

Nope.  The metal housings are not the cause.  Otherwise, Samsung, with its chintzy plastics, would destroy HTC and Apple in RF.  That is not the case.

The gain issue for sub 1 GHz bands is wavelength versus antenna size.  Smartphones are not going to increase in size nor include extensible antennas.  Basically, nobody other than you wants that any longer -- pun intended.  The buying public has spoken.

So, you are better off expecting a return of CRT TVs or designing your own phone than wishing for smartphones to get larger or add whip antennas.

AJ

Robert and AJ, thanks for chiming in.  Strange that the M8 appears to be a strong performer in two bands (25 and 41) and a little weak in the other (band 26).  I'll try to stop obsessing over numbers now.

If the Nexus 5 band 26 figures are for conducted power -- and I recall that they are, though I would have to double check -- then they cannot be readily compared to the radiated power figures for the HTC M8.  Conducted power does not take into account antenna gain.  And antenna gain for <1 GHz in these small handsets is almost always negative.  For example, the band 26 antenna gain in the HTC M8 is -2.5 dBi.

AJ

Of course, real world results may vary.  But the M8 looks promising.  Especially in Band 25.  I'm expecting it to be competitive with the N5, except in B26.  But B26 is less important since it has a propagation advantage.

Yes, we must remember that, in free space, 800 MHz has about a 7 dB path loss advantage over 1900 MHz.  That means add 7 dB to the band 26 figure or subtract 7 dB from the band 25 figure -- but not both.  In doing so, band 26 pulls ahead of band 25.  And in the real world, the path loss disparity tends to be much greater, more on the order of 10-15 dB, in which case band 26 is way out in front.

AJ

Dislike the low resolution and single cellular radio path.

For screen resolution, you will have plenty of better options. For RF transmit path, you will not. So, get used to it.

AJ

Any word of a timeline when Sprint will start to use the acquired USCC spectrum in Chicago?

Last summer, USCC and Sprint agreed to a January 31 sunset date for the USCC network in Chicago.  That is this week.  I have heard nothing to indicate the network shutdown has been delayed.  So, the former USCC PCS B block spectrum should be free and clear by next week.  Then, Sprint deployment of that spectrum can follow.

AJ

For the ones that don't know, 865-869mhz use to be public safety frequencies in which Sprint paid to have Users of said spectrum re-band there equipment to help with Nextel Mitigation interference. Use to be a lot of police and fire on those frequencies nationwide. Sprint shelled out a lot of cash for that.

This is true. For further reference, I wrote an SMR broadband article two years ago that touched upon Public Safety rebanding.

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-90-fcc-ready-to-give-sprint-official-go-ahead-on-smr-800-mhz-wideband-operation/

AJ

US/Mexico IBEZ area has been agreed upon both sides.  Right now there is a 30 month rebanding period that began in August 2013 and has to be complete at the very latest by February 2016.

 

http://www.fcc.gov/document/commencement-800-mhz-band-reconfiguration-along-mexico-border

Yes, but that does not mean Sprint will be able to deploy a 5 MHz FDD LTE carrier or even an LTE carrier at all in the IBEZ.  That will still depend upon coordination between Sprint and Mexican operators.  In other words, keep your hopes low so that you will not be disappointed.

AJ

Thanks for the plaudits. The spectrum analyzer has come in handy over the past year and a half, has definitely been a worthwhile investment.

AJ

And would you believe it, in the five minutes it took me to set up in a parking lot and run my RF sweep, the police pulled into the parking lot.  Fortunately, it turned out that they were there to assist two motorists who had been involved in a small fender bender.  But I thought that I was going to get questioned AGAIN!

AJ

AJ, could you go into more detail about RSRQ? It seems like everyone around S4GRU uses RSRP and I wanted to know why. Is it because that RSRP is closer (in terms of dBms) to RSSI?

Yes. RSRQ is related to RSRP, but RSRQ is Reference Signal Received Quality. And in many ways, RSRQ is to Ec/Io as RSRP is to RSSI.

AJ

Not bashing Sprint here, I'm a long time loyal customer (currently HTC One), but am I the only one that's saying, "Hold on a minute."?  One of the reasons I want LTE is so that I can use data and voice at the same time.  Is this not where Sprint is headed?

For years, Sprint handsets were not capable of simultaneous voice and data.  Then, for about three years, they were -- due to WiMAX, SVDO, and/or SVLTE.  But all of those technologies are on the way out.  As a result, simultaneous voice and data likely will be absent from new handsets for several years until VoLTE becomes commonplace.  But, yes, simultaneous voice and data is ultimately "where Sprint is headed."

AJ

this s4 is the s4mini so a smaller screen.  if you want the big screen you get single band..if you want tri-band you get the smaller screen...this is according to sprint's own site.

No, that is incorrect.  This is not the tri band Galaxy S4 Mini.  This is a separate tri band, full size Galaxy S4.

AJ

i talk quote a bit.  frankly if you aren't using the voice why not carry an LTE tablet around instead of a phone?  Just my .02.

Most people would not prefer to carry around something the size of an LTE tablet, as it would not be pocketable.  Plus, even people who rarely use voice capabilities still need to make/take a phone call every now and then, and they probably use SMS quite often.  A handset fits the bill; a tablet does not.

AJ