iansltx

Counterpoint: 3G, let alone LTE, is faster than the home internet that anyone can get at my parents' location, or farther out from it. The wireless ISP here has as much capacity for their whole system as Sprint has for one cell site. Maybe less. I'm not advocating tethering without Sprint's tethering plan. However there's a company called Millenicom that sells "unlimited" Sprint 3G (50+ GB will get a call from them wondering what's going on). It's $70 per month. There's also Sprint tethering, which I have no remorse on using instead of parents' WiFi. It's $1.70 or so per day (prorated; I remove the feature when I am not using it). Then there's unlimited data available on my phone, which is faster than what's available (at any price short of bonded T1s) via a traditional ISP. In this case I'll tend to keep WiFi off on my phone (I turn WiFi off when I'm out and about, turning it on only when I know I'll be in an area with a hotspot), pushing web traffic over the cellular network. This is for use on my phone and my phone only...and I'm not slamming the network while doing it...so I figure that this is reasonable behavior. To put things another way, if you're going to go with the argument that unlimited is only unlimited for those who limit their usage...on a network that has as much capacity as a cable network had four years ago (when Comcast sold service with a 250GB cap), you might as well tell people to go another carrier with a capped plan, since that way they pay for what they use. Less angst for everyone, since apparently my usage on a single cell site dozens of miles away from where anyone else on here lives congests the network for everyone and causes Sprint to kill unlimited data. Oh wait...Millenicom's still around. Personally, I like T-Mobile's approach to the data dilemma: unlimited on-phone data is $20 per month. That's more expensive than 2GB of data for $10, and less expensive than 5GB of data plus tethering for $30. So obviously T-Mobile has a reasonable expectation that its subscribers to that plan, while not worrying about their wireless usage, will use somewhere between 2GB and 5GB on average. They have this expectation because they've run the numbers and, with their cost structure, they are willing to take the risks associated with offering an unlimited plan...and the rewards (more customers) of doing so. I know a friend whose family switched to the unlimited data plan on multiple lines of service, grabbed a new phone or two,(including his HTC One S) and saved some money in the process. Thing is, they'll continue to be profitable for T-Mobile despite having a fast network, unlimited data and probably very low WiFi usage... Why do I say very low WiFi usage? Because, for the average Joe, unless they're beaten over the head with WiFi related messages (like many phones do nowadays...if WiFi is turned on), they won't bother connecting to their home wireless network unless the cellular network is too slow for them. Which is fine, because those users (my mom included) aren't doing data-intensive stuff on their phones (500MB of usage per month or so for my mom). Again, it's all a numbers game, and those users are factored in with the numbers. Also, for what it's worth, if a company doesn't want its subscribers to use a lot of data on their unlimited network, they shouldn't advertise functionality that chews through data. But apparently newer networks can take the bandwidth beating that online video dishes out...which is going to be used mostly away from home anyway, because I'm probably the only one who will curl up with his phone and watch a couple episodes of Dr. Who on it, instead of reaching for a device with a larger screen

No update here yet. I'll upload the update.zip if I get it before anyone else does. The better LTE searching power would be appreciated.

Lol...you can get a "laser keyboard" for any Bluetooth compatible phone, but the lack of fact-checking on this is...breathtaking.

FWIW the phone is $49.99 on-contract at AmazonWireless. $400 off-contract at Sprint. This would actually be an excellent phone for Ting to pick up...and according to what they tweeted me earlier, they're working on it...

In a similar vein, the iPhone 5 doesn't support the 700MHz lower A block (band class 12). That's another can of worms that only obliquely concerns Sprint, so my rant...er...musings on that whole situations will occur elsewhere. The short version: AT&T doesn't want to pay LTE roaming revenue to anyone, and will hamstring its customers' phones (and its competitors' ability to buy phones) in order to avoid setting the precedent, or even the possibility of setting a precedent, on 4G roaming.

The phone may have GSM/WCDMA capabilities, however I didn't see them mentioned in the Sprint FCC certification. I'll look again prior to writing the article tomorrow. As for BC10, that's an open-and-shut case of shoddy reporting. There's an entire certification document set specifically for that band (look up the phone on PhoneScoop, then go from there to the FCC by clicking on its FCC ID). Including, of course, a doc including ERP etc. at SMR on CDMA. EDIT: Oh, and the phone definitely supports EvDO Rev. A. Shoddy reporting it is. Too bad...I used to use pdadb on a regular basis for Handsrping and Palm PDAs (like my old TX, IIIx, Visor Pro or VII, most of which I got used).

The big deal is that the iPhone 5 can't do this on networks that run voice over anything other than WCDMA.

I'll answer that with a resounding "maybe." Previous iPhones have had baseband updates. However enabling VoLTE might require recertification by the FCC, since Apple specifically said that the functionality was not supported. If recertification is required, it probably isn't worth it for Apple to go through the process. If not, maybe it'll show up...

Network Vision's better 3G speeds and slightly increased coverage (due to RRUs) doesn't require a differently optimized phone. Network Vision's LTE of course requires an LTE phone. CDMA in SMR (better coverage for voice) requires a phone that can do CDMA in SMR. The iPhone has both. The eventual addition of LTE in 2500 and SMR bands requires phones to support that technology in those bands. No current phone does this. The iPhone is no exception.

If you're talking about transmit power or antenna strength, I'm not sure, as I haven't looked at the FCC docs for the 4S. If you're talking about global band support, the iPhone 5 is definitely superior. The 4S can connect to all the GSM/HSPA bands that the iPhone 5 can, however the iPhone 5 (A1429) adds in CDMA on SMR and 2100MHz, in addition to better HSPA capabilities (DC-HSPA+ instead of 14.4 Mbps HSPA) and LTE.

Just because the chip supports TD-LTE (along with SVDO/SVLTE) doesn't mean Apple supports it in the device construction or iOS. Sure, they could co-opt the WiFi antenna for 2500MHz TD-LTE and it would probably work just fine, but since Sprint hasn't even begun certifying devices for that band class, it ain't gonna happen this time around. The phone does have CDMA (1xAdvanced or EvDO Rev. A) on SMR though. So it will be able to use that component of Sprint's network.

From having a look at the FCC docs myself, I can't find any mention of SVDO/SVLTE, other than running VoIP and data simultaneously (no VoLTE). Definitely disappointing if the omission means a lack of support.

Was poring over FCC docs today in preparation for an OET article like what AJ has done for the Eclipse, S3, etc., similar to what I'm sure The Verge did. In the few thousand pages of material that Apple submitted, SVDO and SVLTE are not mentioned. What is mentioned is that only one technology, on one antenna, will be transmitting at any given time. The charts that go along with this note are confusing at best (they look like information overload until you realize that the data therein is largely redundant) but seem to indicate that you can use, at best, one cellular tech and one WiFi band at once. So if you're on a CDMA + LTE network you can't do SV-anything without a VoIP app, and on a WCDMA + LTE network you're limited to WCDMA if you want data with your non-VoIP voice. Why have I not mentioned VoLTE yet? Because it's explicitly not supported. On the plus side, FaceTime over cellular! Yay! Wait...do I hear crickets? Hmm...okay.

Optimizing for a narrower frequency range is easier/cheaper than optimizing for a wider one.

The iPhone 5 goes back to a multi-model scheme thanks to the disparate bunch of LTE bands everyone is using. I took a look at the breakdown, as well as at the non-LTE radios, to see what this would mean for Sprint... First, what bands does each iPhone support? Apple has a list: http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/ Version #1 (A1428) is, more or less, the AT&T edition. 700MHz lower B+C and AWS First off, looks like AT&T still wants to do LTE in AWS. Second, while the iPhone only has quad-band HSPA+ (like the iPad; 850/900/1900/2100), its HSPA and LTE bands line up with T-Mobile's refarmed PCS H+ and upcoming AWS LTE. Which means of course that, if you can get an unlocked A1428 iPhone, it will probably be faster on T-Mobile than AT&T. Just like the 4/4S are when using TMo PCS H+ today. Version #2 (A1429 CDMA) is the Sprint + Verizon edition. 2100, 1800, Cellular, upper 700, PCS+G This is the most interesting model of the three IMO. Despite SpectrumCo, there's no AWS here for Verizon. There is, however, support for a band that Verizon probably won't launch for several years: LTE in Cellular. I'm sure this was due to KDDI needing the band, but it's entertaining nonetheless. And of course Sprint's current LTE deployment is fully supported, though LTE in SMR or 2500 isn't. On the non-LTE side, the phone is the only mass-market phone sold in the US that supports EvDO Rev. B. This, like the inclusion of LTE-850, is due to KDDI/au in Japan. On the other hand, Apple is using correct nomenclature for the 850 (vs. 800) band now, designating everything as 850MHz except CDMA on this model. Which of course indicates that the iPhone will (finally) support Sprint's 1x SMR network (so iPhones won't be at a coverage disadvantage to anything Sprint has sold in the past year from another manufacturer). The iPhone 5 also supports HD voice, which I'm guessing is the same thing that is supported on the Evo 4G LTE. So look for Sprint to be the first carrier in the US to support HD voice on the iPhone. Version #3 (A1429 GSM) is the international LTE version. 2100, 1800, Cellular Nothing is surprpising here; the iPhone may not nab everyone's current and future LTE bands, but having three international bands supported is a happy medium for a world phone. My guess is that this model is just the CDMA model with the additional bands/techs disabled in software, since it shares a model number with the CDMA version and has a subset of the CDMA version's bands. This means that Apple is only producing two versions of its newest phone (and two versions of its newest iPad) for the entire world...one for AT&T (okay, not quite but close) and one for everyone else in both cases. This state of affairs leaves smaller carriers in a bit of an odd predicament. The AT&T edition of the iPhone has AWS and 700 lower B + C bands built in for LTE, which is good for T-Mobile (though TMo won't get to use its AWS HSPA+) and better for someone like CricKet or MetroPCS than before (since both will deploy LTE on 1700). However there's still now AWS CDMA on any iPhone, nor is there an iPhone with both AWS and PCS LTE support. This presents a no-win situation for someone like US Cellular, who has CDMA on 850 and 1900 (A1429) but will deploy LTE across 700 (including lower-A at times) and AWS (A1428, except for the A band) and in certain cases 850 and 1900 (A1429). Of course, US Cellular would have to pick A1429, but then they will have to live with a phone that is 3G-only in any area where their cellular + PCS holdings are,'t enough to support both CDMA and LTE. But hey, at least Sprint now has an iPhone that can do LTE and CDMA just as well (band-wise) as any other currently-available Sprint phone.