Apparently Samsung can't supply enough of their Octa Core prcessors and are reserving them for non LTE countries in Asia and Africa.
70% of the first 10 million handsets will have the Qualcomm quad core.
UK, Europe, US and Australia will not recieve the Octa Core!
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone...tedly-use-quadcore-not-octacore-chips-1140469
So meaning no development on octa core thats sad i guess...
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
That's pretty sweet for me. Now I'll most likely get Omega on the USA one.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
qazibasit said:
So meaning no development on octa core thats sad i guess...
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But is there really going to be that much development for the Exynos S4? I've been hearing horror stories about devs dropping support for the Exynos right and left.
Sent from my HTC Vivid.
I have a feeling the octa will be in the note 3,
With the launch event, they have essentially marketed the wrong phone.
Im still torn, because all I usually do is root the phone and remove the bloatware.
Obagleyfreer said:
Apparently Samsung can't supply enough of their Octa Core prcessors and are reserving them for non LTE countries in Asia and Africa.
70% of the first 10 million handsets will have the Qualcomm quad core.
UK, Europe, US and Australia will not recieve the Octa Core!
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone...tedly-use-quadcore-not-octacore-chips-1140469
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is fantastic news.
S 4 Development will be thriving for most of the versions!
And if you guys were expecting newer versions with Exynos, don't put your hopes up too high, it'll likely be in the Note 3 as standard.
But it will be incredibly sad news to anyone who wants a thriving Exynos S 4 development,
this includes future Note 3 development if Exynos comes as standard.
Livebyte said:
This is fantastic news.
S 4 Development will be thriving for most of the versions!
And if you guys were expecting newer versions with Exynos, don't put your hopes up too high, it'll likely be in the Note 3 as standard.
But it will be incredibly sad news to anyone who wants a thriving Exynos S 4 development,
this includes future Note 3 development if Exynos comes as standard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. I'm quite happy that the majority will have the Quad core, the dev scene will be great!
Most devs have sworn not to develop for Exynos devices as Samsung won't release sources.
And now that the same SOC will be used in US, Europe and Australia it can only be a good thing!
Let's deconstruct the story...
according to a report out of South Korea today.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link? Reports "out of South Korea" come in all degrees of accuracy.
said the report picked up by Unwired News.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Follow the link and it's to a story about Qualcomm officially announcing the S-600 will be used in the SGS4. At the bottom of the story it says Octa's on track for the SGS4's April 26th launch data. Not a single mention of where S-600 or Octa will be used.
In fact, the U.S., U.K., and Australia won't see any Galaxy S4s with Samsung's Exynos 5 Octa system on a chip, which is being reserved for Asian and African nations that lack LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh? We already knew LTE heavy countries would be receiving S-600. But 2/3 of the world aren't LTE- capable yet. So it's probably safe to assume the 1/3 of LTE counties have lots of wireless subscribers so they probably will make up half of the SGS4's sold. I'd find it hard to believe that 2/3 of the non-LTE world (Africa? Seriously?) make up 30% of smartphone purchasers as the story claims.
The report indicates that not enough of these chips will be available for the launch of Samsung's new flagship smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What report?
Samsung's much-talked-about processor is said to be scheduled for mass production in Q2 2013, whereas the Korean manufacturer's Galaxy S4 release date is at the end of April.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The link to Unwired they provided says the opposite and their coverage is less than a week old.
So, until the credibility of the "report" that's repeatedly quoted can be verified I'm taking this one with a grain of salt. I don't consider SamMobile a terribly reliable source but at least their S-600 vs. Octa deployment schedule had some detail attached.
P.S. - A gazillion sites quoting TechRadar's claim of "70%" doesn't make it any more credible unless the missing "report" itself turns up and is in fact credible. If there's any mobile device out there people are interested in right now it's the SGS4. How many clicks throughs do you think TechRadar's gotten off that story?
BarryH_GEG said:
Let's deconstruct the story...
Link? Reports "out of South Korea" come in all degrees of accuracy.
Follow the link and it's to a story about Qualcomm officially announcing the S-600 will be used in the SGS4. At the bottom of the story it says Octa's on track for the SGS4's April 26th launch data. Not a single mention of where S-600 or Octa will be used.
Huh? We already knew LTE heavy countries would be receiving S-600. But 2/3 of the world aren't LTE- capable yet. So it's probably safe to assume the 1/3 of LTE counties have lots of wireless subscribers so they probably will make up half of the SGS4's sold. I'd find it hard to believe that 2/3 of the non-LTE world (Africa? Seriously?) make up 30% of smartphone purchasers as the story claims.
What report?
The link to Unwired they provided says the opposite and their coverage is less than a week old.
So, until the credibility of the "report" that's repeatedly quoted can be verified I'm taking this one with a grain of salt. I don't consider SamMobile a terribly reliable source but at least their S-600 vs. Octa deployment schedule had some detail attached.
P.S. - A gazillion sites quoting TechRadar's claim of "70%" doesn't make it any more credible unless the missing "report" itself turns up and is in fact credible. If there's any mobile device out there people are interested in right now it's the SGS4. How many clicks throughs do you think TechRadar's gotten off that story?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very valid points!
I need to stop believing everything I read on the internet, it's going to get me into trouble haha
That said, I still believe there is "some" truth to this.
And we all know that the majority of countries will get the Quad Core over the Octa Core, simply due to LTE.
BarryH_GEG said:
Let's deconstruct the story...
Link? Reports "out of South Korea" come in all degrees of accuracy.
Follow the link and it's to a story about Qualcomm officially announcing the S-600 will be used in the SGS4. At the bottom of the story it says Octa's on track for the SGS4's April 26th launch data. Not a single mention of where S-600 or Octa will be used.
Huh? We already knew LTE heavy countries would be receiving S-600. But 2/3 of the world aren't LTE- capable yet. So it's probably safe to assume the 1/3 of LTE counties have lots of wireless subscribers so they probably will make up half of the SGS4's sold. I'd find it hard to believe that 2/3 of the non-LTE world (Africa? Seriously?) make up 30% of smartphone purchasers as the story claims.
What report?
The link to Unwired they provided says the opposite and their coverage is less than a week old.
So, until the credibility of the "report" that's repeatedly quoted can be verified I'm taking this one with a grain of salt. I don't consider SamMobile a terribly reliable source but at least their S-600 vs. Octa deployment schedule had some detail attached.
P.S. - A gazillion sites quoting TechRadar's claim of "70%" doesn't make it any more credible unless the missing "report" itself turns up and is in fact credible. If there's any mobile device out there people are interested in right now it's the SGS4. How many clicks throughs do you think TechRadar's gotten off that story?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well what's the percentage when we do our own numbers? I think we know a good amount that will be using the Snapdragon confirmed. What if we assumed that all the other versions are using Octa, what would the percentage be there?
BarryH_GEG said:
Let's deconstruct the story...
bla bla bla bla bla
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sometimes I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and have some real contextual interpretation issues. Here's the original article to help out: http://www.etnews.com/news/device/device/2739089_1479.html#ystfuv It contains much more information than the English counterparts.
Huh? We already knew LTE heavy countries would be receiving S-600. But 2/3 of the world aren't LTE- capable yet. So it's probably safe to assume the 1/3 of LTE counties have lots of wireless subscribers so they probably will make up half of the SGS4's sold. I'd find it hard to believe that 2/3 of the non-LTE world (Africa? Seriously?) make up 30% of smartphone purchasers as the story claims.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it really that hard to believe that a $650+ high end phone might not have a very high market-demand outside of first world countries?
North America, Japan, Korea, Australia, and basically every relevant European country is getting the LTE variant. In terms of market size that only leaves out China, India, SE Asia, and maybe South America, and as I stated, even if they outnumber the first-class countries 3:1 in population, that doesn't even nearly make up for the income inequality and the simple fact that a high-end smartphone is a luxury item there.
AndreiLux said:
Sometimes I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and have some real contextual interpretation issues. Here's the original article to help out: http://www.etnews.com/news/device/device/2739089_1479.html#ystfuv It contains much more information than the English counterparts.
Is it really that hard to believe that a $650+ high end phone might not have a very high market-demand outside of first world countries?
The US, Japan, Korea, Australia, and basically every relevant European country is getting the LTE variant. In terms of market size that only leaves out China, India, SE Asia, and maybe South America, and as I stated, even if they outnumber the first-class countries 3:1 in population, that doesn't even nearly make up for the income inequality and the simple fact that a high-end smartphone is a luxury item there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only countries that matter in Asia are Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan & Japan.
Others are still emerging markets which means high-end smartphones like the S 4 has little relevance there.
Deal with it people, Qualcomm versions are definitely going to be the majority of the S 4's.
One year later, you won't regret it.
Mark my words.
Livebyte said:
The only countries that matter in Asia are Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan & Japan.
Others are still emerging markets which means high-end smartphones like the S 4 has little relevance there.
Deal with it people, Qualcomm versions are definitely going to be the majority of the S 4's.
One year later, you won't regret it.
Mark my words.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct, and those markets combined are still only half the size of the US market.
To have a bit of scale:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
And that's only what fits the smart-phone definition, high-end expensive smart-phones like the S4 is again drastically skewed.
I can't find the quote anymore but I remember that Europe alone consisted for like 50% of the last S series sales, worldwide. Now count the fact that Europe is getting the LTE version in the biggest markets...
Livebyte said:
Deal with it people, Qualcomm versions are definitely going to be the majority of the S 4's.
One year later, you won't regret it.
Mark my words.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't be so sure about that. The only reason this situation even came to be is because of Samsung's manufacturing problems. Once they have sorted that out do you still think they'll willing to pay $30 per phone in components to Qualcomm when they could have sourced it cheaper or have that money returned back internally into the company? You might very well see the numbers going belly up in favor of the Exynos later in the year.
Livebyte said:
One year later, you won't regret it.
Mark my words.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kinda true, you'll be worrying about what's in the S5 in 2014
AndreiLux said:
Correct, and those markets combined are still only half the size of the US market.
To have a bit of scale:
And that's only what fits the smart-phone definition, high-end expensive smart-phones like the S4 is again drastically skewed.
I can't find the quote anymore but I remember that Europe alone consisted for like 50% of the last S series sales, worldwide. Now count the fact that Europe is getting the LTE version in the biggest markets...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hah. Try to find someone here in Singapore that doesn't own an high-end smartphone, I'll give you a dollar for that.
If you don't have one, you'll basically be an outcast here.
Don't be so sure about that. The only reason this situation even came to be is because of Samsung's manufacturing problems. Once they have sorted that out do you still think they'll willing to pay $30 per phone in components to Qualcomm when they could have sourced it cheaper or have that money returned back internally into the company? You might very well see the numbers going belly up in favor of the Exynos later in the year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm still hanging in the middle about that.
It could either go both ways.
I'm hoping it will stick cause it will hinder development for sure.
But one thing I'm sure, if they have sorted all of this out, Exynos will definitely be standardized across all versions of the Note 3.
SlimJ87D said:
Well what's the percentage when we do our own numbers? I think we know a good amount that will be using the Snapdragon confirmed. What if we assumed that all the other versions are using Octa, what would the percentage be there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's almost impossible really. Some Asian countries have large numbers of mobile users but low percentages of them can afford high-end smartphones. Some have tons of high-end smartphone users but their populations aren't all that large. For example, VZW in the U.S. has almost as many subscribers as all of Japan.
Unless something's gone horribly wrong, Octa would be the SoC Samsung would push wherever they could. It should cost them no more than S-600 to produce (if it does, they screwed up) and rather than giving the mark-up to Qualcomm they'd keep it in the Samsung empire. So the rumors could be true and Octa's going to late, there are heat and power consumption issues, it's only meant to be used in Africa, and it's useless because 70% of end-users are on LTE. Or they might not.
With launch (theoretically) a month away and very little coming out about Octa itself or where it's being used I'd guess something's up. On the bright side maybe performance and battery life is so much better than S-600 their struggling with how to position two such different devices as "the same."
I guess we'll know soon from the horse's mouth.
---------- Post added at 06:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:30 PM ----------
AndreiLux said:
Correct, and those markets combined are still only half the size of the US market.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung sold 60MM "smartphones" in Q4 2012. Of those, only 15MM were SGS3-class or higher. The closest you'll come to markets rich in high-end smartphone users is to use Apple as a comparative as they only sell high-end devices and are who Samsung's aiming for on the high-end. Here's a sobering stat. 60% of devices sold in 2012 were "dumb phones."
So, there is still no proof about which processors supports lte (however I'm pretty sure it's actually separate to the cpu these days?). Initially the thought was snapdragon for the us lte bands and exynos for other lte bands. The htc one snapdragon supports main lte bands (800/1800/2600. Missing 1700/2100/2300), so in that basis could be sold all over, but then wether the exynos supports lte or not, what's stopping it from being sold all over as a 3g phone?
Brendo said:
So, there is still no proof about which processors supports lte (however I'm pretty sure it's actually separate to the cpu these days?). Initially the thought was snapdragon for the us lte bands and exynos for other lte bands. The htc one snapdragon supports main lte bands (800/1800/2600. Missing 1700/2100/2300), so in that basis could be sold all over, but then wether the exynos supports lte or not, what's stopping it from being sold all over as a 3g phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both processors in this case don't have integrated LTE and both in support LTE via a separate modem. The whole story basically has nothing to do with LTE itself. It's just Samsung keeping two designs instead of three out in the market (for the moment).
AndreiLux said:
I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and have some real contextual interpretation issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I think you're pissed off at me because you weren't happy with my reply to someone asking about black crush in another thread. And my contextual interpretation abilities are fine. If you'd like to chat further about either of our contextual interpretation abilities PM me and we can spare the rest of the forum while not violating XDA's rule about attacking others personally.
AndreiLux said:
Both processors in this case don't have integrated LTE and both in support LTE via a separate modem. The whole story basically has nothing to do with LTE itself. It's just Samsung keeping two designs instead of three out in the market (for the moment).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't think it would be down to LTE 100% afterall the i9305 has a Exynos SOC and LTE.
I think I might just wait a few months and see if Samsung release the Exynos version with a Qualcomm LTE modem like they did on the S3
@AndreiLux, as a long time Perseus user and huge fan of your work I was wondering if you will be getting the S4 and developing a Kernel for it?
If so which one, Exynos or Qualcomm?
Related
Do y'all think they will eventually make a Nexus S for 850 and 1900 3G bands like they did for the Nexus One?
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Hard to say... it'd make sense if they want to market it to UK and Canadian users, since more of their carriers use the bands AT&T does for 3G. Even if they do, it's not gonna make me jump from my N1. I'm perfectly happy with it, and I personally don't care for the Nexus S.
tehgeekguy said:
Hard to say... it'd make sense if they want to market it to UK and Canadian users, since more of their carriers use the bands AT&T does for 3G. Even if they do, it's not gonna make me jump from my N1. I'm perfectly happy with it, and I personally don't care for the Nexus S.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding UK carriers - wrong. The Nexus S already has UMTS 2100 which is used UK-wide, and UMTS 900 which is about to gain greater adoption in the UK. No carrier in Europe uses AT&T's bands.
But regarding Canadian carriers, yes, it'd make sense to produce a UMTS 850/1900 version. That doesn't mean it's incredibly likely to happen.
Well I hope it does! Everyone is really downing the phone and theyve never even held it! Google put their name on it so I bet its way better than people are making it out to be
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
I hope so too
I will surely jump from my Nexus One
I love it, but a change of looks would be nice
Here's to hoping there's a software hack like the one they had for the Vibrant's 850 MHz band.
While I have no first hand knowledge what so ever, if Google/handset manufacturer work on the same time line as the N1, after a period of time they will release a North American 3G variant of the Nexus S.
Quite frankly, I wonder why TMo seems to always get the Google Experience Phone, do most developers use TMo?
While I have no issues with TMo other than that they are not real big in my area of the USA, I cannot help but wonder why not either put a pentaband chip-set in the phone (which supports all Frequencies) or offer two variants right off the bat.
It just seems weird to me is all, I realize that El Goog probably has a good reason, but if sales are a key driving force why not offer it to more potential users and not just to users on the USA smallest network.
Dan
dan1431 said:
While I have no first hand knowledge what so ever, if Google/handset manufacturer work on the same time line as the N1, after a period of time they will release a North American 3G variant of the Nexus S.
Quite frankly, I wonder why TMo seems to always get the Google Experience Phone, do most developers use TMo?
While I have no issues with TMo other than that they are not real big in my area of the USA, I cannot help but wonder why not either put a pentaband chip-set in the phone (which supports all Frequencies) or offer two variants right off the bat.
It just seems weird to me is all, I realize that El Goog probably has a good reason, but if sales are a key driving force why not offer it to more potential users and not just to users on the USA smallest network.
Dan
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they don't care? Google and Samsung are both corporations that serve to make their shareholders $$$, not keep us happy. Seriously. How many 850 MHz Nexus Ones did Google sell? Four? It's a ****ing shame because that phone @ at&t when it came out was really only up against the iPhone 3GS - it had no retail presence, and failed. Someone in some marketing office is confusing causation & correlation - their unsubsidized, unmarketable phone didn't sell.
They messed up again, the phone is still only being sold unsubsidized. Nobody buys unsubsidized phones in America (statistically speaking).
EDIT: I have an 850 MHz Nexus One - release day. I haven't seen a single phone on the market to make me even consider switching out. Consequence of dropping unsubsidized cash on a phone I guess.
sheik124 said:
Here's to hoping there's a software hack like the one they had for the Vibrant's 850 MHz band.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was a false positive. The TMobile Vibrant has 1900 3g but it's never had 850.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
sheik124 said:
Because they don't care? Google and Samsung are both corporations that serve to make their shareholders $$$, not keep us happy. Seriously. How many 850 MHz Nexus Ones did Google sell? Four? It's a ****ing shame because that phone @ at&t when it came out was really only up against the iPhone 3GS - it had no retail presence, and failed. Someone in some marketing office is confusing causation & correlation - their unsubsidized, unmarketable phone didn't sell.
They messed up again, the phone is still only being sold unsubsidized. Nobody buys unsubsidized phones in America (statistically speaking).
EDIT: I have an 850 MHz Nexus One - release day. I haven't seen a single phone on the market to make me even consider switching out. Consequence of dropping unsubsidized cash on a phone I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nexus S is being sold @ a subsidized price: $199 w/ contract
Google and Samsung do serve to make money for shareholders, but Google does so primarily by making people happy, that is why their services are mostly free. Happy customers are Google's commodity.
About the AT&T 3G bands: I got an "i don't know" from a Google Software developer this morning on Twitter, so doubtful it will be around the Tmobile launch, but I don't think there is any question with the phone being sold in Best Buy and the way Samsung handled the Galaxy, it won't be too long
If there was a 850MHz version, I would put my order in tonight as I'm itching for a 4" phone (perfect size IMO). I have a feeling there probably wont be one though, as the Nexus S is more about having an up to date, clean-slate phone for developers to use and for Google to showcase new Android features. I doubt they care about maximizing sales of them, and there's probably not a lot to gain by opening them up to AT&T/Rogers/Bell/Telus customers, especially after all the testing and certification requirements.
Canadians that really want one can go with Wind Mobile or Mobilicity... and if I lived in the US I would pick T-Mobile over AT&T any day.
sheik124 said:
Here's to hoping there's a software hack like the one they had for the Vibrant's 850 MHz band.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While this has been addressed in part already, I'd like to address the other half of the story.
The Nexus S has already gone through the FCC. Check the FCC filings, and you'll find the frequencies on which the phone can operate. Go back and check the Vibrant initially passing through the FCC. See the difference?
The S does not have the hardware required for 3G to operate on AT&T. No software hack will enable what the hardware just CAN NOT do.
SoberGuy said:
While this has been addressed in part already, I'd like to address the other half of the story.
The Nexus S has already gone through the FCC. Check the FCC filings, and you'll find the frequencies on which the phone can operate. Go back and check the Vibrant initially passing through the FCC. See the difference?
The S does not have the hardware required for 3G to operate on AT&T. No software hack will enable what the hardware just CAN NOT do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, didn't know that.
PrawnPoBoy said:
Canadians that really want one can go with Wind Mobile or Mobilicity... and if I lived in the US I would pick T-Mobile over AT&T any day.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's easy for you to say. I'd jump on Tmobile in a heartbeat but they have no, and I mean none, service at my work. Since I spend the majority of my time there it rules out Tmobile for me. So lets hope an ATT compatible version comes out in a few months.
Yeah I would happily drop 500+ dollars on a at&t nexus s if they make one for 850 and 1900 3G bands
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
dan1431 said:
Quite frankly, I wonder why TMo seems to always get the Google Experience Phone, do most developers use TMo?
Dan
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
maybe all developers have shotty credit and can only get approved for T-Mobile flexpay?
i kid i kid...kinda...
dan1431 said:
While I have no first hand knowledge what so ever, if Google/handset manufacturer work on the same time line as the N1, after a period of time they will release a North American 3G variant of the Nexus S.
Quite frankly, I wonder why TMo seems to always get the Google Experience Phone, do most developers use TMo?
While I have no issues with TMo other than that they are not real big in my area of the USA, I cannot help but wonder why not either put a pentaband chip-set in the phone (which supports all Frequencies) or offer two variants right off the bat.
It just seems weird to me is all, I realize that El Goog probably has a good reason, but if sales are a key driving force why not offer it to more potential users and not just to users on the USA smallest network.
Dan
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah i dont understand it either. it seems as though these manufacturers actually HURT their sales by not being forthcoming right off the bat. we all dance around the issue, not knowing to buy or not buy, will an 850 version come later for me, etc. nobody is gonna drop 500 with that type of info. just lay it all out there from the beginning so people know to buy or not!
cpcrazyfly said:
maybe all developers have shotty credit and can only get approved for T-Mobile flexpay?
i kid i kid...kinda...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If more people supported developers, credit wouldn't be needed. . . .
Sent from my SGH-I987 using XDA App
dan1431 said:
Quite frankly, I wonder why TMo seems to always get the Google Experience Phone, do most developers use TMo?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have two thoughts on this. First, TMo doesn't give a crap. Look at the approach that most providers take to their phones, as far as bloatware, locking it down, crippling, etc. TMo, IMO, does far less of that than any other carrier. Imagine Google asking a carrier to offer a subsidized price on a Google Experience device, that they can't put any bloatware on. AT&T would laugh. For months. I think the prime reason is that TMo is willing to do that, while the others simply are not.
Two, doesn't TMo have a cell tower in Google's parking lot? I read that somewhere, but can't find anything on it. Maybe someone here has some info on that??
dan1431 said:
While I have no issues with TMo other than that they are not real big in my area of the USA, I cannot help but wonder why not either put a pentaband chip-set in the phone (which supports all Frequencies) or offer two variants right off the bat.
It just seems weird to me is all, I realize that El Goog probably has a good reason, but if sales are a key driving force why not offer it to more potential users and not just to users on the USA smallest network.
Dan
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, Dan, I feel it's because TMo is the only carrier to offer a subsidy on it. Sammy can make a phone that works on any or all frequencies, if they want to. But they'd have to find someone willing to sell it, without any carrier subsidy, and more importantly, they'd have to have customers willing to buy it unsubsidized. On this latter point, I believe that is why Google felt the N1 was a massive failure. They didn't sell anywhere near what they wanted to, and they couldn't get AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon to offer a subsidy. I'm not sure what happened with the CDMA folks, but I can only venture a guess as to AT&T...
SoberGuy said:
I have two thoughts on this. First, TMo doesn't give a crap. Look at the approach that most providers take to their phones, as far as bloatware, locking it down, crippling, etc. TMo, IMO, does far less of that than any other carrier. Imagine Google asking a carrier to offer a subsidized price on a Google Experience device, that they can't put any bloatware on. AT&T would laugh. For months. I think the prime reason is that TMo is willing to do that, while the others simply are not.
Two, doesn't TMo have a cell tower in Google's parking lot? I read that somewhere, but can't find anything on it. Maybe someone here has some info on that??
Again, Dan, I feel it's because TMo is the only carrier to offer a subsidy on it. Sammy can make a phone that works on any or all frequencies, if they want to. But they'd have to find someone willing to sell it, without any carrier subsidy, and more importantly, they'd have to have customers willing to buy it unsubsidized. On this latter point, I believe that is why Google felt the N1 was a massive failure. They didn't sell anywhere near what they wanted to, and they couldn't get AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon to offer a subsidy. I'm not sure what happened with the CDMA folks, but I can only venture a guess as to AT&T...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was guessing the same thing. Either there is RIDICULOUSLY good T-Mo reception at the Mountain View campus OR it has to be some sort of deal between T-Mo and Google.
I remember when the G1 came out. I was thinking "wow, what an ugly phone. Android seems like a cool concept but seeing how it works on that phone is crappy. boo hiss etc". The phone did not seem to have much promise compared to the other competitors (windows mobile and....iphone). Naturally T-Mo took a huge risk carrying and promoting the at the time unknown phone. It seems like that faith has paid off because Google has chose T-Mobile as the only official carrier of ALL of their developer phones (ADP1 (G1), ADP2 (MT3G), Nexus One, and now the Nexus S.)
Or maybe it's some combination of both of those theories.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/27/t-mobile-g2x-lacks-quadband-hspa-shatters-dreams/
So glad i didnt buy this now. Oh well...
Alas, returning the phone was justified. I know that for the average customer this might not have been a big deal, but I wanted a true high end global HSDPA device. I wanted it to be true so much...
Oh well, still a great phone for those who do not care about the missing bands.
Onwards with the custom roms!
Stinks and some major fubared information on the website. Oh well, awesome phone.
So much for that....back to my vibrant for now.....
I thought that this phone passed the fcc with the tmobile and att bands. Dont really care, cause most likely I will have moved on to another phone by the time the merger happens. So whats going on. Does anyone know the link to the fcc filing.
Yeah, was sad for a second and then I picked up the phone and used it and I didn't care anymore
I haven't cared since I read att won't be switching off aws too soon and they would grandfather in all T-Mobile plans. Also not even sure I'd stay with att if the merger does happen anyway. Depends on too much and this phone is too amazing to return now. Super satisfied with my purchase.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2x using XDA App
best news ive heard all week
jrwingate6 said:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/27/t-mobile-g2x-lacks-quadband-hspa-shatters-dreams/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i know for those that wanted to use this phone on att it sucks. but for me i signed a 2 year contract based on this phone. if and when the att merger goes through. they will have to offer you out of your contract or supply you with a new phone. and since id cut off my right foot before id use att ever again, i think this is great news. I think it will be 18-24 months before you see any changes even if it goes through anyways, so i think the only problem here is if you wanted to use this phone on att. which i think was not wanted by tmobile, they want you to come to tmobile thats why they offer this phone.--only prob was advertising it did have those bands. but it did get straightened out in the return time. If anyone paid an early term fee and paid full price for this phone to work on att-tmobile better make it financially right or they will have some problems, im betting they will.
You know I still have a hard time believing this. I can't see how it passed the FCC with such false advertising and because the were spitting it out so much. I just have a sneaky suspicion that we'll see a radio that has the AT&T bands. That quote was probably just from some Customer Service rep reading off a script.
Why would TMOBILE say, "Yea it supports other carriers"? It would be in there best interest to say you have to use it on our network.
I think the phone is a Quad Band and could support it if the radio was opened up. The only time I'll believe it is when I hear it from some of the devs here on XDA.
But really what does it matter? Most phones don't support both bands. I hear people saying, I'm just going to buy the Sensation... well that isn't going to be quad band either (unless I'm missing something).
What is the point of the FCC if they don't check these things? The FCC is supposed to make sure that the product being offered works as intended and advertised. I mean there are just too many things pointing out that the device IS CAPABLE of the receiving the different frequencies.
Tmobile probably just blocked the frequencies in the radio and are saying this just to shut people up.
(sorry I posted this over the course of 5 phone calls so it may not be in logical order)
fcc
player911 said:
You know I still have a hard time believing this. I can't see how it passed the FCC with such false advertising and because the were spitting it out so much. I just have a sneaky suspicion that we'll see a radio that has the AT&T bands. That quote was probably just from some Customer Service rep reading off a script.
Why would TMOBILE say, "Yea it supports other carriers"? It would be in there best interest to say you have to use it on our network.
I think the phone is a Quad Band and could support it if the radio was opened up. The only time I'll believe it is when I hear it from some of the devs here on XDA.
But really what does it matter? Most phones don't support both bands. I hear people saying, I'm just going to buy the Sensation... well that isn't going to be quad band either (unless I'm missing something).
What is the point of the FCC if they don't check these things? The FCC is supposed to make sure that the product being offered works as intended and advertised. I mean there are just too many things pointing out that the device IS CAPABLE of the receiving the different frequencies.
Tmobile probably just blocked the frequencies in the radio and are saying this just to shut people up.
(sorry I posted this over the course of 5 phone calls so it may not be in logical order)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
fcc's job.
thanks for the million
pass.
so disappointed. guess i'll hold on to my phone a little while longer
niftydl said:
I wanted a true high end global HSDPA device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, how is it not a "true high end global HSPA device" ? It's quad-band 850/900/1800/1900 for 2G/GPRS and UMTS/HSPA+ bands I (2100) and IV (1700).
So it will work pretty much everywhere in the world (just no HSPA+ on AT&T network).
So what phone will you get that is a "true high end global HSPA device" ?
It is not confirmed....ha, lg made this phone, until they release a statement that they never put the bands in the phone, or never plan to enable then in future baseband updates, nothing is official yet.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
This is really something.
A poster elsewhere on XDA had gotten a written statement from TMo that it had those bands (followed by legal gobbledygook terms & conditions stating that they reserved the right to make or not make them available.
Now. their statement saying "opps" they goofed. I will give this another day or two to get sorted out (traveling all day tomorrow). I will then decide whether to return it and wait for their next two-core phone (which is supposed to come with 2.4 on it - if you can believe TMo anymore).
I am on a rooted CM7 OC MT4G - not a bad place to wait for a later release. If I miss their 20 day return window - will raise hell - as I had relied on their written representations that the G2x had the AT&T data bands.
Footnote - I am still confused as to why they show up in the "hidden menu".
I'm going to use the phone until the Sensation comes out. I have a print out of the spec sheet off of tmobile.com showing it's supposed to be a quad-band phone. I'll call tech support and tell them I'm having trouble connecting to the 1900 band. They'll tell me I can't. I'll forward them the spec sheet showing I bought a quad-band phone based on their representations. Voila... new phone.
Bummer if it ends up being true. Got official word on the diamond some years ago that it had no physical bands and 6 months later a version with those bands came out and a few weeks after that it was enabled on all the phones that supposedly didnt have them but did thanks to the smart people here. At any rate this one is off the list for now. Leaves an aT&T user without anything to look at that isnt locked down or just plain sucks for the moment.
I don't understand why everybody thinks FCC info is false.
I told you so but y'all didn't listen.
any possible group law suite?
BarryH_GEG said:
I'm going to use the phone until the Sensation comes out. I have a print out of the spec sheet off of tmobile.com showing it's supposed to be a quad-band phone. I'll call tech support and tell them I'm having trouble connecting to the 1900 band. They'll tell me I can't. I'll forward them the spec sheet showing I bought a quad-band phone based on their representations. Voila... new phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You might also want to print out and save the statement by TMo on the link attached below also. I am think if I keep this - may do the same. On the border right now on keeping or returning it in the next few days.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1041402&highlight=ATT&page=11
Does anyone know of any sprint/sprint compatible phones on the Horizon that will take advantage of any of the Dual Wimax/LTE chips.
I bought a Galaxy Note 2 outright, since my area just LIT up its LTE network, and my epic 4g touch, only worked on Wimax.
I was thinking about selling or giving away, my e4Gt, but may go on a road trip, and there is still way more Wimax, than LTE alive on the Sprint network. I was thinking worse comes to worse I could carry both and have sprint swap activation when I'm in different areas. Sounds like a pain in the butt though.
I still have about 20days to return my Galaxy Note 2, if there is anything down the pipe, that I can switch to that would simplify my data wants.
I would love the ASUS Padfone 2 to come to Sprint @[email protected] Sigh probably not going to happen...
Thanks!!!!
Wow a whole lot of nothing :|
The thing I find amazing is that there is a chip manufacturer, that makes a dual band wimax/lte chip, and I have heard of no proposed devices in the USA :|
http://www.sequans.com/products-solutions/streamrichlte/sqn5120/
Its a shame that Sprint isn't contracting for a phone that handles both, for people who are traveling the great highways and bi ways of America. I just looked at the Sensorly App Maps for Sprint 4G Wimax, and coverage looks great for most of the major population centers, LTE coverage SUCKS, but is great where I work. I don't see them getting that much coverage with LTE within the year, so whats the plan sprint? They discouraging customers from buying new devices? Don't they think a crossover product might actually have been a lucrative investment?
It makes no sense to me, I see them being able to push more phone sales, by offering greater regional coverage, and preparing customers for the switch over since Wimax will be discontinued in 2 years :| *sigh*
I guess this post should be moved to the No1 currrr! section.
bmup
bump
spodemaster said:
bump
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No they will not make a dual Wimax/LTE phone. They plan on cutting off wimax entirely by next year I believe
No they claim they are going to support it until 2015
spodemaster said:
No they claim they are going to support it until 2015
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Either way it's being cut off so no point in making dual wimax/lte phones
brandonarev said:
Either way it's being cut off so no point in making dual wimax/lte phones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't think they could make some extra cash, by pushing a phone that supports both for the next 2 years?? The typical contract length?
spodemaster said:
You don't think they could make some extra cash, by pushing a phone that supports both for the next 2 years?? The typical contract length?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really because the wimax market isn't that big so no sense in making it when only certain markets will buy it.
brandonarev said:
Not really because the wimax market isn't that big so no sense in making it when only certain markets will buy it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know when I looked at the Sprint Wimax Coverage Maps nationally, It looks like there are quite a few significant markets lit up with WiMax
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/17/us-samsung-shin-idUKBRE95G05I20130617
Reuters) - Samsung Electronics Co plans to sell a variation of its flagship Galaxy S4 smartphone that will transmit data at nearly twice the normal speed, the head of its mobile business said on Monday.
J.K. Shin, also co-chief executive of the world's biggest technology firm by revenue, said the phone would be sold in South Korea as early as this month.
Samsung was in talks with several overseas carriers to take the phone, Shin told Reuters in an interview at Samsung's headquarters in Suwon, just south of Seoul. He declined to name the carriers.
"We'll be the first with the commercial launch of the advanced 4G version of the smartphone," Shin said.
The new S4 will use LTE-Advanced 4G technology, an upgrade from conventional 4G called LTE, or long term evolution. LTE-Advanced offers data transmission at up to twice the normal 4G speed. The phones will be powered by Qualcomm chips.
A movie download that takes 3 minutes with conventional 4G would take slightly more than 1 minute, Samsung said.
Samsung's shares have lost almost $20 billion since June 7 after analysts cut forecasts for Galaxy S4 sales by as much as 30 percent on industry data that showed the high-end smartphone market was getting saturated.
The same problem is hitting sales of the iPhone 5, made by Samsung rival Apple Inc.
Samsung's market capitalization is still a hefty $195 billion. Its shares closed down 0.2 percent on Monday.
Shin showed little concern about sales prospects for the S4, which hit stores in late April. The mobile devices division is the company's biggest profit generator.
"S4 sales remain strong. It's selling far stronger than the (Galaxy) S III ... and the new LTE-Advanced (4G) phone will be another addition to our high-end segment offerings that ensure healthy profit margins," Shin said.
Shin declined to provide forecasts for S4 sales. He said the new S4 would be slightly more expensive than the current one.
The South Korean firm hopes the addition of hardware offerings such as faster data transmission, along with its widely anticipated move to introduce models with unbreakable or flexible displays, will help it protect margin growth.
"As operators seek to provide more data-centric mobile services, I think this will become mainstream 4G technology globally in the coming years," Shin said.
Shin also said sales of Samsung's tablet products in the U.S. market jumped 3.3 times since it installed brand shops within Best Buy's stores in April, and is now considering expanding the format in Latin America and Britain. Samsung declined to name potential retailers.
EYES ON NETWORK BUSINESS
Having conquered the smartphone market that Apple virtually created with the iconic iPhone in 2007, Samsung is seeking to do the same in the network business with the booming 4G mobile equipment market, challenging bigger rivals such as Ericsson, China's Huawei and Nokia Siemens Networks.
Many countries need to upgrade mobile base stations to handle not just 3G but also 4G, or build them from scratch to support 4G connections.
Shin said the network gear market was one of Samsung's fastest growing businesses, mainly thanks to 4G equipment sales which had been rising more than 30 percent a year since 2010.
The new phone would help this part of Samsung's business, he said.
"Such technology leadership will set the pace for the competition and help us become a major player in the network gear market," Shin said.
Samsung has won some 4G network deals from all major South Korean carriers, U.S. Sprint Nextel Corp and Japan's KDDI Corp and Hutchison Whampoa's British unit, but it needs to crack China to close the gap with traditional vendors in the overall gear equipment market.
Shin said there had not been much progress in Samsung's push to penetrate China's 4G equipment market yet, but it was increasing investment in the country.
China's three mobile operators - China Mobile, China Unicom and China Telecom - plan to spend a combined 345 billion yuan ($56.3 billion) this year on network upgrades. That includes investment in 4G, which multiplies mobile broadband speeds by up to five times for users of iPhone and Galaxy phones compared with 3G.
Many analysts believe Huawei and ZTE Corp - already big suppliers of China Mobile since only 10-15 percent of 3G network contracts went to foreign vendors - will be winners, leaving others to fight for smaller bits of the pie.
Samsung hopes to show Chinese clients that 4G networks with new technology can be built faster and with lower operating costs.
(Editing by Dean Yates and Alex Richardson)
That's all great, but I have two concerns:
1. LTE (at least over here) goes up to 75 Mbit/s - why would anyone need more?
2. LTE options are not that expensive these days, but are capped at ridiculous limits (2 GB) - so I don't get the point. Okay, it's an investment for the future, but for now... no.
So what?
Gaming is the only thing where this extra power will be noticeable. But companies want to sell as many games as possible. So they will start supporting these extra functions when a lot of phones are shipped with them.
On the PC for example it usually takes years, until a new version of DirectX or OpenGL are actually used in games.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
another s4? damn now updates will take ages
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Samsung are really over doing the Galaxy S range to the point where soon it will mean nothing because of brand dilution.
I'm pretty happy getting over 53mb on Telstra LTE and anything more is just overkill.
I'll pass on this phone.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda premium
now that i think about it, seems really unfair to those 10 million early adopters that a much faster version of the same phone comes like 2 months later
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
negrobembon said:
now that i think about it, seems really unfair to those 10 million early adopters that a much faster version of the same phone comes like 2 months later
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably only launching in a few select markets. They did the same with the i9305 which had 4G and 2Gb ram.
please no. give us a break
negrobembon said:
now that i think about it, seems really unfair to those 10 million early adopters that a much faster version of the same phone comes like 2 months later
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would it be unfair? The current version does not support LTE Advance, so in the only market so far that does (Korea), they are releasing a new one. It's like releasing an LTE Nexus 4 after the regular one, there's nothing unfair about it.
Now if specs will change from Exynos 5 Octo to SD800, blame the Exynos team that so messed up the 5410 chipset that they are stopping manufacturing it, so the LTE Advance gets the next best SoC. Again, nothing unfair, just the reality.
As per sammobile........ "The new galaxy s4 will support LTE-advanced and will be powered by qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 CPU that will make the already fast Galaxy S4, faster with up to twice the normal 4g speed and higher clock speed".
Samsungg has done it again just like the i9305. Dammit.... I wish this was the one that was released instead of the s600 if they really wanted to be king thats what they should of done from day Because no one yet had the s800 .. arghhhh...
But so far i think its only being released in there home country not sure about the rest if the world.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
Well the UK won't get it that for sure, we only have one network atm that 4G & that still patchy.
Maybe 2015 we see the the S6 with advance 4G as standard, but there still no saying we have any network by then that support it, were pretty slow on the uptake in the UK.
ixon2001 said:
Well the UK won't get it that for sure, we only have one network atm that 4G & that still patchy.
Maybe 2015 we see the the S6 with advance 4G as standard, but there still no saying we have any network by then that support it, were pretty slow on the uptake in the UK.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it comes out any time within the next two years I'll be annoyed two year contract :'(
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda premium
Faster is always better, people tell me having a car with 600 hp is overkill...I say I wish it had 800 .
I couldn't bring myself to go to a smaller screen from my note 2 to buy an s4....if the supercharged version comes to canada it would be hard not to buy it.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda premium
harise100 said:
So what?
Gaming is the only thing where this extra power will be noticeable. But companies want to sell as many games as possible. So they will start supporting these extra functions when a lot of phones are shipped with them.
On the PC for example it usually takes years, until a new version of DirectX or OpenGL are actually used in games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The article is about network speed, not CPU power. Current LTE speeds provide WAY more bandwidth than is needed for even the most demanding online games.
The111 said:
The article is about network speed, not CPU power. Current LTE speeds provide WAY more bandwidth than is needed for even the most demanding online games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point still stands.
There is always newer and faster technologie as time goes on. Until they become mainstream it takes a while.
Last year they already sold SGS3 with LTE, but where I live, there is still no LTE in sight.
force70 said:
Faster is always better, people tell me having a car with 600 hp is overkill...I say I wish it had 800 .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but you see, a car with 800 hp can't do anything more or better than a car with 600 hp. Except be marginally faster.
With a 100 hp car, however... that margin becomes great as the Great Wall of China.
The only thing this new S4 is is an investment into the future. It certainly won't make the I9500/I9505 obsolete or archaic.
I think that the 4g network will be able to handle this advance 4g im guessing here but I really dont think they have to change all that much with the towers again I think 4g advance is something like 3g to 3g +..... it wont be much to have to turn it on with current 4g (assuming)... my main point is the s800 was ready month or 2 before the s4 was released they should of just used the best of the best from the start then by the time s5 comes something better will be out
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
robogo1982 said:
Yes, but you see, a car with 800 hp can't do anything more or better than a car with 600 hp. Except be marginally faster.
With a 100 hp car, however... that margin becomes great as the Great Wall of China.
The only thing this new S4 is is an investment into the future. It certainly won't make the I9500/I9505 obsolete or archaic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually another 200 hp would really make a diff in my quarter mile et's not to mention make the car even more fun to drive on the street....off topic but true..
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda premium u
harise100 said:
My point still stands.
There is always newer and faster technologie as time goes on. Until they become mainstream it takes a while.
Last year they already sold SGS3 with LTE, but where I live, there is still no LTE in sight.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both of those sentences are true statements, but I'm not sure what they have to do with the post I was responding to, or how that point still stands. Let's examine those points, which I still don't understand:
Gaming is the only thing where this extra power will be noticeable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What types of games (or specific games even) will benefit from bandwidths >75Mbps?
But companies want to sell as many games as possible. So they will start supporting these extra functions when a lot of phones are shipped with them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does a gaming company "support" a wireless communication standard? What does that mean?
The111 said:
Both of those sentences are true statements, but I'm not sure what they have to do with the post I was responding to, or how that point still stands. Let's examine those points, which I still don't understand:
What types of games (or specific games even) will benefit from bandwidths >75Mbps?
How does a gaming company "support" a wireless communication standard? What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think he meant the extra CPU power not the bandwidth
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
If you are a customer of AT&T, and you have a device that supports AT&T's LTE bands/frequencies but believe they are blocking access to the service (because it isn't on their list of compatible devices), please file a complaint with the FCC here:
https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/360001201223
Some background to this?
There has to be substance to the claim and numbers filing for them to take action.
It may fall under the FTC more so than the FCC.
https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/c #4
blackhawk said:
Some background to this?
There has to be substance to the claim and numbers filing for them to take action.
It may fall under the FTC more so than the FCC.
https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/c #4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See comparison here:
Galaxy S7 (SM-G930W8) vs Galaxy S7 (SM-G930A)
Side by side comparison between Galaxy S7 (SM-G930W8) vs Galaxy S7 (SM-G930A) phones, differences, pros, cons and full specifications. What's the better?
www.phonemore.com
Phone on the left is the AT&T branded model, which will continue to be supported after 3G sunset. Phone on the right is my Canadian version, which has more network capabilities than the AT&T version, including all those of the AT&T version. Naturally, this is assuming that the information on this website is correct.
Here is the comparison with the international version:
Galaxy S7 (SM-G930F 32GB) vs Galaxy S7 (SM-G930A)
Side by side comparison between Galaxy S7 (SM-G930F 32GB) vs Galaxy S7 (SM-G930A) phones, differences, pros, cons and full specifications. What's the better?
www.phonemore.com
My thoughts are AT&T isn't obligated to guarantee service to all devices especially if other competitors are in that area.
If you have a service contract that stipulates a guarentee of service for that specific device... you see where this is going.
AT&T does grandfather certain services but will try their damndest to get out of them as I well know. If it was grandfathered AT&T might roll that over to the upgraded service.
At some point though progress marches on. Unless obsolete technologies provide a benefit to a significant amount of customers it's simply unsustainable and/or cost effective.
The key word in all of this is contract. Unless there's a state or federal mandate stating otherwise. At this point my vision blurs and 4G is a nice improvement. Guess my old flip phone will be toast soon too.
It will be interesting how this plays out for the underdog.
blackhawk said:
My thoughts are AT&T isn't obligated to guarantee service to all devices especially if other competitors are in that area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Generally I agree with this sentiment, but AT&T is so large and their coverage so much better that they can behave almost like a monopoly. I don't see our government taking any anti-trust action against any of the large carriers (if they cared, why would they have allowed so many mergers in the first place?), so they should be regulated like a monopoly, as much as my free-market instincts hate to say that.
UPDATE!!!
I spoke with someone today from AT&T's "Office of the President" regarding my phone. She assured me that it was impossible to get my current phone to work post-3G sunset (I still don't believe that), but offered to provide me with a replacement AT&T phone of equal value (or greater value, at a discount). She emailed me a list of available phones, including the Google Pixel 4a 5G (model number G025E).
After a brief period of research, I learned that NONE of the phones available through AT&T can have their bootloaders unlocked. I responded that I would be glad to have the Pixel if she could have one of their technicians unlock it for me, and if that wasn't possible, I would instead accept a credit on our account to cover the cost of purchasing a suitable phone elsewhere. They were going to give me the Pixel for US$150, and it was listed for $525 retail, so I offered to accept a credit of $375. She agreed.
It's not the resolution I'd hoped for, but I'll take it. So if AT&T tries to pacify you with one of their cheap, throwaway prepaid phones, don't settle!
Woods598 said:
AT&T proposes to include in the trial all of its consumer TDM-based voice and internet access transport services, and to offer the following.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What trial? Looks like you may have left some things out of your post.