Related
So will the Nexus 5 support VoLTE?
AT&T has said VoLTE starts deployment by the end of this year. Does anyone think the Nexus 5 will work on AT&T's VoLTE?
This thread doesn't have to be about speculation. This is XDA and I expect more technically from this forum. Let's think about this systematically. What is required for a phone to work on VoLTE? Is the LTE hardware enough? Probably not. I think we can all agree that the software has to support it. I've read that the LG Connect 4G on MetroPCS supports VoLTE since they have already deployed VoLTE and it is supported using that phone. So that means Android has had VoLTE since Android 2.3 Gingerbread. Was that custom software for the LG Connect or is there still code in Android supporting VoLTE? Is anyone knowledgeable to look at Android 4.3 source files to see evidence of VoLTE living there, in comparison to the Android source in the LG Connect? Maybe there are system files in Android that have VoLTE in their name. That would be a good clue.
Was there anything in the LG Connect's FCC documentation that specified VoLTE testing or specifications? Is this needed for VoLTE? Or is LTE testing alone enough since it is all the same from a physical frequency perspective?
I brought this topic up in another forum and I got some good responses. I just want to take it to the next level here with all the gear heads and XDA wizardry that lives here.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 4
galfert said:
So will the Nexus 5 support VoLTE?
AT&T has said VoLTE starts deployment by the end of this year. Does anyone think the Nexus 5 will work on AT&T's VoLTE?
This thread doesn't have to be about speculation. This is XDA and I expect more technically from this forum. Let's think about this systematically. What is required for a phone to work on VoLTE? Is the LTE hardware enough? Probably not. I think we can all agree that the software has to support it. I've read that the LG Connect 4G on MetroPCS supports VoLTE since they have already deployed VoLTE and it is supported using that phone. So that means Android has had VoLTE since Android 2.3 Gingerbread. Was that custom software for the LG Connect or is there still code in Android supporting VoLTE? Is anyone knowledgeable to look at Android 4.3 source files to see evidence of VoLTE living there, in comparison to the Android source in the LG Connect? Maybe there are system files in Android that have VoLTE in their name. That would be a good clue.
Was there anything in the LG Connect's FCC documentation that specified VoLTE testing or specifications? Is this needed for VoLTE? Or is LTE testing alone enough since it is all the same from a physical frequency perspective?
I brought this topic up in another forum and I got some good responses. I just want to take it to the next level here with all the gear heads and XDA wizardry that lives here.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i love your inquiry!
as we all know, tmobile's launching VOlte in seattle, via s/w upgrade to various phones, but why that way?
wouldn't it had been easier via an updated volte capable sim card with the needed provisioning?
what governs any phone's baseband code on certain networks; is it HARD coded, or SOFT coded, to change on the fly, depending on the network? -
iPhone can support VoLTE
that link also addresses how volte is implemented on tmobile's network..
or if one prefer - How it works: Voice over LTE (VoLTE)
one thing for sure, qualcomm & erricsson trialed volte on an earlier snapdragon chipset (Qualcomm's Snapdragon S4 MSM-8960)
the nexus 5's snapdrag, is a newer **Qualcomm MSM8974 snapdragon 800** .. i would doubt it DOESN'T
support volte, why add the feature to an older chipset, & not include it by default in a newer.. -
Qualcomm's Snapdragon almost ready for Voice over LTE (VoLTE) (February 2, 2012)
~edit~
i'm so glad i'm not mentally lazy (that's why i use linux dammit) the nexus 5 CAN DO VOLTE! -
Doug M.
Chief Operating Officer (COO) and Chief Sales & Marketing Officer (CSMO) at D2 Technologies, Inc.
We (www.d2tech.com) are trying to break the "chicken/egg" cycle by providing a commercial-ready reference implementation for native IR.92 VoLTE, IR.94 and RCS 5.1 / joyn for mobile devices. At MWC, we demo'd it on a Nexus 5, Huawei Ascend G716-L070, Nvidia’s Tegra 4i reference platform and an Intel® Atom™ based commercial handset. We're also providing several LTE modem IC vendors with an embedded IR.92 VoLTE solution that has APIs in the LTE modem IC to the mobile AP that allow the RCS/IR.94/WiFi calling capabilities embedded in the mobile OS to leverage the IMS registration and SIP signaling stack, and DSP voice engine that now reside in the modem IC. This makes it very easy for device OEMs to provide native RCS and/or VoLTE and IR.94 video calling.
from - http://www.linkedin.com/groups/China-Set-Lead-RCS-Integration-1890406.S.5849549644362706944
the nexus 5 can do volte on china mobile now, from china mobile's volte white paper - http://www.lte-tdd.org/upload/accessory/20138/20138271114319913691.pdf
3.4 Terminal Aspects
3.4.1 Multi-Mode and Multi-band
To meet the requirements for domestic frequency access and international roaming,
five radio modes including FDD LTE, TD-LTE, TD-SCDMA, WCDMA, GSM
should be supported by China Mobile TD-LTE terminals, which are divided into the
basic type and the enhanced type: the basic type terminal should support 5 modes and
10 bands, the enhanced type terminal should support 5 modes and 12 bands.
Furthermore, terminals with other multi-mode and multi-band capabilities can be
introduced to meet the market needs.
Supporting the Band41（2496-2690MHz）is mandatory for TD-LTE terminals in
2014. If the terminal support Band 41 without Band 38, it must comply with the
3GPP TS36.331 R8.H.0 and later versions, while for the terminal with both
Band41 and Band38, it is not needed to support the 3GPP TS36.331 R8.H.0
version.
qualcomm msm8974ab bring up kernel log ( that the nexus 5 has)
<6>[ 11.666645] pil-q6v5-mss fc880000.qcom,mss: modem: loading from 0x08000000 to 0x0d100000
<6>[ 11.667153] asoc: snd-soc-dummy-dai <-> SLIMBUS4_HOSTLESS mapping ok
<6>[ 11.668196] asoc: snd-soc-dummy-dai <-> VoLTE mapping ok
<3>[ 11.669309] init: cannot expand '${sys.sysctl.extra_free_kbytes}' while writing to '/proc/sys/vm/extra_free_kbytes'
& this is an interesting read, (not for the lazy) -
The State of Qualcomm's Modems - WTR1605 and MDM9x25
**comment from the article** -
iwod - Sunday, January 06, 2013 - link
"Interesting, i was late to the article and there is only 10 comments, compared to 3 page on ARM vs Atom. People not interested in LTE / Baseband at all??
Anyway, so do LTE UE 4 offer better bandwidth efficiency then UE 3? Since both only required 20Mhz, but UE 4 gives up to 150Mbps.
Apart from Beidou and TDS-CDMA, WTR1605 seems like a small step, no size reduction?
Are there any power improvement with 9x25? LTE seems to be draining battery a lot.
So i gathered all current Qualcomm already support VoLTE, we are only waiting for carrier to support it, right? And may be off topic, why aren't carrier doing it / Faster?
I am not sure if i am right, the more port there are, the more supported band / wireless spec there will be. It seems to be one of the reason iPhone 5 could not come with world wide LTE supported. So wouldn't ditching GSM help? ( 4G is here.... time to ditch 2G right? )
How do WiFi and Bluetooth fits into the scenario? They are all wireless tech, why do they requires another chip? Couldn't Qualcomm fits those in?
I remembered there was a article about Intel Digital Radio. I admit i still do not understand much of it. Any relation to this? Or is Digital Radio more on the antenna side of things."
**reply to that**-
DanNeely - Sunday, January 06, 2013 - link
"VoLTE increases the load on their 4g networks by reducing the load on 2g/3g; since 4g is only going to get more crowded with time while 2g is becoming a ghost town and 3g will become one in the next few years as LTE deployments are completed, VoLTE does nothing beneficial for the carriers in the short term.
Long term it's needed to let them shut down their legacy networks; but that's at least 4-5 years out according to occasional talking points they make (and if Sprint/iDEN is any indication even farther out in the real world) which makes it not worth enabling for handsets that will probably be junked well before it happens."
...........
we can deduct, that all current qualcomm chipsets have the VOlte feature baked in (but dormant for some odd reason);
tmobile, enables it on selected handsets via a pushed software update, not via an updated **VOlte sim** = Generic Bootstrapping Architecture
&
Subscriber Authentication in the IP Multimedia Subsystem
..
~shrugz shoulderz~
Probably to tie you into T-Mobile branded handsets where they make huge margins. Same as Wi-Fi calling.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
rootSU said:
Probably to tie you into T-Mobile branded handsets where they make huge margins. Same as Wi-Fi calling.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i know how it works now;
the tmobile update *FULLY* enables the sip protocol on it's IMS ( IP Multimedia Subsystem) to match what's dormant in the phone ALREADY..
it's basically SIP ( with heightened QoS) -
read that - http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php/1833821-Tmobile-launches-VoLTE-in-Seattle/page6
then
this - http://lteuniversity.com/get_trained/expert_opinion1/b/bbest/archive/2012/12/17/the-volte-conversation-between-ims-and-lte.aspx
...voLTE basically , speaks in SIP (session initiated protocol) -
http://www.sharetechnote.com/html/Handbook_LTE_VoLTE.html - the picture in this link with the raw network traffic can be mimicked with a tmobile sanctioned volte device, tethered wirelessly to a laptop in promicous mode, with wireshark or tcpdump, with the right arguments, or both, & with the said tmobile phone in a call session, the packets can be dumped & analyzed afterwards..
j'vai said:
i know how it works now;
the tmobile update *FULLY* enables the sip protocol on it's IMS ( IP Multimedia Subsystem) to match what's dormant in the phone ALREADY..
it's basically SIP ( with heightened QoS) -
read that - http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php/1833821-Tmobile-launches-VoLTE-in-Seattle/page6
then
this - http://lteuniversity.com/get_trained/expert_opinion1/b/bbest/archive/2012/12/17/the-volte-conversation-between-ims-and-lte.aspx
...voLTE basically , speaks in SIP (session initiated protocol) -
http://www.sharetechnote.com/html/Handbook_LTE_VoLTE.html - the picture in this link with the raw network traffic can be mimicked with a tmobile sanctioned volte device, tethered wirelessly to a laptop in promicous mode, with wireshark or tcpdump, with the right arguments, or both, & with the said tmobile phone in a call session, the packets can be dumped & analyzed afterwards..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@galfert.. now that we KNOW at it's heart, VOlte speaks sip, it would be work to mimc the sip settings from another tmobile VOlte phone to a nexus 5 on the tmobile network..
it'll be lengthy, adding the bearer info, secondary bearer info, number + proper sip addy, & parking it on lte..
*BUT* it wouldn't work STILL, unless the UE (user equiptment) gets the OK'd update on tmobile's IMS gateway, *TO* set up & tear down the voice bearer connection with properly enhanced Q0S offered by the IMS..
the sip setting for the nexus 5 are in the phone setting for internet calls, & actually, i'll plug a thread started in here from 13 on this very subject -
Nexus 5 - Internet Calling Experience/SIP Thread by BinkXDA ..
the tools are in the device, but aren't complete from the network perspective..
& yet, i know NOT if tmobile could fashion this update for phone(s) a lil bit more heavier, where those un-known fields needed, are automatically populated.. maybe they're working on that for the future..
Here is something else to consider. T-Mobile has WiFi calling. Google Voice users for a long time have used apps to do VoIP over Google Talk XMPP and still can despite it being past the date. So who is to say an app couldn't just do it or they couldn't use just the SIP part of the phone app? Get the right codec and it is golden.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using XDA Free mobile app
MrObvious said:
Here is something else to consider. T-Mobile has WiFi calling. Google Voice users for a long time have used apps to do VoIP over Google Talk XMPP and still can despite it being past the date. So who is to say an app couldn't just do it or they couldn't use just the SIP part of the phone app? Get the right codec and it is golden.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you're so right...
i use groove IP to call over lte, evdo, & wifi at times, after tinkering with the echo settings, it's as clear as any voice call..
only with the tmobile volte set up, the plus is you're using your same mobile number still (google snatched that away when breaking xxmp protocol in gv) ..
but with adjusting, the QoS can be just as good as your connection allows the call to be.. mine's is with groove IP / ring.to
galfert said:
So will the Nexus 5 support VoLTE?
AT&T has said VoLTE starts deployment by the end of this year. Does anyone think the Nexus 5 will work on AT&T's VoLTE?
This thread doesn't have to be about speculation. This is XDA and I expect more technically from this forum. Let's think about this systematically. What is required for a phone to work on VoLTE? Is the LTE hardware enough? Probably not. I think we can all agree that the software has to support it. I've read that the LG Connect 4G on MetroPCS supports VoLTE since they have already deployed VoLTE and it is supported using that phone. So that means Android has had VoLTE since Android 2.3 Gingerbread. Was that custom software for the LG Connect or is there still code in Android supporting VoLTE? Is anyone knowledgeable to look at Android 4.3 source files to see evidence of VoLTE living there, in comparison to the Android source in the LG Connect? Maybe there are system files in Android that have VoLTE in their name. That would be a good clue.
Was there anything in the LG Connect's FCC documentation that specified VoLTE testing or specifications? Is this needed for VoLTE? Or is LTE testing alone enough since it is all the same from a physical frequency perspective?
I brought this topic up in another forum and I got some good responses. I just want to take it to the next level here with all the gear heads and XDA wizardry that lives here.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One thing you've forgotten to mention is Qualcomm's proprietary baseband firmware that has to have VoLTE support enabled. It's all closed source and signed.
We know that N5's baseband processor itself is capable, but if the firmware isn't there to enable and drive VoLTE, no matter which software you create over-the-top, it won't magically turn on VoLTE.
The main and most important difference between VoLTE and third party VoIP solutions like Skype, FaceTime, etc, is that VoLTE processing happens at the very baseband level, which handles phone call continuity between LTE and UMTS/GSM, and also makes it more efficient.
On the other hand, OTT processing is all OS/SoC.
I asked T-Mobile's technical guru about it a while back, here's what I got:
https://twitter.com/askdes/status/469582255191388160
Hilbe said:
I asked T-Mobile's technical guru about it a while back, here's what I got:
https://twitter.com/askdes/status/469582255191388160
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://twitter.com/TMobileHelp/status/479798004627427328
from 20 days ago.
Sorry for digging up this old thread, but after reading the how-does-VoLTE-work article, there's a point that nobody has mentioned yet...
While engaged in a voice call, a user might pass outside of an LTE coverage area, so that call needs to be able to fall back onto legacy networks. The VoLTE standard accomplishes this with Single Radio Voice Call Continuity (SR-VCC).
[...]
SR-VCC requires the network provider to have the IMS framework in place, but it also impacts device design. To support SR-VCC, devices must not only be able to connect to both the LTE and the legacy networks, but be able to connect to both at the same time. This is governed by the antenna architecture in the device. In order to conserve space, some devices, like the iPhone 5, will have 3G and 4G traffic sharing the same physical antennae, toggling between the two standards as needed. SR-VCC requires devices to have dedicated antennae for both 3G and 4G connections.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I may be mistaken about this, but the antenna is shared on the Nexus 5, isn't it? So it cannot support the LTE-to-3G handoff and as a result may never support VoLTE...
I've read it cannot, but by the time this technology is rolled out in a major way the phone will be verging on obsolete, I'm still happy with mine though
code65536 said:
Sorry for digging up this old thread, but after reading the how-does-VoLTE-work article, there's a point that nobody has mentioned yet...
I may be mistaken about this, but the antenna is shared on the Nexus 5, isn't it? So it cannot support the LTE-to-3G handoff and as a result may never support VoLTE...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just watched a disassembly video on YT and he showed the Nexus 5 has two antennas. One for 2/3G and one for LTE.
Gesendet von meinem C5502 mit Tapatalk
Any confirmation on this?
I also only saw two antennas as I replaced my screen.
Ifixit.com says its MIMO and GPS antenna:
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nexus+5+Teardown/19016/[URL]
Any confirmation? Any help?
Bounty for the first person to post a solution to add the 1700 700 LTE bands to the n9005.
Seeing as its believed to be hardware supported many of us are trying to unlock those frequencies for true international LTE.
Possible solutions proposed:
Flashable AWS modem for n9005
NVRAM dump with AWS config.
Bids** so far:
IamNoone: 1BTC
Nakedtime: 20USD
xaviero17: 40USD
**Feel free to bid USD, I just happen to find BTC more appealing.
current BTC Trade value: http://bitcoinity.org/markets
Heres hoping we get some workable solutions. Even if they're easy.
If the hardware supports, you would simply need to import (and maybe modify slightly) the QCN file from an N900W8 variant and upload to your 9005 device.
QCN contains IMEI, must also be edited to remove imei.
Besides, has one been dumped from a W8?
Someone feel free to dump...
Would this mean we could use the 9005 on at&t LTE and 3g network?
Sent from my HTC One using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
dirtbikerr450 said:
Would this mean we could use the 9005 on at&t LTE and 3g network?
Sent from my HTC One using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
N9005 already operates on ATT HSDPA and UMTS.
This is for ATT LTE.
I would love to see lte band 18 and 19 supported. Those are the japanese 800Mhz bands, that practically no phone except the crippled japanese provider models support.
Anyway, modifying the radio to send on those (or any not certified) bands would very likely be illegal in nearly any jurisdiction, wouldn't it?
cgi said:
I would love to see lte band 18 and 19 supported. Those are the japanese 800Mhz bands, that practically no phone except the crippled japanese provider models support.
Anyway, modifying the radio to send on those (or any not certified) bands would very likely be illegal in nearly any jurisdiction, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In a case like this it would be much more likely for it to be a hardware issue stopping you. I don't think that a band like that, which is not supported on any Snapdragon note 3 (or am I wrong?) Would be possible to just change by software. I do know that if the antenna isn't designed for the frequency the signal would suck and you would likely also get signal reflections into the phones output amps, among other problems. And that is assuming you child even get the chip to try to transmit on those bands....which I also don't think you could do
asaqwert said:
In a case like this it would be much more likely for it to be a hardware issue stopping you. I don't think that a band like that, which is not supported on any Snapdragon note 3 (or am I wrong?) Would be possible to just change by software. I do know that if the antenna isn't designed for the frequency the signal would suck and you would likely also get signal reflections into the phones output amps, among other problems. And that is assuming you child even get the chip to try to transmit on those bands....which I also don't think you could do
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not are not exactly wrong, but the bands 18 and 19 are very close to bands 5 and 6. Both are supported as far as I can tell, although 6 is only for UTMS. But that means that the power amps and antenna tuning should be there. Also, qualcomm advertises this "rf360 solution" which is supposed to support more or less all bands between 700 and 2700MHz. No idea, whether is is in the note3 though.
So you see, I did give this some thought.
cgi said:
I would love to see lte band 18 and 19 supported. Those are the japanese 800Mhz bands, that practically no phone except the crippled japanese provider models support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We might want to make a separate Bounty for this kind of thing. Such as unlocking ALL frequencies supported by the Snapdragon.
cgi said:
Anyway, modifying the radio to send on those (or any not certified) bands would very likely be illegal in nearly any jurisdiction, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I prefer to make the assumption that people have honorable intentions. For several people, they're just trying to get LTE on AT&T.
There's no good reason that anyone would want to use illegal frequencies, since such frequencies would likely not give them cell service anyway.
Sonorus said:
We might want to make a separate Bounty for this kind of thing. Such as unlocking ALL frequencies supported by the Snapdragon.
I prefer to make the assumption that people have honorable intentions. For several people, they're just trying to get LTE on AT&T.
There's no good reason that anyone would want to use illegal frequencies, since such frequencies would likely not give them cell service anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think what he means (judging from the knowledge he would seem to have on the topic) frequencies that are not certified for use in a given jurisdiction, not "illegal"frequencies in some other way. In the US fir example, if you use a device that transmits on any frequency that your device has not specifically been passed for by the fcc (and above a maximum power limit which is rather low, from what I recall) then you are breaking federal fcc regulation with respect to creating possible interference, transmitting radio signals on a band your device want created for etc. It can get you into big trouble. Having said that, unlocking your phone in the states is legal to, but no one is ever going to find out. Same thing with the frequency thing, they have those laws so that a) when someone creates interference they can stop/prosecute them and b) so they can stop people importing devices for sale that are not certified.
Having said that, if it is not a frequency that is explicitly supported by the hardware then but that is simply close to a supported one, it would require more than just a hack. It would require reverse engineering the Qualcomm code and then writing your own hardware interface software etc, that is assuming that the bands are close enough that the amps and antenna would work, then you would have to hack the rest of the firmware to actually utilize these new bands and actually talk to your other new software.
In short, it is highly unlikely that it would be possible, at least given the time and resources that most people would spend on dev work (which I understand is a lot but this is a much bigger deal than dev work on open source code) and also Qualcomm probably would not look to kindly on us reverse engineering their stuff. Also, it is quite possible that the hardware commands simply would not exist for the software to ask the hardware to do this. I am not familiar enough with the Qualcomm hardware nor mobile hardware in this way, as I've never programmed or dine dev work on android phones(single dad now with not enough time as it is) so I can't say for sure here but I have a hunch that the hardware simply was created to offer functionality on certain bands and that is all it would offer. If it was unsupported in software but supported in hardware, that's one thing, but unsupported in hardware pretty much means you're sol in my opinion
asaqwert said:
I think what he means (judging from the knowledge he would seem to have on the topic) frequencies that are not certified for use in a given jurisdiction, not "illegal"frequencies in some other way. In the US fir example, if you use a device that transmits on any frequency that your device has not specifically been passed for by the fcc (and above a maximum power limit which is rather low, from what I recall) then you are breaking federal fcc regulation with respect to creating possible interference, transmitting radio signals on a band your device want created for etc. It can get you into big trouble. Having said that, unlocking your phone in the states is legal to, but no one is ever going to find out. Same thing with the frequency thing, they have those laws so that a) when someone creates interference they can stop/prosecute them and b) so they can stop people importing devices for sale that are not certified.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what I meant. If it was just a matter of editing a config file, it would be unlikely to cause any interference. I do assume, that the original radio firmware is well-behaved and doesn't start sending on a given frequency unless it picks up a cell tower there first. However, regulators have been known to look unkindly at uncertified devices, especially if you cause interference. And you most certainly void your certification if you modify the radio.
Anyway, I did unpack the radio firmware and looked around in it with a hex editor a bit, hoping for a lucky find of the needle in the haystack, so to say. What I found was not very encouraging. It's a batch of binary files. Some looking like bootloaders, others looking like L4 realtime kernels. There also seems to be a qurt kernel, whatever that is. Maybe some kind of Qualcomm realtime os implementation. Also dsp firmware or some such. Then I found some strings that might be part of digital signatures. I did some googling on suggestive strings I found, but if there is any documentation on that stuff, then Qualcomm keeps it secret (or I am too stupid to find it).
There was no such thing as "SupportLTEon700MHz=false" or something like that. Not that I expected anything like that.
So unless there is an insider somewhere willing to violate all kinds of NDAs and contracts, it is unlikely that this will happen, I think.
Both of you are making this more complicated than it probably needs to be.
For one, the phones that DO support 700 and 1700 use the same chipset. This is something that was done on the Note 2. A simple config change unlocked those frequencies. I believe we'd only need to repeat the concept for the Note 3. In other words, all we need is for someone familiar with the process to take on the job.
The Snapdragon 800 (N9005's chipset) does accept the LTE_B17 line of flags. (LTE band 17). It's already in the hardware, we just need to turn it on.
This bounty explicitly states for 700 and 1700 LTE bands, which the chipset DOES support at least 1 of those bands. This isn't about the Japanese bands, that was brought up by someone else and isn't what this topic is about. Please make a separate bounty for that feature so that people aren't confused about THIS topic.
So unless there is an insider somewhere willing to violate all kinds of NDAs and contracts, it is unlikely that this will happen, I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has already happened on other phones. It's a matter of incentive.
Sonorus said:
Both of you are making this more complicated than it probably needs to be.
For one, the phones that DO support 700 and 1700 use the same chipset. This is something that was done on the Note 2. A simple config change unlocked those frequencies. I believe we'd only need to repeat the concept for the Note 3. In other words, all we need is for someone familiar with the process to take on the job.
The Snapdragon 800 (N9005's chipset) does accept the LTE_B17 line of flags. (LTE band 17). It's already in the hardware, we just need to turn it on.
This bounty explicitly states for 700 and 1700 LTE bands, which the chipset DOES support at least 1 of those bands. This isn't about the Japanese bands, that was brought up by someone else and isn't what this topic is about. Please make a separate bounty for that feature so that people aren't confused about THIS topic.
This has already happened on other phones. It's a matter of incentive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://wccftech.com/enable-t-mobile-hspa-aws-bands-on-at-t-galaxy-s4-sgh-i337-sgh-i337m/ as reference
WorldIRC said:
http://wccftech.com/enable-t-mobile-hspa-aws-bands-on-at-t-galaxy-s4-sgh-i337-sgh-i337m/ as reference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh I would love to see this come out for the Note 3 a nice simple way to pick up the extra bands our hardware is capable of.
Me and another member got relatively far with this but was not able to flash the N900W8 modem onto an N9005 because the boot loader is locked. We were going to try a few other things before I gave up and just bought an N900W8 for cheaper than what I paid for the N9005.
The QCN file was edited to match that of an N900W8 with respect to a few entries in the LTE BC CONFIG. Unfortunately just changing it resulted in no service. We then proceeded to change the WCDMA band configuration to match, but like members of the S3, this is apparently overwritten some how by the device on boot. You need to reboot the phone for the modified QCN to take effect, so basically it did nothing.
Whatever solution you guys come up with its probably a matter of a complete modem and QCN file then reboot to make it happen.
I tried to write a custom update.zip file that overwrote the two partitions containing the modem.bin and NON-HLOS.bin without success.
Rogers parameter 6828:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9KfOSKSSjgdSEE2Z043U09JTGc/edit?usp=sharing
LTE BC CONFIG MENTION:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=33234706&postcount=43
In regards to an update.zip. You must execute the flash after following the same sequence of steps as when flashing with odin. (eg remove battery, put battery in, hold vol down and home, plug in USB cable, then odin will come up) Except instead of vol down, use vol up. Something about this sequence unlocks the ability to flash modems (in odin, recovery and root). (if you don't do it, writes to the mmc will timeout)
While you /can/ flash modems for W8 and T on the N9005, they will fail to boot, apparently enforced by the PBL (the lowest level bootloader on the device).
Changing individual parameters in NVRAM may not take effect for a number of reasons;
1) There are two partitions (MODEM*1 and MODEM*2) that seem to contain NVRAM parameters, but are not directly part of EFS. They look like backups of critical parts of NVRAM, i suspect during the boot sequence, these BINs push NVRAM parameters into EFS, overwriting any changes. I was unable to trivially decipher the contents, but i didn't put a lot of effort into it.
2) Some kind of failsafe similar to the Modem flashing problem. (modem wont stick! maybe NVRAM wont either!)
3) Modem itself may set certain parameters in NVRAM. Only way to test this i think would be to try changing IMEI in NVRAM, and see if it reverts back on reboot. As the modem doesn't pertain to your IMEI, it would never correct it if it was incorrect.
Personally i think #2 is the case, and will try to enable change via cold boot method.
I have successfully changed the modem partition to contain arbitrary data, as long as the binaries are untouched. As soon as they are modified (even eg. changing the name of the baseband), they will not operate. So they are probably protected by signature or hash.
Got NV#06828 to stick as 5B0001. It was originally D50008.
It however, does not enable the necessary bands, it would appear. The value is persisting across reboots, so indeed it has been changed permanently.
I suspect NV#01877 needs modified as well. But i've been unsuccessful in getting it to stick.
I'm attempting to change 040002 to 060000 in item 1877.
The fact that i was able to write NV#06828 suggests that 01877 is likely changeable as well. Still haven't figure out what conditions are allowing writes to persist. Luck of the draw seems to be what makes it work.
Sonorus said:
Got NV#06828 to stick as 5B0001. It was originally D50008.
It however, does not enable the necessary bands, it would appear. The value is persisting across reboots, so indeed it has been changed permanently.
I suspect NV#01877 needs modified as well. But i've been unsuccessful in getting it to stick.
I'm attempting to change 040002 to 060000 in item 1877.
The fact that i was able to write NV#06828 suggests that 01877 is likely changeable as well. Still haven't figure out what conditions are allowing writes to persist. Luck of the draw seems to be what makes it work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. Thanks for the information.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Bumping this
I'll pledge $20 for 700MHz AT&T band
Everything started when I've made some tests and I've noticed some strange things:
- on every KK ROM I've tested, mobile data drops completely after some talk time. It is happening only during calls (long calls usually). It is regardless of the radio used, I have tested it with 1.13, 1.15 and 1.20...the same with all. It is also happening regardless of the call type: on BT (car-kit or headset), speaker, headset, handset. EDIT: Now I made some tests and seems like I don't have this issue anymore but instead I have the issue below. I don't know why and when this started to happen
- as soon as I make a call, the mobile data icon switches from H/H+ to 3G. As soon as the call ends, it switches back to H/H+. I've run some speed tests and it's not only the icon, it's the speed too. I get about 0.09 Mbps during a call with the 3G icon and up to 8 Mbps when not in a call with the H/H+ icon.
Now there are some build.prop entries I don't understand and I couldn't find any explanation on them. There are many threads in which some of them are recommended, some say they work, some say they don't, I am really puzzled. Below there are a few about I couldn't find any details:
- ro.ril.radio.svn = usually value here is 19 but I heard about 01, 02, 03 or 04 as well. Nobody seem to know why it's one or another and more important what does this does.
- ro.ril.hsxpa = usualy 2 but I saw many people recommending 3 or 4 without any arguments on that. What does 3 or 4 do here? Don't say it's enabling HSDPA or HSUPA because the lower values already do that: 0 = UMTS, 1 = HSDPA, 2= HSDPA/HSUPA. So why 3 or 4?
- ro.telephony.ril.v3 = now this is a nice one. Mostly I've seen this set as skipradiooff but I found more: icccardstatus, skipbrokendataca ll ,datacall, signalstrength, facilitylock. What's this all about? What any of these options do?
Now why I ask such stupid questions you'll say. If they work who cares...ok, but DO they work? Has anyone tested if they change something? If yes maybe those persons could bring some light here because nobody seems to know. And I mean if one of the above do change something, the ones that tested and recommend these settings should at least tell us what happens if one or another option is included.
Has anyone commented out for example the ro.ril.radio.svn and see what's happening? Or put 01 or 04 instead of 19 and see if any change? Cause I couldn't find any difference with this option set or not. Why is then recommended? Maybe it's particular to some carriers (I saw alot of settings related to US T-Mobile). If it's true, maybe it's good to know that only for that carrier it does something and on any European carrier it has no effect (or it has, I don't know)
Please anyone who knows some info or made some tests post here. Maybe we could shred some light into this cause after searching and searching I couldn't find anything clear. Everybody is mentioning those with one or another setting but nobody explain.
EDIT: I've start testing
ro.telephony.ril.v3 =icccardstatus - this seem to show a "no SIM" or "insert SIM" icon instead of the cell signal icon. Even so, calls CAN be made, I've tested a few. Probably this disables the ability to read SIM card status so that's why it shows that no SIM is present
ro.telephony.ril.v3 =datacall - this disables completely the mobile data. Icon for mobile data is gone and there's no mobile data access. Browser and any apps are reporting "no connection"
ro.ril.hsxpa = I hope it is not my imagination, maybe others can test as well but here's what I found. If 4 is there, most of the times I get H indicator and speed. If 2 is there, I mostly get H+ indicator and speed. So strange but at least in my case 2 seems to be better than 4 (which anyway I don't know what means). EDIT: Ok, after further testing and searching it seems that value of 3 means HSDPA "uncapped" and 4 means HSUPA "uncapped". So it could be that 4 is better than 2 or 3 but this has to be tested for each particular carrier to see if it's really improving something or not
ro.telephony.ril.v3 =skypbrokendataca ll was the fix (100% of the time) for a data acquisition issue on the HTC Sensation for TMOUS customers. Ironically, it causes a lot of 3g connection problems for non-TMOUS customers though. The problem it fixed was a blinking H or E with corresponding lack of data. Many times, sending a MMS would fix the issue as well, but not always. (thank you @nicknc for clarifications)
Skipbrokendatacall was the fix (100% of the time) for a data acquisition issue on the HTC Sensation for TMOUS customers. Ironically, it causes a lot of 3g connection problems for non-TMOUS customers though.
The problem it fixed was a blinking H or E with corresponding lack of data. Many times, sending a MMS would fix the issue as well, but not always.
Sent from my One S using Tapatalk
nicknc said:
Skipbrokendatacall was the fix (100% of the time) for a data acquisition issue on the HTC Sensation for TMOUS customers. Ironically, it causes a lot of 3g connection problems for non-TMOUS customers though.
The problem it fixed was a blinking H or E with corresponding lack of data. Many times, sending a MMS would fix the issue as well, but not always.
Sent from my One S using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I'll add this info in OP. Also that should have no impact on Ville in this case
I've also read alot about that H/H+ switch to 3G during calls. Unfortunately I cannot test myself because I don't have 2 phones but I'll keep searching. As I read, it seems there's a similar issue with those having LTE networks (or 4G how it's called). It is known that the LTE network is not capable of having voice but only data. The only way of having voice in a LTE network is via voice-over-IP that is not implemented. That it is called VoLTE (Voice Over IP over LTE) and the project for introducing it has already started but it'll take some time till it'll be finalized. Therefore, if someone is on LTE network will notice that during voice calls the mobile data switches/drops to 3G and resumes on LTE as soon as the call ends (or not...for some carriers it has to be manually switched back). This is implemented by the carrier and it's called CSFB (Circuit Switched Fall Back). The internet is full with complaints and questions related to this data drop, especially in US but it is also in Europe or other zones in which LTE was implemented. Lot of people asks how can they prevent this to happen...short answer is they can't, only way is to change the data plan back to 3G from LTE. More details can be found by searching on Google and also I found this technical article HERE (for those interested in such details)
Now what I believe (but I can't prove or test), is that for the same reason I have that switch from H/H+ to 3G. Vodafone RO has LTE implemented and it could be that when someone makes a voice call, mobile data is automatically dropped to 3G even if it is not on an LTE data plan. When I tested with someone else on the same carrier, he didn't have that dropped data but also he was not living in an area with LTE coverage so it could be that this is happening only where LTE is implemented (that's why I need more time to test and find persons who can help me).
Okay-- a few updates for TMOUS
I tried ro.ril.hsxpa set to 2 for a few days. No appreciable difference, other than an appearance of a tendency to hold onto 2G longer than the phone should in a high-coverage 4G environment.
I also tried hsdpa set to 24 and hsupa set to 6, as everyone likes to whine about how our phone doesn't support values of "28" and "7".
This is where it gets interesting. Regardless of the setting of ro.ril.hsxpa to "2" or "4", I do not get H+ indicator with hsdpa set to 24 and hsupa set to 6. When I flip it back to 28 and 7, I get the H+ indication. There is no appreciable difference in speed, but then again, I am currently getting a speed lower than what I get when at home (10 mbps vs. 14 mbps). So, it could be 10 mbps is the max available on the tower to which I am currently connected.
The upload seems to be lower than normal (2mbps), so it is likely that conditions are not ideal.
When I return home in a few days, it will be interesting to see if there is a difference there between 28 and 24.
It does appear some of these settings might have infiltrated from other HSDPA+42 or even LTE phones, and wouldn't necessarily apply to ours.
The 24 for hsdpa and 6 for hsupa is from the table I found and tells the maximum speed at which device can download or upload. It is useless theoretically to set higher values since the device is not hardware capable of achieving them
Sent from nowhere over the air..
Rapier said:
The 24 for hsdpa and 6 for hsupa is from the table I found and tells the maximum speed at which device can download or upload. It is useless theoretically to set higher values since the device is not hardware capable of achieving them
Sent from nowhere over the air..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I understand that, but the strange thing is the lack of H+ indication for me on 24/6.
Sent from my One S using Tapatalk
nicknc said:
Yeah, I understand that, but the strange thing is the lack of H+ indication for me on 24/6.
Sent from my One S using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should be another reason...I have H+ and I have the same 24 an 6 values. I am currently using the following
ro.ril.hsdpa.category=24
ro.ril.hsupa.category=6
ro.ril.hsxpa=4
ro.ril.radio.svn=19 (still don't know what it does but ...)
ro.ril.fast.dormancy.rule=0 (my network doesn't support fast dormancy)
Rapier said:
Should be another reason...I have H+ and I have the same 24 an 6 values. I am currently using the following
ro.ril.hsdpa.category=24
ro.ril.hsupa.category=6
ro.ril.hsxpa=4
ro.ril.radio.svn=19 (still don't know what it does but ...)
ro.ril.fast.dormancy.rule=0 (my network doesn't support fast dormancy)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've used those values for many months, along with
ro.ril.disable.power.collapse=0
ro.telephony.ril.v3=skipradiooff
and I always get the H+, though my data rates have really gone to hell in the last few months...5Mb is good for me these days.
Ok, and what does that "skipradiooff" do? Because nobody seems to know. All are putting that setting in build.prop or recommend it but nobody could tell why. To be honest I didn't notice any difference with or without it
Could be something specific to T-Mobile and in this case that's why I don't see a difference
Sent from nowhere over the air..
Rapier said:
Ok, and what does that "skipradiooff" do? Because nobody seems to know. All are putting that setting in build.prop or recommend it but nobody could tell why. To be honest I didn't notice any difference with or without it
Could be something specific to T-Mobile and in this case that's why I don't see a difference
Sent from nowhere over the air..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very likely does nothing. According to this commit, the hooks were removed in CM10.2 anyways
http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/49846/
Well, I have these as default in cm on my mako. Interested to see if that HW_powersavings or the quick power on would be useful in getting fast dormancy to function without the data drops
proximity_incall=enable
power_supply.wakeup=enable
ro.config.hw_power_saving=1
ro.config.hw_fast_dormancy=1
ro.config.hw_quickpoweron=true
persist.sys.use_dithering=0
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
I'm having a hard time finding a definitive answer about which LTE band I'll lose using the tmobile variant on att.
I don't think any, I think both are identical. I am using the N920T with AT&t. I would suggest you consider using DarthStalkers ROM, he was able to pull the AT&T carrier files.
The N920T & A are the same. If you had bought the N920I you might lose bands.
Does anyone know where I can get a band 12 coverage map? I can only find the LTE coverage map which doesn't specify if band 12 is used there
wdkingery said:
I'm having a hard time finding a definitive answer about which LTE band I'll lose using the tmobile variant on att.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
17 and 30 (I don't think the 920t's band 12 will work with AT&T's B17 - even though 12 is a subset of 17 (or do I have that backwards?) Possibly 29 (downlink only for AT&T) - but there's very little documentation on B29, so I'm not sure if the N920A supports it or not.
garyd9 said:
17 and 30 (I don't think the 920t's band 12 will work with AT&T's B17 - even though 12 is a subset of 17 (or do I have that backwards?) Possibly 29 (downlink only for AT&T) - but there's very little documentation on B29, so I'm not sure if the N920A supports it or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you be so kind as to translate what that will mean to me? I have a t-mobile note 4 here on att and it seems to do fine.. Do you think I'll be so lucky with the note 5?
wdkingery said:
Could you be so kind as to translate what that will mean to me? I have a t-mobile note 4 here on att and it seems to do fine.. Do you think I'll be so lucky with the note 5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Band 29 is rarely used by AT&T (only as a downlink in heavily congested areas.) This shouldn't be a problem.
Band 30 (WCS band) is something AT&T _just_ started deploying, but I've never seen it in actual use. In fact, until very recently, none of AT&T's own phones supported it. B30 is really of limited value for general use due to it's propagation (or lack thereof.) Like 29, its probably only used as a supplement to other bands. I wouldn't worry about B30.
B17, however, is a Big Deal for AT&T. That's AT&T's primary "lower frequency" LTE band. Because of the low frequency, it has excellent propagation (meaning it moves farther and through trees, buildings, etc.) They use this band to cover large geographical areas with minimal towers. If you will be using your phone in a non-urban area, B17 is almost essential for AT&T. (My phone spends the majority of the time at my home on B17.)
I haven't heard of anyone with a TMO Note 5 device (without explicit B17 support) attaching to AT&T's B17, but that doesn't mean it won't work. However, Unless someone confirms B17 functionality on the n290T from actual use (and not just what they think), I'd suggest assuming that it won't work.
garyd9 said:
Band 29 is rarely used by AT&T (only as a downlink in heavily congested areas.) This shouldn't be a problem.
Band 30 (WCS band) is something AT&T _just_ started deploying, but I've never seen it in actual use. In fact, until very recently, none of AT&T's own phones supported it. B30 is really of limited value for general use due to it's propagation (or lack thereof.) Like 29, its probably only used as a supplement to other bands. I wouldn't worry about B30.
B17, however, is a Big Deal for AT&T. That's AT&T's primary "lower frequency" LTE band. Because of the low frequency, it has excellent propagation (meaning it moves farther and through trees, buildings, etc.) They use this band to cover large geographical areas with minimal towers. If you will be using your phone in a non-urban area, B17 is almost essential for AT&T. (My phone spends the majority of the time at my home on B17.)
I haven't heard of anyone with a TMO Note 5 device (without explicit B17 support) attaching to AT&T's B17, but that doesn't mean it won't work. However, Unless someone confirms B17 functionality on the n290T from actual use (and not just what they think), I'd suggest assuming that it won't work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An informative post if ever there was one indeed.
What app do you use to determine which hand your phone is connected thru? I have found this app "LTE discovery", and it seems my att note 3 stays connected to 5 mostly, or 4 for lte. But then for GSM is doesn't list a band, but appears connected. On her t-mobile note 4 connected to att, she stays on 5, but the GSM doesn't appear to be connected to anything..
We will be almost exclusively in the middle of a city, but as with anything that could change or in the event of a road trip..
Is there a place I can sit and study this information? Perhaps a website with all of this data? Or do you happen to work in the field?
In a sea of noobs, an informed person is a real diamond in the rough - I appreciate your time.
wdkingery said:
What app do you use to determine which hand your phone is connected thru? I have found this app "LTE discovery", and it seems my att note 3 stays connected to 5 mostly, or 4 for lte.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good app to use. I also use my phone's diagnostic menu's, but I doubt AT&T left those enabled on the 'a' variant.[/QUOTE]
wdkingery said:
But then for GSM is doesn't list a band, but appears connected. On her t-mobile note 4 connected to att, she stays on 5, but the GSM doesn't appear to be connected to anything..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that with "lte discovery" that she doesn't appear to have any GSM side connection? She most likely does, as that's where voice calls will take place...
wdkingery said:
Is there a place I can sit and study this information? Perhaps a website with all of this data?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google. Then google some more. If you run out of pages from google, use another search engine. All the information is readily available - it just takes time to find it all.
garyd9 said:
That's a good app to use. I also use my phone's diagnostic menu's, but I doubt AT&T left those enabled on the 'a' variant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that with "lte discovery" that she doesn't appear to have any GSM side connection? She most likely does, as that's where voice calls will take place...
Google. Then google some more. If you run out of pages from google, use another search engine. All the information is readily available - it just takes time to find it all.[/QUOTE]
so i got through all the hoops.. don't have LTE ;-(
it connects to band 4 or 5 when i first come out of airplane mode, but it jumps right back off. stuck on 4g. called at&t for an hour, they said initially it wasn't provisioned on my sim card, but then afterwards they determined it was a problem on my end, walked my thru APN settings and then ended the call.. still no LTE.
do you have an opinion of what i could do?
wdkingery said:
do you have an opinion of what i could do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quoting me in a thread was enough... didn't have to also PM me...
@TEKHD has a firmware that might work for you. Check it out over here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/tmo...h6-tekxodus-n5-urv1-00-00-lollipop-5-t3201869
He has apparently provided a mechanism that is working for other AT&T users... (probably via loading the AT&T RIL libs.)
I haven't tried this (and I don't even have a 't' variant myself.) On the other hand, a quick search of that thread seems to show that other people are having successes with AT&T sim's on 't' variant devices.
Good luck!
Gary
sorry about the double.
after a precursory examination, idon't see exactly what you are talking about in his thread..
is it a download?
garyd9 said:
Quoting me in a thread was enough... didn't have to also PM me...
He has apparently provided a mechanism that is working for other AT&T users... (probably via loading the AT&T RIL libs.)
Good luck!
Gary
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the search feature doesn't appear to work for me; shows 0 results on att or at&t.. i'm having to sift thru all 114 pages by hand.
garyd9 said:
He has apparently provided a mechanism that is working for other AT&T users... (probably via loading the AT&T RIL libs.)
Gary
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i searched all 114 pages and didn't find reference to any of that.. now i know why search provided no results; there weren't any!
so i need to find the att ril libraries. how will i ever find that.
wdkingery said:
i searched all 114 pages and didn't find reference to any of that.. now i know why search provided no results; there weren't any!
so i need to find the att ril libraries. how will i ever find that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe that was the wrong firmware... it's something in the TMO dev section. Please search.
garyd9 said:
Maybe that was the wrong firmware... it's something in the TMO dev section. Please search.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i've searched the entire tmo dev section for term "at&t" and there are sparse hits; there is some conversation about CSC for a guy in canada getting his VoLTE working, but nothing on att.
wdkingery said:
i've searched the entire tmo dev section for term "at&t" and there are sparse hits; there is some conversation about CSC for a guy in canada getting his VoLTE working, but nothing on att.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparently, you already found it: http://forum.xda-developers.com/tmo...on-1-aroma-t3212091/post63516726#post63516726
This has AT&T RIL's in the update.zip, and from a quick look at the first post in that thread, they are installed based on an aroma installer. Others in that thread claim it works for them. You're using a TMO device on ATT, so you have to expect some level of incompatibility. There are AT&T LTE bands that the TMO device simply doesn't support. It doesn't matter what happens with your Note 4. Different device and different modem.
So, if you want to use a TMO device on ATT, you'll have to make some sacrifices. Most people will find the sacrifices are less drastic using an international version of the phone. For some reason, US carriers go out of their way to ensure their devices are incompatible with each other.
garyd9 said:
Apparently, you already found it: http://forum.xda-developers.com/tmo...on-1-aroma-t3212091/post63516726#post63516726
This has AT&T RIL's in the update.zip, and from a quick look at the first post in that thread, they are installed based on an aroma installer. Others in that thread claim it works for them. .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok this is where i started, by flashing the ATT option for this rom. but that doesn't solve the problem. i'm in the process of clean flashing the tmobile choice like he suggested.
thanks for all your help.
i'm afraid this isn't going to work either. i realize the wife's note 4 may have different hardware, and isn't a good reference.
i can see the thing connect to band 5, then band 4, lte .. but it's in "emergency calls only" mode, then it gives up on that, connects to HSUPA or HSPA+ and that's the last of an LTE connection.
i feel like it would connect if it could, and that i'm having a software issue.
problem solved guys sorry for the large headache..
Solution:
AT&T did not recognize my IMEI as being LTE capable. Because of that, they decline to allow my phone to connect to LTE. My phone would connect to an LTE tower (as in the screen shots a few pages back), but wouldn't receive anything back from AT&T, so it would say "emergency calls only" and then give up after about 10 seconds, and then never go back. Crap data all around at this time.
What you'll need to do is walk into an AT&T store, take a picture of the IMEI off an LTE phone, and then call in and change your IMEI to the phone you found. This will cause the system to recognize your phone as LTE capable, and like magic, you'll have LTE.
I can confirm that I have a tmobile branded unit that attaches to band 17. It isn't as frequently as on my note 4, I'm generally on band 2. With that said I've had virtually no trouble with service. I was initially worried about the b17 issue, but it hasn't seemed to make any difference.
intifadamericana said:
I can confirm that I have a tmobile branded unit that attaches to band 17. It isn't as frequently as on my note 4, I'm generally on band 2. With that said I've had virtually no trouble with service. I was initially worried about the b17 issue, but it hasn't seemed to make any difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does it attach to band 17 on AT&T or t-mobile?
I am starting this thread, since there seems to be a lot of confusion around "newer" LTE bands, like Band 12 on T-Mobile, which apparently require a fully functioning and "approved" VoLTE phone to get reception.
There are various threads in device-specific forums, but they are not getting a lot of attention, and this is a significant enough problem that it should be more visible.
T-Mobile at this point has pretty fantastic coverage via the 700MHz Band 12 LTE network.
The only problem is that Band 12 requires the phone to be VoLTE "certified". The rumor was that phones could still connect to this band/LTE-network and send/receive data, but that they would fall back to alternative bands, even 3G or 2G, for phone calls. For a lot of people that would be "good enough" if not ideal.
Based on some recent testing, this is NOT CORRECT:
While phones may "sometimes" connect to Band 12 for data, the much more common scenario is apparently that the phone will disconnect from Band 12 almost immediately, or will refuse to connect to Band 12, and will instead default to an alternative LTE, 4G, 3G, or 2G connection.
In other words: even if you have perfect LTE Band 12 coverage (5/5 bars, or 100%), your "Band 12 capable" phone may instead try to connect to a really ****ty GPRS or EDGE tower that has barely any reception for the phone.
I recently encountered this with my Xperia X Compact while travelling: My phone would barely be able to connect to a T-Mobile tower with a GPRS data connection, while my wife's Moto G4 would get 5/5 or 100% LTE reception. Swapping SIM cards had the same result, so we know the problem rests with the phone.
Searching for "Available Mobile Networks" on my "band 12 capable" phone would show various T-Mobile 4G networks, but the phone would be unable to connect to them.
Talking to other Xperia X Compact owners, they have the same problem: the phone will sporadically connect to Band 12, but it is not a reliable connection (if the phone even connects) and it will (more likely) prefer other networks/bands/frequencies.
Based on the phone having the proper frequencies, I would assume that T-Mobile has some mechanism on some (or the majority of) towers where they disconnect non-VoLTE certified devices.
Anecdotally, I also had a similar issue with my previous phone - a Nexus 5x. The phone is even VoLTE certified, but when using Cyanogenmod/LineageOS, it would have really terrible reception, despite the location having almost perfect Band 12 coverage - LineageOS/CM does not (or had no) VoLTE support.
I have also tried "hacking" the X Compact to enable VoLTE support by adding the relevant lines to the build.prop and enabling the option under Settings and (*#*#4636#*#*) but this does not appear to make any difference.
A list of T-Mobile "VoLTE certified" phones can be found here:
http://www.spectrumgateway.com/compatible-phones
Would be great if anyone has any suggestions how to resolve this, or force the phone to prioritize Band 12, but it would otherwise appear that the only solution is to get the phone certified by T-Mobile (so much for net neutrality and open access).
I'm using an Xperia X Compact and my home market only has band 12 lte and I can't connect to it. Which means I'm always in 3g or roaming and rarely have data in buildings. It's maddening because I will only buy Sony. I think they are the only manufacturer making attractive handsets and the build quality is light years beyond well marketed, poorly constructed brands like Samsung and LG. But regardless of anyone's choice of manufacturer, a device with a functioning 700 mhz lte radio should function just fine on the corresponding network regardless of where it was purchased.
Would certifying this device and enabling VOLTE be particularly costly to Sony? Correct me if I'm wrong but based on internal components this device should be capable of this ja?
I think it wouldn't hurt to send petitions to both the manufacturer and T-mobile USA. This certainly doesn't help Sony in a market they are seriously struggling in. It also isn't very uncarrier to favor certain devices over others.
The only reason I switched from Verizon was the ability to choose my device. That and the things John Legere was doing to change the industry. I believed in what he was saying. But right now it isn't working for me and likely many others. He should know. I can say firsthand that the guy answers his emails. I think we need to show both parties that this is worth their attention.
---------- Post added at 01:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------
I should mention that after multiple calls to T-mobile tech support I received a cryptic call very late at night from someone high up in tech support.
Long story short he at least admitted that even though it wasn't a t mobile device and even though it didn't support VoLTE, it should still connect to band 12 just fine. He also said that they were having problems with this sort of thing in my area and that it should be resolved in a month. He also said my IMEI was logged and I would be given priority in the matter. Whatever that means.
I should also mention that was a month ago and he didn't have an email to give me. He did however give me a phone number (probably just the department) that I need to dig up.
Could just be a bunch of fluff because they are afraid to lose customers. Then again he was from tech support not customer retention. And as I said t mobile does listen to its customers.
POMF2K said:
I'm using an Xperia X Compact and my home market only has band 12 lte and I can't connect to it. Which means I'm always in 3g or roaming and rarely have data in buildings. It's maddening because I will only buy Sony. I think they are the only manufacturer making attractive handsets and the build quality is light years beyond well marketed, poorly constructed brands like Samsung and LG. But regardless of anyone's choice of manufacturer, a device with a functioning 700 mhz lte radio should function just fine on the corresponding network regardless of where it was purchased.
Would certifying this device and enabling VOLTE be particularly costly to Sony? Correct me if I'm wrong but based on internal components this device should be capable of this ja?
I think it wouldn't hurt to send petitions to both the manufacturer and T-mobile USA. This certainly doesn't help Sony in a market they are seriously struggling in. It also isn't very uncarrier to favor certain devices over others.
The only reason I switched from Verizon was the ability to choose my device. That and the things John Legere was doing to change the industry. I believed in what he was saying. But right now it isn't working for me and likely many others. He should know. I can say firsthand that the guy answers his emails. I think we need to show both parties that this is worth their attention.
---------- Post added at 01:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------
I should mention that after multiple calls to T-mobile tech support I received a cryptic call very late at night from someone high up in tech support.
Long story short he at least admitted that even though it wasn't a t mobile device and even though it didn't support VoLTE, it should still connect to band 12 just fine. He also said that they were having problems with this sort of thing in my area and that it should be resolved in a month. He also said my IMEI was logged and I would be given priority in the matter. Whatever that means.
I should also mention that was a month ago and he didn't have an email to give me. He did however give me a phone number (probably just the department) that I need to dig up.
Could just be a bunch of fluff because they are afraid to lose customers. Then again he was from tech support not customer retention. And as I said t mobile does listen to its customers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since I did encounter this also on my Nexus 5x with LineageOS, I doubt that what T-Mobile told you is true. They must be actively blocking these non-certified handsets, since the phone should just attempt connecting.
So who do we need to appeal to? T mobile or Sony.?
POMF2K said:
So who do we need to appeal to? T mobile or Sony.?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both. Maybe also complain to the FCC - I thought that carriers needed to provide open access to their network. Verizon got into hot water for not doing so ...
Does your compact ever connect to lte for a few seconds after a reboot?
I might try to force LTE and restart and see if that has any effect.
I just flashed the UK. T mobile networks work just fine. Well except lte/4g but that was expected.
POMF2K said:
Does your compact ever connect to lte for a few seconds after a reboot?
I might try to force LTE and restart and see if that has any effect.
I just flashed the UK. T mobile networks work just fine. Well except lte/4g but that was expected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does connect sometimes but it then usually kicks down to Band 4 or a GSM band (HSDPA, UMTS, EDGE, or even GPRS).
I cannot find any info how to prioritize LTE bands, so I assume this is T-Mobile's band 12 cell tower's kicking the phone off when they notice that it is not VoLTE approved.
Interesting discussion on Howard forums....
http://www.howardforums.com/showthr...rtphones-with-band-12-LTE-w-o-VoLTE-now/page2
POMF2K said:
Interesting discussion on Howard forums....
http://www.howardforums.com/showthr...rtphones-with-band-12-LTE-w-o-VoLTE-now/page2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting discussion though nothing new.
Yes, we know that Band 12 phones should be able to get a data connection, yet T-Mobile apparently actively disconnects them (or bars them from connecting), especially in areas where Band 12 would give you great coverage but there is no other coverage.
F Sony and F T-Mobile for this!
BTW: here is an article about the follow up model: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/sony-xperia-xz1-compact/
Please leave comments about Sony not getting their phones approved for VoLTE with T-Mobile and the phone therefore NOT REALLY WORKING with the carrier.
It would seem to me that the only solution to this problem would be either T-Mobile accepting a standard spec for VoLTE, they open source their code for VoLTE, or someone figures out how to implement VoLTE and trick T-Mobile to think it is an approved "whitelisted" phone.
Given that the T-Mobile network is getting worse and worse every day without Band 12 coverage, I find it really surprising that most people just don't seem to care. Does nobody use their phone outside of WiFi?
andTab said:
It would seem to me that the only solution to this problem would be either T-Mobile accepting a standard spec for VoLTE, they open source their code for VoLTE, or someone figures out how to implement VoLTE and trick T-Mobile to think it is an approved "whitelisted" phone.
Given that the T-Mobile network is getting worse and worse every day without Band 12 coverage, I find it really surprising that most people just don't seem to care. Does nobody use their phone outside of WiFi?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a standard spec, the problem is the certification. It requires a certificate from T-mobile to be used by the phone, which is gained through certification. And if SONY is detecting T-mobile at the modem level then there isn't anything a ROM can do with or without a ROM. I had a Z5, but this drove me crazy so I switched to a Pixel.
I wouldn't expect this to change based on SONY de-prioritizing the US phone market, so either upgrade to a new supported sony phone or move on (shrug)
sovanyio said:
There is a standard spec, the problem is the certification. It requires a certificate from T-mobile to be used by the phone, which is gained through certification. And if SONY is detecting T-mobile at the modem level then there isn't anything a ROM can do with or without a ROM. I had a Z5, but this drove me crazy so I switched to a Pixel.
I wouldn't expect this to change based on SONY de-prioritizing the US phone market, so either upgrade to a new supported sony phone or move on (shrug)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That can't be true.
I accept that T-Mobile may issue a certificate but that must be processed on the rom/OS/phone.apk level. Otherwise, every custom ROM on any certified phone would work. We all know that is not the case.
If it's the rom/OS/phone.apk though, why can't we hack a phone to work with TMUS / VoLTE?
I have an x compact and while it is the best device I have ever owned it is essentially unusable on T-Mobile or att.
andTab said:
That can't be true.
I accept that T-Mobile may issue a certificate but that must be processed on the rom/OS/phone.apk level. Otherwise, every custom ROM on any certified phone would work. We all know that is not the case.
If it's the rom/OS/phone.apk though, why can't we hack a phone to work with TMUS / VoLTE?
I have an x compact and while it is the best device I have ever owned it is essentially unusable on T-Mobile or att.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the SONY modem firmware doesn't even attempt to negotiate VoLTE, which does *not* happen in user space. It is likely possible to hack the qualcomm modem with QPST to enable this, but without documentation and correct values one will not get very far.
sovanyio said:
Because the SONY modem firmware doesn't even attempt to negotiate VoLTE, which does *not* happen in user space. It is likely possible to hack the qualcomm modem with QPST to enable this, but without documentation and correct values one will not get very far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it was the modem, then flashing a new system (eg custom ROM) should not make any difference.
I also have a Nexus 5x. With stock it is fantastic and uses VoLTE on T-Mobile. With LineageOS, it is useless on Band 12. SAME MODEM!
Experience therefore shows that it is the OS/System that somehow prevents this from working.
andTab said:
If it was the modem, then flashing a new system (eg custom ROM) should not make any difference.
I also have a Nexus 5x. With stock it is fantastic and uses VoLTE on T-Mobile. With LineageOS, it is useless on Band 12. SAME MODEM!
Experience therefore shows that it is the OS/System that somehow prevents this from working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nexus 5x is a different phone made by a different manufacturer with a different firmware scheme. You cannot compare them directly.
I noticed that the XZ1 Compact says right on the website compatible with t mobile band 12 and wifi calling... this is infuriating. It should be easy for them to patch the Xperia x compact.
I would have never purchased this if I had known. Especially since they apparently flashed an update to my old t mobile z3 that allows voice over lte and band 12.
Sony X Compact
sovanyio said:
There is a standard spec, the problem is the certification. It requires a certificate from T-mobile to be used by the phone, which is gained through certification. And if SONY is detecting T-mobile at the modem level then there isn't anything a ROM can do with or without a ROM. I had a Z5, but this drove me crazy so I switched to a Pixel.
I wouldn't expect this to change based on SONY de-prioritizing the US phone market, so either upgrade to a new supported sony phone or move on (shrug)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has to be on Sony, use the t-mobile BYOD app to check, I have a Huawei mate 9 that I just purchased, connects perfectly on band 12, VoLTE works just like it's supposed to. On a side note I went through three Sony phones before I bought this Huawei, had to return all three due to quality control issues, one had worst touches that made the phone unusable, one wouldn't pick up the SIM card, and the third wouldn't power on at all, thank good Amazon refunded my money on all three. They may have the Sony name on the phone, but they are still build by the lowest bidder in China and makes with Sony's name.
revjamescarver said:
It has to be on Sony, use the t-mobile BYOD app to check, I have a Huawei mate 9 that I just purchased, connects perfectly on band 12, VoLTE works just like it's supposed to. On a side note I went through three Sony phones before I bought this Huawei, had to return all three due to quality control issues, one had worst touches that made the phone unusable, one wouldn't pick up the SIM card, and the third wouldn't power on at all, thank good Amazon refunded my money on all three. They may have the Sony name on the phone, but they are still build by the lowest bidder in China and makes with Sony's name.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See this: http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/0...cked-smartphones-and-yep-its-still-confusing/ It is up to an OEM to decide to go through this process per-phone. Since no US carrier carried the phone they didn't not bother spending the money or time to certify it. I loved the SONY design, but since they weren't supporting the market I had to abandon them for other phones.