Related
I saw a friend who just got the HTC Tilt and had a TomTom navigation program installed on it that worked without pairing it with a bluetooth gps receiver.
I know that the xv6700 has the built in gps (for 911) and was wondering if anyone has gotten a navigation program to work with this phone without purchasing an additional BT GPS Receiver.
NOPE!
If you do a search you will find this question has been asked lots of times!
Sorry, I too hoped it would work!
Works Fine
I use the Tilt with TomTom everyday. It works fine using the built in GPS.
I'd love to see a hack to be able to use TomTom on my xv6700....anyone come up or leading up to one ?
I have a XV6700 with TomTom but in order to get it to work I had to go and get a Bluetooth GPS antenna. The built in GPS chip does not work with TomTom only E911. Using it with the bluetooth it works REALLY great.
HTH
Once and for all, the 6700 has E911 GPS only, it cannot be used wtih turn by turn gps applications. If you really want/need some form of inaccurate navigation and don't want to buy a bluetooth gps unit, your options are Microsoft Live Search, Google Maps, or Navizon.
This thread should be closed.
Apache GPS
I've recently upgraded the Titan to the new radio version that allows for built in functionality. Does anyone know if the new Apache radio will work, or if a newer one is coming out?
as many times as this has been posted and with the post above yours you still ask this question. the apache has no real fuctioning gps chipset. it functions for 911 location only. end of story
i would like to beg to differ, the 6800 does not have a dedicated GPS chip but the same GPSone chip the 6700 has... it may be a newer version of the chip but it does the same thing the 6700 does. if someone who isnt closed minded cares to take their time to try to extract the information from the 6800's radio firmwares and impliment it on the 6700 it should work.. the only thing that could stop us from using that chip is if it is hardware locked. all you have to do is redesign the radio firmware and put it into an existing kitchen rom... I will try to figure it out but ive never worked with building custom roms before and it will likely take a long time to get anywhere... i am sure someone who is any good at kitchen roms would be willing to take a crack at it
yeah but you miss the big picture. a chip isnt worth a hill of silicone if you dont have an antenna to hook to it
madmattco said:
yeah but you miss the big picture. a chip isnt worth a hill of silicone if you dont have an antenna to hook to it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, if the problem is *also* that there is no antenna attached, will it be possible to solder a connection from the chip to use the phone antenna??
willfck4beer said:
So, if the problem is *also* that there is no antenna attached, will it be possible to solder a connection from the chip to use the phone antenna??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But if there is no antenna attached, then how is the e911 getting its gps signal fix?
Jeff
most do it by triangulating between 3 or so cell towers
the program GPS Today has a feature that can used cell phone tower based positioning instead of a GPS receiver. i've never tested it because i have a 6800 with fantastic GPS, but its worth a try. Its free and pretty damn cool, so that would be crazy if the solution was that easy. try it out.
http://m.geoterrestrial.com/
There was a long thread about this over on pdaphonehome a while back. In short:
YES, the PPC-6700 DOES have stand alone GPS functionality. There was an email from HTC posted where they confirmed this. The reason it does not work stand alone is because Sprint requested it be disabled (I guess they wanted to charge for their own navigation package). But there is built in GPS that can use cell tower triangulation and regular GPS. Some people actually had the Verizon version working in a roundabout way for a while.
I went so far as to install Sprint's Nav software after I got on a plan that included navigation (for my wife's Instinct). It ran fine, but could never get a signal.
Sorry to bump an old thread-
Since the GPS hack is out for the XV6800, can it, or something similar be applied to the PPC6700?
iornslave said:
i would like to beg to differ, the 6800 does not have a dedicated GPS chip but the same GPSone chip the 6700 has... it may be a newer version of the chip but it does the same thing the 6700 does. if someone who isnt closed minded cares to take their time to try to extract the information from the 6800's radio firmwares and impliment it on the 6700 it should work.. the only thing that could stop us from using that chip is if it is hardware locked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm, I'm not sure where this info came from or what planet this phone came from, but it is completely inaccurate. Here's the story and please, DO NOT post anymore "Can I" questions on this as it is not a viable issue.
The 6800 (known by HTC as the Titan) has the Qualcomm MSM7500 "cell phone on a chip" chipset. This includes their GPSOne gps solution. It is an integrated GPS receiver for the phone. It is unique to the Qualcomm systems as it is their technology. In essence, it is a standalone gps receiver as it requires drivers to run and can be used independently of other functions.
Now, the 6700 (known by HTC as the Apache) has the Intel Boulevard chip. It is not a "cell phone on a chip" solution as the MSM7500 is. The 6700 would have had the Qualcomm solution (maybe not the 7500, but equivalent for the time), but legal matters complicated things and HTC signed with Intel instead. The Apache HAS gps built in as does EVERY cell phone made after a certain date set by the government requiring ALL cell phone manufacturers to include a GPS solution for E911 location requirements. These solutions only need a 2D fix and are not processed in the same manner as an NMEA enabled GPS receiver. As it would be possible to intercept these signals and process them through an intermediate driver, it would be practically worthless as the fix is only approximate (30 meters+-), half or all the data is tower triangulated (aGPS) and the value of the fix is geek value only.
So, if you want to mess with it, go ahead. Just remember, a seperate GPS receiver is a lot less hassle and a lot cheaper.
alright first off before i ask my question i think all of you should know. i am an extreme newb to cell phone hacking and moding so please excuse my arrogance 2nd thing i do most off my posts off my cell phone so please excuse the bad grammer and spelling. anyways as i have been reading in the forum people list the mods to their phones and i notice one listed radio? so could someone educate me on what a radio is i figure that it is what keeps you conected to the service provider but other than that i am clueless so when you mode it do you physically open the device and replace something and 2 what is the point of changing the radio do. so could an expert educate me and feel free to tell me everything you know rather than just answering my 2 main questions.
I guess thats its the radio you use to listen to music, news etc... Most phones nowadays come equipped with built-in radio function. I hope that helps. =)
im not too sure about the exact thing you are talking about
however thats what a buddy of mine working in a cell repair shop told
for the radio(the one that broadcast phone signal not the radio you listen to)
you know that in order to use a 3g phone in the US or elsewhere
[but the problem is mainly US cuz here we use special 3G band compared to the rest of the world] you need to get the good frequency
however most of the time manufacturers only design and produce different radio chip for different region if they really have to
cuz you know running those factories is not given to anyone
and why redesign a phone when you already have one
a phone is like a computer.. "change a part, gotta change the whole part" concept..
however a phone might not work in certain 3G frequencies not because the radio cant but because the manufacturer didnt pass the regulations in those regions and it happen that the phone can be 3G but its locked in the ROM
so you need to mod the ROM to make 3G radio work
like the omnia
some ppl argues that it might be dual-UMTS but the US 3G is locked in the ROM
because samsung didnt pass the FCC(Federal C??? C?? the agency that rules communication) at that time(when the first omnia shipped)
so they couldnt put US 3G
same thing for the touch diamond but it was GSM that needed to be rom-unlocked
d3thstalker said:
I guess thats its the radio you use to listen to music, news etc... Most phones nowadays come equipped with built-in radio function. I hope that helps. =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not the right kind of radio bud
vanilla_star_8 said:
im not too sure about the exact thing you are talking about
however thats what a buddy of mine working in a cell repair shop told
for the radio(the one that broadcast phone signal not the radio you listen to)
you know that in order to use a 3g phone in the US or elsewhere
[but the problem is mainly US cuz here we use special 3G band compared to the rest of the world] you need to get the good frequency
however most of the time manufacturers only design and produce different radio chip for different region if they really have to
cuz you know running those factories is not given to anyone
and why redesign a phone when you already have one
a phone is like a computer.. "change a part, gotta change the whole part" concept..
however a phone might not work in certain 3G frequencies not because the radio cant but because the manufacturer didnt pass the regulations in those regions and it happen that the phone can be 3G but its locked in the ROM
so you need to mod the ROM to make 3G radio work
like the omnia
some ppl argues that it might be dual-UMTS but the US 3G is locked in the ROM
because samsung didnt pass the FCC(Federal C??? C?? the agency that rules communication) at that time(when the first omnia shipped)
so they couldnt put US 3G
same thing for the touch diamond but it was GSM that needed to be rom-unlocked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what i understand about radios (the cell phone kind )
Your radio is what communicates with the tower and can affect how many "bars" you get. Not having the correct radio will also cause your phone
Camera not to work, to have a black screen, and/or to have no sound or intermittent sound.
The radio chip stores information, but you can change the information on that chip by "flashing a new radio."
This is just my own understanding so if i made a mistake don't be afraid to correct me
I believe the radio part of these devices is the information that tells the hardware in the phone how to act. What frequencies to use on the cell band, how the wifi antenna acts, how the bluetooth antenna acts, etc... Even how the GPS antenna works. Hence while in CDMA land my Titan needed a GPS enabled radio to make the gps work. There was a chip and antenna in there, but the radio excluded directions for the processor to interact with it.
My mind is simple, and this may be wrong but it is how I understand how the radio portion affects the phone.
Also, feel free to correct us if we are wrong!
Wow... Where.... wow.
Radio function
Radio is the whole function of the cell phone part of your tiny portable PCs your carrying around.
Its a
Duplex (transmits and receives separate carrier waves at the same time) ,Two-way, VHF and UHF, FM tranceiver in its purest form.
The cell towers are nothing more than ham radio pioneered "repeater" stations, connected to land phone lines. 20 years before the 1st commercial cell phone, HAM radio operators were setting up their own area "club" repeater stations, and networking them much like cell phone operators do now. The biggest rush of my young electronic life was carrying a kenwood TR-2500 FM handheld with me on my Yamaha YZ-80 out to the remote areas of our trails, and making a phone-patch call from the handheld thru the repeater and to a household phone. It felt like star trek man. I felt so high tech and up to date as a 15 year old carrying a radio my license didnt allow yet. LOL The funny part was everyone who was on frequency would get to hear your conversation too. Modern cell phones are the same thing only with collars and leashes.
So , back to the PDA with a two meter radio crammed tight agaist a computer with buttons that are too small ...
Thats really what you have.
Everything that a PDA is , outside of Radio [ a patch(voice) connect or a modem(data) connect] is just a small computer.
By the way, I raised the room temp tonite by leaving a Touch Pro turned on and Idling its data connection ...
Circuit... great explanation! But how do I know what Radio version my X1i needs?
In Smartphones and Pocket PCs, 'Radio' refers to the RIL. Radio Interface Layer. An API (Application Program Interface) that sits between Windows Mobile and the hardware driving the phone. An API is a published series of functions/methods that an application or operating system can call.
Ther is a patent for it at http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6826762.html.
It is so that the transmitter/receiver sits at arms length from WM or its apps, i.e. you can't go POKE the phone's registers directly, you have to ask pretty please through the API.
The Radio part of the ROM is the version that this API is at, for your device.
I was thinking about this for android since it's an open system but it probably applies to any phone once you XDA guys get them.
The idea is that since there is a Cell Phone radio in the phone, and there is a possibility to gain access to that radio is it possible to create a DOS attack in an area using just a normal cellphone? Imagine having an app to effectively block communications for what would probably be a very small area to keep it going long enough.
Does phone hardware even have the capabilities to do this?
Hypothetically, it should be possible, though I'm unsure of the level of access to the radios themselves in any phones...If you can get the radio to output noise on all frequencies constantly, with enough output, you should be able to jam a small area. However, the biggest issue (after gaining access to the radio chipset at the lowest level) would be pumping out enough power across the different channels to degrade others' reception.
You could probably get away with pumping out noise in intervals (extending battery life from your handset) and still degrade a signal enough to disrupt communications.
However, encrypted signals may be able to overcome brute-force jamming to a certain extent...I'm not sure if cellphones use spread-spectrum or frequency hopping, but if they do, there's another issue to overcome.
Keep in mind, if anyone clues in to the jamming, law enforcement radio direction-finding equipment will pinpoint the jamming headset pretty quickly, since you need to output a more powerful signal for your jamming to be effective.
cell phone jammers are also highly illegal.
It was a thought that came to my mind and I understand they're very illegal but I was wondering. Mostly for the capabilities of our phones, mostly the android ones.
I think it's a pretty interesting topic. Not sure I've ever heard anyone think of this one before on the forums (I don't post a lot but I read a lot)
only government officials can use cell jammers in case of bomb threats and stuff like that
You can buy jammers online if you know where to look for peanuts. Outside the USA some places have been using them as casually as in theaters. I also heard similar reports in hopitals but that surely has to be rumour mill since the whole point of no phones there is to reduce electromagetic interference messing with equipment like in planes so why would you spam with even more? (I think jammers DDOS the airwaves rather than anything much intelligent?).
The modem section of android has AFAIK always been closed source. This put a spanner in the works for things like the Replicant project which was trying to build a truely transparent phone open source so that you always know what is going on and have some privacy. The furthest they got was pretty much everything apart from the modem open source and that modem was able to spy on everything else.
Basically the network owners want a tight rein on what's connecting to their networks and the spectrum licensees want control of the spectrum. This is something both have at the moment legally...
but what with software defined radio like GNU Radio is pretty impossible to enforce and the only thing delaying this change is the economics of software defined radio and it's size. I expect this will change over time and that could be another very disruptive and interesting technology. As such I expect it'll try to be repressed making the problem worse.
That said, there are plenty of modems now for Arduino like projects and I'd expect just one of these to be open source?
Hope this helps clear it up for you
-j
This isn't the type of discussion that XDA encourages, especially not a discussion that's over a year old. Thread closed.
Flashed the G930U fw to my G930P and so far only crossed one issue: FM support.
When loading NextRadio, I'm prompted with an error:
The required software is missing, but we're working hard to enable NextRadio on all devices soon...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this fixable by simply installing "missing software"? if so, what?
Nope. The 930U firmware doesn't include the FM hardware API. And I doubt if there's enough people with 930U's out there who care enough for Samsung to consider implementing it. You and I might... but few others seem to
That's actually pretty discouraging. TMO apparently released a SW update in early May that enabled the built-in FM radio on the S7. Can't think of any good reason why that hasn't been done on the G930U yet.
http://www.androidauthority.com/t-mobile-galaxy-s7-s7-edge-gained-fm-radio-latest-update-690893/
If rooted, and know the right build.prop edits from a carrier variant that has it unlocked, I'm sure we could enable it.
TehPirate_ said:
If rooted, and know the right build.prop edits from a carrier variant that has it unlocked, I'm sure we could enable it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the case I would be quite interested in rooting my 930U. The other option is to perhaps flash a major carrier version of the firmware onto it. I've been considering flashing the 930P version.
And I've discovered another interesting, yet discouraging fact about the 930U. I've reported within other threads that I've had possession of three 930u's over the course of the past few weeks. Each of them has shared the problem of very low wifi sensitivity. More specifically, none of the three 930U's I've tested has been able to see the weaker wifi network signals in the area of my residence. And that's based upon a direct comparison among two 930P's (Sprint-provided S7's) and one 930A (an international unlocked S7) that I've tested long side said 930U's. Of course, when someone is dealing with moderate to strong wifi signals they likely won't notice any problem with 930U's. It will only be evident on the weaker signals. But I can assure you there has been a striking difference between the 930U's and the other devices on those weaker wifi signals!
Here's the interesting part. I had contacted Samsung's 2nd level tech support about the wifi deafness on my first 930U. He concluded it was likely a hardware issue. Weeks later another 2nd level Samsung support tech told me he had encountered other complaints about the 930U and low wifi sensitivity. He as well believed it to be a hardware-related issue. Well, today I installed a 3rd party app from the Play store called 'Wifi Connect'. This app actually allows my 930U to see all of the test nodes in my area perfectly fine and at reasonable signal strength., where the firmware wifi scanner can't see any of them! And the app has no trouble seeing these nodes even when its "wifi boost" feature is toggled off. This more or less proves that the low wifi sensitivity on the 930U is not hardware-related at all, but is instead somehow peculiar to the current release of the 930U firmware (G930UUEU2APEH (CSC/CP)). That is to say that I am now convinced it's merely a software bug. I can only hope that more 930U users will notice this issue and complain so Samsung so it might become resolved. A good wifi receiver is pretty important these days!
clonk said:
If that's the case I would be quite interested in rooting my 930U. The other option is to perhaps flash a major carrier version of the firmware onto it. I've been considering flashing the 930P version.
And I've discovered another interesting, yet discouraging fact about the 930U. I've reported within other threads that I've had possession of three 930u's over the course of the past few weeks. Each of them has shared the problem of very low wifi sensitivity. More specifically, none of the three 930U's I've tested has been able to see the weaker wifi network signals in the area of my residence. And that's based upon a direct comparison among two 930P's (Sprint-provided S7's) and one 930A (an international unlocked S7) that I've tested long side said 930U's. Of course, when someone is dealing with moderate to strong wifi signals they likely won't notice any problem with 930U's. It will only be evident on the weaker signals. But I can assure you there has been a striking difference between the 930U's and the other devices on those weaker wifi signals!
Here's the interesting part. I had contacted Samsung's 2nd level tech support about the wifi deafness on my first 930U. He concluded it was likely a hardware issue. Weeks later another 2nd level Samsung support tech told me he had encountered other complaints about the 930U and low wifi sensitivity. He as well believed it to be a hardware-related issue. Well, today I installed a 3rd party app from the Play store called 'Wifi Connect'. This app actually allows my 930U to see all of the test nodes in my area perfectly fine and at reasonable signal strength., where the firmware wifi scanner can't see any of them! And the app has no trouble seeing these nodes even when its "wifi boost" feature is toggled off. This more or less proves that the low wifi sensitivity on the 930U is not hardware-related at all, but is instead somehow peculiar to the current release of the 930U firmware (G930UUEU2APEH (CSC/CP)). That is to say that I am now convinced it's merely a software bug. I can only hope that more 930U users will notice this issue and complain so Samsung so it might become resolved. A good wifi receiver is pretty important these days!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't experienced this WiFi problem but like you said, those with strong connections won't notice. I also run the G930U fw on a G930P variant which may factor in.
clonk said:
And I've discovered another interesting, yet discouraging fact about the 930U. I've reported within other threads that I've had possession of three 930u's over the course of the past few weeks. Each of them has shared the problem of very low wifi sensitivity. More specifically, none of the three 930U's I've tested has been able to see the weaker wifi network signals in the area of my residence.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have any power saving modes enabled? My home wifi signal is strong, so no issues, and I haven't played with the power saving modes, but just a thought.
samnada said:
Do you have any power saving modes enabled? My home wifi signal is strong, so no issues, and I haven't played with the power saving modes, but just a thought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both power saving mode and ultra power saving mode are and have been off all along. Per app power saving is on for a number of apps, but that only kicks in on apps that haven't been used in a couple of days (as I understand it). And the built-in wifi provision isn't an app anyway... it's a component of the OS. With the Wifi Connect app loaded, the 930U's wifi receiver sensitivity is exactly the same as that on the other devices. So the hardware is obviously fine. It can't be anything but the OS firmware in my view.
---------- Post added at 01:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:53 AM ----------
TehPirate_ said:
I haven't experienced this WiFi problem but like you said, those with strong connections won't notice. I also run the G930U fw on a G930P variant which may factor in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's possible I suppose. I'd like to test things the other way around (930P fw on 930U hardware). And I'm seriously thinking of doing just that. If I'm right, the 930P fw should cure the reduced wifi reception issue, much like the Wifi Connect app has done.
clonk said:
Both power saving mode and ultra power saving mode are and have been off all along. Per app power saving is on for a number of apps, but that only kicks in on apps that haven't been used in a couple of days (as I understand it). And the built-in wifi provision isn't an app anyway... it's a component of the OS. With the Wifi Connect app loaded, the 930U's wifi receiver sensitivity is exactly the same as that on the other devices. So the hardware is obviously fine. It can't be anything but the OS firmware in my view.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok. I can't really test it since as I said my wifi is strong. When I look at the wifi scan of my neighbors networks I don't see a big difference compared to my previous Galaxy S4, although it's boxed up for shipment so i can't do a side-by-side like you are. Also, the Wifi Analyzer app looks very much like the signal strengths I saw on the S4, but that might be similar to Wifi Connect. Can only hope Samsung is working diligently on a big release to fix the SW issues. I can dream...
samnada said:
Also, the Wifi Analyzer app looks very much like the signal strengths I saw on the S4, but that might be similar to Wifi Connect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be my guess. Maybe it has something to do with the point at which these 3rd party apps hook in for the signal source. Perhaps the OS wifi receiver software takes the signal from a different location. That's all just blind theory on my part, though.
samnada said:
Can only hope Samsung is working diligently on a big release to fix the SW issues. I can dream...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Me too.
Got a response back from Samsung Support claiming that the S7 doesn't have a FM radio built-in. ?????
So, I emailed them a link to Youtube video of a guy actually doing the T-Mobile SW update and then playing the FM radio on his S7. We'll see what their excuse is now.
samnada said:
Got a response back from Samsung Support claiming that the S7 doesn't have a FM radio built-in. ?????
So, I emailed them a link to Youtube video of a guy actually doing the T-Mobile SW update and then playing the FM radio on his S7. We'll see what they're excuse is now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did they mean the S7 in general? Did they mean even the carrier-specific S7's? If that's what they told you, I can attest to the fact that they have given you entirely false information! I have recently been in possession of two SM-G930P's (i.e., the Sprint variant of the S7) which each received local FM broadcast stations (through the headphone wire as an antenna) via the NextRadio app. And they both did so flawlessly!
Beyond that, I've personally spoken (a number of times, actually) with Samsung 2nd tier tech support about this very issue. Each time I have been assured that the SM-G930U as well has a functional FM receiver chip onboard. It merely requires the API interface in its firmware to enable said chip. The only model that may not have the FM chip is the SM-G930A (i.e., the exynos powered unlocked international variant). And that would likely be because it's illegal in certain countries where the 930F is marketed to receive radio signals within the 88 to 108 MHz frequency band. That's not a broadcast band in all parts of the world (as it is within the US and some other places) so in some areas it may thus be used instead for government communications or other radio services that the local governments there want to keep off limits. If Samsung wants to sell phones in those areas, it may be easier for them to make those phones incapable of reception on that frequency band. So the 930F may be out of luck as far as hearing FM broadcast stations with its hardware. As far as I know, this hasn't been absolutely confirmed, though.
clonk said:
Did they mean the S7 in general? Did they mean even the carrier-specific S7's? If that's what they told you, I can attest to the fact that they have given you entirely false information! I have recently been in possession of two SM-G930P's (i.e., the Sprint variant of the S7) which each received local FM broadcast stations (through the headphone wire as an antenna) via the NextRadio app. And they both did so flawlessly!
Beyond that, I've personally spoken (a number of times, actually) with Samsung 2nd tier tech support about this very issue. Each time I have been assured that the SM-G930U as well has a functional FM receiver chip onboard. It merely requires the API interface in its firmware to enable said chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the section of the email I got back:
"I have checked the user manual and our available resources and I found that none of our latest phones including unlocked (SM-G930U) phones have a built-in FM radio chip.
So, when there is no built –in FM radio chip embedded inside the phone the software update will not make any effect. "
So, they're clueless.
samnada said:
Here's the section of the email I got back:
"I have checked the user manual and our available resources and I found that none of our latest phones including unlocked (SM-G930U) phones have a built-in FM radio chip.
So, when there is no built –in FM radio chip embedded inside the phone the software update will not make any effect. "
So, they're clueless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. I'd say that's a pretty clueless statement. He/she "checked the user manual" *smirk* ... Since Samsung is not yet marketing the FM radio capability as a feature, naturally it's not going to be referenced in the user manual.
One of the Samsung techs explained to me that their newest mobile devices sold in the US do contain an onboard FM chip in compliance with a directive issued by the FCC. He explained that the FCC did not issue said directive so phone users would have FM broadcast audio reception capability. He said that instead the directive was issued so all new phones would be able to receive the EAS (Emergency Alert System) disaster and local emergency bulletins that are issued by the regional government emergency departments and sent out via local FM broadcast stations over the 88-108 MHz FM broadcast band to mobile devices within their coverage areas. I believe those are the little alerts with the exclamation point within a triangle that contain warning/threat/environmental alert information. He said that the phones would not be able to receive those alerts when cellular networks are down or overwhelmed if they did not contain functional FM receiver chips. Again, he said that all of Samsung's newest US-targeted phones have potentially operative FM receiver chips for this reason. While I can't confirm that his explanation is absolutely accurate, at least it sounds reasonable.
Late Update:
Just wanted to update this thread to assure anyone who may stumble upon it that the G930U (US unlocked S7 variant) absolutely does have a functional FM chip onboard. I flashed G930P firmware onto my most recent U and the NextRadio app took right off receiving local over-the-air FM stations. However, it's a shame you have to use carrier firmware to get it to work.
I've since swapped off that last 930U for another 930P, mainly because the U (like my 2 previous U's) had a wifi sensitivity issue... which is a rather huge thing for me. I still may try yet one more U though - in case the wifi issue was simply a very unlikely coincidence on the 3 U handsets I've already tested. I kind of doubt that's the case, though, which is why I haven't fully decided to try another U.
clonk said:
Late Update:
Just wanted to update this thread to assure anyone who may stumble upon it that the G930U (US unlocked S7 variant) absolutely does have a functional FM chip onboard. I flashed G930P firmware onto my most recent U and the NextRadio app took right off receiving local over-the-air FM stations. However, it's a shame you have to use carrier firmware to get it to work.
I've since swapped off that last 930U for another 930P, mainly because the U (like my 2 previous U's) had a wifi sensitivity issue... which is a rather huge thing for me. I still may try yet one more U though - in case the wifi issue was simply a very unlikely coincidence on the 3 U handsets I've already tested. I kind of doubt that's the case, though, which is why I haven't fully decided to try another U.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have been very happy with my 930U on T-Mo for the last month and besides the FM disappointment, I have had zero issues. What was the case with your wifi?
thanassi44 said:
Have been very happy with my 930U on T-Mo for the last month and besides the FM disappointment, I have had zero issues. What was the case with your wifi?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Concerning the FM radio: Since the U does have a functional FM chip, Samsung need only enable it with a future update to resolve the matter. We just can't know whether that will happen anytime soon (if ever).
The wifi sensitivity issue is that each U model I've tested seemed to suffer from a double-faceted problem. I noticed the issue in particular since I regularly use my phones at a few locations where the wifi signals I need to connect with are below moderate strength levels. The first part of the problem is that all S7's seem to mask wifi signals that are less than -85 dBm (i.e., these weaker signals won't be reported by the OS wifi software during scan mode). My guess is that this may be because the developers consider signals below the -85 dBm threshold to be virtually unusable, so to display such unusable signals would serve no practical purpose in their view. The second part of the problem is that on the U's -at least on the ones I've tested- the wifi receiver sensitivity is noticeably lower than that on the P and F models I've tested. So this brings the detectable wifi signals that are barely above -85 dBm on the P and F models to a point below -85 dBm on the U models, which not only makes them unusable, but causes them to go unreported during scanning as well. Therefore, since you can't see any wifi node signals below -85 dBm on any S7, the signals that are above -85 dBm and thus barely usable on the P and F models are not able to even be detected on the U models because of its lower wifi sensitivity. It's as if the weaker wifi nodes in an area don't exist when using a U model.
I should note that 3rd party wifi apps will not mask the weaker wifi signals. You can see them all, regardless of strength. This proves that the OS threshold masking is in place. I will admit that if masking of the weaker wifi node signals were not in place, the signals below -85 dBm would undoubtedly be too weak to connect with. But the lower wifi sensitivity on the U model tends to compound this problem. So it really comes down to the fact that the U models I've tried in fact contained noticeably weaker wifi receivers for some reason (perhaps an antenna or other component difference). If the wifi signals you will be using are of moderate signal strength or greater, you shouldn't have any issues with the U model. And in my case it still may have been an unlikely coincidence... the three U's that I tested may not have been typical as far as U model wifi performance. I have no way to be sure one way or the other.
Well lookie here:
http://phandroid.com/2016/09/01/verizon-galaxy-s7-edge-radio-update/
Maybe there's hope for some of us!
asuh said:
Well lookie here:
http://phandroid.com/2016/09/01/verizon-galaxy-s7-edge-radio-update/
Maybe there's hope for some of us!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone with a G930U should contact Samsung, mention this info, and ask when our S7s will have the FM radio enabled.
hello dear friends i have a g930u i updated it to android N then i installed next radio, it is working perfectly . by the way i dont live in USA i am in algeria :good:
I just picked up a T-Mobile S7 to play around with and, as you all know, the G930T on T-Mobile USA has FM radio enabled.
However I've noticed that the radio reception is absolutely horrible with a lot of static, crosstalk from other stations, and dropouts. I tried two other FM-supporting phones that I have (Verizon Moto G and unlocked Xperia Z5 compact) and they're both clear as day with no issues. Note that this is in the same location, with same headphones, and same station... just a different phone.
Does anyone know of any fixes for this? Is it a chipset issue, build issue, software issue?
redct said:
I just picked up a T-Mobile S7 to play around with and, as you all know, the G930T on T-Mobile USA has FM radio enabled.
However I've noticed that the radio reception is absolutely horrible with a lot of static, crosstalk from other stations, and dropouts. I tried two other FM-supporting phones that I have (Verizon Moto G and unlocked Xperia Z5 compact) and they're both clear as day with no issues. Note that this is in the same location, with same headphones, and same station... just a different phone.
Does anyone know of any fixes for this? Is it a chipset issue, build issue, software issue?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It could be anything from a faulty component -such as a bad rf amplifier circuit- to an implemented chip/circuitry revision, to a change in component suppliers. If you just purchased the S7 and are under warranty I would exchange it for another one to see if the FM broadcast receiver sensitivity is better. I know there was a big problem with the FM receiver sensitivity on the 930U model devices. I went through several of those and they all demonstrated the kind of horrible reception that you've described. Whereas each of the 930Ps and 935Ps (Sprint model) I've used have demonstrated wonderful FM reception.