Nexus, HD2, and all other phones with weaksauce 3G bands

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

So when it comes to LTE, we'll have AT&T and Verizon together on AWS. T-Mobile waiting on LTE, but I'm guessing it will join AWS too. At least we have 3 carriers on the same band. LTE will still use SIM cards right? I believe this was stated a while back.

Right now it's a total mess. Sprint won't take a Verizon phone even if it uses EVDO and on paper should work fine. They have to activate for you (downside of CDMA). Now, as for GSM the two GSM providers in the US are different 3G bands. So essentially, you could say it's every man for himself. Then of these 4 carriers, the only one that is slightly compatible with the rest of the world is AT&T and its 1900 capabilities, but even that's meh because you don't know where ATT's deploying 1900 and 850. 850 should be the new thing they deploy anyway. I hate that in order to get a certain phone, we're waiting to see which carrier has it etc while in most places around the world, you're just waiting for a phone to come out and you can either snag it in the unlocked form, or wait for your carrier to get it so you can get a subsidy price.

But with LTE, we'll have the 2 largest carriers on AWS. I heard Canada and Latin America will be using those bands too? If so, then at least we get a united front and a better chance at better phones.

My question is what is 2100 mhz being used for in the US at the moment? The frequency PDF shows that it's blocked off for mobile just like the other frequencies that are actually used in the US. When a phone goes in for FCC certification, it clears the CDMA I (2100) band too... It's just a bit odd for me.

 

[Dari]

Help may come your way from Google. Watch the interview. They want to have a truly universal phone.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/the-engadget-interview-erick-tseng-senior-product-manager-of-a/

 

[Fox5]

So when it comes to LTE, we'll have AT&T and Verizon together on AWS. T-Mobile waiting on LTE, but I'm guessing it will join AWS too. At least we have 3 carriers on the same band. LTE will still use SIM cards right? I believe this was stated a while back.

Right now it's a total mess. Sprint won't take a Verizon phone even if it uses EVDO and on paper should work fine. They have to activate for you (downside of CDMA). Now, as for GSM the two GSM providers in the US are different 3G bands. So essentially, you could say it's every man for himself. Then of these 4 carriers, the only one that is slightly compatible with the rest of the world is AT&T and its 1900 capabilities, but even that's meh because you don't know where ATT's deploying 1900 and 850. 850 should be the new thing they deploy anyway. I hate that in order to get a certain phone, we're waiting to see which carrier has it etc while in most places around the world, you're just waiting for a phone to come out and you can either snag it in the unlocked form, or wait for your carrier to get it so you can get a subsidy price.

But with LTE, we'll have the 2 largest carriers on AWS. I heard Canada and Latin America will be using those bands too? If so, then at least we get a united front and a better chance at better phones.

My question is what is 2100 mhz being used for in the US at the moment? The frequency PDF shows that it's blocked off for mobile just like the other frequencies that are actually used in the US. When a phone goes in for FCC certification, it clears the CDMA I (2100) band too... It's just a bit odd for me.

Doesn't tmobile use the 2100 and 1700 bands, one for upstream and one for downstream?
Ah, according to wikipedia, part of the 2100mhz band is used for sattelite communication. Part of the 1900Mhz spectrum is used by 2g phone service (and 3g).
Poor tmobile, according to wikipedia the higher bands require a tower placed approximately every 1 mile for fast performance. I can see why ATT is switching to 850Mhz.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Doesn't tmobile use the 2100 and 1700 bands, one for upstream and one for downstream?
Ah, according to wikipedia, part of the 2100mhz band is used for sattelite communication. Part of the 1900Mhz spectrum is used by 2g phone service (and 3g).
Poor tmobile, according to wikipedia the higher bands require a tower placed approximately every 1 mile for fast performance. I can see why ATT is switching to 850Mhz.

850 gives you great indoors reception. In general low freq bands give you good building penetration. So when T-Mobile was stuck in 2G and so was ATT, I did the test. Outdoors we all got great reception, but in certain apartments, T-Mobile would just completely die. I used to laugh at my friend who would buy fancyass phones from Asia but lack 850 and lose reception all together. "Ok great, you got that new 1.3 MP phone, but you can't even make calls in your own apartment. What's the point?" T-Mobile used 1900 exclusively while AT&T/Cingular deployed 850/1900 for the 2G network.

 

[Fox5]

850 gives you great indoors reception. In general low freq bands give you good building penetration. So when T-Mobile was stuck in 2G and so was ATT, I did the test. Outdoors we all got great reception, but in certain apartments, T-Mobile would just completely die. I used to laugh at my friend who would buy fancyass phones from Asia but lack 850 and lose reception all together. "Ok great, you got that new 1.3 MP phone, but you can't even make calls in your own apartment. What's the point?" T-Mobile used 1900 exclusively while AT&T/Cingular deployed 850/1900 for the 2G network.

Thankfully, wifi is everywhere now, so just make VOIP calls inside. I think some of the android phones are even capable of seamlessly switching over.

It is cheaper if you invest in quality phones than buying cheap but multiple phones.

Tmobile's unsubsidized plans are cheaper either way. Tmobile's plans generally save $20 to $40 a month (depending what you compare to), so over a 2 year contract that's $480 to $960. A quality smart phone costs around $600 unlocked, or $200 with contract, so you come out ahead unsubsidized even with the minimum savings after 2 years, and you can keep your phone for a longer period of time and continue to save.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Thankfully, wifi is everywhere now, so just make VOIP calls inside. I think some of the android phones are even capable of seamlessly switching over.



Tmobile's unsubsidized plans are cheaper either way. Tmobile's plans generally save $20 to $40 a month (depending what you compare to), so over a 2 year contract that's $480 to $960. A quality smart phone costs around $600 unlocked, or $200 with contract, so you come out ahead unsubsidized even with the minimum savings after 2 years, and you can keep your phone for a longer period of time and continue to save.

But Wifi is no excuse for a crap network (ahem AT&T's trying to use seamless wireless switchover on iPhones). It's like saying comcast can't deliver good enough picture so they also install an antenna so you can use OTA HD so they can save bandwidth on local HD channels. That's no excuse for their crappy compressed HD signals which result in lowass bitrates. In the end you have to upgrade your network.

VOIP calls require some sort of subscription or whatever right? It's not like you can just make them for free. And unless your carrier wants to pursue that, I think money should be invested in fixing the network.

T-Mobile is cheaper, but once again this is because it and Sprint are the bottom 2 carriers. Sprint is losing customers. T-mobile is trying to deploy its 3G network. Verizon and ATT can do whatever they want, and their rates have been pretty much the same since... forever. And t-mobile has yet to take over even with their impressive rates which have been around... forever too! Even Sprint Sero didn't make them #1

 

[Fox5]

But Wifi is no excuse for a crap network (ahem AT&T's trying to use seamless wireless switchover on iPhones). It's like saying comcast can't deliver good enough picture so they also install an antenna so you can use OTA HD so they can save bandwidth on local HD channels. That's no excuse for their crappy compressed HD signals which result in lowass bitrates. In the end you have to upgrade your network.

VOIP calls require some sort of subscription or whatever right? It's not like you can just make them for free. And unless your carrier wants to pursue that, I think money should be invested in fixing the network.

T-Mobile is cheaper, but once again this is because it and Sprint are the bottom 2 carriers. Sprint is losing customers. T-mobile is trying to deploy its 3G network. Verizon and ATT can do whatever they want, and their rates have been pretty much the same since... forever. And t-mobile has yet to take over even with their impressive rates which have been around... forever too! Even Sprint Sero didn't make them #1

Tmobile's network is almost up to att's size (att has been slacking) and is faster (mainly because they split upstream and downstream onto two separate frequencies).
VOIP can be done with various SIP services, including Skype (costs about $60 a year) and Google Voice (free, but requires some hacking or a gizmo5 account (not currently available) to use as SIP).
My new nokia includes built in seamless skype as well as generic SIP services for calls.

Anyhow, wifi is widespread enough that I can depend on it for the majority of my phone use, I only need widespread phone use for convenience/emergencies. I can live without mobile Internet (or fast mobile Internet) for the times when I'm away from home or work or school.

 

[NuShrike]

2100MHz in the USA is actually used for satellite phones (or just Mobile Satellite Services), as far is my previous research found. That's what burned the USA. It is strange the 3G people would standardize on a frequency that's already preallocated in the USA.

3G was meant to unify the world out of the fractioned GSM frequencies -- it did, but not in 3rd world country USA, being only a consumer of tech.

As for HTC phones no longer having world 3G, it was suggested in wmpoweruser that USA carriers caused that. They(probably AT&T) said conceptually said if any manufacturer made unlocked phones carrying USA frequencies, that phone will never be carried in the USA, nor that manufacturer, probably.

So there you go. It's some sort of collusion between HTC/AT&T(to support Apple)/Qualcomm(because they do make all-world cdma/w-cdma all frequency chips), etc.

 

[coolVariable]

2100MHz in the USA is actually used for satellite phones (or just Mobile Satellite Services), as far is my previous research found. That's what burned the USA. It is strange the 3G people would standardize on a frequency that's already preallocated in the USA.

3G was meant to unify the world out of the fractioned GSM frequencies -- it did, but not in 3rd world country USA, being only a consumer of tech.

As for HTC phones no longer having world 3G, it was suggested in wmpoweruser that USA carriers caused that. They(probably AT&T) said conceptually said if any manufacturer made unlocked phones carrying USA frequencies, that phone will never be carried in the USA, nor that manufacturer, probably.

So there you go. It's some sort of collusion between HTC/AT&T(to support Apple)/Qualcomm(because they do make all-world cdma/w-cdma all frequency chips), etc.

Technically AT&T uses somewhat international bands for 3G: 850 and 1900.
europe and asia uses 2100 but across north and south america plus Australia/NZ 850/1900 are the most common.

That's probably why apple went with 850/1900/2100 3G frequencies for the iphone which make it pretty much a world phone for 3G.