Related
Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers
Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?
Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?
If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?
Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity
Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget
Because the entire point of the Nexus One was to prove that customers wanted a phone that was not bound by "carrier demands" thats why all the Droids have the pay for tethering, while the Nexus One supports it freely.
Why not just be flexible?
Let the T-Mobile and Att versions be completely free of carrier control and be flexible with the Verizon/Sprint versions. I'd much rather have a non-tethering N1 on Sprint and Verizon as options than nothing at all...
If Samsung could do it, why not Google?
Because each version of the Galaxy is a totally different version, because this carrier didnt like this option on the phone, they took it out and renamed the phone. There are 4 versions of this phone each one less of a total package then the one before it. The Nexus One didn't want to be "flexible" it wanted to be allowed at the party as it designed to be. Plus the Nexus One was originally planned to be on Sprint and Version, it was the carriers who then dropped support for it. Also i was just throwing tehtering out there as an example there are many other things that the Nexus One can do that other phones have had stripped because of carrier control.
Those phones are gonna be hindered by carrier approval for updates.
The main thing that will be gimped is the native tethering option of android.
Samsung is in the game for $$$ with a guaranteed business plan.
Google was attempting to change the typical business plan. It was always an gamble.
Blueman101 said:
Because each version of the Galaxy is a totally different version, because this carrier didnt like this option on the phone, they took it out and renamed the phone. There are 4 versions of this phone each one less of a total package then the one before it. The Nexus One didn't want to be "flexible" it wanted to be allowed at the party as it designed to be. Plus the Nexus One was originally planned to be on Sprint and Version, it was the carriers who then dropped support for it. Also i was just throwing tehtering out there as an example there are many other things that the Nexus One can do that other phones have had stripped because of carrier control.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon publicly came out and said they wanted the nexus but it was Google that did not come thru for unknown reasons. Who are we to believe, I agree I don't trust any of them. But its definitely weird that Verizon went on record saying that. Why would they lie? And the next question is if that was the truth, why would Google have backed out?
RogerPodacter said:
Verizon publicly came out and said they wanted the nexus but it was Google that did not come thru for unknown reasons. Who are we to believe, I agree I don't trust any of them. But its definitely weird that Verizon went on record saying that. Why would they lie? And the next question is if that was the truth, why would Google have backed out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats true, no one really knows who was at fault. Google isnt know for their Dev phones coming to CDMA. Its also possible that Google turned it down when the CDMA carriers refused to offer the Nexus One full freedom.
ap3604 said:
Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers
Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?
Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?
If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?
Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity
Samsung is not the first! The touch pro 2s for example existed on all 4 networks!
Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the normal customers will have no idea the phones are related directly. They are all a little different and have different names. Each carrier has say with software unlike the n1. That means no tethering etc. I dont see why US carries like to cripple phones and brand them... I get that they want their own image or to not look like just a network provider but customized phones blow... My htc pure has no front facing cam and all the td2s tp2s needed different skins/cases and that also means more expensive repairs and ****. Carriers around the world just stamp their logo and inject some crapware (sometimes) and leave everything else the same!
JCopernicus said:
Those phones are gonna be hindered by carrier approval for updates.
The main thing that will be gimped is the native tethering option of android.
Samsung is in the game for $$$ with a guaranteed business plan.
Google was attempting to change the typical business plan. It was always an gamble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe someone will figure how to make a vanilla android rom for it.
I think the problem with the N1 is that the only carrier that subsidized it is T-Mobile. The two largest carriers are At&t and Verizon. Verizon doesn't carry it. For At&t, how many ppl are gonna shell out $529 for a phone, when you can get an iphone for like $199. All of us in this forum would, but for others it's too big of a difference.
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
When did "US Cellular" become one of "the 4" carriers??? They're #7 according to here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mobile_network_operators_of_the_Americas#United_States
Verizon got the HTC Desire
Sprint got the HTC EVO
If they got those phones, why would they want the N1 for? Those HTC phones are, in the carrier's eyes, better than the N1 and they aren't restricted to the plans that Google made T-Mobile customers switch over to in order to get the N1 for a lower price.
If those two phones came to Tmobile, I wouldn't have a N1 to be honest.
Blueman101 said:
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. There are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
This is just the announcement right? In mid March 2010, Sprint and Verizon announced they were getting the N1, until they changed their mind. Like you guys said earlier something about the "Evo" and the "Moto shadow". Shadow is pretty sweet, 4.3 inch display plus QWERTY!
Wikipedia that **** "nexus one"
arkavat said:
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. Their are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent point. I much prefer that system to ours.
Sent from my Sexy Nexy, courtesy of the fine developers of Tapatalk
let me finance that sammich for you ...
Blueman101 said:
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
$530 is too much? ok buy a g1 for 279. or a flip phone for 35 at a pawn shop. remember, this is something you OWN, not something that you lease with heavily financed contracts and etc s to mess with.
a potato chip is rediculously expensive if you compare it to the price of potatoes. cmon, find a logical argument folks or would you rather a company NOT profit, fail and leave you with no. support?
ohgood said:
$530 is too much? ok buy a g1 for 279. or a flip phone for 35 at a pawn shop. remember, this is something you OWN, not something that you lease with heavily financed contracts and etc s to mess with.
a potato chip is rediculously expensive if you compare it to the price of potatoes. cmon, find a logical argument folks or would you rather a company NOT profit, fail and leave you with no. support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you missed his point a bit.
Google was attempting to do a few things with the N1. First, they wanted to offer a completely raw phone, free of all carrier branding and bloatware and crippling. To do so meant selling it themselves, or in stores like Best Buy or whatever. This would push the second item: showing those in the states how a lot of other countries operate, buying unlocked phones without a carrier subsidy and contract. I love this idea. Both ideas.
However, the timing was rather unfortunate. $530 in this economy is rough for a lot of people. Doesn't mean the idea is horrible, doesn't mean anyone is blaming Google. It simply means that there are a lot of people that won't buy the N1 (or any brand new completely unlocked phone) right now because of the economy. I personally have several friends that love my N1. They wish they could buy one but are either unemployed or under-employed (took jobs making much less than they're used to, simply to get a check coming in).
I love Google's approach on this. I think it's great that they (supposedly) told Verizon and Sprint go suck an egg, and that the N1 was not to be messed with. This is my first truly unlocked, unbranded phone and I don't think I'll ever go back to buying them from the carrier.
Plain and simple most carriers were not thrilled with the idea of a totally unbranded/un-carrier approved handset being activated on their network.
With the GSM variant, there is little that any carrier can do, but CDMA is a different animal and I am really not surprised that VZW/SPRINT said heck no.
Dan
arkavat said:
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. There are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as in the UK, I have a cheap sim-only with unlimited data and just buy phones unlocked sim-free (no carrier restrictions) from the hundreds of stores (Play, Amazon etc). The money I save over the normal 18 months is enough to buy a Nexus One and have money left over.
But still some people in UK see the 'free phone' and sign up to a stupid long-term contract.
So sprint didn't get the contract?
http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/3/2679769/samsung-galaxy-note-sprint-att-launch-rumor
The rumor is that it would be announced alongside the new nexus...ces officially starts tomorrow i believe.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA App
I would very much doubt it. Because carriers have to redevelop phones with CDMA radios for US carriers, and those phones are usable in so few markets, it is much more expensive per unit to build and market a CDMA device than to create a GSM variant and allow customers all over the world to buy it and pop in a SIM. I'm actually surprised AT&T and Samsung bothered to develop an AT&T version of the note when the global version seems to be working so well. I guess kudos to AT&T for giving people a subsidized version with a US warranty.
That said, I would love the Note on Sprint, whether it's WiMax or eventually LTE. If they released it I would wait in line to get one.
AT&T could have gotten an exclusive for the initial release of the Note. So after it's released on AT&T we can hopefully expect it on Sprint. OR Sprint wanted CES to be about LTE and The Note will end up being Wimax...who knows
It wasn't even confirmed, it was a wild rumor. That said, it may appear sometime down the line.
Alright so I've been looking around on various Android forums and people seem to be very upset that there is no CDMA variant of the Nexus 4 announced so far. Coming from the Sprint/Verizon Galaxy Nexus, I am glad that they're not bothering this time around because CDMA goes against what the Nexus brand stands for, openness.
These carriers are very self-contained. You can only purchase phones to use on their network from them. Want a unlocked phone? You're out of luck BUT you can purchase the phone from their website off contract or you can go and get one from eBay or Craigslist. Because of this, the carriers have manufacturers by the balls, especially when it comes to updating phones. Want to get an update? You'll have to wait until these carriers "inspect" the update to ensure that it is not "harmful to the network" and all that PR crap they go on and on about.
Anyways, CDMA would mean that Google/LG would have to make a 4G LTE variant since these carriers only sell 4G phones now and Google doesn't seem too happy about how the CDMA variants of the GNex turned out last time. The updates were untimely to say the absolute least and the battery life was horrendous. I'm sure that the guys at Google had one hell of a time disputing against the crapware that Verizon/Sprint wanted to put on their phones so they could get a quick buck from Blockbuster and whatever other useless advertisements and applications they put on there now days.
If you want a Nexus phone, jump over to another carrier. I'm finally going over to T-Mobile and I'm getting unlimited data/text and a hundred minutes (which won't be used because I use GrooVe for voice over data/WiFi) for $30 a month. The entire move is going to cost me less than $400 and I'm sure you all have phones that you could sell to get over here. It really is the better move and the HSPA+ is amazingly fast without the battery drain.
My only option for a carrier is Verizon or sprint. At&t and T-Mobile only have gprs where my grandparents live, and I need internet for work. I'm upset there isn't a CDMA variant.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I'm pretty excited about making the move to GSM and prepaid service. Any smartphone I've ever had was either Sprint and now Verizon. I can't even get an hour and a half of on-screen time with my Verizon gnex. It'll constantly switch from 3g to LTE and most of the time get stuck in the middle, looking for signal and draining the battery, it's horrendous.
I'm glad that there isn't a CDMA variant because CDMA is dead-end technology, and anything that brings about its demise sooner is a good thing IMO. Whatever the original technical merits were that CDMA held over GSM have pretty much become nonexistent as I understand it, and you give up the huge advantage of being able to easily switch carriers without purchasing a new phone. Anyone who's spent time outside the US and in an open GSM phone system knows how nice it is to be able to switch carriers at will.
But also Google's rationale for not including LTE makes a lot more sense with no CDMA variant. As the OP mentioned, a CDMA variant would absolutely HAVE to have LTE. Verizon's EV-DO network is still Rev. A, right? That's disgustingly slow in today's day and age, and while it makes sense that the CDMA carriers would have skipped over later revisions of EV-DO and go straight to LTE, it also means they're in an "LTE or bust" situation right now. GSM networks have a much better upgrade path, and 42mbps HSPA+ is more than fast enough for just about anything you'd want to do on a phone.
Personally I'm happy with the decision, because as a GSM user I see no need to frantically jump on the LTE bandwagon. I'd much rather take better battery life and a lower phone cost than have a transmission standard that is overkill for the vast majority of phone applications forced down my throat.
You all don't remember that GSM Nexus devices always come out first. CDMA phones will most likely come out months later, and with higher storage to generate buzz. Google knows better than to shut out ~20 million subscribers.
I'm pretty confident they are offering such low priced unlocked phones to try and get as many people into their ecosystem as possible. Ignoring CDMA users is not consistent with that, so just like before, it'll likely be 1 to 5 months before we see 32gb CDMA phones later on.
disynthetic said:
You all don't remember that GSM Nexus devices always come out first. CDMA phones will most likely come out months later, and with higher storage to generate buzz. Google knows better than to shut out ~20 million subscribers.
I'm pretty confident they are offering such low priced unlocked phones to try and get as many people into their ecosystem as possible. Ignoring CDMA users is not consistent with that, so just like before, it'll likely be 1 to 5 months before we see 32gb CDMA phones later on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I get where you're coming from, I completely disagree. Of course, I'm with a GSM carrier (and always have been), so I couldn't care less if they come out with a CDMA Nexus 4. Then again, I'm one of those people that don't believe the Galaxy Nexus offered by Verizon and Sprint was an actual Nexus device. If a phone's updates are coming from a carrier and not straight from Google...that's not a true Nexus and, frankly, you get what you deserve for thinking it is (in general terms...I'm not talking about you specifically).
I think all the reasons listed earlier are correct. I think Google got a bad taste in their mouths from having the carriers (re: Verizon and Sprint) dictate to them what they were going to do instead of the other way around. I also agree that CDMA is a dying technology and I'm also all for anything that bring that about faster. Wireless companies in the US need to get their #[email protected]% together and agree on a standard. All this GSM/CDMA/LTE crap is just confusing to consumers (not to me, but to uneducated consumers).
I firmly believe, though, that if you want a Nexus phone you need to get with a GSM carrier. Period. If by some miracle Google does release a CDMA version of the Nexus 4 later, I'll still believe you don't have a "true" Nexus phone. Only when the carriers have their hands off the updates can you actually make me believe a CDMA Nexus is a "real" Nexus.
I've been looking at the pre paid services but I have two lines since I pay for my mothers phone.
With the 1000 minute family plans it ends up making more sense for me to go that route since I'd get 2 free galaxy S2's.. One for her and I'd sell the other + my Sprint Galaxy s2 on eBay for my N4...
Very excited about moving back to T-mob after being on Sprint with **** service in my area for almost a year.
Please use the rant thread here or post in one of the review threads.
General section is for news/tips/tricks/guides/etc, not really for everybody to create a new thread every time they have a thought on this and that.
Closed
Every GALAXY launch we go through the same BS. No 32GB option available, and this time no GOLD or BLUE color options available. Why? Why? Why? Is it really that difficult to include all the colors with 32GB? Now those of us who want to get the phone on launch are once again screwed just like we were last year and the year before on 32gb of storage. Of course I take all this back if the unlocked variant offered AT&T LTE support; which it doesn't by the way. Why am I not surprised? The 16gb S5 will have about 10GB of user storage.
I am so fed up with this type of BS. AT&T is, unfortunately, the only carrier that works well in my area. T-Mobile is spotty with lots of EDGE. If only their service was on lower spectrum, I'd be all over them.
Anyone else feeling just as frustrated with this mess we endure every year.
I totally agree, but the ATT S4 did come with a 32Gb. I am using it right now. I wish Sammy would up them all to 32Gb and an option for 64Gb. 16Gb is too small with how large touchwiz is with each revision. No way I will go back to only 16Gb on board.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
16GB is never an issue with me, regardless of the device. It's more than enough for my needs, considering I have maybe 2-4 very small games on my devices at any given time. What does piss me off is the lack of all the colors. I wanted the blue model, but of course, that's not possible...for whatever idiotic reason. I just said screw it and preordered the black. I guess I'll just buy a different back cover down the road.
karmuh said:
16GB is never an issue with me, regardless of the device. It's more than enough for my needs, considering I have maybe 2-4 very small games on my devices at any given time. What does piss me off is the lack of all the colors. I wanted the blue model, but of course, that's not possible...for whatever idiotic reason. I just said screw it and preordered the black. I guess I'll just buy a different back cover down the road.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
16GB may not be an issue for everyone, but why can't they just give the customer the choice at pre-launch? I have no problem paying more for storage. Why does Apple sell every color and size up front from day 1? That's what I don't get. Since they are dying so much to be like Apple, then why can't they at least do that?
MattMJB0188 said:
16GB may not be an issue for everyone, but why can't they just give the customer the choice at pre-launch? I have no problem paying more for storage. Why does Apple sell every color and size up front from day 1? That's what I don't get. Since they are dying so much to be like Apple, then why can't they at least do that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed -- it really doesn't make any sense at all. All model options should be available from day 1, no exceptions. That's one thing Apple does an excellent job at. They announce their devices and the same day you can start preordering any color/storage model, assuming the stock is available, of course. It pissed me off even more, because we had to wait this long after the S5 announcement to just preorder it...and then we don't have all the options available? Very annoying.
karmuh said:
Agreed -- it really doesn't make any sense at all. All model options should be available from day 1, no exceptions. That's one thing Apple does an excellent job at. They announce their devices and the same day you can start preordering any color/storage model, assuming the stock is available, of course. It pissed me off even more, because we had to wait this long after the S5 announcement to just preorder it...and then we don't have all the options available? Very annoying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1, Samsung never have full availability of their models. Either they announce a color but don't have it or announce a 64 GB version and don't have it.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
barondebxl said:
+1, Samsung never have full availability of their models. Either they announce a color but don't have it or announce a 64 GB version and don't have it.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I know. Its ridiculous. I don't know why I had such high hopes for them to turn around and launch the S5 differently than before.
MattMJB0188 said:
I am so fed up with this type of BS. AT&T is, unfortunately, the only carrier that works well in my area. T-Mobile is spotty with lots of EDGE. If only their service was on lower spectrum, I'd be all over them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know it doesnt help right now, but i recall reading on Engadget recently that T-Mobile is claiming that all of their 2g areas will be upgraded to 4g by 2015 or early in 2015. That should open up more options for you and countless others.
cloudraker said:
I know it doesnt help right now, but i recall reading on Engadget recently that T-Mobile is claiming that all of their 2g areas will be upgraded to 4g by 2015 or early in 2015. That should open up more options for you and countless others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That will help, but a major problem T-Mobile has it that their frequencies don't reach as far as AT&T's and therefore you get EDGE. T-Mobile has all their towers upgraded in my area to HSPA+ and some with LTE, but since those signals don't travel as far, it always turns into EDGE. They need to shut EDGE down entirely and use only H+.
New TouchWiz is just over 8 gigs of space, I've been told the 16gb version will have about 7 gigs of usable storage. I'm waiting for the 32gb version to come to AT&BS I guess a little later this year.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
This is why I am thinking of passing on s5 and going to HTC one m8. I checked out the phone at AT&T and very impressed with it plus it comes in 32gb at AT&T as default. Tired of Samsung Bs. They will release a 32gb version on AT&T 6 months down the road or never.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
sabre31 said:
This is why I am thinking of passing on s5 and going to HTC one m8. I checked out the phone at AT&T and very impressed with it plus it comes in 32gb at AT&T as default. Tired of Samsung Bs. They will release a 32gb version on AT&T 6 months down the road or never.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea. With the S4 I think they announced the 32GB version about 2 weeks after the 16GB went on sale; ultimately screwing anyone who wanted one because their return policy was up.
I actually ordered the 16GB because I never have come close to filling the internal storage I was just pissed its not an option. I just really wanted the blue. **** like that pisses me off. I am sure if AT&T gets the 32GB it will only come in black. I wanted white this time.
Yeah AT&T waited 2 weeks on purpose so you couldn't return the 16gb version. I bet they will pull something similar now. Hoping that somebody is desperate to open another line or pay full price to get it.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Same thing with last year. 64GB M7 cost the same as a 16GB S4.
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Equally as important as the space issue is the "download booster" feature, which is disabled on all the demo devices that are popping up in AT&T stores. I'm going to wait for the actual devices to ship to customers before passing judgment because floor models definitely do have things disabled sometimes. That said, it certainly shouldn't shock anyone that AT&T would want this disabled. Years of history support the idea that they don't want people using their network, and they push people toward WiFi whenever possible. I can just see some corporate goon in a boardroom breaking out in a cold sweat over the idea of people accidentally using download booster and going over their data plans because they didn't realize what they were doing.
Let us not forget this is also the same carrier who disabled installation of non-market APKs on their early Android devices, shipped the Note 2 without the multi-window functionality until enough people raised hell, and removed the Knox security app from the Note 3. This says nothing of the fact that they still manage to get their paws into Nexus devices, successfully getting Google to code in an exception that disables tethering on the Nexus 7 if you have an AT&T SIM card in it. There's no account check or anything else. If you have an AT&T SIM card in your Nexus 7, the tethering option disappears. End of story. Not even Verizon does that. Also, does anyone remember how, for the longest time, AT&T made both Apple and Google disable video chat in Facetime and Hangouts over HSPA+ and LTE, forcing you to use WiFi?
So far, I'm leaving my preorder intact, but if my device doesn't have the download booster feature, I'm returning it. Every time I decide to give a carrier-branded device a chance, it seems I get let down. Even with Nexus devices, AT&T finds a way to let me down (thus why I have my N7 on Verizon). I'm trying to give AT&T the benefit of the doubt on the download booster, but I'm not at all optimistic. :/ I mainly stick with AT&T because they're basically the only choice if you want to use unlocked Nexus and/or GPE devices and still have Verizon-like coverage.
oldblue910 said:
Equally as important as the space issue is the "download booster" feature, which is disabled on all the demo devices that are popping up in AT&T stores. I'm going to wait for the actual devices to ship to customers before passing judgment because floor models definitely do have things disabled sometimes. That said, it certainly shouldn't shock anyone that AT&T would want this disabled. Years of history support the idea that they don't want people using their network, and they push people toward WiFI whenever possible. I can just see some corporate goon in a boardroom breaking out in a cold sweat over the idea of people accidentally using download booster and going over their data plans because they didn't realize what they were doing.
Let us not forget this is also the same carrier who disabled installation of non-market APKs on their early Android devices, shipped the Note 2 without the multi-window functionality until enough people raised hell, and removed the Knox security app from the Note 3. This says nothing of the fact that they still manage to get their paws into Nexus devices, successfully getting Google to code in an exception that disables tethering on the Nexus 7 if you have an AT&T SIM card in it. There's no account check or anything else. If you have an AT&T SIM card in your Nexus 7, the tethering option disappears. End of story. Not even Verizon does that. Also, does anyone remember how, for the longest time, AT&T made both Apple and Google disable video chat in Facetime and Hangouts over HSPA+ and LTE, forcing you to use WiFi?
So far, I'm leaving my preorder intact, but if my device doesn't have the download booster feature, I'm returning it. Every time I decide to give a carrier-branded device a chance, it seems I get let down. Even with Nexus devices, AT&T finds a way to let me down (thus why I have my N7 on Verizon). I'm trying to give AT&T the benefit of the doubt on the download booster, but I'm not at all optimistic. :/ I mainly stick with AT&T because they're basically the only choice if you want to use unlocked Nexus and/or GPE devices and still have Verizon-like coverage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said. Personally, I have never used a Nexus device. I have heard bad things about LG's nexus. But I guess it wouldn't be fair of me to judge that device without actually using it. Samsung's TW provides me with exactly what I need. I love the look and a lot of the features. Like you, and as I have already stated, I will keep my pre-order intact and wait until I actually get the device to see for myself if the feature has been disabled or not.
If they do, in fact disable download booster, I probably will go with the international variant. No carrier branding whatsoever. I believe its the same case as in the past. NO LTE, but 21mbps HSPA+ which is fine for my needs. I think loosing LTE may be worth getting an untouched/non-carrier branded Samsung phone. NO limitations, no nothing. Having the ability to have a custom recovery and kernels would be a deal breaker alone. We already know the AT&T S5 will have a locked down bootloader.
One thing I am looking forward to with the AT&T S5 is its support for carrier aggregation. I live in the Chicago land area (one of AT&T's first LTE-A markets). So I am dying to see how much faster my speeds will be.
oldblue910 said:
Equally as important as the space issue is the "download booster" feature, which is disabled on all the demo devices that are popping up in AT&T stores. I'm going to wait for the actual devices to ship to customers before passing judgment because floor models definitely do have things disabled sometimes. That said, it certainly shouldn't shock anyone that AT&T would want this disabled. Years of history support the idea that they don't want people using their network, and they push people toward WiFI whenever possible. I can just see some corporate goon in a boardroom breaking out in a cold sweat over the idea of people accidentally using download booster and going over their data plans because they didn't realize what they were doing.
Let us not forget this is also the same carrier who disabled installation of non-market APKs on their early Android devices, shipped the Note 2 without the multi-window functionality until enough people raised hell, and removed the Knox security app from the Note 3. This says nothing of the fact that they still manage to get their paws into Nexus devices, successfully getting Google to code in an exception that disables tethering on the Nexus 7 if you have an AT&T SIM card in it. There's no account check or anything else. If you have an AT&T SIM card in your Nexus 7, the tethering option disappears. End of story. Not even Verizon does that. Also, does anyone remember how, for the longest time, AT&T made both Apple and Google disable video chat in Facetime and Hangouts over HSPA+ and LTE, forcing you to use WiFi?
So far, I'm leaving my preorder intact, but if my device doesn't have the download booster feature, I'm returning it. Every time I decide to give a carrier-branded device a chance, it seems I get let down. Even with Nexus devices, AT&T finds a way to let me down (thus why I have my N7 on Verizon). I'm trying to give AT&T the benefit of the doubt on the download booster, but I'm not at all optimistic. :/ I mainly stick with AT&T because they're basically the only choice if you want to use unlocked Nexus and/or GPE devices and still have Verizon-like coverage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said. Unlocked devices in the USA pretty much only fully support AT&T frequencies. Sure they may be unlocked, but use any other carrier and you'll end up losing out on one to numerous frequencies.
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
SolarTrans said:
Well said. Unlocked devices in the USA pretty much only fully support AT&T frequencies. Sure they may be unlocked, but use any other carrier and you'll end up losing out on one to numerous frequencies.
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't speak for all unlocked devices, but every Nexus device with a cellular radio fully supports all bands for both AT&T and T-Mobile. In addition, the Nexus 5 fully supports all Sprint CDMA and LTE bands, and the 2013 N7 has full Verizon LTE support.
On the GPE side, you're right. The Moto G and both generations of the HTC One lack support for HSPA+ on the AWS/1700 MHz band, which T-Mobile requires for any area not refarmed to use HSPA+ on the PCS/1900 MHz band.
That said, all GPEs fully support T-Mobile LTE.
Sent from my Z Ultra Google Play Edition using Tapatalk
oldblue910 said:
I can't speak for all unlocked devices, but every Nexus device with a cellular radio fully supports all bands for both AT&T and T-Mobile. In addition, the Nexus 5 fully supports all Sprint CDMA and LTE bands, and the 2013 N7 has full Verizon LTE support.
On the GPE side, you're right. The Moto G and both generations of the HTC One lack support for HSPA+ on the AWS/1700 MHz band, which T-Mobile requires for any area not refarmed to use HSPA+ on the PCS/1900 MHz band.
That said, all GPEs fully support T-Mobile LTE.
Sent from my Z Ultra Google Play Edition using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah that's true I forgot about T-Mobile. Nexus 5 did it right with good carrier support. GPE supporting T-Mobile and AT&T is nice, but nowhere near ideal. Case in point the M8 unlocked and Dev editions only support AT&T. Also, I think the unlocked iPhones support all the US carriers (99% sure).
Point is, to my knowledge, unlocked device support in the USA is like this (greatest adoption to least):
1. AT&T
2. T-Mobile
3. Sprint (very little support)
4. Verizon (pretty much nothing)
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
i'm confused, why doesn't everyone that want bigger memory space to just spend 35 dollars on amazon and get a 64GB micro card? that'd what i did so now when i get my AT&T S5, I'll have a total of 70 GBs free space....
i think you guys are crying way too much about this 16GB deal.
I was wondering if anyone has heard anything on the 5.1.1 update will be released. All of the other major carriers have released it weeks ago so I am expecting it anytime now. Thanks
I don't have any information on the 5.1.1 update from AT&T but I will say that the lack of updates really gives a bad impression of the S6 edge.
I'm testing the waters of switching from AT&T to T-Mobile, sold my G925A, and bought the G925T. The G925T has had 5.1.1 for some time now and T-Mobile just pushed out the latest updates with all known Stagefright vulnerabilities addressed, most of the S6 edge+ updates (App Edge, refreshed icons), Rich Communication Services support, and the Samsung Pay app (not fully enabled yet, though). The phone seems to run the way it was designed with no noticeable lag, overall quicker response (even the fingerprint reader is noticeably faster), and a bit less carrier bloat.
If I end up staying with AT&T, this version unlocked will probably be superior to the AT&T version.
chp said:
I don't have any information on the 5.1.1 update from AT&T but I will say that the lack of updates really gives a bad impression of the S6 edge.
I'm testing the waters of switching from AT&T to T-Mobile, sold my G925A, and bought the G925T. The G925T has had 5.1.1 for some time now and T-Mobile just pushed out the latest updates with all known Stagefright vulnerabilities addressed, most of the S6 edge+ updates (App Edge, refreshed icons), Rich Communication Services support, and the Samsung Pay app (not fully enabled yet, though). The phone seems to run the way it was designed with no noticeable lag, overall quicker response (even the fingerprint reader is noticeably faster), and a bit less carrier bloat.
If I end up staying with AT&T, this version unlocked will probably be superior to the AT&T version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for this excellent comparison - you've confirmed for me exactly what I thought would be the case if I were to go with a G925T over the A, but instead, I think I'm just going to dump this phone off and go with the Nexus 5X (2015) - I won't have to deal with any root issues, any lack of updates anymore, any AT&T BS....
I'm just so sick of how AT&T has treated loyal customers with locked down phones, I just don't have the time to spend screwing with them anymore, not like I did before, but now I'm just fed up with the whole thing - I wish I could say "something has to change," but it never will, customers will just buy locked down phones, suffer through not being able to root them, and forget all about what it was like to have control anymore!
KryptosXLayer2 said:
Thank you for this excellent comparison - you've confirmed for me exactly what I thought would be the case if I were to go with a G925T over the A, but instead, I think I'm just going to dump this phone off and go with the Nexus 5X (2015) - I won't have to deal with any root issues, any lack of updates anymore, any AT&T BS....
I'm just so sick of how AT&T has treated loyal customers with locked down phones, I just don't have the time to spend screwing with them anymore, not like I did before, but now I'm just fed up with the whole thing - I wish I could say "something has to change," but it never will, customers will just buy locked down phones, suffer through not being able to root them, and forget all about what it was like to have control anymore!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's the best way to get rid of it. I am on AT&T Next as well
KryptosXLayer2 said:
Thank you for this excellent comparison - you've confirmed for me exactly what I thought would be the case if I were to go with a G925T over the A, but instead, I think I'm just going to dump this phone off and go with the Nexus 5X (2015) - I won't have to deal with any root issues, any lack of updates anymore, any AT&T BS....
I'm just so sick of how AT&T has treated loyal customers with locked down phones, I just don't have the time to spend screwing with them anymore, not like I did before, but now I'm just fed up with the whole thing - I wish I could say "something has to change," but it never will, customers will just buy locked down phones, suffer through not being able to root them, and forget all about what it was like to have control anymore!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for this info. I totally agree with both chp & KryptosXLayer2 about this issue. I've got a 925A, actually Build G925AUCU2AOF4, using T-Mobile and although I get great reception (I live in a box-canyon and reception on most networks is pretty nil), besides ALL the AT&T bloatware & needless/useless apps I can't remove unless rooted, I can't root this phone! (Also, same issue with the 5.1.1 update not available.) Tried all the options only to learn AT&T hasn't released the file to be able to root it. I'm fed up also and after reading ya'lls comments I think I'll start looking for a 925T as well and dump my 925A. Tired of waiting for AT&T to get with the program...