Related
Hello Is it possible to enable all the T-mobile US carrier features on the Exynos N960F/DS ?
Yes, when I reach 10 posts. I will be able to make a new thread with step by step images.
HERE is the guide, I got to 10 post
https://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-note-9/how-to/note-9-n960fd-dual-sim-csc-change-oxm-t3841000
jgoorn said:
Yes, when I reach 10 posts. I will be able to make a new thread with step by step images.
HERE is the guide, I got to 10 post
https://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-note-9/how-to/note-9-n960fd-dual-sim-csc-change-oxm-t3841000
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there absolutely any way to do it without root? Can't I take the home CSC of a desired rom and flash just that in Odin, keeping everything else as it originally was?
hkalltheway said:
Is there absolutely any way to do it without root? Can't I take the home CSC of a desired rom and flash just that in Odin, keeping everything else as it originally was?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure, I saw something like that on another post but then it was updated 4 pages later to say that method was not functioning. I assume you don't want to trip knox, but if you just don't want root but want custom CSC flash twrp and custom rom with root. Edit files to change csc as shown in my guide, or others guides. then factory reset rom, and reflash without root, and then make odin reset the recovery to stock recovery.
This is all speculation however.
I was very excited to see this as I've been wanting an international Exynos variant due to absolutely 'needing' to have root.
The Million dollar question is "Does the carrier aggregation still exist? ie... Does ALL the bands work perfectly on T-Mobiles network just as it would 1:1 on a TM variant Note 9?"
I along with some other fellow Note 8 owners got the (F) model of the Note 8 last year and we had discovered that the international variants on T-Mobile / US network suffered from carrier aggregation, where it would connect fine to one single frequency, but it would not aggregate properly to where it would not be able to 'hand off' / 'connect to multiple frequencies at once' with the (F) variants....
For those that remember, I went as far as completely disassembling my Note 8 and testing varies antenna cables thinking that it was hardware related, however, it has been concluded that it is a software issues that causes the international variant of the Note 8 to not work properly on US carriers....
Note: If one is in an area with good signal in the US with a (F) variant, it may look like everything is fine and well, however, it is not. Due to the good reception, the (F) variant is connecting only to that one band, whereas with other devices the domestic US variant would have the ability to pick up several bands and aggregate accordingly, where the (F) can't ...
Therefore, the Million dollar question is "Does this carrier aggregation issue still exist on the Note 9?"
The only way to be able to properly test this is for one to have both the T-Mobile Note 9 + the International (F) variant Note 9 and test the bands side by side in multiple areas ... along with checking in the hidden settings to see exactly what bands it is connected to. If they match, great.... if not, then the carrier aggregation still exists.....
While at it, I'll tag my fellow OG partners in Android Fanatics @DeeXii , @butchieboy , @KennyLG123 ....
I doubt it. It will probably be another year or two to get full or near full capability on Samsung modems. Look at all the weird spectrums going up in different countries. And TMobile just got band 71. It will be awhile before we start seeing noticeable effects nationwide for 71. Your optimism is obsessive. When the galaxy note 2 came out all were Exynos chipsets but some had LTE radios. I opted for without mainly because LTE was not fleshed out yet. (and the LTE radios were add on chips and not fully integrated meaning they were battery drainers). I made a good call as did Apple. You also have to consider Qualcomm has a lot more experience than Samsung and Intel in modems and radios. People are so focused on the results or what they can get without thinking through the whole front end of it and what is plausible, necessary and time needed. I am not saying no but again your optimism is obsessive to a fault. Qualcomm hasn't even made a truly international modem yet. (More bands than they can fit in their design and still too many different techs.) How would Samsung do it? It could be done but your battery life would suffer. That's why there are regional phones. Alsooooo, 2g bands are being deprecated in a few places (I think hspa too but nowhere near as much as GPRS/EDGE). To be honest I think it won't be until 2021 at the very least where there will be a few mainstream phones that you could pop in a sim anywhere and get good service across those regions. For now, you have to compromise. LTE is thankfully dropping in the GSM bucket but it needs to be sorted out.
iunlock said:
I was very excited to see this as I've been wanting an international Exynos variant due to absolutely 'needing' to have root.
The Million dollar question is "Does the carrier aggregation still exist? ie... Does ALL the bands work perfectly on T-Mobiles network just as it would 1:1 on a TM variant Note 9?"
I along with some other fellow Note 8 owners got the (F) model of the Note 8 last year and we had discovered that the international variants on T-Mobile / US network suffered from carrier aggregation, where it would connect fine to one single frequency, but it would not aggregate properly to where it would not be able to 'hand off' / 'connect to multiple frequencies at once' with the (F) variants....
For those that remember, I went as far as completely disassembling my Note 8 and testing varies antenna cables thinking that it was hardware related, however, it has been concluded that it is a software issues that causes the international variant of the Note 8 to not work properly on US carriers....
Note: If one is in an area with good signal in the US with a (F) variant, it may look like everything is fine and well, however, it is not. Due to the good reception, the (F) variant is connecting only to that one band, whereas with other devices the domestic US variant would have the ability to pick up several bands and aggregate accordingly, where the (F) can't ...
Therefore, the Million dollar question is "Does this carrier aggregation issue still exist on the Note 9?"
The only way to be able to properly test this is for one to have both the T-Mobile Note 9 + the International (F) variant Note 9 and test the bands side by side in multiple areas ... along with checking in the hidden settings to see exactly what bands it is connected to. If they match, great.... if not, then the carrier aggregation still exists.....
While at it, I'll tag my fellow OG partners in Android Fanatics @DeeXii , @butchieboy , @KennyLG123 ....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I remember that thread very well, kalm_traveller also made adjustments to the antenna . I recall that ultimately carrier aggregation didn't work on international models when used on the USA networks.
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
@rbiter said:
I doubt it. It will probably be another year or two to get full or near full capability on Samsung modems. Look at all the weird spectrums going up in different countries. And TMobile just got band 71. It will be awhile before we start seeing noticeable effects nationwide for 71. Your optimism is obsessive. When the galaxy note 2 came out all were Exynos chipsets but some had LTE radios. I opted for without mainly because LTE was not fleshed out yet. (and the LTE radios were add on chips and not fully integrated meaning they were battery drainers). I made a good call as did Apple. You also have to consider Qualcomm has a lot more experience than Samsung and Intel in modems and radios. People are so focused on the results or what they can get without thinking through the whole front end of it and what is plausible, necessary and time needed. I am not saying no but again your optimism is obsessive to a fault. Qualcomm hasn't even made a truly international modem yet. (More bands than they can fit in their design and still too many different techs.) How would Samsung do it? It could be done but your battery life would suffer. That's why there are regional phones. Alsooooo, 2g bands are being deprecated in a few places (I think hspa too but nowhere near as much as GPRS/EDGE). To be honest I think it won't be until 2021 at the very least where there will be a few mainstream phones that you could pop in a sim anywhere and get good service across those regions. For now, you have to compromise. LTE is thankfully dropping in the GSM bucket but it needs to be sorted out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So how come Apple is doing that since the iPhone 6s unlocked version? Qualcomm Modem and a truly a word.
Doing what?
I would almost guarantee no ca working. Does it really matter? My s8+ still got 12mb download speeds.
Yakuzahi said:
So how come Apple is doing that since the iPhone 6s unlocked version? Qualcomm Modem and a truly a word.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doing what?
iunlock said:
I was very excited to see this as I've been wanting an international Exynos variant due to absolutely 'needing' to have root.
The Million dollar question is "Does the carrier aggregation still exist? ie... Does ALL the bands work perfectly on T-Mobiles network just as it would 1:1 on a TM variant Note 9?"
I along with some other fellow Note 8 owners got the (F) model of the Note 8 last year and we had discovered that the international variants on T-Mobile / US network suffered from carrier aggregation, where it would connect fine to one single frequency, but it would not aggregate properly to where it would not be able to 'hand off' / 'connect to multiple frequencies at once' with the (F) variants....
For those that remember, I went as far as completely disassembling my Note 8 and testing varies antenna cables thinking that it was hardware related, however, it has been concluded that it is a software issues that causes the international variant of the Note 8 to not work properly on US carriers....
Note: If one is in an area with good signal in the US with a (F) variant, it may look like everything is fine and well, however, it is not. Due to the good reception, the (F) variant is connecting only to that one band, whereas with other devices the domestic US variant would have the ability to pick up several bands and aggregate accordingly, where the (F) can't ...
Therefore, the Million dollar question is "Does this carrier aggregation issue still exist on the Note 9?"
The only way to be able to properly test this is for one to have both the T-Mobile Note 9 + the International (F) variant Note 9 and test the bands side by side in multiple areas ... along with checking in the hidden settings to see exactly what bands it is connected to. If they match, great.... if not, then the carrier aggregation still exists.....
While at it, I'll tag my fellow OG partners in Android Fanatics @DeeXii , @butchieboy , @KennyLG123 ....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the F model and tested with both AT&T and T-Mobile. Carrier aggregation works with 2 bands on AT&T (12+2) and while it supports all the other AT&T bands it will not aggregate them. No carrier aggregation at all on T-Mobile (single band only).
You can see the supported CA combos the F model has by looking at the FCC filing of the device (do a google search).
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
@rbiter said:
Doing what?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doing a world phone with smaller battery than the Note line.
So basically it can be done. Samsung can make a world if they want to.
Apple doesn't have a world phone. They have a minimum of 2 phones to do the world. You have to pick your poison of which part. If they do have one, it probably has you covered for calls but not data. Heck any phone has this if data is less a priority and making calls and texts are a higher priority.
There might be obscure world phones but we probably are not privy to it. Satellite phones too of course but price. I actually read an article about Qualcomm's modem and the increase of LTE bands that came out recently talking about RF360 and Intel and Samsung probably not having anything to compete for at least a couple of years. They don't have an all in one solution yet. Close but not world yet. You have China, US and I forgot what part of South America that messes it up. Even though LTE falls under GSM standards I wish they would tighten it up. So many bands across different countries now and you can't keep up. Band 71 for TMobile is not relevant yet unless you live in a market that is getting it because of low or no coverage.
@rbiter said:
I doubt it. It will probably be another year or two to get full or near full capability on Samsung modems. Look at all the weird spectrums going up in different countries. And TMobile just got band 71. It will be awhile before we start seeing noticeable effects nationwide for 71. Your optimism is obsessive. When the galaxy note 2 came out all were Exynos chipsets but some had LTE radios. I opted for without mainly because LTE was not fleshed out yet. (and the LTE radios were add on chips and not fully integrated meaning they were battery drainers). I made a good call as did Apple. You also have to consider Qualcomm has a lot more experience than Samsung and Intel in modems and radios. People are so focused on the results or what they can get without thinking through the whole front end of it and what is plausible, necessary and time needed. I am not saying no but again your optimism is obsessive to a fault. Qualcomm hasn't even made a truly international modem yet. (More bands than they can fit in their design and still too many different techs.) How would Samsung do it? It could be done but your battery life would suffer. That's why there are regional phones. Alsooooo, 2g bands are being deprecated in a few places (I think hspa too but nowhere near as much as GPRS/EDGE). To be honest I think it won't be until 2021 at the very least where there will be a few mainstream phones that you could pop in a sim anywhere and get good service across those regions. For now, you have to compromise. LTE is thankfully dropping in the GSM bucket but it needs to be sorted out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your lack of optimism is obsessive and at fault. What's wrong with being optimistic and having hope? Most of us are just wanting a simple root on the SD variant of the Note 9, whether it be a samfail method or whatever, we'll take it.
The US variant Note 5 was Exynos and worked just fine, so its not impossible for an Exynos equipped phone to work on US carriers. After all, most of the newer phones have a wide range of frequencies that it can support. Sure some phones are set regionally, but you're aware that there are dual SIM phones right?
If you were familiar with the F model Note 8 that some of us got and have tested last year, then my post would have made more sense to you.
suzook said:
I would almost guarantee no ca working. Does it really matter? My s8+ still got 12mb download speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it does matter, because with out the ability for the phone to hand off and/or merge the signals, for those in areas where the reception is sketchy, it'd become major headache.
clubtech said:
I have the F model and tested with both AT&T and T-Mobile. Carrier aggregation works with 2 bands on AT&T (12+2) and while it supports all the other AT&T bands it will not aggregate them. No carrier aggregation at all on T-Mobile (single band only).
You can see the supported CA combos the F model has by looking at the FCC filing of the device (do a google search).
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey @clubtech, thanks for reiterating. Yea that was the case exactly as you've described.... I was getting the same results on TM on the F variant. I'm aware of the fcc filings, but the curiosity stems from the potential possibility...
Is this a possible lead to get CA working on N960F/DS?
https://www.reddit.com/r/GalaxyS8/comments/75ru94/root_exynos_galaxy_s8_how_to_get_carrier/
I've tried this method but just get these two lines without the menu popping up as instructed.
Broadcasting: Intent { act=android.provider.Telephony.SECRET_CODE dat=android_secret_code://27663368378 flg=0x400000 }
Broadcast completed: result=0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am most likely doing something wrong or these devices are somehow further locked down. I'm rooted, connected adb, etc. as the instructions say with no success.
Techronico said:
Is this a possible lead to get CA working on N960F/DS?
https://www.reddit.com/r/GalaxyS8/comments/75ru94/root_exynos_galaxy_s8_how_to_get_carrier/
I've tried this method but just get these two lines without the menu popping up as instructed.
I am most likely doing something wrong or these devices are somehow further locked down. I'm rooted, connected adb, etc. as the instructions say with no success.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mind sharing more info? I'm willing to try it with my device, I'll make a full backup and give it a go! Anything for even better reception!
jgoorn said:
Mind sharing more info? I'm willing to try it with my device, I'll make a full backup and give it a go! Anything for even better reception!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried using the dialer codes *#0011# and *#2263# first to get an idea of what I was looking at. These are mentioned further down in the Reddit thread by other users.
Apparently the code mentioned in the Reddit thread OP is a more advanced code that was removed/disabled from being activated from the dialer several iterations of Samsung devices ago...(ie. It now requires root, can only be activated from adb or terminal).
My theory is that Samsung has now fully gimped it or further hid the activation method. This method apparently worked on the Note 8...
Techronico said:
I tried using the dialer codes *#0011# and *#2263# first to get an idea of what I was looking at. These are mentioned further down in the Reddit thread by other users.
Apparently the code mentioned in the Reddit thread OP is a more advanced code that was removed/disabled from being activated from the dialer several iterations of Samsung devices ago...(ie. It now requires root, can only be activated from adb or terminal).
My theory is that Samsung has now fully gimped it or further hid the activation method. This method apparently worked on the Note 8...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, I'm the author of that thread and I also have an Exynos s9+ which is same as the Note 9.
The menu is indeed completely disabled, you can't get to it even with adb or root.
There is a way to activate it, but it will not fix our issue. I've been trying for weeks.
We have a problem that started out on the Note 8, and that is the phone is not reporting the correct supported aggregation combos to the cell tower.
Using the menu, my phone does not support 4+12 however it reports 2+12 and I get carrier aggregation when I disable B4.
So far j haven't found a way to change those combos. At this point I'm very sure it grabs them from the CSC. I've been experimenting and have been unsuccessful so far
The S8 reported the correct combos out of the box, however the ill configured 3xCA was stopping it from working, disabling 3xCA made 2xCA work perfectly.
Our issue here is just were missing those combos so no matter what the phone will not do 4+12 even though the hardware is fully capable.
If anyone knows how to change combos, pm me or reply here, thanks.
Interceptor777 said:
Hey, I'm the author of that thread and I also have an Exynos s9+ which is same as the Note 9.
The menu is indeed completely disabled, you can't get to it even with adb or root.
There is a way to activate it, but it will not fix our issue. I've been trying for weeks.
We have a problem that started out on the Note 8, and that is the phone is not reporting the correct supported aggregation combos to the cell tower.
Using the menu, my phone does not support 4+12 however it reports 2+12 and I get carrier aggregation when I disable B4.
So far j haven't found a way to change those combos. At this point I'm very sure it grabs them from the CSC. I've been experimenting and have been unsuccessful so far
The S8 reported the correct combos out of the box, however the ill configured 3xCA was stopping it from working, disabling 3xCA made 2xCA work perfectly.
Our issue here is just were missing those combos so no matter what the phone will not do 4+12 even though the hardware is fully capable.
If anyone knows how to change combos, pm me or reply here, thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will totally donate to you if you can get this to work some how! It's pretty much the last feature I'm looking at as a "This phone is perfect except for X".
I am thinking of getting n9600 for use on t-mobile and at&t
Will losing B71 band mean too much of a hassle, or I won't even feel it?
Any ideas?
Anybody here using that. I am gravitating towards that due to dual sim
tsk1979 said:
I am thinking of getting n9600 for use on t-mobile and at&t
Will losing B71 band mean too much of a hassle, or I won't even feel it?
Any ideas?
Anybody here using that. I am gravitating towards that due to dual sim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm using n9600 in bay area with simple mobile (tmobile network) and get calls, sms/mms and lte data out of the box.
I didn't have to but i flashed detonator anyway for the wifi calling, Volte and video calling. I don't ever use those but it's nice to know it's there.
Seeing as the N9600 is a Snapdragon device, you should be able to use it in the states without any issues.
iceepyon said:
Seeing as the N9600 is a Snapdragon device, you should be able to use it in the states without any issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is
1. No CDMA
2. Some bands like B71 missing. Am wondering if it won't be too much of a hassle
iceepyon said:
Seeing as the N9600 is a Snapdragon device, you should be able to use it in the states without any issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Misleading and oversimplified statement...there's more to it than simply Snapdragon or Exynos.
I just got one (n9600) for Metro by TMobile. Would love video calling, volte, Samsung pay. Any ideas?
tsk1979 said:
The problem is
1. No CDMA
2. Some bands like B71 missing. Am wondering if it won't be too much of a hassle
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's going to depend on where you are whether the missing bands are going to be a hassle or not. I live in an almost purely Band71 area so it would be almost useless to me at home, however I travel to areas where it's band 4 so it wouldn't be an issue there. So the question is, where do you plan to use it the most?
Based on my past experience, when I used an AT&T unlocked Note 4 and S5 with a Tracfone sim(T-Mobile as the underlying carrier), I would have sporadic calling issues with no audio during phone calls. When I made or received calls, the other person could not hear me or I couldn't hear them. In some instances, we couldn't hear each other. Data was always working good and displaying 4G LTE and SMS always worked. I even had the band set to LTE/GSM after trying Automatic. (https://support.t-mobile.com/thread/140917)
I switched the Tracfone T-Mobile sims with Tracfone AT&T sims and all of these call issues disappeared. Of course, I had to set the band back to Automatic. And set the APN to get 4G LTE. When considering this issue, it leads me to this question:
Since I have the opportunity to purchase any brand of unlocked Note 8 and use it with either of my Tracfone sims (AT&T or T-Mobile), which Note 8 model do you recommend for the best experience considering phone-to-carrier compatibility and less importantly, bloatware/Android speed?
My first choice is the SM-N950F which doesn't have any bloatware, but I'm not sure how seamless it would work in terms of network/band/data compatibility issues. I'm researching this now. Any input on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Graz
Basically I learned when using the international SM-N950F with any U.S. carrier including Tracfone, you will not get certain features these carriers offer: Visual VM, WIFI Calling, Video Calling. So why even bother buying a branded AT&T or T-Mob Note 8 because all of the bloatware included on these phones won't be able to be used anyway for these features, nor will I get OTA security updates with a Tracfone sim.
So, I'm thinking the SM-N950F or even the U.S. unlocked unbranded Note 8 may work better because they don't have the bloatware I can't use anyway. But which if any, would work better in terms of calling, banding, or data compatibilities with a Tracfone sim(AT&T or T-Mob underlying carrier)?
Thanks, Graz
---------------------------------
EDIT: So far (and I may be wrong) I learned:
It seems the International (SM-N950F) version and U.S. Unlocked version (SM-N950U1) can both be rooted but it seems there's more info on rooting the SM-N950F by Max Lee.
The International (SM-N950F) sometimes may not come with a manufacturer's warranty depending on were you buy it from.
Both Note 8s will work with U.S. carriers, but according this page, the U.S. Unlocked version (SM-N950U1) has more bands/frequencies. https://www.techwalls.com/samsung-galaxy-note-8-sm-n950-model-number-differences/
---------------------------------
EDIT AGAIN: What I decided to to was purchase the ATT branded SM-N950U and flash one of the following UNLOCKED firmwares to it to remove bloat:
XAA This firmware will provide for a bare bones, no bloat experience
ATT or TFN: These will have some carrier files, but very little bloat. Not sure if these unlocked firmwares will provide features like WIFI Calling/ VOLTE.
I have an up to date verizon note 9 although still paying for it I had it on their service for over 6 months so legally allowed to use on another service currently using it on cricket with no issues other than no VOlte which I've never had with cricket no matter what phone because I won't use the phones they have because I don't like them but that's another story....Since I can't get volte on my Verizon model note 9 that's fully updated for US I was wanting to switch to tmobile...I was set up with a sim card on their magenta plus plan worked great till I got to my home which is in a more rural area but did show verified coverage at driveway on their map I had no signal so I went to settings searched for mobile networks found tmobile listed registered and it connected like 2 bars LTE but within min lost service did it again lost service again while I had lte I was able to call and use data...so my question is could this be me using a verizon phone for it not latching on by itself or holding the signal I know note 9 has the 600mhz band but was wandering if I went ahead and got a tmobile phone if it would actually latch on and hold the signal that Verizon's addons and changing is playing well with tmobile...UNLESS someone can tell me how to get VOlte on cricket with this note 9 then I wouldn't need tmobile then 3g calling has went to crap over a year....thankyou for any input
Terasman210 said:
I have an up to date verizon note 9 although still paying for it I had it on their service for over 6 months so legally allowed to use on another service currently using it on cricket with no issues other than no VOlte which I've never had with cricket no matter what phone because I won't use the phones they have because I don't like them but that's another story....Since I can't get volte on my Verizon model note 9 that's fully updated for US I was wanting to switch to tmobile...I was set up with a sim card on their magenta plus plan worked great till I got to my home which is in a more rural area but did show verified coverage at driveway on their map I had no signal so I went to settings searched for mobile networks found tmobile listed registered and it connected like 2 bars LTE but within min lost service did it again lost service again while I had lte I was able to call and use data...so my question is could this be me using a verizon phone for it not latching on by itself or holding the signal I know note 9 has the 600mhz band but was wandering if I went ahead and got a tmobile phone if it would actually latch on and hold the signal that Verizon's addons and changing is playing well with tmobile...UNLESS someone can tell me how to get VOlte on cricket with this note 9 then I wouldn't need tmobile then 3g calling has went to crap over a year....thankyou for any input
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All N960U and N960U1 devices are EXACTLY the same. The only difference between the devices is software.
Flash the software for the carrier your running including the Userdata for you Note 9. It should work for all features especially on T-Mobile. T-Movile fully allows unlocked devices on their network whereas Verizon doesn't. I'm pretty sure at&t is like Verizon through when it comes to unlocked devices, and they own cricket so that rule probably trickles down to them as well.
You can get all carrier version of software for your Note 9 on samfirm or sammobile
Jammol said:
All N960U and N960U1 devices are EXACTLY the same. The only difference between the devices is software.
Flash the software for the carrier your running including the Userdata for you Note 9. It should work for all features especially on T-Mobile. T-Movile fully allows unlocked devices on their network whereas Verizon doesn't. I'm pretty sure at&t is like Verizon through when it comes to unlocked devices, and they own cricket so that rule probably trickles down to them as well.
You can get all carrier version of software for your Note 9 on samfirm or sammobile
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But my question would be would my phone latch on to tmobile towers using tmobile firmware better than my current state using verizon firmware I'm excluding wifi calling and volte just trying to determine if I would have a difference in service availability picking up towers and holding them with stronger lte signal or if it's just poor coverage both ways and will be no different than you for your advice as well
Terasman210 said:
But my question would be would my phone latch on to tmobile towers using tmobile firmware better than my current state using verizon firmware I'm excluding wifi calling and volte just trying to determine if I would have a difference in service availability picking up towers and holding them with stronger lte signal or if it's just poor coverage both ways and will be no different than you for your advice as well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You will not have a difference in coverage. T-Mobile did the same thing with where I live and listed it on their map as being fully covered. I barely get LTE at my house or anywhere in my neighborhood.
Jammol said:
You will not have a difference in coverage. T-Mobile did the same thing with where I live and listed it on their map as being fully covered. I barely get LTE at my house or anywhere in my neighborhood.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay thank you for saving me the trouble of doing firmware swap or just buying a phone from them just to try and have same result and have to return....man I wish cricket would sell the note 10 or 9 where I could get the volte...but thankyou for your time
Terasman210 said:
Okay thank you for saving me the trouble of doing firmware swap or just buying a phone from them just to try and have same result and have to return....man I wish cricket would sell the note 10 or 9 where I could get the volte...but thankyou for your time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You will never know until you try it, so why not try it and find out? Make it an SM-N960U1. Debloated and ready to go with any sim you install. Flash the unbranded firmware that can work on any of the US providers. That's what I have, and when I loaded a T-Mobile sim, I got VoLTE and wifi calling. I've run a lot of custom firmwares in the past, but this is the best phone and firmware combo I've ever had. And it's pure stock.
Also, this stock One UI with dark mode is very slick. VERY! No Substratum, no themes, no fuss. Just clean and black.
gruuvin said:
You will never know until you try it, so why not try it and find out? Make it an SM-N960U1. Debloated and ready to go with any sim you install. Flash the unbranded firmware that can work on any of the US providers. That's what I have, and when I loaded a T-Mobile sim, I got VoLTE and wifi calling. I've run a lot of custom firmwares in the past, but this is the best phone and firmware combo I've ever had. And it's pure stock.
Also, this stock One UI with dark mode is very slick. VERY! No Substratum, no themes, no fuss. Just clean and black.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
His goal is better service reception.
Only the carrier can fix that by actually providing the coverage they put on their maps.
Jammol said:
His goal is better service reception.
Only the carrier can fix that by actually providing the coverage they put on their maps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lots of people have reported better or worse quality service, all other things equal except for firmware/software: different radios enabled/disabled; different optimizations. I just read another thread where someone got better tmobile reception at his house after flashing tmobile software over US unlocked software. There are more variables than just the carrier side of things.
gruuvin said:
Lots of people have reported better or worse quality service, all other things equal except for firmware/software: different radios enabled/disabled; different optimizations. I just read another thread where someone got better tmobile reception at his house after flashing tmobile software over US unlocked software. There are more variables than just the carrier side of things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thankyou then that kinda answers my question that although phones are equal between verizon version and unlocked internally and firmware being the difference that using a tmobile phone with their firmware I'd stand the best chance of service and since my area uses extended range area I would probably have a better experience than on my note 9 verizon...thankyou again
Terasman210 said:
Thankyou then that kinda answers my question that although phones are equal between verizon version and unlocked internally and firmware being the difference that using a tmobile phone with their firmware I'd stand the best chance of service and since my area uses extended range area I would probably have a better experience than on my note 9 verizon...thankyou again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. I think it may make no difference at all, or it might (much to gain, but nothing to lose), but most of the evidence in these forums, when it comes to connection quality, is extremely variable and anecdotal. Nobody can know an answer to this kind of question, unless they test it out for themselves. Good luck!
Carrier Unlocked vs. Factory Unlocked vs. Carrier & eBay adamant GSM & CDMA different
Carriers and vendors on eBay have been adamant that a SM-N960U phone is different, and you cannot use Note 9 phones that came from GSM wireless providers on a CDMA networks and vice-versa. They become incensed and assume a position of superiority at the very suggestion that the differences between network today are often handled by changing firmware. With all of the US Note 9s being the same hardware, this is my take on where they are coming from.
1. If it says carrier unlocked for example: AT&T, it will only be compatible with GSM networks (GSM networks---AT&T, T-Mobile, Cricket, MetroPCS by T-Mobile) - My interpretation is that's only true if you don't flash SPR, VZW, or XAA/U1 firmware, and even then that is not necessarily true in the 4G range.
2. If it says factory unlocked, it will work with all networks-- both CDMA and GSM - My interpretation of that is, it seems their idea of "Factory Unlocked", actually means the phone is running the XAA/U1 firmware.
3. Their refusal to even entertain the possibility of a single model with different firmware working across all of the US networks stems from a long history of cell phone models only being able work with a single wireless provider's bands and proprietary technology.
Correct me if I'm wrong in my logic.
IT_Architect said:
Carriers and vendors on eBay have been adamant that a SM-N960U phone is different, and you cannot use Note 9 phones that came from GSM wireless providers on a CDMA networks and vice-versa. They become incensed and assume a position of superiority at the very suggestion that the differences between network today are often handled by changing firmware. With all of the US Note 9s being the same hardware, this is my take on where they are coming from.
1. If it says carrier unlocked for example: AT&T, it will only be compatible with GSM networks (GSM networks---AT&T, T-Mobile, Cricket, MetroPCS by T-Mobile) - My interpretation is that's only true if you don't flash SPR, VZW, or XAA/U1 firmware, and even then that is not necessarily true in the 4G range.
2. If it says factory unlocked, it will work with all networks-- both CDMA and GSM - My interpretation of that is, it seems their idea of "Factory Unlocked", actually means the phone is running the XAA/U1 firmware.
3. Their refusal to even entertain the possibility of a single model with different firmware working across all of the US networks stems from a long history of cell phone models only being able work with a single wireless provider's bands and proprietary technology.
Correct me if I'm wrong in my logic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you can accurately generalize "them".
IT_Architect said:
Carriers and vendors on eBay have been adamant that a SM-N960U phone is different, and you cannot use Note 9 phones that came from GSM wireless providers on a CDMA networks and vice-versa. They become incensed and assume a position of superiority at the very suggestion that the differences between network today are often handled by changing firmware. With all of the US Note 9s being the same hardware, this is my take on where they are coming from.
1. If it says carrier unlocked for example: AT&T, it will only be compatible with GSM networks (GSM networks---AT&T, T-Mobile, Cricket, MetroPCS by T-Mobile) - My interpretation is that's only true if you don't flash SPR, VZW, or XAA/U1 firmware, and even then that is not necessarily true in the 4G range.
2. If it says factory unlocked, it will work with all networks-- both CDMA and GSM - My interpretation of that is, it seems their idea of "Factory Unlocked", actually means the phone is running the XAA/U1 firmware.
3. Their refusal to even entertain the possibility of a single model with different firmware working across all of the US networks stems from a long history of cell phone models only being able work with a single wireless provider's bands and proprietary technology.
Correct me if I'm wrong in my logic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i wouldint be surprised that alot of the postings on ebay have the same device under different carriers or just simply generically stated as unlocked. they want more than just 1 result popping up to make it as visible as possible. whether this is legal or not is something to debate with ebay. but i wouldint be surprised savvy vendors would be doing this and depending on which posting was bought, would simply flash carrier firmware or u1 firmware. there are also the ones posting 2nd hand handsets that might have initially been on one build and and along the way was flashed and sold under its original device banner because they looked up product code/serial and sold it as that. also not to mention phones still on contract which can be a time bomb.
Ebay's a jungle. but if you know your rights and have the right arguments to prove your case, you can return almost anything. and if that doesn't work, 2nd stage is a case with paypal.
bober10113 said:
i wouldint be surprised...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've also been noticing the fine print on the listings that quite a few "good deals" state in the fine print that it is on a contract.
I'm just sticking with there is no difference in the hardware and they are all the same hardware all capable of the GSM and CMDA bands with the proper firmware, no matter what they say about not being able to work with Verizon, and that I can take it to Verizon or T-Mobile. The only thing I might believe is one of them who said it work work with everyone but Sprint, whose issue is most likely based on an IMEI restriction than any capability of the phone.
IT_Architect said:
I've also been noticing the fine print on the listings that quite a few "good deals" state in the fine print that it is on a contract.
I'm just sticking with there is no difference in the hardware and they are all the same hardware all capable of the GSM and CMDA bands with the proper firmware, no matter what they say about not being able to work with Verizon, and that I can take it to Verizon or T-Mobile. The only thing I might believe is one of them who said it work work with everyone but Sprint, whose issue is most likely based on an IMEI restriction than any capability of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
or on some mdm lockdown as its a rental phone or something and flashing is not an option.
bober10113 said:
or on some mdm lockdown as its a rental phone or something and flashing is not an option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is good to know.
Thanks!
Just bought a refurb Note 9 from Amazon...
I realize this is an old thread.... but it is just what I've been wondering.
I bought a Samsung Note 9 phone, labeled (somewhat conflictingly) as completely unlocked but (later on) as only a GSM phone. The model number on the phone is N960U1. That's on a printed label on back of the phone and in the software settings (UI 2.0, as 2.1 hasn't come out yet with this model and T-Mobile[??]). However, I note that lifting the sticky label, the original on chassis number beneath it is N960U (a carrier specific phone).
I thought I knew about phones - I've flashed two other (make that 3 other including my wife's) older Samsung Note phones w/ custom roms because I was tired of being back with Marshmallow.
But fundamental questions I have:
1. Is the N960U phone the exact same phone hardware wise as the N960U1?
2. In other words, is the software lock the *only* difference between these phones?
3. And does that mean I could presumably, once my phone (unlocked by whatever provider once had it locked) is identified as an N960U1, run it on GSM, CDMA, and have access to any and all services offered by whatever provider I choose?
And finally, which is where I began all this, will this phone update to the UI 2.1 eventually as an unlocked phone with that specific (still not available) N960U1 update? Or is the phone in some state of being "neither fish nor foul" - that is, not *really* a fully unlocked phone?
I am asking all this because I could still send it back to Amazon if it is less than it ought to be and get something else.
It is currently running the June UI 2.0 update from T-Mobile....
Thanks for any thoughts. The deeper one digs, the more questions come up.
shonkin said:
1. Is the N960U phone the exact same phone hardware wise as the N960U1?
2. In other words, is the software lock the *only* difference between these phones?
3. And does that mean I could presumably, once my phone (unlocked by whatever provider once had it locked) is identified as an N960U1, run it on GSM, CDMA, and have access to any and all services offered by whatever provider I choose?
4. And finally, which is where I began all this, will this phone update to the UI 2.1 eventually as an unlocked phone with that specific (still not available) N960U1 update? Or is the phone in some state of being "neither fish nor foul" - that is, not *really* a fully unlocked phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Yes
2. The U vs. U1 is not indicative of a lock vs. no lock. U phones can be unlocked or locked. The U firmware is wireless-provider-specific firmware. It could be Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T, etc. Each have their own firmware to work with their specific networks. They will also force updates on you whether you want them or not. The U1 firmware is standards-compliant support. The better the wireless provider supports the standards, the better U1 works. T-Mobile supports it perfectly but has some loss of functionality with allied vendors. You may never notice. Next, is Verizon. Verizon was CDMA, so its 3rd gen stuff won't work like the GSM networks will because they don't have any anymore. However, all of the 4G will, and Verizon has more 4G coverage than any of the others have 2+3+4G coverage. Thus, you don't miss the 3G like you would AT&T who is 25%-30% less than 4G, but AT&T has always been GSM so coverage-wise it is close to Verizon. For standards compliance for U1, AT&T is dead last by far, and if that isn't enough, the most resistant to accept a phone not sold by them. If you do not buy a new phone through a wireless provider, it will be a U1 phone. With a U1 phone you can prevent it from updating if you hold your mouth right. You cannot stop a U phone from updating. Other countries were behind the US so they tend to be more standards-compliant because they weren't as heavily in the game when the innovation was taking place. That means for traveling and swapping SIMs for different foreign carriers, you would want the U1. The Note 9 is the first Note with about every band known to man like the iPhone.
3. Yes
4. If the phone was purchased as a U1, it is undoubtedly unlocked because the seller is not selling it on a contract, and has no idea which network the phone will be used on.
Everything I've read, the 960U /U1 are the same hardware. To support that, their firmware modules are the same except one that is carrier-specific. The U1 for the Note 9 is not carrier specific. I had a T-Mobile Note 9 that I used on the Verizon network with no issues. I have a Verizon Note 9 now, and there is no difference. The only reason I have the Verizon Note 9 now is because the brand new T-Mobile one, still sealed in the box and with the protective film on it, ended up on the bad MEID list. Apparently someone bought it and brought it back without using it and stopped paying on it and thought they were out of the contract by doing so. The Verizon U phone that I have now has been flashed to U1 and works fine on their network. So the advantage of the U is its supports all of your carrier's services. The U1 supports all of your carrier's services that are standards-based and don't use carrier-specific services. Example, if the carrier supports support VoLTE, U1 will not usually support it because it must coordinate with the carrier's servers while U will. They say the U1 doesn't have the carrier bloatware. I don't agree. The carrier-specific added services are designed to work with their servers. Moreover, in the areas that need to be filled in, you get the basic programs from Samsung to replace the more capable ones you get from the carrier. I use U1 because I need to stop them from updating me due to my line-of-business software on my phone and for International travel when I replace the SIM with a local network SIM. If that's not you, and you want the latest for your carrier, U is what you want.
IT_Architect said:
1. Yes
2. The U vs. U1 is not indicative of a lock vs. no lock. U phones can be unlocked or locked. The U firmware is wireless-provider-specific firmware. It could be Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T, etc. Each have their own firmware to work with their specific networks. They will also force updates on you whether you want them or not. The U1 firmware is standards-compliant support. The better the wireless provider supports the standards, the better U1 works. T-Mobile supports it perfectly but has some loss of functionality with allied vendors. You may never notice. Next, is Verizon. Verizon was CDMA, so its 3rd gen stuff won't work like the GSM networks will because they don't have any anymore. However, all of the 4G will, and Verizon has more 4G coverage than any of the others have 2+3+4G coverage. Thus, you don't miss the 3G like you would AT&T who is 25%-30% 3G, but AT&T has always been GSM so coverage-wise it is close to Verizon. For compatibility U1, AT&T is dead last by far. If you do not buy a new phone through a wireless provider, it will be a U1 phone. With a U1 phone you can prevent it from updating if you hold your mouth right. You cannot stop a U phone from updating. Other countries were behind the US so they tend to be more standards-compliant because they weren't as heavily in the game when the innovation was taking place. That means for traveling and swapping SIMs for different foreign carriers, you would want the U1. The Note 9 is the first Note with about every band known to man like the iPhone.
3. Yes
4. If the phone was purchased as a U1, it is undoubtedly unlocked because the seller is not selling it on a contract, and has no idea which network the phone will be used on.
Everything I've read, the 960U /U1 are the same hardware. To support that, their firmware modules are the same except one that is carrier-specific. The U1 for the Note 9 is not carrier specific. I had a T-Mobile Note 9 that I used on the Verizon network with no issues. I have a Verizon Note 9 now, and there is no difference. The only reason I have the Verizon Note 9 now is because the brand new T-Mobile one, still sealed in the box and with the protective film on it, ended up on the bad MEID list. Apparently someone bought it and brought it back without using it and thought they were out of the contract by doing so. The Verizon U phone that I have now has been flashed to U1 and works fine on their network. So the advantage of the U is its supports all of your carrier's services. The U1 supports all of your carrier's services that are standards-based and don't use carrier-specific services. Example, if the carrier supports support VoLTE, U1 will not usually support it because it coordinates with the carrier's servers while U will. They say the U1 doesn't have the carrier bloatware. I don't agree. The carrier-specific added services are designed to work with their servers. I use U1 because I need to stop them from updating me due to my line-of-business software on my phone and for International travel when I replace the SIM with a local network SIM. If that's not you, and you want the latest for your carrier, U is what you want.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for this. Very helpful. I'm not sure yet whether I'll send the phone back.
UPDATE: Samsung released the T-Mobile update to UI 2.1 (dated July 7) today, August 11 2020.
NOTE: I installed this and hit an issue after the install completed re an error message (see photo). This error apparently is happening in a widespread way, and the 3 solutions offered by Samsung did not work. What *did* (I think) work for me was to go to Settings > Software Update > UICC Unlock. Beneath that button on the N960UI it reads (as it should) "Your device is unlocked to support any sim." I click it anyway and I get a report that my device sim is restricted, bla bla bla. I hit the "OK" and reboot the phone to see... and sure enough, that's all it apparently took to remove the annoying nag about the install not having completed. In fact I get a successful "handshake" message between T-Mobile and the phone having formed a more perfect union or some such.
shonkin said:
Thank you for this. Very helpful. I'm not sure yet whether I'll send the phone back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can flash between any carrier U and U1 firmware at any time. The only thing you need to be aware of is the boot loader version, which is the 5th character from the right in the build number.
- It must be the same number or higher.
- You cannot flash backwards to a lower number.
E.G. You can flash from a newer version of Android to an older version PROVIDED the older version does not have a lower boot loader version. If flashing the newer version of Android changed the boot loader version to a higher version than the older operating system supports, you cannot flash to the older version of Android ever again. The boot loader version is not synched with the the Android version. It is synched with the particular build. Thus, you might get an update to the current operating system that increments your boot loader. If you like to always be on the latest version of firmware, this is no likely to be a problem.
For the SM-N960U/U1 phones, the various carrier versions, U, and the U1 version are released at the same time. A lot of standardization has occurred and made possible by the hardware being the same. In the U1 versions for the SM-N960 you will see carrier names associated with different downloads. It's all bogus. The downloads are all exactly the same with the same module names, size, and the same MD5 signature.
IT_Architect said:
You can flash between any carrier U and U1 firmware at any time. The only thing you need to be aware of is the boot loader version, which is the 5th character from the right in the build number.
- It must be the same number or higher.
- You cannot flash backwards to a lower number.
E.G. You can flash from a newer version of Android to an older version PROVIDED the older version does not have a lower boot loader version. If flashing the newer version of Android changed the boot loader version to a higher version than the older operating system supports, you cannot flash to the older version of Android ever again. The boot loader version is not synched with the the Android version. It is synched with the particular build. Thus, you might get an update to the current operating system that increments your boot loader. If you like to always be on the latest version of firmware, this is no likely to be a problem.
For the SM-N960U/U1 phones, the various carrier versions, U, and the U1 version are released at the same time. A lot of standardization has occurred and made possible by the hardware being the same. In the U1 versions for the SM-N960 you will see carrier names associated with different downloads. It's all bogus. The downloads are all exactly the same with the same module names, size, and the same MD5 signature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
VERY helpful info here.... as of this morning Samsung updated my phone w/ UI 2.1 T-Mobile files. I posted on it elsewhere as a recurring error popped up. Surfing the web shows that error cropped up for all sorts of people doing the 2.1 update on various carriers. I *think* I found the solution but have posted it enough places (including a few posts back in this thread) I won't do again unless someone here wants it. Samsung's "solutions" (all three of them) do not work. Oh, I think I'll hold on to this phone rather than switch out for a T-Mobile specific... gives me more lattitude down the road when I feel like rooting it. Ha!
shonkin said:
VERY helpful info here.... as of this morning Samsung updated my phone w/ UI 2.1 T-Mobile files. I posted on it elsewhere as a recurring error popped up. Surfing the web shows that error cropped up for all sorts of people doing the 2.1 update on various carriers. I *think* I found the solution but have posted it enough places (check other threads here) I won't do again unless someone here wants it. Samsung's "solutions" (all three of them) do not work. Oh, I think I'll hold on to this phone rather than switch out for a T-Mobile specific... gives me more lattitude down the road when I feel like rooting it. Ha!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as the difference between the one you have and T-Mobile, there isn't any difference. If you want T-Mobile specific, simply flash their firmware. The upside nearly all of T-Mobile's network was late to the game so their network had little non-standards-based legacy to deal with and thus works very will with the U1 firmware as well. You can always switch back and forth. Different carriers have different MEID ranges. A few carriers, such as AT&T might deny you based on that number not being theirs, but it is not a phone capability issue since the hardware is the same.
You cannot root any of the U phones at this time that I'm aware of. There has been talk and they've been able to do it soft of but not without serious snags in functionality. All N960s sold in the US are U/U1 phones with the SnapDragon processor. There is a SnapDragon that is rootable and dual-SIM, the SM-N9600. In China you may not sell a phone that is not rootable. However, that phone is also used in many other countries. It should work with T-Mobile too, BUT there may be some performance limitations because it might not support all of their bands. Verizon won't accept it initially, BUT a lot of people have activated the SIM on an approved phone, and then moved the SIM the SM-N9600 and it works fine. The SM-N9600 supports all of Verizon's LTE bands. The downside is you cannot use Samsung Pay, the best pay system out there. The SM-N9600 is in demand which affects the price. It is a good world phone with SnapDragon/Qualcomm and a well implemented Dual SIM. You may see it said that the SM-N9600 doesn't work on a CDMA network. That may be, but Verizon has hardly any CDMA left themselves because the FCC is kicking them off it. They won't have any by year end and were supposed to be and almost were by year-end last year. There is more to the game than GSM vs. CDMA. It is also support for the major specific band for the carrier that is used to log you into their network, which is independent of which band you will communicate on. That is a potential show stopper. About the only place in the world where the SM-N9600 has any issues is in the US. If you can get your carrier to work with it, you are pretty much golden for the rest of the world.
IT_Architect said:
1. Yes
2. The U vs. U1 is not indicative of a lock vs. no lock. U phones can be unlocked or locked. The U firmware is wireless-provider-specific firmware. It could be Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T, etc. Each have their own firmware to work with their specific networks. They will also force updates on you whether you want them or not. The U1 firmware is standards-compliant support. The better the wireless provider supports the standards, the better U1 works. T-Mobile supports it perfectly but has some loss of functionality with allied vendors. You may never notice. Next, is Verizon. Verizon was CDMA, so its 3rd gen stuff won't work like the GSM networks will because they don't have any anymore. However, all of the 4G will, and Verizon has more 4G coverage than any of the others have 2+3+4G coverage. Thus, you don't miss the 3G like you would AT&T who is 25%-30% less than 4G, but AT&T has always been GSM so coverage-wise it is close to Verizon. For standards compliance for U1, AT&T is dead last by far, and if that isn't enough, the most resistant to accept a phone not sold by them. If you do not buy a new phone through a wireless provider, it will be a U1 phone. With a U1 phone you can prevent it from updating if you hold your mouth right. You cannot stop a U phone from updating. Other countries were behind the US so they tend to be more standards-compliant because they weren't as heavily in the game when the innovation was taking place. That means for traveling and swapping SIMs for different foreign carriers, you would want the U1. The Note 9 is the first Note with about every band known to man like the iPhone.
3. Yes
4. If the phone was purchased as a U1, it is undoubtedly unlocked because the seller is not selling it on a contract, and has no idea which network the phone will be used on.
Everything I've read, the 960U /U1 are the same hardware. To support that, their firmware modules are the same except one that is carrier-specific. The U1 for the Note 9 is not carrier specific. I had a T-Mobile Note 9 that I used on the Verizon network with no issues. I have a Verizon Note 9 now, and there is no difference. The only reason I have the Verizon Note 9 now is because the brand new T-Mobile one, still sealed in the box and with the protective film on it, ended up on the bad MEID list. Apparently someone bought it and brought it back without using it and stopped paying on it and thought they were out of the contract by doing so. The Verizon U phone that I have now has been flashed to U1 and works fine on their network. So the advantage of the U is its supports all of your carrier's services. The U1 supports all of your carrier's services that are standards-based and don't use carrier-specific services. Example, if the carrier supports support VoLTE, U1 will not usually support it because it must coordinate with the carrier's servers while U will. They say the U1 doesn't have the carrier bloatware. I don't agree. The carrier-specific added services are designed to work with their servers. Moreover, in the areas that need to be filled in, you get the basic programs from Samsung to replace the more capable ones you get from the carrier. I use U1 because I need to stop them from updating me due to my line-of-business software on my phone and for International travel when I replace the SIM with a local network SIM. If that's not you, and you want the latest for your carrier, U is what you want.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you successfully flash U1 software on your Note 9? I tried doing this back in March unsuccessfully as Odin threw up an error.