So I've been torn on switching from iOS back to Android because the Note 9 looks amazing. I've waited too long and both AT&T models won't ship until next week (first world problems), so I'm wondering if the unlocked SM-N960UZBAXAA model will work on AT&T or what all will be missing network wise.
It will work on all major and minor carriers in the US. I'm also getting that version~
When using the unlocked/unbraded GS8/Note8/GS9 there were a few limits on the USA carriers... While calling/data/sms works, Carrier specific features like Wifi Calling, VoLTE, Visual Voicemail, etc. varied. I expect that will apply to the unlocked/unbranded Note 9 too.
For unlocked on ATT, there is a VVM app in the play store that works. But if I recall correctly, Wifi Calling and VoLTE didn't work.
For Verizon, at first there wasn't a VVM app, but there is one in the GALAXY app store now that works (and now will auto install when Verizon sim is in the phone if you open the Galaxy App Store). VoLTE (aka HD Voice) works. Wifi Calling and Verizon's Video Calling features do not work.
For T-Mobile, all features worked "out of the box"
But if its like the GS8/Note8/GS9, eventually the carrier branded Note 9 firmware/software will leak and you can flash the unlocked device with the carrier branded firmware (and remain sim unlocked). Doing this you would also get any/all "carrier bloat" apps just like the carrier branded devices have pre-installed.
EDIT: And since my unlocked/unbranded SMN960U1ZBAX (per end of box) arrived today, I can confirm that its the same as my unlocked/unbranded Note 8 and Galaxy S9 on Verizon... Wifi calling and Verizon's video calling don't work, the Visual Voice Mail app downloads from the Galaxy App store, and everything else works.
KidJoe said:
But if its like the GS8/Note8/GS9, eventually the carrier branded Note 9 firmware/software will leak and you can flash the unlocked device with the carrier branded firmware (and remain sim unlocked). Doing this you would also get any/all "carrier bloat" apps just like the carrier branded devices have pre-installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am assuming the opposite is true as well if it's the same way as before? In other words, start with an (unlocked) carrier variant, and flash the original US XAA firmware to get rid of carrier bloat and unlock any frequencies not in the carrier firmware variant?
vacaloca said:
I am assuming the opposite is true as well if it's the same way as before? In other words, start with an (unlocked) carrier variant, and flash the original US XAA firmware to get rid of carrier bloat and unlock any frequencies not in the carrier firmware variant?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm assuming (you know what they say about that word!!) that it will be the same as it was with the GS8/Note8/GS9 when it comes to flashing... including any bloat or frequency changes depending on what/how you flash. BUT I haven't tried anything on my unlocked Note 9 yet other than initial setup and quick tests of calls/messages/VoLTE/VVM/etc. and I haven't seen any Verizon firmware/rom leak to flash it.
KidJoe said:
I'm assuming (you know what they say about that word!!) that it will be the same as it was with the GS8/Note8/GS9 when it comes to flashing... including any bloat or frequency changes depending on what/how you flash. BUT I haven't tried anything on my unlocked Note 9 yet other than initial setup and quick tests of calls/messages/VoLTE/VVM/etc. and I haven't seen any Verizon firmware/rom leak to flash it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool, thanks. Where did you get your SMN960U1ZBAX model? What carrier is BAX? Curious
vacaloca said:
Cool, thanks. Where did you get your SMN960U1ZBAX model? What carrier is BAX? Curious
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blue 128gig Unlocked from Samsung USA. That is just from the label on the end of the box. Maybe the label is missing the last two letters. and should be SMN960U1ZBAXAA
About screen shows SM-N960U1 similar to how my Black Note 8 from Samsung shows SMN950U1ZKAX on the box (also missing the trailing AA) but shows SM-N950U1 on the about screen .
hello
about N960U and U1 :
SM-N960U OYN multi CSC ( ATT BST CCT CHA GCF SPR TMB USC VMU VZW XAA XAS )
by default : XAA
CROWNQLTE_USA_SINGLE.pit
SM-N960U1 OYM multi CSC ( ACG AIO ATT BST CCT GCF LRA SPR TFN TMB TMK USC VMU VZW XAA XAR XAS )
by default : XAA
CROWNQLTE_USA_SINGLE.pit
regards
KidJoe said:
When using the unlocked/unbraded GS8/Note8/GS9 there were a few limits on the USA carriers... While calling/data/sms works, Carrier specific features like Wifi Calling, VoLTE, Visual Voicemail, etc. varied. I expect that will apply to the unlocked/unbranded Note 9 too.
For unlocked on ATT, there is a VVM app in the play store that works. But if I recall correctly, Wifi Calling and VoLTE didn't work.
For Verizon, at first there wasn't a VVM app, but there is one in the GALAXY app store now that works (and now will auto install when Verizon sim is in the phone if you open the Galaxy App Store). VoLTE (aka HD Voice) works. Wifi Calling and Verizon's Video Calling features do not work.
For T-Mobile, all features worked "out of the box"
But if its like the GS8/Note8/GS9, eventually the carrier branded Note 9 firmware/software will leak and you can flash the unlocked device with the carrier branded firmware (and remain sim unlocked). Doing this you would also get any/all "carrier bloat" apps just like the carrier branded devices have pre-installed.
EDIT: And since my unlocked/unbranded SMN960U1ZBAX (per end of box) arrived today, I can confirm that its the same as my unlocked/unbranded Note 8 and Galaxy S9 on Verizon... Wifi calling and Verizon's video calling don't work, the Visual Voice Mail app downloads from the Galaxy App store, and everything else works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right on. Thanks for the info.
I don't really use any of that, so as long as everything else (voice, data, etc.) works as it should, I think it'll be a-okay.
yakapa40 said:
hello
about N960U and U1 :
SM-N960U OYN multi CSC ( ATT BST CCT CHA GCF SPR TMB USC VMU VZW XAA XAS )
by default : XAA
CROWNQLTE_USA_SINGLE.pit
SM-N960U1 OYM multi CSC ( ACG AIO ATT BST CCT GCF LRA SPR TFN TMB TMK USC VMU VZW XAA XAR XAS )
by default : XAA
CROWNQLTE_USA_SINGLE.pit
regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The first one can be found in the firmware for this thread:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/ga...in-firmware-snapdragon-n960usqu1arg6-t3827862
What about the second one?
I have had the unlocked note 8 on AT&T for a year and it works just fine. I had to download VVM app and MyATT app from play store and they work great. I never used VoLTE or Video calling so that never bothered me. My note 9 unlocked should be here today and I plan just to switch out sim cards and go.
Sent from my Galaxy Note8 using XDA Labs
nuclearrage said:
I have had the unlocked note 8 on AT&T for a year and it works just fine. I had to download VVM app and MyATT app from play store and they work great. I never used VoLTE or Video calling so that never bothered me. My note 9 unlocked should be here today and I plan just to switch out sim cards and go.
Sent from my Galaxy Note8 using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice! I don't care about VoLTE or Video Calling and I don't even have voicemail set up on my line, so sounds like I'm golden! :good:
N960U , about VoLTE
in : setting/about phone/software informaion/Service provider SW ver
if your CSC is ATT/ATT/... ( active/SIM/original product code )
you will have :
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
regards
KidJoe said:
...EDIT: And since my unlocked/unbranded SMN960U1ZBAX (per end of box) arrived today, I can confirm that its the same as my unlocked/unbranded Note 8 and Galaxy S9 on Verizon... Wifi calling and Verizon's video calling don't work, the Visual Voice Mail app downloads from the Galaxy App store, and everything else works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would also guess that:
- Carrier aggregation doesn't work so that maximum download is around 17mbps and upload is around 6mbps instead of downloads is ~82mbps and uploads ~44mbps.
- The IMEI is not recognized with regard to pushing secondary LTE bands, which in turn also throttles bandwidth.
Other: This is one of those hostage situations like number portability that is something every consumer wants and no carrier wants. Laws passed by Congress removed cable companies anti-competitive ability to force you to lease their equipment. They need to take the next step and separate content from the cable infrastructure like they did when they deregulated the utilities and separated the lines from the selling of energy, which resulted in my paying 1/4th in today's dollars what I did before in yesterday's dollars and solving the fake energy shortage. The same needs to happen with wireless providers. They need to let you buy your own equipment with no penalty. Cable Internet gateways have a globally unique ID that identifies you as a paying customer on their network and the type of equipment it is. Cell phones have their own globally unique ID that does the same. Both receive an IP address for Internet access. We don't need any new protocols. We've been using Internet data connections for voice over data networks for more than two decades. The SIP protocol, even after packaging the data into IP packets, requires only 85 kbps per session, and is often marketed as HD Voice. Just a .5 mbps Internet connection is more than enough to handle multiple sessions. VoLTE uses SIP, which has been in widespread use for 16 years. The phone simply needs to be a hand-held PC on the Internet, running any operating system that can communicate with the Internet. The bands are simply the connection protocols for communications between the tower and your phone. For me, there is the perfect U.S. unlocked phone that can take care of my communications needs while I'm here in the U.S., and a foreign location. However, AT&T will severely hamstring that phone, even though it is the same hardware as the one they sell. This situation is akin to having to buy your PC from your cable company in order to get high-speed Internet, AND accept their apps and permissions, whatever they do.
IT_Architect said:
I would also guess that:
- Carrier aggregation doesn't work so that maximum download is around 17mbps and upload is around 6mbps instead of downloads is ~82mbps and uploads ~44mbps.
- The IMEI is not recognized with regard to pushing secondary LTE bands, which in turn also throttles bandwidth.
Other: This is one of those hostage situations like number portability that is something every consumer wants and no carrier wants. Laws passed by Congress removed cable companies anti-competitive ability to force you to lease their equipment. They need to take the next step and separate content from the cable infrastructure like they did when they deregulated the utilities and separated the lines from the selling of energy, which resulted in my paying 1/4th in today's dollars what I did before in yesterday's dollars and solving the fake energy shortage. The same needs to happen with wireless providers. They need to let you buy your own equipment with no penalty. Cable Internet gateways have a globally unique ID that identifies you as a paying customer on their network and the type of equipment it is. Cell phones have their own globally unique ID that does the same. Both receive an IP address for Internet access. We don't need any new protocols. We've been using Internet data connections for voice over data networks for more than two decades. The SIP protocol, even after packaging the data into IP packets, requires only 85 kbps per session, and is often marketed as HD Voice. Just a .5 mbps Internet connection is more than enough to handle multiple sessions. VoLTE uses SIP, which has been in widespread use for 16 years. The phone simply needs to be a hand-held PC on the Internet, running any operating system that can communicate with the Internet. The bands are simply the connection protocols for communications between the tower and your phone. For me, there is the perfect U.S. unlocked phone that can take care of my communications needs while I'm here in the U.S., and a foreign location. However, AT&T will severely hamstring that phone, even though it is the same hardware as the one they sell. This situation is akin to having to buy your PC from your cable company in order to get high-speed Internet, AND accept their apps and permissions, whatever they do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. Last paragraph if it existed I agree with you.
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
IT_Architect said:
I would also guess that:
- Carrier aggregation doesn't work so that maximum download is around 17mbps and upload is around 6mbps instead of downloads is ~82mbps and uploads ~44mbps.
- The IMEI is not recognized with regard to pushing secondary LTE bands, which in turn also throttles bandwidth.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your wrong about the imei issue. I have a converted Sprint ls998(v30+) that is flashed with Verizon sw, and volte, wifi calling, video calling, and vvm work fine. The phone is not in vz's database. Ca is working properly too. It's all sw related.
suzook said:
Your wrong about the imei issue. I have a converted Sprint ls998(v30+) that is flashed with Verizon sw, and volte, wifi calling, video calling, and vvm work fine. The phone is not in vz's database. Ca is working properly too. It's all sw related.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe he was referring to unlocked devices working on ATT network. Whether flashed or not .
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
suzook said:
Your wrong about the imei issue. I have a converted Sprint ls998(v30+) that is flashed with Verizon sw, and volte, wifi calling, video calling, and vvm work fine. The phone is not in vz's database. Ca is working properly too. It's all sw related.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe, if you re-read the thread, you are agreeing with us.
People buy the U.S. unlocked phone version to get the additional bands so they can use the phone internationally where they spend time. When you flash the phone to a U.S. carrier's firmware, you lose the communications bands you need to do that, and you pick up all of the provider's unwanted apps. If you flash the firmware from one, and the modem of another, you are "not in Kansas anymore." For some, their only goal is to have a phone that works in both environments and do not see the following limitations as onerous:
1) Not doing carrier aggregation therefore maximum download is around 17mbps and upload is around 6mbps while with an carrier branded phone download is 82mbps and upload is 44mbps.
2) Not provisioning LTE advanced features such as VoLTE, Wi-Fi calling, or advanced messaging.
3) Not setting up the IMEI to push secondary LTE bands which in turn also throttles bandwidth.
4) Forfeiting a warranty (usually)
5) Not having forced, irremovable, carrier-specific software and services, when perhaps there was one or two of which they would have wanted to use.
IT_Architect said:
I believe, if you re-read the thread, you are agreeing with us.
People buy the U.S. unlocked phone version to get the additional bands so they can use the phone internationally where they spend time. When you flash the phone to a U.S. carrier's firmware, you lose the communications bands you need to do that, and you pick up all of the provider's unwanted apps. If you flash the firmware from one, and the modem of another, you are "not in Kansas anymore." It may or may not work right or worse, and almost certainly trip KNOX, thereby making it impossible to use secure apps of any kind such as payment processing, etc. For some, their only goal is to have a phone that works in both environments and do not see the following limitations as onerous:
1) Not doing carrier aggregation therefore maximum download is around 17mbps and upload is around 6mbps while with an carrier branded phone download is 82mbps and upload is 44mbps.
2) Not provisioning LTE advanced features such as VoLTE, Wi-Fi calling, or advanced messaging.
3) Not setting up the IMEI to push secondary LTE bands which in turn also throttles bandwidth.
4) Forfeiting a warranty (usually)
5) Not having forced, irremovable, carrier-specific software and services, when perhaps there was one or two of which they would have wanted to use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't define speeds based on your own experience. It will vary wildly by region because of density, congestion and peak times and what is setup there. Yeah, you will probably lose CA but speeds are not written in stone no matter the path chosen.
Note 8 & 9 are what I'm looking at. I'm currently with Verizon and it has been good. I'm thinking AT&T. Are you on AT&T? If so, what is your experience with them? Do you travel outside of your local area much? Thanks!
Observations:
For any particular build generation:
1. Between the U and U1, none of the firmware files are the same, not AP, BL, CP or CSC.
2. Between the U firmwares, only the USERDATA changes. The others have the same name and SHA-512.
3. Between the U1 firmwares, ALL of the files have the same and SHA-512. This indicates SamMobile's different zip files for XAA, VZW, TMB, TMK, etc. are an "exercise". U1s are sold by non-carrier outlets who have no idea where the phone will be used.
4. Flash file size differences between the U and U1 are as follows:
AP - The Unlocked U1 flash is more than a gig larger than for the carrier U flash.
BL - They are very close to same size with the carrier version being 41K larger.
CP - They are very close to the same size with the carrier version being 327K larger.
CSC - The carrier U flash is about 20 megs larger than the Unlocked U1.
USERDATA - T-Mobile is 1.35 GB, Verizon: 1.76 GB. The US UNLOCKED U1 doesn't have a USERDATA flash file.
My Theory:
There are many theories swirling about that center on carriers restricting services when you don't buy your phone from them. My theory is much simpler. With all of the U carrier firmware, you will see a gig plus USERDATA flash file. The U1's firmware doesn't have a USERDATA flash file, but the U1's AP flash file is a gig plus larger than U's AP flash file. I also work in the UNIX world. Applications that are installed at the same time you install the operating system will be installed in the operating system area. If you install those same apps later, they will be installed in the user software area. My theory about the Note 9's firmware is that the U1 Firmware is Android+Samsung-specific software+Samsung specific hardware drivers+standards-based wireless network drivers+Samsung basic apps. Samsung gives wireless providers the same with standards-based wireless network drivers+Samsung basic apps in separate install. This could explain how the gig plus moved from the U1's APP to the U's USERDATA. It would also enable a consistent user interface for the same service across all wireless providers who may be providing the service using entirely different methods. This would explain why running the carrier-specific the U firmware vendors all support capabilities such as Wi-Fi calling and Video Calling, while when the same phones are running US Unlocked firmware, only some do. That would mean those with the services available have deployed them in a standards-compliant way. For instanced, for T-Mobile, Voice over LTE(VoLTE) and Voice over Wi-Fi(VoWiFi) work but USCC roaming doesn't. On Verizon, Voice over LTE(VoLTE) and Carrier Aggregation works, but NOT Voice over Wi-Fi(VoWiFi). With AT&T, neither work. So that likely means the Verizon does not support VoWiFi on their network while AT&T doesn't support VoLTE nor VoWiFi, and have proprietary implementations on their network that are only available if your flash their carrier-specific firmware. This would also explain why when a phone is running the US Unlocked U1 software with a Verizon SIM installed you will not have Wi-Fi calling available, and when you simply swap to the T-Mobile SIM, it will magically show up. This seems to me to simply be the U1 firmware responding to what it finds. It hasn't been that long since our phones would only work on one network. It hasn't been that long since the critical mass existed to migrate to the new LTE standard. The T-Mobile build-out only increased rapidly, and Sprint may not even be finished rolling out VoLTE yet, thus much less likely to have non-compliant systems in place. You could extend this reasoning to other wireless technologies as well. It also makes sense why the mechanism to prevent firmware upgrades to not be present in the U carrier-specific firmware, while it is present in the the standards-compliant U1 firmware. The U1 path adds support for new standards as it goes. The U path must replace proprietary methods for advantage or regulatory reasons. If this theory is correct, you would be better off with U1 firmware when traveling abroad. The name US Unlocked may have little to do with US, and a lot more to do with being standards-based, which is more likely what you would encounter in other countries where widespread deployment occurred later. The SM-N960U* already supports more bands than any phone I've found, and with US Unlocked U1 firmware, it may be the best world phone as well.
Why I believe this:
In an environment of democracy and capitalism, companies are free to make decisions that benefit themselves the most, and those who are stockholders appoint CEOs who know how to make that happen. They would get fired for not using other people's equipment and networks for free if they could. If they could make more money by getting rid of non-VoLTE devices to free up bands, they will, and the FCC is forcing it to happen. The fact that VoLTE is not controllable by the user interface, does not indicate it is not being used. Why would you give a user the option control VoLTE, Carrier Aggregation, etc.? Voice Over Wi-Fi VoWiFi employs SIP/VOIP technology, which predates smart phones. Towers and equipment are often not owned by the wireless providers because they are co-location sites that must be approved by local authorities. Standards-based equipment means it would be cheaper, you need less of it, you have more options with regard to inter-carrier agreements of which some are mandated by the FCC. Moreover, investments in non-standard methods and equipment devalues the company, and even determines how much they can leverage money. Holding out on people who do not buy their phones from them doesn't make sense because they are not denying these services to BYOD pre-pay users, or anyone who flashes their phones to their firmware. The FCC already forces them to unlock their phones before they are paid for, so it doesn't make sense to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to acquiring users from other carriers. If carrier salesmen posts are true, they don't make much on phones anyway, and phones are more a vehicle to sell their services and accessories. They know that you know they don't have you over a barrel anymore and implementing interoperability is their new reality, and the reality of any maturing technology.
Surprises and Mysteries:
After I paid my premium membership for a month and went to SamMobile to download US Unlocked U1 firmware, I was surprised to find files for all different wireless network providers. Puzzled, I downloaded them all. SamMobile shows TMK as USA, so believing that I was getting US Unlocked, I downloaded it and flashed it. Booting up I got the Samsung Logo, which also made sense. I learned later that SamMobile has things mislabeled. TMK is MetroPCS, and XAA is the US Unlocked I should have flashed. However, then I noticed after the U1 files were unzipped that the flash files all had the same name. Then I tested their SHA-512 numbers and they were exactly the same, which means they are the same files. So, if they are the same files, why do they list the different wireless providers and put them in separate zip files with the carrier's extension on them? There isn't even an expectation of a difference because when they sell a U1 phone, they don't know which network it will be used on. What I do know is the Phone INFO app shows:
Firmware's CSC Code: XAA (I never flashed the XAA zip file. I flashed the TMK zip file, but since I found the flash files were the same for every U1 firmware zip file, seeing the US Unlocked code of XAA was not shocking.)
Active CSC Code: VZW (SIM installed)
Future
Great discussion .... Thanks
I've been down several roads with this including an S9 Exynos and then an S10
I then tried a One Plus 7 Pro and even switched to TMO because I couldn't get WiFi Calling with AT&T.
Currently am experimenting with a Note 9 that I believe was original sim locked to At&T but now unlocked and now with the most recent U1 firmware
Calling features work fine with TMO including WiFi Calling, but I'm looking to try AT&T as well (my reception is much better in my rural areas with att vs TMO).
Do you know if the calling features will work with the U1 firmware and ATT? ( If I get IMEI compatibility issues squared away with att)
Or do I have to flash U firmware?
I'm awaiting a Note 10 that is unlocked. Wondering if I can get ATT calling features to work on it?
jcrompton said:
Do you know if the calling features will work with the U1 firmware and ATT? ( If I get IMEI compatibility issues squared away with att) Or do I have to flash U firmware? I'm awaiting a Note 10 that is unlocked. Wondering if I can get ATT calling features to work on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not use AT&T. From what I've read, is no advanced features work with U1 on AT&T. With Verizon, VoLTE and Carrier Aggregation works fine, but ViLTE and VoWiFi does not.
I live in a T-Mobile fringe area that uses B71 exclusively (at least at my house). My experience with U vs U1 is that even though the signal is relatively weak, -118 dBm, the T-mobile branded U firmware holds the LTE signal fine. On the unlocked U1 firmware the signal is a tad weaker, plus it will drop the signal entirely and give me a no network error and/or it will roam on AT&T hspa. So clearly the Tmo software has optimizations for B71 at least over the unlocked U1.
I also have used a Pixel 3XL, an iPhone XR and a Moto G7 power in the same area. They do occasionally roam but I don't experience the loss of signal that I get with the Note 9 and the unlocked firmware.
BladeRunner said:
I live in a T-Mobile fringe area that uses B71 exclusively (at least at my house). My experience with U vs U1 is that even though the signal is relatively weak, -118 dBm, the T-mobile branded U firmware holds the LTE signal fine. On the unlocked U1 firmware the signal is a tad weaker, plus it will drop the signal entirely and give me a no network error and/or it will roam on AT&T hspa. So clearly the Tmo software has optimizations for B71 at least over the unlocked U1. I also have used a Pixel 3XL, an iPhone XR and a Moto G7 power in the same area. They do occasionally roam but I don't experience the loss of signal that I get with the Note 9 and the unlocked firmware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is very valuable information for a guy on the fence like me.
Thanks TONS!!!
BladeRunner said:
I live in a T-Mobile fringe area that uses B71 exclusively (at least at my house). My experience with U vs U1 is that even though the signal is relatively weak, -118 dBm, the T-mobile branded U firmware holds the LTE signal fine. On the unlocked U1 firmware the signal is a tad weaker, plus it will drop the signal entirely and give me a no network error and/or it will roam on AT&T hspa. So clearly the Tmo software has optimizations for B71 at least over the unlocked U1.
I also have used a Pixel 3XL, an iPhone XR and a Moto G7 power in the same area. They do occasionally roam but I don't experience the loss of signal that I get with the Note 9 and the unlocked firmware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
on U1 firmware, when you go to the phones dialer and dial:
*#2263#
do you get a hidden service mode menu like attached picture? if so then just force band 71 so that it dosen't switch. you can also disable other bands and leave only the ones you know work best so that device dosent try to switch to other weaker ones that you know will drop. also by setting to forcefully stay on LTE by selecting menu 4 in band selection and specifying the bands it should stop from reverting to hspa. but also might cause no signal. but again by selecting only the bands you know work i believe it should help. i have done many tests and what i do is to force bands one by one and check strength in a place where i know signal is poor. this way you weed out the bad bands. write it down somewhere and then go reactiavte all of them. then go to the disable band menu and remove everything except the ones listed previously and be left with only the stronger ones and stop fone from attempting to connect to random weaker ones.
Hi everyone,
Recently upgraded from my old Moto G6 to M31. Not sure why Samsung has not activated CA on this phone due to which we cannot get 4G+ (but only 4G) which can improve net speed by using multiple bands at once. Even the 2+ year old Moto G6 had this feature active.
Any way to activate that to improve network performance?
Ref :
https://r2.community.samsung.com/t5/Galaxy-M/carrier-aggregation-in-Samsung-m31/td-p/4846545
https://r2.community.samsung.com/t5/Tech-Talk/Carrier-Aggregation/td-p/4081356
I don't know if there is much todo for it because Exynos modem can't modify. But maybe it support Carrier Aggregation but not with combinations used in your carrier and that's why you don't see 4G+ /LTE+ icon on statusbar or on *#0011# Service Mode.
I have made instructions to check Carrier Aggregation support from modem logs: https://mt-tech.fi/en/how-to-get-4g...ions-from-your-android-phone/#Samsung_Devices . If you can get modem log there can then see if there is anything about Carrier Aggregation. If it support i will then list it to cacombos.com site where can check Carrier Aggregation supported devices and supported combinations.
Exynos 9611 does support Career Aggregation 3CA, most bands are supported, but Samsung has chosen to keep it disabled, it can be activated by a secret service menu, but we need to find out the correct steps, codes, and sequence to access that menu, Samsung service engineers have these codes.
Bro head over to m31 guide and discussion of carrier aggregation and let us solve this problem
Hi, any news about 4g+ issue on m31. I'm looking on net how to enable it.
Alex
Hi everyone,
I've received my new SIM for a 130GB-per-month 5G data plan with Bouygues Telecom by way of MVNO NRJ Mobile, but the phone remains stuck on LTE.
I've tried to change network settings (going from GLOBAL to 5G/4G automatic, and back, to no avail.
I bought this phone new from Rakuten, and I understand its ROM was designed for US carriers (unlocked), but I thought that once properly set, I'd get access to the Bouygues Telecom 5G network anyway.
What am I missing here?
UglyStuff said:
Hi everyone,
I've received my new SIM for a 130GB-per-month 5G data plan with Bouygues Telecom by way of MVNO NRJ Mobile, but the phone remains stuck on LTE.
I've tried to change network settings (going from GLOBAL to 5G/4G automatic, and back, to no avail.
I bought this phone new from Rakuten, and I understand its ROM was designed for US carriers (unlocked), but I thought that once properly set, I'd get access to the Bouygues Telecom 5G network anyway.
What am I missing here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you're missing is a phone that can handle international 5G bands. The U.S. version uses different 5G bands.
Hi, and thanks for the quick reply. Can I flash a different ROM on this phone, or is it that the 5G modem can't accomodate French 5G bands?
UglyStuff said:
Hi, and thanks for the quick reply. Can I flash a different ROM on this phone, or is it that the 5G modem can't accomodate French 5G bands?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does not support.
Samsung Galaxy S20 FE 5G - Full phone specifications
www.gsmarena.com
List of 5G NR networks - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
OK, thanks. I'll just have to decide if I simply cancel this new plan, or buy a new phone to go with it...