Related
Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers
Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?
Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?
If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?
Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity
Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget
Because the entire point of the Nexus One was to prove that customers wanted a phone that was not bound by "carrier demands" thats why all the Droids have the pay for tethering, while the Nexus One supports it freely.
Why not just be flexible?
Let the T-Mobile and Att versions be completely free of carrier control and be flexible with the Verizon/Sprint versions. I'd much rather have a non-tethering N1 on Sprint and Verizon as options than nothing at all...
If Samsung could do it, why not Google?
Because each version of the Galaxy is a totally different version, because this carrier didnt like this option on the phone, they took it out and renamed the phone. There are 4 versions of this phone each one less of a total package then the one before it. The Nexus One didn't want to be "flexible" it wanted to be allowed at the party as it designed to be. Plus the Nexus One was originally planned to be on Sprint and Version, it was the carriers who then dropped support for it. Also i was just throwing tehtering out there as an example there are many other things that the Nexus One can do that other phones have had stripped because of carrier control.
Those phones are gonna be hindered by carrier approval for updates.
The main thing that will be gimped is the native tethering option of android.
Samsung is in the game for $$$ with a guaranteed business plan.
Google was attempting to change the typical business plan. It was always an gamble.
Blueman101 said:
Because each version of the Galaxy is a totally different version, because this carrier didnt like this option on the phone, they took it out and renamed the phone. There are 4 versions of this phone each one less of a total package then the one before it. The Nexus One didn't want to be "flexible" it wanted to be allowed at the party as it designed to be. Plus the Nexus One was originally planned to be on Sprint and Version, it was the carriers who then dropped support for it. Also i was just throwing tehtering out there as an example there are many other things that the Nexus One can do that other phones have had stripped because of carrier control.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon publicly came out and said they wanted the nexus but it was Google that did not come thru for unknown reasons. Who are we to believe, I agree I don't trust any of them. But its definitely weird that Verizon went on record saying that. Why would they lie? And the next question is if that was the truth, why would Google have backed out?
RogerPodacter said:
Verizon publicly came out and said they wanted the nexus but it was Google that did not come thru for unknown reasons. Who are we to believe, I agree I don't trust any of them. But its definitely weird that Verizon went on record saying that. Why would they lie? And the next question is if that was the truth, why would Google have backed out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats true, no one really knows who was at fault. Google isnt know for their Dev phones coming to CDMA. Its also possible that Google turned it down when the CDMA carriers refused to offer the Nexus One full freedom.
ap3604 said:
Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers
Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?
Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?
If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?
Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity
Samsung is not the first! The touch pro 2s for example existed on all 4 networks!
Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the normal customers will have no idea the phones are related directly. They are all a little different and have different names. Each carrier has say with software unlike the n1. That means no tethering etc. I dont see why US carries like to cripple phones and brand them... I get that they want their own image or to not look like just a network provider but customized phones blow... My htc pure has no front facing cam and all the td2s tp2s needed different skins/cases and that also means more expensive repairs and ****. Carriers around the world just stamp their logo and inject some crapware (sometimes) and leave everything else the same!
JCopernicus said:
Those phones are gonna be hindered by carrier approval for updates.
The main thing that will be gimped is the native tethering option of android.
Samsung is in the game for $$$ with a guaranteed business plan.
Google was attempting to change the typical business plan. It was always an gamble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe someone will figure how to make a vanilla android rom for it.
I think the problem with the N1 is that the only carrier that subsidized it is T-Mobile. The two largest carriers are At&t and Verizon. Verizon doesn't carry it. For At&t, how many ppl are gonna shell out $529 for a phone, when you can get an iphone for like $199. All of us in this forum would, but for others it's too big of a difference.
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
When did "US Cellular" become one of "the 4" carriers??? They're #7 according to here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mobile_network_operators_of_the_Americas#United_States
Verizon got the HTC Desire
Sprint got the HTC EVO
If they got those phones, why would they want the N1 for? Those HTC phones are, in the carrier's eyes, better than the N1 and they aren't restricted to the plans that Google made T-Mobile customers switch over to in order to get the N1 for a lower price.
If those two phones came to Tmobile, I wouldn't have a N1 to be honest.
Blueman101 said:
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. There are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
This is just the announcement right? In mid March 2010, Sprint and Verizon announced they were getting the N1, until they changed their mind. Like you guys said earlier something about the "Evo" and the "Moto shadow". Shadow is pretty sweet, 4.3 inch display plus QWERTY!
Wikipedia that **** "nexus one"
arkavat said:
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. Their are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent point. I much prefer that system to ours.
Sent from my Sexy Nexy, courtesy of the fine developers of Tapatalk
let me finance that sammich for you ...
Blueman101 said:
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
$530 is too much? ok buy a g1 for 279. or a flip phone for 35 at a pawn shop. remember, this is something you OWN, not something that you lease with heavily financed contracts and etc s to mess with.
a potato chip is rediculously expensive if you compare it to the price of potatoes. cmon, find a logical argument folks or would you rather a company NOT profit, fail and leave you with no. support?
ohgood said:
$530 is too much? ok buy a g1 for 279. or a flip phone for 35 at a pawn shop. remember, this is something you OWN, not something that you lease with heavily financed contracts and etc s to mess with.
a potato chip is rediculously expensive if you compare it to the price of potatoes. cmon, find a logical argument folks or would you rather a company NOT profit, fail and leave you with no. support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you missed his point a bit.
Google was attempting to do a few things with the N1. First, they wanted to offer a completely raw phone, free of all carrier branding and bloatware and crippling. To do so meant selling it themselves, or in stores like Best Buy or whatever. This would push the second item: showing those in the states how a lot of other countries operate, buying unlocked phones without a carrier subsidy and contract. I love this idea. Both ideas.
However, the timing was rather unfortunate. $530 in this economy is rough for a lot of people. Doesn't mean the idea is horrible, doesn't mean anyone is blaming Google. It simply means that there are a lot of people that won't buy the N1 (or any brand new completely unlocked phone) right now because of the economy. I personally have several friends that love my N1. They wish they could buy one but are either unemployed or under-employed (took jobs making much less than they're used to, simply to get a check coming in).
I love Google's approach on this. I think it's great that they (supposedly) told Verizon and Sprint go suck an egg, and that the N1 was not to be messed with. This is my first truly unlocked, unbranded phone and I don't think I'll ever go back to buying them from the carrier.
Plain and simple most carriers were not thrilled with the idea of a totally unbranded/un-carrier approved handset being activated on their network.
With the GSM variant, there is little that any carrier can do, but CDMA is a different animal and I am really not surprised that VZW/SPRINT said heck no.
Dan
arkavat said:
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. There are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as in the UK, I have a cheap sim-only with unlimited data and just buy phones unlocked sim-free (no carrier restrictions) from the hundreds of stores (Play, Amazon etc). The money I save over the normal 18 months is enough to buy a Nexus One and have money left over.
But still some people in UK see the 'free phone' and sign up to a stupid long-term contract.
THIS SUCKS!
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/20/atandt-agrees-to-buy-t-mobile-from-deutsche-telekom/
Welcome to AT&T Wireless...
All I can say is F_*$
I hate AT&T! I used to have both At&t and T-mobile and I left the death star because of their terrible customer service! Now I have to go to Sprint or Verizon..most likely Verizon because of their coverage. However its going to cost me almost Double. Again all I can say is ****!
I just put a 32gb memory card in my HD7, this super sucks.
I was thinking to myself, sh!t! AT&T sucks! I then realized, well the monstrous GSM network would be pretty cool. I just hope they don't mess with the unlimited data plan, or the attractive prices. I use my phone a lot, and unfortunately some of us have to stay on 3G data at all times because we can't all afford home internet for WiFi (where I live it is NOT affordable). I also enjoy my 85 dollar phone bill, a considerable drop from the $120/mo. AT&T or Verizon charge.
sirandrew said:
Welcome to AT&T Wireless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe it's "AT&T Mobility" **** I have a bad feeling about this.
Luisraul924 said:
I believe it's "AT&T Mobility" **** I have a bad feeling about this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL - Indeed... there goes my rate plan out the window.
I have been here before.
I was with what was the Original At&t Wireless, they sold out to Cingular, and they sold out again and back to the At&t nameplate. So I was on a great plan and had been on a great plan for many years. At&t started turning off services on my plan. Every time I would call they would just say..."well you are on a legacy plan and we don't support that anymore. You need to sign up for a new plan at twice the cost if you want those features."And I am not talking about major stuff, call forwarding, paging, voice mail, etc. I see this coming again for all of us T-Mobile customers that have been with them for sometime. I was an originally a voicestream customer and now I will switch carriers, most likely to Verizon, if I am going to pay that much for service I will go where I get the best coverage. I know the drawbacks of both but I refuse to ever give At&t another penny after the way they treated me the last time I was a customer. It's sad to see a company that takes care of its customers like T-Mobile not be able to keep up in this Monopolistic world. Just another example of what deregulation has brought to the USA. We will be down to three major carriers with this merger and I will bet it will be two soon. So much for competition and lower prices.
Yeah, this is pretty bad. Hopefully when the deal goes through next year they will let me out of my contract without penalty.
they will if they change your plan. t-mobile has a 3000 minute, unlimtied text and data family plan (limited time only) that's $10 cheaper than their 1500 family plan with the same features....mine kicks in 3/29 for 2 years...if it changes, i leave ETF free.
linky http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/...re-for-Families-3000-Talk-Text-Unlimited-Data
What does this ultimately mean for T-Mobile customers?
Will T-Mobile still keep their branding name?
there will still be t-mobile, but only in the u.k., no more t-mobile usa.
mr8820 said:
there will still be t-mobile, but only in the u.k., no more t-mobile usa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct. It'll just be AT&T. I wonder, given Sprint's situation, if Verizon will pick them up as they are using the same cell technology as each other. It would be a massive duopoly. I'm not sure how that would affect the prices, it might drive prices lower faster given that they'll only mainly be looking at each other in terms of "scopin the comp out".
****ing sucks...
LMAO I still dont see what the big deal is aside from prices going up however
i dont see what the big issue is with At&t
aside from capping data and the 4g debacle.
I had them and they were pretty decent to me
Nothing will happen for a year. ATT primarily wants TMO's AWS spectrum and other assorted IP. THEN they'll assimilate everyone
carmeng4evr said:
LMAO I still dont see what the big deal is aside from prices going up however
i dont see what the big issue is with At&t
aside from capping data and the 4g debacle.
I had them and they were pretty decent to me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Prices going up: If I bought the same services (but still less than what I'm getting from TMo) from AT&T it would cost me an extra $35 a month (from $119 to $154). That's $420 a year. That is a pretty significant difference.
The closest package I could get with both Verizon and Sprint is $188 a month. That's $828 more a year. With less competition, it's significantly more likely that AT&T will raise their prices to Verizon and Sprint's level as opposed to the other way around.
If this deal falls through, how are we supposed to feel about tmobile?
Sent from my 32GB HD7 using Board Express
when I　hear the news feel sad........so...there isn't any cheap price anymore guys.
My friend works for T-Mobile as an engineer, he said expect T-Mobile to implement all the changes MUCH sooner than we expect. He said his division is already being broken up & relocated. Some are getting their walking papers. The T-Mobile employees aren't too happy about this either. Also confirmed that older phones like the HD2 will not be supported with 3G capabilities on at&t's network. But even though the deal won't be complete for a few months, they will start making most changes sooner, so the transition will move along smoother. Basically us that love T-Mobile & hate at&t are screwed.
For all you folks complaining about AT&T capping your download speeds, it appears it's only going to get worse. The federal government so far has not made any progress toward getting additional spectrum available, forcing carriers to make do with what they've got. As the article in the link below notes, "Ultimately, carriers will have to get more creative about how they use their existing spectrum, which will likely result in stricter caps on usage. Consumers who use more data will likely be charged higher prices for that data."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-57379526-266/how-politics-inflame-the-spectrum-crisis/?tag=nl.e404
In the short run, you might jump to another carrier, but in the long run, it could get worse for everyone. Lightsquare has been effectively stopped (for now) from building a new wireless network because of the potential for interfering with GPS signals. AT&T has been stopped from acquiring T-Mobile which would have given AT&T more spectrum.
So, as bad as things seem now, this may be the best that they will be.
PS: Also see this article:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57...-suffer/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
The FCC really needs to figure out how they are going to auction off the spectrum. Also, the whole ATT/T-mobile merger should have gone through. ATT is the only company that is compatible with T-mobile's equipment and can afford them.
rft3ch said:
The FCC really needs to figure out how they are going to auction off the spectrum. Also, the whole ATT/T-mobile merger should have gone through. ATT is the only company that is compatible with T-mobile's equipment and can afford them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it was cited that the decrees in competition would hurt every one and the loss of high paying jobs was to great
Aww that's bull does the fed gov have contract with Verizon or somethin? Coz a merger like that would surely put them out of commission
Sent from my HTC Raider X710e using xda premium
Cingular. Aka ma bell was broken up before for having a monopoly. Monopolies are bad for consumers, if any of you have graduated high school you should know this. Cingular has thus bought all tel, at&t, and now wants t-mobile. Creating another monopoly would not net us any better prices.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk
Verizon bought alltel
So your saying Verizon is At&ts only competition ??? Lol
Sent from my HTC Raider X710e using xda premium
colonel187 said:
Cingular. Aka ma bell was broken up before for having a monopoly. Monopolies are bad for consumers, if any of you have graduated high school you should know this. Cingular has thus bought all tel, at&t, and now wants t-mobile. Creating another monopoly would not net us any better prices.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cingular was not Ma Bell, it was a seperate company that purchased the failing wireless portion of At&t. Which was then purchased back by att, which wad really a rebranded SBC
Also Verizon purchased Alltel.
Good story though.
Sent from my HTC Raider X710e using xda premium
How does the merger or buy out of T-Mobile from AT&T help the consumer in any sense? Less companies out there competing, the higher your prices are gonna be, simple as that. If verizon goes, all those consumers have to go somewhere....
PakAttack1994 said:
How does the merger or buy out of T-Mobile from AT&T help the consumer in any sense? Less companies out there competing, the higher your prices are gonna be, simple as that. If verizon goes, all those consumers have to go somewhere....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One reason AT&T wanted to buy T-Mobile was to use its network to more rapidly expand its LTE network. Also, the two systems are compatible in some ways, making a transition easier.
As to competition as a way hold down prices, the major carriers (AT&T and Versizon) already control most of the market with T-Mobile and Sprint dividing a much smaller portion. Price comparisons I've seen usuaally show Verizon higher than AT&T for similar plans.
The main point I was making in the original post was that prices are likely to rise for all carriers in the long run as demand increases faster than the ability of the government and the carriers to provide adequate spectrum. The main concern should not be how many carriers there are, but whether the carriers (2 or 20) can meet the growing demand for high-speed services.
You got me about all tel, its another company I can't quite get off the tip of my tongue. Anyway.
Yes Verizon is the only real completion at&t has, tmo and sprint are too small. AT&T wireless was formed by by AT&T
AT&T wireless was doing so well they split into their own company. Sbc acquired Cingular which. At&t & Cingular were the two major companies in competition with Verizon but norther had the customer base alone to match Verizon.
Cingular bought at&t wireless and sbc bought at&t landline. Owning the rights to the name now Cingular and sbc changed their name to at&t thus gaining the same or a little more customers over Verizon. Sbc and at&t came to be when ma bell was forced to split due to monopoly.
Gobbling up the missing prices of ma bell and some small stragglers is creating another monopoly.
Just like the cable companies in many areas. There is only one and they raise there prices almost every other month. Only competition its satellite that forces you to sign contacts.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk
This is why I'm glad the Tmobile merger was stopped or else things would've only gotten worse. The Government actually needs to break up Verizon and AT&T now since they are too big as it is and doing price fixing with each other.
NIKKG said:
This is why I'm glad the Tmobile merger was stopped or else things would've only gotten worse. The Government actually needs to break up Verizon and AT&T now since they are too big as it is and doing price fixing with each other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
However, that does not really address the basic issue here -- as data usage grows with more people using more wireless devices, the available spectrum/band-width (as it exists now) probably will not be able to keep up with the demand.
Economics 101: when demand exceeds supply, prices go up. Increasing the number of companies selling wireless service will not necessarily increase the amount of bandwidth available.
My point, is that the government, which ultimately controls wireless frequencies, has not acted in a timely manner to address the issue (with the exception of stopping a company that wanted to add more bandwidth).
..
Very interesting article
Australia is just as bad with a lazy government. This NBN (National Broadband Network) appears to be nothing more than a spin from the Labor government, which can be an example of people who use lots of data suffering at the hands of lazy morons who really have no excuse for it.
---------- Post added at 02:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:31 PM ----------
I feel sorry for those on AT&T's old unlimited plan who are getting throttled.
Capping plans appears to only benefit the carrier as they make millions off those who go over the capped amount.
I used 2GB in a two days on Telstra's 4G network.
So AT&T tries to buy T-mobile for $35 BILLION, but cant afford to upgrade their network. What a bunch of ****.
How can I see if Im getting throttled? I can do a speed test and get a good speed, but browsing is slow.
Telstra is looking to shaping customer when they go over their limit in a couple of months. This was announced last year. As per existing solution it will Text you when you are near the cap. I beleive that once you are capped you can purchase once off topups.
So examples are:
$49 Plan gives 1G for month, with $450 for Voice SMS
$59 gives 1.5G with $550 for Voice (free SMS /MMS)
etc
Once the shapping solution is deployed you can:
1. Not spend any more and manage to how much data you have for the month.
2. Purchase a once off data top up .
$10 = 1 Gig
$20 = 2 Gig
etc
3. Move to a offer that provide more data each month
Once implemented there will no longer be bill shock. You can then choose eactly how much you spend on data.
so when will they do this for home internet.. haha
In Australia Fixed broadband for Telstra has been capped for several years for consumer plans. So no bill shock possible on Fixed data.
As per previous post need to wait a couple more months until this capping is available for Mobiles. Then bill shock will be removed for fixed.
I don't beleive any smart long term techo believes Bill shock generates revenue it just drives loyal customers away, that might choose to use them for the next 30 years.
I know the Nexus 4 works on ATT obviously. My point is for marketing and sales Google should have the Nexus 4 in ATT stores as well, showing off their new pride and joy. Just being officially on T-Mobile in the U.S. won't spread the Nexus word around enough to the average Joe and Jane.
Looks like the European market will get the bigger marketing push ?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
They would certainly sell more, but AT&T would want a cut. I guess AT&T could do what T-Mobile is doing and selling it subsidized on a plan like any other smartphone, but something tells me AT&T would want to load their crapware on it. AT&T doesn't seem like they give two ****s about the Nexus program. AT&T would never carry the phone in-store, off contract, at Google's prices, even if Google was giving them a small cut of it.
I agree, but not.
IF AT&T got the N4 it would:
A.) be more expensive (like the Tmob variant, yes cheaper on 2 year, but stupid expensive off contract)
B.) Likely contain at least some bloat, Maybe this would be negotiated out, but I somehow doubt it
C.) be carrier locked (like the Tmob variant)
D.) Be the exact same phone with no benefit to us for purchasing it from AT&T except signing a 2 year contract
If Google wants more AT&T users to buy it they just have to advertise it more in the US, letting everyone know it works with AT&T and can be had directly from google, plug in your sim and go. No need to involve AT&T, they will just ruin it.
Hi!
First off, I didn't know where this belongs, so I'm sorry in advance if this is the wrong part of the forum.
My wife and I are moving to Santa Monica in August, and one of my biggest struggles right now is figuring out what American carrier to go with (yep, this is MY issue to handle, since I'm the phonegeek in the family). I'll start off with telling you what we're used to here in Sweden, and I hope you can help us pick a carrier and maybe even a plan that will fit our usage after the big move.
We always buy our phones unlocked from electronics stores, ALWAYS. I'm currently using the OnePlus One which should be working fine in the U.S., but I am planning on getting an LG G4 in a few months. Wifey's got an iPhone 5S (European version, guessing she'll have to replace it in order to use 4G/LTE IB the U.S?) I suppose it depends on what carrier we choose, but if signing up for a plan and getting the phone along with it is a better option than cashing it we're of course willing to do so (I have absolutely no idea how this stuff works in America, as you might've understood by now...).
We're currently using Telenor, on a shared family plan. The cost for this is roughly $85 a month. It includes a shared 24GB of data, unlimited calls and unlimited texts. To be honest, this is way beyond what we ever use, so cutting the data amount in half should be no problem at all. We don't text or call that much either, but it's nice to have the ability to do so if needed.
From what I understand, Verizon locks their phones down tight. Locked bootloaders, SIM locked and whatnot. If this really is the case Verizon really isn't a viable option considering the fact that I'm an avid flasher of roms. My wife doesn't really care much about that stuff though, she's all iPhone all the way.
Any advice, thought or opinion is welcome and highly appreciated!
UPS or Fedex
Sent from my LG-E610 using XDA Free mobile app
Tmobile. I hate verizon for the same reasons. But, I've heard people in that part of Cali say it's got good service.
But, if no verizon. Then tmobile
And, yes verizon does that.
Karakoram2 said:
Tmobile. I hate verizon for the same reasons. But, I've heard people in that part of Cali say it's got good service.
But, if no verizon. Then tmobile
And, yes verizon does that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply! I've read good stuff about T-Mobile so I think that's what I'll go with. Apparently I'll get 4G with a European LG G4 with them aswell so that suits me great.