Database Develop

Diamond Now on Sprint?

I'm starting to see Diamonds for sale on Ebay. If I were to purchase one now, would it work on Sprint, even though they have not officially released it yet? Also, any reason to wait for the rumored Raphael; is it better?
Anybody switch to Diamond from Mogul; is it much better?
Thanks for your thoughts.

The diamonds you see is most likely unlocked, and can be used in any network you like.. I have no clue where in this world you reside, but US beware! No quad-band.

I'm in USA, so are you saying do not buy? Thanks for your response.

Mr_Sinister said:
I'm in USA, so are you saying do not buy? Thanks for your response.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes dont buy unless its an American version of the Diamond...the ones on ebay are all asian versions which means that it wont work on the 3G network in America as far as i know. Judging by past posts on here by American forum members...best you will get is either Edge or GPRS if your lucky.
The American version of the Diamond should be released in july/august...best off waiting till then i would say.

Whoa! There is a lot of untrue information floating around here. First of all, Sprint runs on a completely different network than the rest of the world. So while the phones you purchase on eBay are most likely unlocked, they still run on GSM bands, which means you will only be able to use it with either AT&T or T-Mobile in the states. (Sprint/Verizon run on CDMA bands.)
Additionally, as noted - these non-US versions of the Diamond are not quad-band, and they do not run on the 3G bands used here in the states. I have one and live in the Washington DC area. I get fairly consistent Edge speeds, and slightly more dropped calls than with a US-release phone. It's well worth it to have the most kick-ass phone currently available, but it is a sacrifice nonetheless. Of course, depending on your geographic region, you may have more or less luck.
Finally, on a personal opinion note... Get off Sprint. Phones like this are always released first for the rest of the world, and have to be made with radios specific to Sprint/Verizon for use on their networks, which is always going to trail widespread release by several months at least (if not a year or longer). By using AT&T or T-Mobile, you are going to have access to much greater equipment selections on a regular basis.

I, have the Diamond in New York on T-Mobile Network, and my Edge connection is pretty quick with Opera, and as far as calls after two weeks of use I have yet to experience a dropped call or bad reception. I know this is not the same case in every area, but the fact that this device will not work in the US is not entirely true except 3G.
*Note* Neither Sprint nor Verizon will work.

The current versions of Diamond is not CDMA version. So they will not work on any CDMA networks in the US. That includes but not limited to Sprint, Verizon, and US Cellular. They will however work in the US with T-Mobile and AT&T with Edge connection. According to the FCC filing, they will do the full announcement of Diamond in the US by August 13 and PCS 1900Mhz was mentioned in the pdfs. All photos and such can not be disclosed by FCC until Aug 13th.

[Q] Due for upgrade

Hey guys,
I'm set for an upgrade, I'm looking for suggestions on what to get. Should I get something now or wait little while for something good that's coming out?

I hear people chattering about the Nexus Prime and SGS II. Personally, I'm on the Evo 3D, and love it. The only problem with the new 3D's is the hboot. Can't fully get s off.

Motorola Photon!

my upgrade is in december. im gonna see if i can get sprint to give me the early ok so i can get somethin on black friday..... hopefully the 3vo for nothing.

tl;dr - I'm not upgrading anytime soon because of LoS issues on the SG2E4GT and WiMAX is on the way out.
I've been off-contract since August. I was all set to get the SG2E4GT until the LoS issues became so prevalent, and I did some research into how slow Samsung has been to issue updates/fixes for their other Android phones (at least on Sprint, anyway). This has also kind of made me a bit cautious regarding the Galaxy Nexus since it too is a Samsung device.
Granted, the above issues may become moot once CM7 is up and running on these phones, but then there's also the problem of Sprint converting their 4G network to LTE over the next 1 to 2 years. Since I live in an area with zero WiMAX coverage (Metro Detroit), I'm reluctant to get a new phone right as WiMAX is going away, especially since I'm not paying the magical $10 'premium data' fee, and CM7.1 is running like a champ on my old Hero.
sleepy

I'm in the same boat -- why buy a wimax phone (GS2) when lte is coming to Milwaukee next year? Does the photon support LTE? Maybe the Nexus will. Any other lte-ready phones from sprint?

rigmort said:
Any other lte-ready phones from sprint?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could certainly be wrong, but I don't think any of their current phones support LTE.
Also, I read this article today from phandroid.com:
If you’re a Sprint customer, you may have found yourself recently looking for new reasons to stick with the carrier after their “Season of Change” removed a lot of customer perks. As most of you have already heard, ‘Ol Yeller is getting their new LTE network set up for next year but what you may not have known is the carrier is also planning on rolling out an LTE-Advanced network for the first half of 2013, with voice over LTE (VoLTE) devices scheduled in the first quarter of that year. Sprint’s VP of network and development Iyad Tarazi spilled the beans while speaking during a breakfast meeting at the 4G World conference.
Mr. Tarazi also mentioned that 12 LTE devices are currently scheduled for 2012 with Sprint planning on covering between 250 – 277 million people with blazing fast LTE by the end of 2013. How’s that for sticking with #3?
If you’re curious about the fate of your currently equipped 4G WiMax devices, Sprint’s agreement with Clearwire means you will be covered for at least the next few years. That’s about 60 in smartphone years. With this new development are any Sprint customers going to wait it out? Or have you already been seduced by the blazing fast data of other carriers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I agree...why lock in to a WiMAX phone now (unless you get great WiMAX coverage in your area) when LTE is in the pipeline?
sleepy

Article (theverge): Why the Nexus 4 does not have LTE or CDMA

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nexus-4-does-not-have-4g-lte
Pretty good article explaining why lte on a Nexus 4 doesn't make any sense for any potential whiners out there
Google wants direct control of the software on Nexus devices with no carrier intervention. That alone means Google can't sell an LTE device, as there's simply no access to LTE networks without working with carriers in one way or another: Verizon and Sprint's LTE networks still require compatibility with their 3G CDMA systems, and there's essentially no such thing as an unlocked CDMA device. AT&T's fledgling LTE network runs on different frequencies than other LTE networks around the world, so Google would have to build a custom phone for just 77 markets in the US. Doing that without AT&T's financial assistance makes little sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also it explains it pretty well why they didn't make the same mistake by going CDMA like they did on the Galaxy Nexus.
And there's precious little to suggest working with carriers is even in Google's best interests, or in the best interests of Nexus customers. The Galaxy Nexus was announced last year with a promised LTE version on Verizon, but the carrier held back releasing the phone for months to promote its own Droid RAZR instead. Google eventually grew tired of waiting and sent unlocked HSPA+ devices to reviewers. And software updates for Nexus phones sold through carriers have been problematic as well: it took the Verizon three full months to disseminate the Android 4.1 Jelly Bean update to its Galaxy Nexus, slightly longer than Sprint.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

All accurate, a good summary.
With its pricing of the Nexus 4 and lack of LTE, Google is quite clearly giving US carriers the finger. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if a CDMA/LTE version appeared for Verizon and Sprint, but LTE doesn't really matter that much if you get decent 3G/3.5G/HSPA+ whatever you want to call it (i.e., not Verizon or Sprint 3G).
Really, anything over a few Mbps is enough for me...but I know other people use their phones differently.

Why I'm glad there isn't a CDMA variant

Alright so I've been looking around on various Android forums and people seem to be very upset that there is no CDMA variant of the Nexus 4 announced so far. Coming from the Sprint/Verizon Galaxy Nexus, I am glad that they're not bothering this time around because CDMA goes against what the Nexus brand stands for, openness.
These carriers are very self-contained. You can only purchase phones to use on their network from them. Want a unlocked phone? You're out of luck BUT you can purchase the phone from their website off contract or you can go and get one from eBay or Craigslist. Because of this, the carriers have manufacturers by the balls, especially when it comes to updating phones. Want to get an update? You'll have to wait until these carriers "inspect" the update to ensure that it is not "harmful to the network" and all that PR crap they go on and on about.
Anyways, CDMA would mean that Google/LG would have to make a 4G LTE variant since these carriers only sell 4G phones now and Google doesn't seem too happy about how the CDMA variants of the GNex turned out last time. The updates were untimely to say the absolute least and the battery life was horrendous. I'm sure that the guys at Google had one hell of a time disputing against the crapware that Verizon/Sprint wanted to put on their phones so they could get a quick buck from Blockbuster and whatever other useless advertisements and applications they put on there now days.
If you want a Nexus phone, jump over to another carrier. I'm finally going over to T-Mobile and I'm getting unlimited data/text and a hundred minutes (which won't be used because I use GrooVe for voice over data/WiFi) for $30 a month. The entire move is going to cost me less than $400 and I'm sure you all have phones that you could sell to get over here. It really is the better move and the HSPA+ is amazingly fast without the battery drain.

My only option for a carrier is Verizon or sprint. At&t and T-Mobile only have gprs where my grandparents live, and I need internet for work. I'm upset there isn't a CDMA variant.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

I'm pretty excited about making the move to GSM and prepaid service. Any smartphone I've ever had was either Sprint and now Verizon. I can't even get an hour and a half of on-screen time with my Verizon gnex. It'll constantly switch from 3g to LTE and most of the time get stuck in the middle, looking for signal and draining the battery, it's horrendous.

I'm glad that there isn't a CDMA variant because CDMA is dead-end technology, and anything that brings about its demise sooner is a good thing IMO. Whatever the original technical merits were that CDMA held over GSM have pretty much become nonexistent as I understand it, and you give up the huge advantage of being able to easily switch carriers without purchasing a new phone. Anyone who's spent time outside the US and in an open GSM phone system knows how nice it is to be able to switch carriers at will.
But also Google's rationale for not including LTE makes a lot more sense with no CDMA variant. As the OP mentioned, a CDMA variant would absolutely HAVE to have LTE. Verizon's EV-DO network is still Rev. A, right? That's disgustingly slow in today's day and age, and while it makes sense that the CDMA carriers would have skipped over later revisions of EV-DO and go straight to LTE, it also means they're in an "LTE or bust" situation right now. GSM networks have a much better upgrade path, and 42mbps HSPA+ is more than fast enough for just about anything you'd want to do on a phone.
Personally I'm happy with the decision, because as a GSM user I see no need to frantically jump on the LTE bandwagon. I'd much rather take better battery life and a lower phone cost than have a transmission standard that is overkill for the vast majority of phone applications forced down my throat.

You all don't remember that GSM Nexus devices always come out first. CDMA phones will most likely come out months later, and with higher storage to generate buzz. Google knows better than to shut out ~20 million subscribers.
I'm pretty confident they are offering such low priced unlocked phones to try and get as many people into their ecosystem as possible. Ignoring CDMA users is not consistent with that, so just like before, it'll likely be 1 to 5 months before we see 32gb CDMA phones later on.

disynthetic said:
You all don't remember that GSM Nexus devices always come out first. CDMA phones will most likely come out months later, and with higher storage to generate buzz. Google knows better than to shut out ~20 million subscribers.
I'm pretty confident they are offering such low priced unlocked phones to try and get as many people into their ecosystem as possible. Ignoring CDMA users is not consistent with that, so just like before, it'll likely be 1 to 5 months before we see 32gb CDMA phones later on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I get where you're coming from, I completely disagree. Of course, I'm with a GSM carrier (and always have been), so I couldn't care less if they come out with a CDMA Nexus 4. Then again, I'm one of those people that don't believe the Galaxy Nexus offered by Verizon and Sprint was an actual Nexus device. If a phone's updates are coming from a carrier and not straight from Google...that's not a true Nexus and, frankly, you get what you deserve for thinking it is (in general terms...I'm not talking about you specifically).
I think all the reasons listed earlier are correct. I think Google got a bad taste in their mouths from having the carriers (re: Verizon and Sprint) dictate to them what they were going to do instead of the other way around. I also agree that CDMA is a dying technology and I'm also all for anything that bring that about faster. Wireless companies in the US need to get their #[email protected]% together and agree on a standard. All this GSM/CDMA/LTE crap is just confusing to consumers (not to me, but to uneducated consumers).
I firmly believe, though, that if you want a Nexus phone you need to get with a GSM carrier. Period. If by some miracle Google does release a CDMA version of the Nexus 4 later, I'll still believe you don't have a "true" Nexus phone. Only when the carriers have their hands off the updates can you actually make me believe a CDMA Nexus is a "real" Nexus.

I've been looking at the pre paid services but I have two lines since I pay for my mothers phone.
With the 1000 minute family plans it ends up making more sense for me to go that route since I'd get 2 free galaxy S2's.. One for her and I'd sell the other + my Sprint Galaxy s2 on eBay for my N4...
Very excited about moving back to T-mob after being on Sprint with **** service in my area for almost a year.

Please use the rant thread here or post in one of the review threads.
General section is for news/tips/tricks/guides/etc, not really for everybody to create a new thread every time they have a thought on this and that.
Closed

sprint HTC One unlocked for straight Talk (AT&T)

Is it possable to unlock my sprint HTC to be used on straight talk (AT&T) SIM?
If possable could would I be able to get LTE or HSPA+ data?
Currently I'm only able to get 3G speed on my HTC One as sprint has no LTE in Vegas.
AT&T LTE is everywhere here in Vegas & has service at my house. I only get one bar if service at my house with sprint.
Please let me know if it's possible.

salsa88 said:
Is it possable to unlock my sprint HTC to be used on straight talk (AT&T) SIM?
If possable could would I be able to get LTE or HSPA+ data?
Currently I'm only able to get 3G speed on my HTC One as sprint has no LTE in Vegas.
AT&T LTE is everywhere here in Vegas & has service at my house. I only get one bar if service at my house with sprint.
Please let me know if it's possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not possible.
Also, even if somehow the phone could be unlocked for AT&T use, it would likely perform very poorly as a smartphone because it doesn't support any of AT&T's LTE bands, nor UMTS/HSPA+ 850 which is also a very important band with AT&T.
Plus, I don't believe that AT&T allows LTE use on any of the third party MVNOs that use it.

myphone12345 said:
It is not possible.
Also, even if somehow the phone could be unlocked for AT&T use, it would likely perform very poorly as a smartphone because it doesn't support any of AT&T's LTE bands, nor UMTS/HSPA+ 850 which is also a very important band with AT&T.
Plus, I don't believe that AT&T allows LTE use on any of the third party MVNOs that use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you great info.
my last question is would I be able to switch to MetroPcs
They offer unlimited LTE in las Vegas

salsa88 said:
Thank you great info.
my last question is would I be able to switch to MetroPcs
They offer unlimited LTE in las Vegas
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe I have seen someone say they were able to flash their ONE to Metro PCS. Don't know how, but that should be possible.

salsa88 said:
Thank you great info.
my last question is would I be able to switch to MetroPcs
They offer unlimited LTE in las Vegas
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Metro's LTE band is in the 1700MHz (AWS) band which is not supported by the Sprint HTC One.
---------- Post added at 10:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:00 PM ----------
undrgrndchemist said:
I believe I have seen someone say they were able to flash their ONE to Metro PCS. Don't know how, but that should be possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but only with slow CDMA 3G (which will be going away eventually anyway as part of the TMO merger).

Hmm looks like my options of LTE on my HTC one is not looking very good..
any options to get LTE on my HTC One?

salsa88 said:
Hmm looks like my options of LTE on my HTC one is not looking very good..
any options to get LTE on my HTC One?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No lte in Vegas? Up until a certain point, not let in los Angeles as well while places in the middle on Arkansas has it.
I don't understand how Sprint prioritizes their markets
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 2

finalhit said:
No lte in Vegas? Up until a certain point, not let in los Angeles as well while places in the middle on Arkansas has it.
I don't understand how Sprint prioritizes their markets
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not hard to understand, actually, so long as you look at it from Sprint's market perspective and not from the "why don't I have it?" perspective. Not to ding you or anything, but people are very good at rationalizing reasons they've been wronged, especially when money (the $10/mo surcharge) is involved.
Sprint is targeting areas with relatively low LTE deployment/development, which usually means more out of the way areas and suburbs because until/unless the Softbank merger goes through, they don't really have the capital or spectrum to compete with AT&T or Verizon in LTE buildout. They've been using their money (very wisely, I might add) in retiring their IDEN equipment so that they can refarm spectrum, but until then, they're going to concentrate on markets they can bring LTE to cheaply and semi-exclusively, so as to snag those customers.

Rirere said:
It's not hard to understand, actually, so long as you look at it from Sprint's market perspective and not from the "why don't I have it?" perspective. Not to ding you or anything, but people are very good at rationalizing reasons they've been wronged, especially when money (the $10/mo surcharge) is involved.
Sprint is targeting areas with relatively low LTE deployment/development, which usually means more out of the way areas and suburbs because until/unless the Softbank merger goes through, they don't really have the capital or spectrum to compete with AT&T or Verizon in LTE buildout. They've been using their money (very wisely, I might add) in retiring their IDEN equipment so that they can refarm spectrum, but until then, they're going to concentrate on markets they can bring LTE to cheaply and semi-exclusively, so as to snag those customers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure much much of this makes sense. There's basically 4 carriers and Verizon and AT&T has launched in most of them so I don't known what you mean by semi-exclusively. Being third in a 4 man race is nothing special.
There is a reason smaller markets are cheap...it's because they are small. It's not necessarily the best move to invest in the cheapest market...especially if it's as you say, at the cost of larger markets.
I doubt Sprint is retiring it's iden network without immediate plans to replace it. This is like throwing out your hammer in anticipation of buying another one next year.
I don't know why Sprint does what it's does but a lot of what you said seems to be wild conjecture
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 4 Beta

finalhit said:
Not sure much much of this makes sense. There's basically 4 carriers and Verizon and AT&T has launched in most of them so I don't known what you mean by semi-exclusively. Being third in a 4 man race is nothing special.
There is a reason smaller markets are cheap...it's because they are small. It's not necessarily the best move to invest in the cheapest market...especially if it's as you say, at the cost of larger markets.
I doubt Sprint is retiring it's iden network without immediate plans to replace it. This is like throwing out your hammer in anticipation of buying another one next year.
I don't know why Sprint does what it's does but a lot of what you said seems to be wild conjecture
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offense, but a lot of what you're saying betrays both unfamiliarity with basic economics and technology.
Sprint is targeting areas where they can build out coverage cheaply, and with towers close to markets that, if they have service at all, are from more distant towers provided by AT&T and Verizon. Cost of tower rent and leasing is key, because if you try to build out a larger market, you will not only be behind two major competitors, but spend a significant amount of money to still be behind. It's harder to break into a market where other carriers have devoted a significant amount of resources to, as opposed to one that's more on the margins.
"At the cost of larger markets" also betrays a fixation on longterm, endgame planning. Sprint, right now, is investing a significant amount of money in IDEN teardown and LTE buildout. They have limited cash reserves as a result of both, and until/if the Softbank merger goes through, they're not really looking in a cash infusion anytime soon. They need to get more people and more plans in the door, and the way to expand reach is to target less-solidified markets. Once they have those, they can try for the cities.
It's your comment on IDEN that really has me baffled. Did you even do a cursory search as to what IDEN is? IDEN is older network technology that used to power Nextel's network, and after the Sprint/Nextel merger, Sprint continued to maintain an entirely separate telephony system that, at most, provided patchy extended coverage for its CDMA devices. Meanwhile, the old IDEN equipment continues to hog spectrum that Sprint needs to build out its coverage.
The silliest thing about all of this is your last point: "why would they shut this down without planning to replace it?" Sprint's entire current network is meant to be a replacement for IDEN...and the IDEN shutdown isn't exactly new news. Sprint (http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-rel...-network-on-schedule-to-shut-down-june-30.htm) has been planning this for almost the last year and a half.
That info is seriously one Google search away.

Rirere said:
No offense, but a lot of what you're saying betrays both unfamiliarity with basic economics and technology.
Sprint is targeting areas where they can build out coverage cheaply, and with towers close to markets that, if they have service at all, are from more distant towers provided by AT&T and Verizon. Cost of tower rent and leasing is key, because if you try to build out a larger market, you will not only be behind two major competitors, but spend a significant amount of money to still be behind. It's harder to break into a market where other carriers have devoted a significant amount of resources to, as opposed to one that's more on the margins.
"At the cost of larger markets" also betrays a fixation on longterm, endgame planning. Sprint, right now, is investing a significant amount of money in IDEN teardown and LTE buildout. They have limited cash reserves as a result of both, and until/if the Softbank merger goes through, they're not really looking in a cash infusion anytime soon. They need to get more people and more plans in the door, and the way to expand reach is to target less-solidified markets. Once they have those, they can try for the cities.
It's your comment on IDEN that really has me baffled. Did you even do a cursory search as to what IDEN is? IDEN is older network technology that used to power Nextel's network, and after the Sprint/Nextel merger, Sprint continued to maintain an entirely separate telephony system that, at most, provided patchy extended coverage for its CDMA devices. Meanwhile, the old IDEN equipment continues to hog spectrum that Sprint needs to build out its coverage.
The silliest thing about all of this is your last point: "why would they shut this down without planning to replace it?" Sprint's entire current network is meant to be a replacement for IDEN...and the IDEN shutdown isn't exactly new news. Sprint (http://newsroom.sprint.com/news-rel...-network-on-schedule-to-shut-down-june-30.htm) has been planning this for almost the last year and a half.
That info is seriously one Google search away.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offence but your statements betrays the facts, and misrepresents what I actually said.
Sprint already have towers in L.A. metro area. In fact L.A. has lte now...before the merger. Spirit has towers in Vegas, and is deploying lte there now... so there goes your theory?
Sprint is not new to these markets. They already have infrastructure here. The cost/benefit ratio in deploying in these markets makes much more business sense.
I know about IDEN. Notice my statement "tear it down without replacing it immediately"...my point was, they DO intend to replace it. An act they have committed to..Not contingent on a merger that may or may not happen. Sprint has been planning on doing this before the merger was even an option. A simple Google search would tell you this.
Not so sure why you act so all knowing. You're as oblivious to sprints plans as me or anyone else.
I apologize for betraying my unfamiliarity with both basic technology and economics.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 4 Beta
---------- Post added at 09:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 AM ----------
Further research shows that Sprint does not launch lte in markets until it's his a certain percentage of deployment (50ish). So larger markets take longer to deploy
So there you go.
Again, my apologies for betraying my unfamiliarity with both technology and basic economics.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 4 Beta