Related
I am very interested in trying the XT883 radio because its compatibility with more GSM providers. However, I am currently a Verizon subscriber and I want to find out what to expect in CDMA after loading up the XT883 radio.
My phone is rooted and unlocked, by the way. I think I am asking the internal differences between XT883 and XT862. Can someone shed light on this?
Thanks.
From what I've seen of the software floating around, I suspect there's no hardware differences between the two CDMA models, it's all in software and RadioComm settings.
But I've not taken any steps to confirm this, and won't until I have an SBF available so I can undo any hideously broken experimentation and get back to the phone I currently am quite happy with. ^_^
I did the comparison on the speci of these two. They differ in talk time, standby time, and wifi. While the talk time / standby time could be related to reporting convention for its intended customers, I do feel there should be hardware differences. Just don't know what to expect if loading up the XT883 radio on 862, and if the difference can be reversed by putting its own radio back.
Also, will loading XT883 radio override the hotspot hack?
Thanks.
Sent from my DROID3 using XDA App
newshook said:
I did the comparison on the speci of these two. They differ in talk time, standby time, and wifi. While the talk time / standby time could be related to reporting convention for its intended customers, I do feel there should be hardware differences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have to take the published pages with a grain of salt.
Consider these:
http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/C...ervices/Mobile-Phones/ci.MOTO-XT883-CN-ZH.alt
http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/C...ces/Mobile-Phones/ci.Motorola-ME863-CN-ZH.alt
http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/H...rvices/Mobile+Phones/ci.MILESTONE-3-HK-ZH.alt
http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/H...rvices/Mobile+Phones/ci.Milestone-3-HK-EN.alt
That's the XT883, the ME863 China model, and the Chinese and English versions of the ME863 Hong Kong model.
You may note that translation to Chinese loses 40mAh of battery size, and somehow the ME863 in Hong Kong gets more than double the talk time, with the same battery and standby time.
It's true that the XT883 is an older product page, but the Chinese ME863 is the newest product page of the lot. (It's new since I last looked at this, for example.)
That said, it's entirely possible that the Verizon Droid 3 has better standby battery life, because it's already received a system update the Asia-Pacific devices have not.
And again, I'm not totally sure, but I _believe_ the XT883 and Droid 3 shipped with Android 2.3.4. My retail Hong Kong ME863 has Android 2.3.5, but perhaps the ME863s in China are still on 2.3.4 and that's why their talk-time is lower?
I've lost track of what the Droid 3 is on. The Bell XT860s have 2.3.6 coming, and that seems to be offering a lot of improvements. They had 2.3.4 before, although the XT860s in South America had 2.3.5 include.
http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/U...obile-Phones/ci.DROID-3-by-MOTOROLA-US-EN.alt
As far as the Wifi difference, I really doubt Motorola's manufacturing a version without 802.11n unless there's some regulation in the Chinese market that demands such. Maybe 802.11n isn't certified there for use in unlicensed radio bands, so they can't advertise it. I don't know.
What I do know is that as far as I can see, my ME863 (Hong Kong retail)'s firmware incuded what appeared to be chunks of the Droid 3 stock firmware in unused space, indicating that the build process is to make 'em all, flash 'em with the Droid 3, and then send a batch of 'em that're China-bound to be reflashed with the Chinese-language firmware. (Which amongst other things repartitions things so that preinstall is tiny and unused, and makes the internal SD card slightly bigger. Which is why you can't use Safestrap's aternative boot on them yet.)
I guess the summary is that I see nothing that suggests hardware differences exept the presence of CDMA-specific electronics on the (same) radio chipset. I'm _assuming_ CDMA circuitry is left out, not just disabled.
There is a great recovery thread for use with moto-fastboot, which I used to get my xt862 back to stock. It had xt883 ROM running when I bought it, but I had other issues that I wanted to fix, so I went stock again. After that, I just used the xt883 radio.img and build.prop tweaks to get it working on gsm. I'm almost sure you could use the phone on either gsm or cdma after making these changes, but would it hurt to try and let us know? You can easily get back to stock...I don't have a free Verizon line to try it on myself, else I would lol.
Good luck!
Sent while mobile using Tapatalk.
Looking for a Note 9 for my wife and there are two attractive offers out there today. T-Mobile has the 128gb for $870 and Amazon is selling the 128gb, factory unlocked, along with the wireless charger and Bluetooth earbuds, for $929. We don't really need the earbuds, but the charger would be useful, so these are fairly equivalent offers to us.
We're currently on T-Mobile, but if the band 71 rollout here in December doesn't fix our signal reception inside buildings, we're likely heading to AT&T.
So, I may need to switch the phone to a new carrier early next year. That would seem to indicate that the carrier unlocked version is the safe bet, but I know Samsung has a bad rep when it comes to updates to firmware for the unlocked phones.
If I go with the T-Mobile version, can it later be flashed with AT&T firmware to get all the bells and whistles (VoLTE, visual voicemail etc)? Are there any other important issues I might be overlooking with regards to carrier vs unlocked?
Sardonik said:
Looking for a Note 9 for my wife and there are two attractive offers out there today. T-Mobile has the 128gb for $870 and Amazon is selling the 128gb, factory unlocked, along with the wireless charger and Bluetooth earbuds, for $929. We don't really need the earbuds, but the charger would be useful, so these are fairly equivalent offers to us.
We're currently on T-Mobile, but if the band 71 rollout here in December doesn't fix our signal reception inside buildings, we're likely heading to AT&T.
So, I may need to switch the phone to a new carrier early next year. That would seem to indicate that the carrier unlocked version is the safe bet, but I know Samsung has a bad rep when it comes to updates to firmware for the unlocked phones.
If I go with the T-Mobile version, can it later be flashed with AT&T firmware to get all the bells and whistles (VoLTE, visual voicemail etc)? Are there any other important issues I might be overlooking with regards to carrier vs unlocked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are the same device hardware wise. The unlocked U1 models tend to maintain their value better for some reason, so that's something to take into consideration. Right now, you CAN flash a different carrier's firmware on the carrier or unlocked version. If you buy the T-Mo version, you may have to flash the U1 firmware, and then flash the ATT firmware.
Since I haven't received my Note 9, yet, and I don't have ATT, I can't confirm this, but with the Note 8, people who flashed ATT firmware on non-ATT Note 8s had issues getting WiFi calling to work and they didn't receive OTA updates. You might keep that in mind and do some research.
If it were me, I'd snag that $929 bundle in a heartbeat.
That's all good to hear. It's a shame AT&T makes things so difficult, but hopefully tmo's band 71 rollout fixes our reception issues and we never need to go there.
Mr. Orange 645 said:
If it were me, I'd snag that $929 bundle in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did just that an hour or so ago.
So take this with a grain of salt: You're able to use an AT&T branded device (I did it with an S9+, now with a Note 9), and flash that with the unlocked or t-mobile firmware, and everything will work beautifully.
HOWEVER, I hear AT&T uses an IMEI whitelist for their VoLTE, which is ridiculously dumb, but MAY keep you from using VoLTE even after you flash AT&T firmware to a non-AT&T device.
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.
Hi everyone,
I'm planning on purchasing a preowned V40 mainly to be used as a portable music player but also as a backup phone. I'm on Google Fi and was wondering if it would be a better idea to get the V405UA (AT&T) model over the V405TA (T-Mobile) model. Both are around the same price and both are unlocked, so there shouldn't be any problem using them on Google Fi.
However, I read that the T-Mobile version of LG V-series phones (e.g., V30, V40) are a pain to work with due to proprietary RSA encryption, so I was thinking that the AT&T model might be a safer bet in case I wanted to root my V40 in the future. Currently I understand there's no bootloader unlock or root available for the V405TA (T-Mobile) model. Personally I don't really care too much about root, but it'd be nice to have the option.
But I also read that AT&T phones need an AT&T SIM card with an active plan in order to receive OTA updates, so I'm thinking it'll be a huge pain to install any future security updates if I get the AT&T model.
I'm aware that the V405TA (T-Mobile) model will support more of the bands that Google Fi uses since Google Fi mainly uses T-Mobile's network, but the AT&T model should still work with Fi, albeit with worse coverage.
Thanks, and let me know your thoughts!
HapaxLegomenon said:
Hi everyone,
I'm planning on purchasing a preowned V40 mainly to be used as a portable music player but also as a backup phone. I'm on Google Fi and was wondering if it would be a better idea to get the V405UA (AT&T) model over the V405TA (T-Mobile) model. Both are around the same price and both are unlocked, so there shouldn't be any problem using them on Google Fi.
However, I read that the T-Mobile version of LG V-series phones (e.g., V30, V40) are a pain to work with due to proprietary RSA encryption, so I was thinking that the AT&T model might be a safer bet in case I wanted to root my V40 in the future. Currently I understand there's no bootloader unlock or root available for the V405TA (T-Mobile) model. Personally I don't really care too much about root, but it'd be nice to have the option.
But I also read that AT&T phones need an AT&T SIM card with an active plan in order to receive OTA updates, so I'm thinking it'll be a huge pain to install any future security updates if I get the AT&T model.
I'm aware that the V405TA (T-Mobile) model will support more of the bands that Google Fi uses since Google Fi mainly uses T-Mobile's network, but the AT&T model should still work with Fi, albeit with worse coverage.
Thanks, and let me know your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say you'd be much better off going with the AT&t model. The only band that wouldn't support would be 71. With the AT&t, you could flash it to the US open version and it supports band 71. Well yes, you would get updates with the right carrier sim, they seem to be few and far between.
AsItLies said:
I'd say you'd be much better off going with the AT&t model. The only band that wouldn't support would be 71. With the AT&t, you could flash it to the US open version and it supports band 71. Well yes, you would get updates with the right carrier sim, they seem to be few and far between.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Makes sense, thanks! I'll plan on getting the AT&T version.
I would like to have Android 10, though, and if I'm not mistaken the V405QA (US Open version) only has Android 9, and given the sparseness of software updates LG has released for the V405QA it seems unlikely that they'll release an Android 10 .kdz for the US Open model.
If I plan to use stock AT&T Android 10 firmware, that means I can't use VoLTE or VoWiFi on T-Mobile, correct? I'm aware that I can also crossflash to the Korean V409N firmware for Android 10, but I'm not sure if that would solve the VoLTE problem.
I'm concerned because I read a post by ChazzMatt in the V30 forums stating that T-Mobile will be dropping 3G HSPA support in January 2021, so I'll need VoLTE or VoWiFi to continue making carrier phone calls. In that post, he said that that T-Mobile allows V30 phones on US Open firmware to use VoLTE and VoWiFi, but I'm not sure if this would also apply to a V40 phone running Korean V409N Android 10 firmware.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated!
HapaxLegomenon said:
Makes sense, thanks! I'll plan on getting the AT&T version.
I would like to have Android 10, though, and if I'm not mistaken the V405QA (US Open version) only has Android 9, and given the sparseness of software updates LG has released for the V405QA it seems unlikely that they'll release an Android 10 .kdz for the US Open model.
If I plan to use stock AT&T Android 10 firmware, that means I can't use VoLTE or VoWiFi on T-Mobile, correct? I'm aware that I can also crossflash to the Korean V409N firmware for Android 10, but I'm not sure if that would solve the VoLTE problem.
I'm concerned because I read a post by ChazzMatt in the V30 forums stating that T-Mobile will be dropping 3G HSPA support in January 2021, so I'll need VoLTE or VoWiFi to continue making carrier phone calls. In that post, he said that that T-Mobile allows V30 phones on US Open firmware to use VoLTE and VoWiFi, but I'm not sure if this would also apply to a V40 phone running Korean V409N Android 10 firmware.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've done some research, good. Let me point out a few things;
1) The US Open version should be updated to 10, pretty soon hopefully.
2) Between EBW Open and Korean Open, def go with the Korean, it has support for bands 66 and 71 (in addition to the others), but the EBW does not.
3) Near as I can tell Lineage doesn't have volte or vowifi.
4) With some tweaks to config files, Korean Open 30d does have volte, but not vowifi (this may be possible but I haven't gotten it to work yet).
5) Yes, AT&T firmware won't allow volte or vowifi unless you are using one of their sims.
6) The v40 with US Open Pie does support volte and vowifi on T-Mo. Caveat, I'm using Mint mvno (which uses t-mo towers).
At this time, myself, I'm just having a little fun while waiting for the NAO US Open 10 to drop. The rom that seems to have the most of what I want now (with slight mods), is the Korean Open 10. It also appears as though it's doing 'carrier aggregation', because the signal is exceptional (although some have said the actual signal strength (dBm) may not be any better).
So, if u have to have 10, right now, backup your at&t device (use qfil or edl.py), and crossflash to korean open. Then follow this thread for additional tweaks.
cheers
AsItLies said:
You've done some research, good. Let me point out a few things;
1) The US Open version should be updated to 10, pretty soon hopefully.
2) Between EBW Open and Korean Open, def go with the Korean, it has support for bands 66 and 71 (in addition to the others), but the EBW does not.
3) Near as I can tell Lineage doesn't have volte or vowifi.
4) With some tweaks to config files, Korean Open 30d does have volte, but not vowifi (this may be possible but I haven't gotten it to work yet).
5) Yes, AT&T firmware won't allow volte or vowifi unless you are using one of their sims.
6) The v40 with US Open Pie does support volte and vowifi on T-Mo. Caveat, I'm using Mint mvno (which uses t-mo towers).
At this time, myself, I'm just having a little fun while waiting for the NAO US Open 10 to drop. The rom that seems to have the most of what I want now (with slight mods), is the Korean Open 10. It also appears as though it's doing 'carrier aggregation', because the signal is exceptional (although some have said the actual signal strength (dBm) may not be any better).
So, if u have to have 10, right now, backup your at&t device (use qfil or edl.py), and crossflash to korean open. Then follow this thread for additional tweaks.
cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awesome, thanks for the extremely helpful reply!
One last thing: if I want to have the option to switch from Fi to an AT&T MVNO in the future, I should probably get the last Android 10 AT&T OTA update for my V40 and back up that firmware for VoLTE and VoWiFi before cross-flashing, right? I read somewhere that once you cross-flash your device, even if you return to the original firmware that came with your phone, you won't be able to receive OTA updates (and AT&T doesn't release any KDZs).
HapaxLegomenon said:
Awesome, thanks for the extremely helpful reply!
One last thing: if I want to have the option to switch from Fi to an AT&T MVNO in the future, I should probably get the last Android 10 AT&T OTA update for my V40 and back up that firmware for VoLTE and VoWiFi before cross-flashing, right? I read somewhere that once you cross-flash your device, even if you return to the original firmware that came with your phone, you won't be able to receive OTA updates (and AT&T doesn't release any KDZs).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well there's already a qfil backup of at&t 10 in the 'partition backup request' thread (or some name like that). But will there be any more updates from at&t? I think that's highly unlikely. There *may* be some security patches, but that would be it.
I guess if you use an at&t mvno, you may need at&t firmware to get volte and vowifi, don't know as I don't use those mvno. But on t-mo mvno (mint mobile), I have volte and vowifi with us open firmware (had to go to my mint account and select 'allow vowifi' for it to work).
Sounds like you'd want to check on at&t mvno's, to see what their requirements are to get volte and vowifi.
Android 10 for US Open version
AsItLies said:
You've done some research, good. Let me point out a few things;
1) The US Open version should be updated to 10, pretty soon hopefully.
cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any guess how soon? I must have Android 10 on my unlocked LM-V405QA by mid December. Called AT&T and they could not push it (probably because THEIR variant of V40 ThinQ is different).
Thanks
Long time lurker, first time poster here. First of all, a massive THANK YOU to everyone here. You guys and gals are Awesome! <3
So, I bought a Samsung S10 (SM-G973F/DS) on Ebay recently and flashed it to Lineage OS 19.1. All was fine until I tried to activate it. We did everything...manually changing the ASP settings, and a bunch of other stuff to try and get this thing to connect to the mobile network. Even placed the SIM card in another phone just to confirm the SIM card was fine, which it was.
Long story short, I think the device was perhaps locked even though the seller claimed it was unlocked. Whatever, I'm over it. I flashed stock back on it and re-locked the boot loader, sent it back. Not worth the aggravation. However, I am questioning if there wasn't something else I could have done?
I was trying to activate the S10 on Mint Mobile USA (a T-Mobile reseller, so GSM) it should have been fine. The default language on the device was German. I don't think that should matter, but maybe it does? Do European phones have problems activating in North America?
My question is: If I decide to get another S10 (SM-G973F/DS) from the secondary market (if its even worth it at this point, since the SM-G973F/DS is really hard to find), is there anything I can find out from the seller first so I don't end up having to send it back?
Or, should I just give up my dream of having an S10 installed with Lineage OS and it's glorious headphone jack and expandable storage forever? If so, are there any worthy alternatives to the S10 worth considering, given my affinity for headphone jacks and expandable storage?
Hello PhonePerfection, all a novel why you speak S10 G973F / DS in the United States.
Already your model S10 G973F/DS exynos 5G or the first 4G model so if these this Europe chip model, if now installed Samsung phone info look at who is scoring at worst take screenshots.
I don't understand your question United States, locked unlocked the seller.
You buy in the back market refurbished and unlocked telephone all operator therefore for sim card, the concern these the chip to install network either US or ASIA controls your model if these good SM-G973F/DS and not SM-G973U or G973U1.
Don't forget to say hello
I think what @meric57 is trying to say is that your phone doesn't have the right chips to communicate on the frequencies in the USA. It's made for other markets and other frequencies... so it won't work here.
If you use FrequencyCheck you can see what carriers support what frequencies on your specific model: https://www.frequencycheck.com/comp...m-td-lte-512gb-samsung-beyond-1/united-states
Scroll down to the "United States" area and you'll see it doesn't support the frequencies used in the USA (except for GSM 2.5, which is old and dead here in the USA). The US is primarily on LTE... and you can see that phone model doesn't support ANY of the available frequencies.
Bottom line "GSM" doesn't tell you enough. You have an incomatible phone model for the USA market. No SIM card will fix that.
Note, in SOME cases, you can activate other frequencies by loading different ROMs into the phone. My old LG V30 did this, for example. I have heard that you can run some Exynos phones here in the USA, but I don't know the details to help. FrequencyCheck may help you figure that out. Be sure the look for the complete model number, not just "Galaxy S10" or something... the naming is worthless for figuring this out.
schwinn8 said:
I think what @meric57 is trying to say is that your phone doesn't have the right chips to communicate on the frequencies in the USA. It's made for other markets and other frequencies... so it won't work here.
If you use FrequencyCheck you can see what carriers support what frequencies on your specific model: https://www.frequencycheck.com/compsomethingatibility/RdEkS7k/samsung-sm-g973f-ds-galaxy-s10-global-dual-sim-td-lte-512gb-samsung-beyond-1/united-states
Scroll down to the "United States" area and you'll see it doesn't support the frequencies used in the USA (except for GSM 2.5, which is old and dead here in the USA). The US is primarily on LTE... and you can see that phone model doesn't support ANY of the available frequencies.
Bottom line "GSM" doesn't tell you enough. You have an incomatible phone model for the USA market. No SIM card will fix that.
Note, in SOME cases, you can activate other frequencies by loading different ROMs into the phone. My old LG V30 did this, for example. I have heard that you can run some Exynos phones here in the USA, but I don't know the details to help. FrequencyCheck may help you figure that out. Be sure the look for the complete model number, not just "Galaxy S10" or something... the naming is worthless for figuring this out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
schwinn8 said:
I think what @meric57 is trying to say is that your phone doesn't have the right chips to communicate on the frequencies in the USA. It's made for other markets and other frequencies... so it won't work here.
If you use FrequencyCheck you can see what carriers support what frequencies on your specific model: https://www.frequencycheck.com/comp...m-td-lte-512gb-samsung-beyond-1/united-states
Scroll down to the "United States" area and you'll see it doesn't support the frequencies used in the USA (except for GSM 2.5, which is old and dead here in the USA). The US is primarily on LTE... and you can see that phone model doesn't support ANY of the available frequencies.
Bottom line "GSM" doesn't tell you enough. You have an incomatible phone model for the USA market. No SIM card will fix that.
Note, in SOME cases, you can activate other frequencies by loading different ROMs into the phone. My old LG V30 did this, for example. I have heard that you can run some Exynos phones here in the USA, but I don't know the details to help. FrequencyCheck may help you figure that out. Be sure the look for the complete model number, not just "Galaxy S10" or something... the naming is worthless for figuring this out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, this is great info. Good to know. It looks like that S10 could only communicate on 1 of 8 bands used by Mint/T-Mobile. That 1 usable band appears to have been deprecated by T-Mobile as it is. I think that explains it perfectly. Thank You!
You're welcome.
Yeah, frequencies/bands are very important to watch, particularly if you're buying out of market devices. You have to know model numbers and carriers to be sure of anything, and unfortunately this info is relatively hidden.
schwinn8 said:
You're welcome.
Yeah, frequencies/bands are very important to watch, particularly if you're buying out of market devices. You have to know model numbers and carriers to be sure of anything, and unfortunately this info is relatively hidden.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The CSC on that device was DBT (Germany). I had to find that out in order to put the correct stock OS back on there.
Makes me wonder if the ebay seller even knows this. They appear to specialize in mobile phones with tens of thousands of transactions, so I would hope they've encountered this situation before. They were more than happy to accept a return on the device. Sent me a prepaid shipping label immediately.
Back to the CSC... Let's say I look for another S10 (SM-G973F/DS) but I ask what the CSC is for that device. Are there any regions outside the lower 48 states with reasonably good chances of it working? I suppose I would need to study the mobile frequency website for the answer to that.
I did some quick searching, and supposedly there are websites that say the 973F/DS will work on MM (mint mobile)... but they don't detail how. For example: https://de-googled.com/blogs/news/a-word-on-network-compatibility-of-our-degoogled-phones
and https://www.ebay.com/p/15030406771 (in the description).
So, maybe it is possible? I don't know, so maybe someone else can chime in.
Personally, I stuck with U-version phones and gave up rooting/romming. It's just getting too hard to find phones that offer this, so I figured I'd just adapt back to a stock ROM, since choices are limited. I had done a bunch of that in the past, but I found that stock roms (today) are pretty good... and allow enough customization that made root/rom unnecessary... for me. My current is an SM-G975U1 (unlocked, USA, Snapdragon S10+) on Total Wireless (VZ MVNO)... it works great and I don't miss root/rom at all.
Rumor is that the Galaxy S23 will only be offered as Snapdragon, so maybe that will open up more options... but I doubt it. Samsung loves it's Knox system, and will likely lock down the phone even more with every generation.
schwinn8 said:
I did some quick searching, and supposedly there are websites that say the 973F/DS will work on MM (mint mobile)... but they don't detail how. For example: https://de-googled.com/blogs/news/a-word-on-network-compatibility-of-our-degoogled-phones
and https://www.ebay.com/p/15030406771 (in the description).
So, maybe it is possible? I don't know, so maybe someone else can chime in.
Personally, I stuck with U-version phones and gave up rooting/romming. It's just getting too hard to find phones that offer this, so I figured I'd just adapt back to a stock ROM, since choices are limited. I had done a bunch of that in the past, but I found that stock roms (today) are pretty good... and allow enough customization that made root/rom unnecessary... for me. My current is an SM-G975U1 (unlocked, USA, Snapdragon S10+) on Total Wireless (VZ MVNO)... it works great and I don't miss root/rom at all.
Rumor is that the Galaxy S23 will only be offered as Snapdragon, so maybe that will open up more options... but I doubt it. Samsung loves it's Knox system, and will likely lock down the phone even more with every generation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link. I think I may try for an S10 again if the seller can tell me what the CSC is. That page on De-googled.com affirms that American devices are more restrictive than their European counterparts.
It just doesn't make any sense to me personally to use a device with an open source OS that has loads of telemetry, spyware, bloat, etc. Which is a contradiction that I am not comfortable with. It's like installing a Linux distro that comes bundled with Facebook.
To me, being proactive about privacy is the equivalent to standing up for yourself in the real world. Sure, you can use a stock ROM and there is nothing wrong with that. It's having the freedom to choose which is most important. So long as that choice is available, I will happily go that route.
I like the added bonus of an Android device that seems faster with a longer lasting battery as well. I mean, I paid for this device. I should have the right to decide what apps are running on it.
No argument there... I agree with why we should be allowed to root/rom. Unfortunately, the carriers pull the strings in the USA (business over people) so we are losing options. Frankly, it pisses me off that they can still prevent phones from connecting to their network just because the IMEI doesn't match (even if the software is correct). In the end, if the device CAN work on the network, the carrier should have no say in allowing/disallowing it on the network. They like to claim that a "bad" device could "hurt" the network, but if that happens, they can lock out that phone and figure it out. I doubt that's even ever happened, but whatever. (They prevented me from using my already-working V30 US998 phone on the network, even though it ran as VS996 with no issues for years... they only later saw the IMEI wasn't "theirs" (original SIM card failed) so they prevented me from re-registering it. So stupid.)
Good luck, and let us know if you figure it out... I'm always curious to learn!
yes, most japan and europe phones do not have the correct radios channels in them for 4g and 5g. i ran into this same problem with my xperia phones that i bought overseas. this is a common problem that can happen.
The S10 and all it's variants is a world compatible GSM phone. So yes, the F variant should work with most GSM carriers and resellers in N. America.
There are various websites that will tell you what frequencies and carriers any particular model will work with if you do a search. Like this one.
WillMyPhoneWork.net - Check if your phone works on a network
Check 2G, 3G, and 4G LTE Network Frequency Compatibility for a Smartphone, Tablet, and Mobile Device in any Country and Mobile Network Carrier
willmyphonework.net
According to that site the SM-G973F/DS supports all 2G, 3G, and 4G frequencies used by Mint.