Active Topics
-
Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (3)
to General by Kalatti - 18 hrs, 58 mins ago - more...
| The Following User Says Thank You to Laughingstok For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-01-19
, 21:46
|
|
Posts: 271 |
Thanked: 220 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#32
|
Originally Posted by Laughingstok
It has 900, 1700, and 2100 Mhz 3G radios.
Which bands does the N900 listen to for 3G? There used to be a chart somewhere.
| The Following User Says Thank You to texaslabrat For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-01-19
, 21:46
|
|
Posts: 117 |
Thanked: 44 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#33
|
Originally Posted by colnago
Because they have a network and frequency bandwidth already which they would not go out of since frequency bandwith are licensed AFAIK.
T-Mobile had a 7Mb network in Philly, before the rest of their 3G areas across the country...why couldn't AT&T also have a "test network"? They are also performing 3G upgrades.
If they are performing 3G upgrades they would upgrade the network which *all* of their products use and not something which probably only their rival operator has.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 21:49
|
|
Posts: 117 |
Thanked: 44 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#34
|
Well i just tried with my ATT SIm card and atleast here in new london connecticut its only 2.5G even with a 3G network around.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 21:50
|
|
Posts: 518 |
Thanked: 160 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#35
|
Originally Posted by depu
You are missing my point. I was responding to the comment that if a town in Nevada is seeing higher data speeds, that everyone else in the country, on AT&T would also see them...I'm saying that it is not necessarily true, as AT&T could have increased speeds on an isolated basis, as with T-Mobile.
Because they have a network and frequency bandwidth already which they would not go out of since frequency bandwith are licensed AFAIK.
If they are performing 3G upgrades they would upgrade the network which *all* of their products use and not something which probably only their rival operator has.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 21:54
|
|
Posts: 117 |
Thanked: 44 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#36
|
Originally Posted by colnago
I am getting your point, however you dont seem to understand the technical issue here.
You are missing my point. I was responding to the comment that if a town in Nevada is seeing higher data speeds, that everyone else in the country, on AT&T would also see them...I'm saying that it is not necessarily true, as AT&T could have increased speeds on an isolated basis, as with T-Mobile.
1. N900 does not officiallly support the frequency bands used by ATT for 3G.
2. ATT would not (i think) upgrade their network to include a rivals frequency band which is not used on *any* of their own products/phones.
which would point to the conclusion that, even though the town in Nevada is seeing an upgrade in network (congrats to ATT for that) it should/would not reflect on a N900.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 21:59
|
|
Posts: 518 |
Thanked: 160 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#37
|
Originally Posted by depu
Well "again", I only posed the possibility that an upgrade could have created an "anomaly" focing the higher rates (i.e. 3.5G, which is something AT&T previously did not have?).
I am getting your point, however you dont seem to understand the technical issue here.
1. N900 does not officiallly support the frequency bands used by ATT for 3G.
2. ATT would not (i think) upgrade their network to include a rivals frequency band which is not used on *any* of their own products/phones.
which would point to the conclusion that, even though the town in Nevada is seeing an upgrade in network (congrats to ATT for that) it should/would not reflect on a N900.
And "again", even excluding the 900, its very possible that a local market could see higher rates where others would not. AT&T upgrading "Nevada", and not upgrading say, "Orlando" (i.e. "higher speeds in one area, not in another), has got nothing to do with "including a rivals frequency". Try not to merge the (2) different topics.
Last edited by colnago; 2010-01-19 at 22:02.
|
|
2010-01-19
, 22:03
|
|
Posts: 117 |
Thanked: 44 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#38
|
Originally Posted by colnago
The original topic is that of the n900 getting 3G on ATT network which the thread that i am on.
Well "again", I only posed the possibility that an upgrade could have created an "anomaly" focing the higher rates (i.e. 3.5G, which is something AT&T previously did not have?).
And "again", even excluding the 900, its very possible that a local market could see higher rates where others would not. Try not to merge the (2) different topics.
Qutoting Sheon
so i was downtown at the court house and i was playing music then i hear the sound of msn and skype connect so im like wtf then i look and it says 3G/3.5 -_- i thought this phone dont support 3G on ATT? -_- im back at home now and its back to 2.5G now ;; wth
|
|
2010-01-19
, 22:12
|
|
Posts: 518 |
Thanked: 160 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#39
|
Fair enough...like I said, it looks like people are getting higher speeds, on AT&T "and" T-Mobile, in certain areas. Either way, I'm not getting higher speeds with either network, nor with either phone(Motorola Q)...and that's all that matters!
Actually its all moot, since there is no Sling nor HAVA support for the 900 yet.
Actually its all moot, since there is no Sling nor HAVA support for the 900 yet.
 |
|
2010-01-19
, 22:17
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#40
|
Ok, I'm gonna go with the other Texas rat on this one. Provider name change app... what next.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
If you don't know how to check your N900's uptime, you probably shouldn't own it.