1. Download our Official Android App: Forums for Android!

What are our best LTE options before tiers start?

Discussion in 'Verizon' started by jamor, May 3, 2011.

  1. jamor

    jamor Android Expert
    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    213
    Posts:
    3,688
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010

    Apr 13, 2010
    3,688
    761
    213
    Planet Earth
    I want to upgrade to a new LTE phone to get grandfathered in the unlimited LTE for 29.99.

    The problem is that we are running out of manufacturers..

    Motorola is obviously out of the question since they lock their bootloaders and use their own crappy android software.

    Samsung is almost out of the question since they offer very little support for their phones.

    I guess that leaves us with HTC and.. =/

    HTC doesn't have the best build quality, but I'd much rather have a fully customizable phone with a couple cons than not be able to change my kernel on the Motorola.

    I guess the Thunderbolt is okay. It doesn't have hdmi or dual core and the battery is still pretty small.

    Any sweet LTE HTC phones on the horizon (before LTE plans get tiered) or are we stuck with the Thunderbolt?
     

    Advertisement

  2. Yeahha

    Yeahha Usually off topic
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    813
    Posts:
    10,472
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010

    Jul 29, 2010
    10,472
    4,693
    813
    ...
    FG
    The LG revolution is looks like it should be coming up too. Rumor mill says it may have netflix on it, all the LTE phones have the same screen size but the woes that have been going on with LTE coming up to the launch of the Charge there is no telling when the phones will actually launch and when tiered data could start.
     
    jamor likes this.
  3. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43
    Well motorola might unlock bootloaders in the 2nd half of the year, though who knows for sure, verizon might not let them or they could just be pandering to consumers by pretending to be nice.

    HTC is the best supported by developers generally, but Samsung can be fine too so long as the developers making roms get involved. For example the samsung galaxy s has a build of cyanogenmod, that's not too shabby, but the US versions of the phone don't afaik.

    LG is also potentially good.

    Really I'd say let a phone come out and see how much developer support it gets, not manufacturer support. The manufacturer is important, but if the developers can hack the phone and do whatever they want, and there are enough of them, then the manufacturer is more of a back-up than anything else.
     
  4. jamor

    jamor Android Expert
    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    213
    Posts:
    3,688
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010

    Apr 13, 2010
    3,688
    761
    213
    Planet Earth
    Good point. I was kind of interested in the Samsung Droid Charge, but it doesn't even have a section on XDA which isn't a good sign. Doesn't seem like it is going to be supported at all.
     
  5. John Jason

    John Jason Android Enthusiast
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    302
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011

    Feb 26, 2011
    302
    33
    43
    I'm supposed to have a job?
    Portland, left side North America
    The Samsung Galaxy S II is all the rave these days. Everyone expects it to come to all US carriers eventually, the same as the Galaxy S did. The SGSII is already available in the UK and Korea. I'm holding out for it before I switch from T-Mobile to Verizon. But like others, I want to lock in the unlimited data, so I'm praying that the SGSII makes it to Verizon before tiered data takes effect.
     
    jamor likes this.
  6. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile
    With lte, that will not help you. LTE is more the capable of detecting a rooted phone and denying it network access. LTE is also very capable of making sure some apps are not allow internet access at all, regardless if you are rooted or not. Once you connect with lte, there is not a thing mods, hacks, or root can do for you, if lte says no, it will not work on the network, period.

    As for the teired plans, you are hoping you are grandfathered in, chances (50/50) are they will allow you to do that. From here on out, you will be double charged for everything. LTE will charge you per mb you use and per app you use. Want to visit youtube? Pay up! Want to visit facebook? Pay up! LTE allows the carrier complete control over you phone. If you root it, they will know the minute you connect to the network. If you install a 3rd party app, they can and will block the app, it's access to the internet, and/or charge you for it.

    Welcome to LTE, it is the future. You can not fight it. What are you going to do? Go with att, they really could care less if you did. There is only 2 choices left in the usa, both are going to treat you badly.
     
    jamor likes this.
  7. jamor

    jamor Android Expert
    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    213
    Posts:
    3,688
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010

    Apr 13, 2010
    3,688
    761
    213
    Planet Earth
    So that means if we get an LTE phone, we can just forget about free wifi tether?

    If I install a 3rd party APK than they block it? Is that already happening on the TB?
     
  8. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43

    Except the things that verizon agreed to with the use of the 700mhz spectrum essentially bans everything you just said and if verizon were to do anything like that they would have a huge lawsuit on their hands, no need to be a fear mongerer.
     
  9. John Jason

    John Jason Android Enthusiast
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    302
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011

    Feb 26, 2011
    302
    33
    43
    I'm supposed to have a job?
    Portland, left side North America
    When and where did Verizon agree not to do these things? Is it in the FCC regulations? The user agreements? Can someone get a copy of the agreement? I'm just curious.
     
  10. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile
    You are 100% correct, but look at wireless tethering. They are not banning the apps, only what they are charging for it. You see the difference? They are currently blocking wireless tethering, an app, against the fcc wishes, and you don't see the fcc doing anything about it?

    They will not block facebook, only what they are charging for you to access it. They will not block hulu, netflix, or youtube, only what you are charging for it. It is an open network, which fall 100% under the rules off the fcc, only it could have a pay toll at both ends. 1.)You pay for the data, as in a monthly plan. 2.) You pay for the service on top of the monthly plan, ie see wireless tethering.

    Once again, only Verizon knows what Verizon will do. But lte is 100% capable of it.

    But lets use look at the other rule, the fcc is any device too. Which means that when lte starts to run on att, would we beable to take the htc thunderbolt over to att, right? Wrong. You see the thunderbolt does not support att frequencies, which means you can not even roam on att towers.

    The rules set up by the fcc where just a chuckle for the telecomms.

    I would love for you to prove me wrong. Please go out and show me where verizon has ever said they want to allow any app, any device, and network. Because I can for wimax and sprint.
     
  11. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43
    While i don't know where the full text is, I know that most of the things mentioned were a part of the agreement verizon made with the fcc when they won the fcc's auction for the 700mhz spectrum.

    Anyway here is a link to the howard forums thread where I think the whold discussion started.

    Verizon is violating the 700 Mhz open platform restrictions already


    Basically I don't see verizon or any company attacking anyone for rooting or charging for a certain website like youtube or something just because that would screw them over big time and be a huge detriment. As for tethering, they can attack it all they want, they can't really block it and I don't really care too much about it to use it. Plus the fcc's agreement which they took on says they can't hinder access or use of such apps that increase bandwidth useage anyway. Now the fcc can choose not to act on this, but if verizon really got out of line and really bothered enough people I'm sure enough complaints to the fcc would action going

    Also this is just a wiki link, but it shows that verizon did try to legally attack these agreements not so long ago and dropped the lawsuit right away.




    "After the open access rules were implemented, Verizon Wireless filed suit against the FCC on September 13, 2007, seeking to have the rules dismissed on the grounds that the open access requirement "violates the U.S. Constitution, violates the Administrative Procedures Act
     
  12. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43
    1) No wireless provider has ever officially claimed to plan charging for access to different websites, they would have to be insane to charge for that, customers would start paying a ton and get super mad at their $500 cell phone bills. Tiered data useage is possible, and verizon does have the right to throttle anyone they desire. This is why they choose to throttle the top 5% of users if they need to and have even claimed that is a part of their new policy.

    2) Yes, phones use different spectrum, and different technologies. I can't take a verizon phone to at&t because the 2g voice/data is not the same at all, I can't roam on at&t's 3g either, and yes I won't be able to roam on their 4g or use it because it will use a different spectrum that my phone won't support because supporting every spectrum and technology on every carrier and having unlimited roaming contracts with them all would just be a disaster. The only companies that even do 3g roaming between each other are sprint and verizon I believe. AT&T and tmobile don't, that's why the tmobile nexus s can't get 3g on at&t and the at&t iphone can't get tmobile 3g. This is how things are, but I don't see how it is at all relevant to anything. Just because verizon can't technically lock their phones? So what? They will lock them, if I request them to unlock they will be required to. If they make a 4g global phone like my droid 2 global and it supports at&t's 3g bands then they have to let me unlock the phone and take it there if I so desire, that's all, no one is making the carriers all support all of each others frequencies and technologies though, nor does that matter at all.
     
  13. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile

    When you stop quoting wikipedia, we can continue this conversation.

    But you still never dealt with the problem that the fcc rules say they have to offer the app and they can charge what ever they want for it, which is why, as I understand it, verizon dropped the lawsuit.

    Do they have to allow the app, yes they do. Can they charge 10-15 bucks more a month for you to use the app, yes they can, see tethering apps.

    Once again, file a complaint with the fcc, see how far that will get you.

    <Edit> oh heck I will do it today or tomorrow. I will file a official complaint with the fcc. I will post a response here if I ever get one. </edit>
     
  14. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile
    LOL, you really dont know what you are talking about. The fcc said they had to allow roaming. Which means they have to right?

    I can provide hundreds of quotes about per use charges. Hundreds, all I am asking you is to provide one that says they are not.
     
  15. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43
    Firstly wikipedia is a viable source with real sources with links.

    Secondly here is a quote I already typed but you seemed to have overlooked it.

    "Block, degrade, or interfere with the ability of end users to download and utilize applications of their choosing on the licensee&#8217;s Block C network,Exclude applications or devices solely on the basis that such applications or devices would unreasonably increase bandwidth demands.
    Impose any additional discriminatory charges (one-time or recurring) or conditions on customers who seek to use devices or applications outside of those provided by the licensee."


    Put those two together. They cannot charge you for the use of an application that they do not provide. e.g. pdanet, barnacle wireless tether, etc. Now that means they can't charge for those apps, and the first sentence two bullet points state that they cannot attempt to stop users for obtaining those apps, or exclude those apps just because they use excessive bandwidth. Sure verizon can offer their own wireless tether app, call it special, charge for people to use it, but that doesn't change the fact that they cannoy block the 3rd party apps or charge users for using those apps.


    As for your fcc allowing roaming, the FCC said that the companies had to offer roaming at reasonable prices to the lower level small companies so as to foster competition. e.g. MetroPCS, Criket, etc are required to be offered roaming at what is determined to be a reasonably affordable price. That DOES NOT mean that all phones need to have like 8 antennas in them to support all signal frequencies and all connection technologies. Here is an article on it. Read the whole damn thing, it says how regional carriers are the ones who need data roaming to offer larger services across the nation which is something they cannot afford to do on their own by building a nationwide network. Hence why they are regional carriers. There is no mention in that article of phones needing to be made to allow data roaming between nationwide gsm and cdma networks, the fact that those networks are already nationwide makes it so that roaming isn't exactly necessary, and they already offer 2g roaming between at&t and tmobile, and sprint and verizon also do roaming with each other on 2g.
     
  16. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile
    They are currently blocking tethered apps from the official store and nothing is happening to them. So file a complaint. But a little warning. Now where does it not say that they can not charge you to use those features, just they have to allow them. I just hope verizon will step forward and clear up all the doubt around the issue.
     
  17. Trident

    Trident Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    333
    Posts:
    3,035
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010

    Jan 20, 2010
    3,035
    2,307
    333
    I wear many hats
    Virginia Beach, VA
    There was no need to turn this into a hostile debate. I have edited posts to remove rude and disrespectful content and issued an infraction to the member posting such content. If this conversation can continue with a cool head on all participating members, then awesome. If I am, however, forced to come back in once more, I will be issuing harsher infractions and then thread will most definitely be locked.

    Carry on...
     
  18. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43

    Block, degrade, or interfere with the ability of end users to download and utilize applications of their choosing on the licensee
     
  19. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile
    You see that part right there...outside of those provided by the licensee. You see you can use any app you want, but you still have to pay the provider for the service to connect the device.

    Let me make this very easy to understand.

    LTE has built in pay per use model. It was created to make sure that only provider and very specific services can be run on the phone at the complete control of the service provider. That is what the technology allows.

    As for getting round your wording. Three easy things. 1.) A locked boot loader like those seen on current phones, lte is more then capable of doing this. 2.) A completed walled garden in which installing apps outside of the wall is considered a security risk which is provided in the fcc ruling, see apple and V cast for examples. 3. ) and here is the biggie, the fcc does not have the right to control or regulate the wireless industry. Which means it can set guide lines and ideas all day long, but they can never be enforced by laws or regulations. Verizon has said this over and over, again and again.

    Now I can tell you want the technology can do, it can do it. I can also show you repeatability where carriers that are supporting lte have supported this model. But I can not tell you want verizon is really going to do. I really dont know. But they seem to like, just like the different app pricing and tethering option, to ignore the fcc every chance they get.

    But really, lets ask the players in this what they think.

    Verizon on your specific qoute,

     
  20. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43

    You say that LTE knows when an app connects to the internet, which app is connecting to the internet, and that it can deny that app access, so how is it that right now people on the thunderbolt are using widgets that access the internet and other apps which use background data, surely verizon doesn't have something set up to make sure every widget is acceptable. I would love to see some factual data on how verizon knows which app is asking for data, and how an app like wifi tether apps would show that request for data as any different from say, the browser on the phone when it is switched to desktop mode.

    Also I'm not sure what crazy walled garden you live in with this iPhone, but last I checked the iphone/ipod touch on verizon and at&t can be jailbroken, and cydia can be used for non apple approved apps, and there's even installous for the pirates. Apple has no more control than google/phone manufacturers do. Heck Motorola has more lockdown on my droid 2 global than apple does on my ipod. It's not because the bootloader is locked though, but because things are signed, and without the key to that the phoe autobricks when something isn't signed properly. Anyway that walled garden isn't so walled.

    What you say is interesting, you show verizon's stance, but offer no facts to show how they can enforce said stance.

    As for the network management, I had this same discussion with someone on howard forums a day or two ago and here is what they said in reply

    "Here, the FCC defines in-line what they mean with respect to network management; namely, by reasonable network management, the FCC means ensuring no harm is caused to the network. Also, (1) the FCC has specifically said that large increases in bandwidth demand are not a harm to a network, (2) VZW permits tethering if you do it with their app that you must pay extra to use (per GB of usage), and (3) the harm referenced is traditionally thought of as things that cause interference with a network, not things that use a lot of it.

    Moreover, the FCC specifically affirmatively grants the carrier the option to throttle or meter usage to manage their network. The only thing they may not do is interfere with (or charge extra for) any usage of any device or app that uses the upper C block spectrum."

    Also how has verizon crippled wifi, gps, and bluetooth? I mean last I checked the wifi on any smartphone works just fine, supports b,g, and commonly n. As for gps I'm not sure how they can cripple that. Bluetooth they could maybe make a crappy app for it like they do with gps, but anyone who is a developer can develop and app to use the bluetooth or gps parts in the phone, I am sure the android sdk allows for access to them as there are 3rd party apps for such things.

    Lastly at the start of your post, you claim that a 3rd party application, accessing a service that was paid for, mobile data, is somehow a different service that verizon provides called tethering. By that type of logic verizon should charge me to use the gps on my phone because I'm using their data connection and their gps chip in their phone for that. However they can't and don't, a 3rd party app, namely the one built in by google with google navigation is allowed to do all of this for free. Verizon isn't providing any service with an app other than the app itself. The app can come with a fee, verizon is more than welcome to have their tethering application and charge $20 a month for people to use it, but they cannot charge for 3rd party apps. That is why the first part of the sentence you quoted says

    "Impose any additional discriminatory charges (one-time or recurring) or conditions on customers who seek to use"

    The application itself does not come with any charges, the sentence states that verizon cannot add any charges for the use of any 3rd party application outside of those provided by the licensee(verizon)

    I'm not sure where you're getting these confusing ideas from because I am honestly seriously confused by half of what you are saying, and I am sorry if this post is long, but I tried to respond to all of the things you said to provide the information I have and to rebut the arguments you made. Your move.
     
  21. RiverOfIce

    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    313
    Posts:
    1,715
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010

    Mar 30, 2010
    1,715
    1,254
    313
    In exile
    Google 90% of your questions. The answers will be on the first page. I do this for a living. I understand what lte can and can not do.
     
  22. ben7337

    ben7337 Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #341
    Points:
    43
    Posts:
    208
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010

    Jul 21, 2010
    208
    26
    43
    Most of my post wasn't questions, should I assume that all of my rebutals were correct and that the only thing you are supporting now is that LTE allows verizon to charge for every application and every website?
     
  23. TambourineMan

    TambourineMan Well-Known Member
    Rank:
     #396
    Points:
    36
    Posts:
    213
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2009

    Dec 11, 2009
    213
    9
    36
    What I think he is saying is that LTE would enable Verizon to do that if it were legal and that Verizon may endeavor to ignore the rules. But since he has not rebutted any of your compelling arguments, he must be admitting that the FCC rules under which the extra bandwidth was sold prohibit Verizon from doing so.
     

Share This Page

Loading...