01-03-19 10:41 PM
123 ... 345
tools
  1. modifier's Avatar
    You are really clueless. The nuances of each implementation is proprietary to the vendor. I would have to find THE person in T-Mobile to give me the set up of each tower. That won't be easy.
    One of "THE" persons happens to be exactly who wanted to see your response since he's far more experienced in cell signal engineering than anyone here. In fact, a few in his team wanted to know as well since they're also clueless. Thanks for the name-calling. That was very professional and made them feel better about their overpriced degrees.

    The limitation right now is antenna architecture at both ends. No GSM handset at this time is able to pick up LTE at a greater distance than a standard GSM signal. If it exists then a whole team of engineers want to know about it, hence why I asked the question -- albeit with a feeling it wouldn't go anywhere. Distance isn't likely to change until LTE-A with MIMO antennas and handsets to match. Today's LTE isn't going any farther unless it's a random tower in the desert with lesser signal degradation than areas with standard climates, greater humidity and far less line-of-sight.

    If carriers were leveraging longer distance with LTE then marketing would be bragging about it as much as data speeds. They aren't because they can't -- at least not right now. Coverage is a war and carriers want to win. LTE hasn't helped coverage distance one bit for Tmo.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    12-05-14 03:59 PM
  2. gariac's Avatar
    One of "THE" persons happens to be exactly who wanted to see your response since he's far more experienced in cell signal engineering than anyone here. In fact, a few in his team wanted to know as well since they're also clueless. Thanks for the name-calling. That was very professional and made them feel better about their overpriced degrees.

    The limitation right now is antenna architecture at both ends. No GSM handset at this time is able to pick up LTE at a greater distance than a standard GSM signal. If it exists then a whole team of engineers want to know about it, hence why I asked the question -- albeit with a feeling it wouldn't go anywhere. Distance isn't likely to change until LTE-A with MIMO antennas and handsets to match. Today's LTE isn't going any farther unless it's a random tower in the desert with lesser signal degradation than areas with standard climates, greater humidity and far less line-of-sight.

    If carriers were leveraging longer distance with LTE then marketing would be bragging about it as much as data speeds. They aren't because they can't -- at least not right now. Coverage is a war and carriers want to win. LTE hasn't helped coverage distance one bit for Tmo.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    You need to parse your reply so it resembles English. The first paragraph is simply rubbish.

    I have climbed many a mountain top and had a solid 2g signal, but well beyond the 35km limit. A BlackBerry can easily demod beneath -100dbm. Even a crappy iphone can do that, so your comment that no handset can receive LTE at a distance greater than 2G doesn't make sense.

    Get this straight. Read carefully. LTE CAN cover long distances up to 100km. Get this straight. This doesn't mean there are any towers configured to cover such distances. Understand? It is a function of configuration. Even the old 2g can go beyond 35km if configured for that, as was done in Australia.

    If you have some insider that knows more than me, feel free to consult that person. I get little benefit trying to educate you. Really, I don't care what you think. Believe in ghosts or big foot if you want.


    Posted via CB10
    12-06-14 07:07 AM
  3. gariac's Avatar
    Here is a screenshot of a Samsung phone with TMO voLTE: Screen Shot 2014-06-02 at 21.09.12 TmoNews

    HD voice, unlike voLTE, requires both parties to be in HD calling markets.
    Do you know how Samsung displays LTE versus 4g? That is, maybe the phone is in 4g mode.

    Verizon and AT$T claim they will have VoLTE interoperability.

    I see the LTE wiki has been worked over quite a bit. It turns out there is a provision for narrow band voice. I guess the question is will the US carriers fall back to narrow band.

    I see they also list the 100km cell size. Maybe you know who can now get his panties out of the bunch. ;-)

    Here it is from the wiki:

    Support for cell sizes from tens of metres radius (femto and picocells) up to 100km (62 miles) radius macrocells.




    Posted via CB10
    12-06-14 07:28 AM
  4. kbz1960's Avatar
    My vzw Z30 says IMS is connected. Vzw doesn't offer the service though.
    12-06-14 08:08 AM
  5. modifier's Avatar
    Get this straight. Read carefully. LTE CAN cover long distances up to 100km. Get this straight. This doesn't mean there are any towers configured to cover such distances. Understand? It is a function of configuration. Even the old 2g can go beyond 35km if configured for that, as was done in Australia.
    LTE can travel quite far depending on the band. No one is arguing that. What I asked you to prove is that frequency for frequency (ie: 1700MHz UMTS vs 1700MHz LTE or 1900MHz 2G vs 1900MHz LTE) if LTE is able to be received any farther here in the US and to provide actual data, not just anecdote. You've done nothing but argue semantics, condescend, and ultimately not answer my question. I fully understand how far LTE can potentially travel. That wasn't my question. You missed some very important details.

    Thanks anyway.


    [CB10 / Q10]
    Last edited by modifier; 12-06-14 at 09:52 AM.
    12-06-14 09:42 AM
  6. raino's Avatar
    Do you know how Samsung displays LTE versus 4g? That is, maybe the phone is in 4g mode.
    Isn't that carrier preference, how they want it displayed? If you look at that screenshot closely (not the clearest one,) you can see it says 4G LTE, which is how TMO shows LTE. HSPA+ I am not sure about. I never saw 4G on my pre-LTE, non-TMO branded Samsung, but I think I've seen H+ displayed. It's been quite a while since I've put my SIM in that phone.
    12-06-14 10:59 AM
  7. raino's Avatar
    My vzw Z30 says IMS is connected. Vzw doesn't offer the service though.
    You mean the voLTE service?

    Maybe they have just turned IMS on for everyone, regardless of whether they're in a voLTE market or not.
    12-06-14 11:00 AM
  8. kbz1960's Avatar
    You mean the voLTE service?

    Maybe they have just turned IMS on for everyone, regardless of whether they're in a voLTE market or not.
    Meant the WiFi calling. Think voice over is different?
    12-06-14 11:07 AM
  9. raino's Avatar
    Meant the WiFi calling. Think voice over is different?
    Right, no WiFi calling on Verizon until next year. IMS is the parent of both wifi calling and voLTE though, well at least on TMO.
    kbz1960 likes this.
    12-06-14 11:30 AM
  10. modifier's Avatar
    Right, no WiFi calling on Verizon until next year. IMS is the parent of both wifi calling and voLTE though, well at least on TMO.
    IMS is baked into most modern OSes already so you can expect it to be the basis for VoLTE and WFC on AT&T and VZW unless they decide to write their own SIP solutions for the WFC side of it. I don't see that happening, especially if deployment remains slated for Q2/Q3 2015. Development and testing would take longer than using what's already available.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    raino likes this.
    12-06-14 04:14 PM
  11. gariac's Avatar
    LTE can travel quite far depending on the band. No one is arguing that. What I asked you to prove is that frequency for frequency (ie: 1700MHz UMTS vs 1700MHz LTE or 1900MHz 2G vs 1900MHz LTE) if LTE is able to be received any farther here in the US and to provide actual data, not just anecdote. You've done nothing but argue semantics, condescend, and ultimately not answer my question. I fully understand how far LTE can potentially travel. That wasn't my question. You missed some very important details.

    Thanks anyway.


    [CB10 / Q10]
    I quoted wiki, which indicates LTE can reach 100km. The 2g standard is limited to 35km.

    Now try to follow my logic :

    100km > 35km

    Again, I have no first hand knowledge if any tower is programmed to cover 100km. As I have told you at least four times, all I know is that the system is capable of 100km.

    Are you ESL? This really seems clear to me.


    Posted via CB10
    12-06-14 05:32 PM
  12. gariac's Avatar
    Isn't that carrier preference, how they want it displayed? If you look at that screenshot closely (not the clearest one,) you can see it says 4G LTE, which is how TMO shows LTE. HSPA+ I am not sure about. I never saw 4G on my pre-LTE, non-TMO branded Samsung, but I think I've seen H+ displayed. It's been quite a while since I've put my SIM in that phone.
    Damn these US carriers for marketing 4g as LTE.

    I believe you are correct that it is a VoLTE call since my phone strictly goes to 4g on voice.

    Googling "VoLTE test number" is useless, but I can't believe there isn't some number you can call to check if your phone can do VoLTE.

    Posted via CB10
    12-06-14 05:39 PM
  13. modifier's Avatar
    I quoted wiki, which indicates LTE can reach 100km. The 2g standard is limited to 35km.

    Now try to follow my logic :

    100km > 35km

    Again, I have no first hand knowledge if any tower is programmed to cover 100km. As I have told you at least four times, all I know is that the system is capable of 100km.

    Are you ESL? This really seems clear to me.
    Again you've failed to understand or answer my question. If I wanted an answer from Google or Wikipedia then I wouldn't bother posting.

    You keep comparing LTE in general without specifying the frequency. That isn't the point of this exercise. You have to compare the actual handset reception distances of the SAME frequency (and not the theoretical broadcast distances listed on the Internet) using 1900MHz 2G versus 1900MHz LTE (ie: Sprint) or 1700MHz 3G versus 1700MHz LTE.

    The question I gave you was specific to the US refarming towers using the same antennas and same equipment. It has to be an apples:apples comparison of real-world RECEPTION, not theoretical broadcast.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    12-07-14 09:46 AM
  14. jhimmel's Avatar
    Again you've failed to understand or answer my question. If I wanted an answer from Google or Wikipedia then I wouldn't bother posting.
    He is obviously avoiding the specifics of your question. You will not get an answer. Save your energy.

    Posted via CB10
    modifier likes this.
    12-07-14 10:00 AM
  15. gariac's Avatar
    Again you've failed to understand or answer my question. If I wanted an answer from Google or Wikipedia then I wouldn't bother posting.

    You keep comparing LTE in general without specifying the frequency. That isn't the point of this exercise. You have to compare the actual handset reception distances of the SAME frequency (and not the theoretical broadcast distances listed on the Internet) using 1900MHz 2G versus 1900MHz LTE (ie: Sprint) or 1700MHz 3G versus 1700MHz LTE.

    The question I gave you was specific to the US refarming towers using the same antennas and same equipment. It has to be an apples:apples comparison of real-world RECEPTION, not theoretical broadcast.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    You can't comprehend that frequency doesn't matter. I already explained path loss. You just refuse to listen.

    Again, excluding secondary effects like rain fade, and sticking with line of sight, there is no frequency dependence regarding loss. Anyone who says path loss is a function of frequency has never looked into the derivation of the equations.

    Penetrating into buildings is another story.

    We know that every handset in the US on 2G will fail at 35KM. Period. End of story.

    Again I am not privy to LTE tower provisioning. That is proprietary to the cellular provider. Thus all I can say is if the provider desires to do so, they can make a tower have a range of 100km because that is in the standard.

    No urban tower will be set up to the maximum distance. The problem with doing that is it would max out on capacity. Since there is no directory of towers, it is hard to say how they are provisioned.

    Regarding 2G, I have a particular place in Nevada where I know the tower location, and I can head in a direction where there is no service, so I am literally at the edge of a cell. The 35km limit is pretty lose to real life. You get a km or two less due to less that perfect conditions.

    This particular tower went 4g the day I left the area. I can see how far it goes, but that isn't an LTE test.

    Have you considered calling a T-mobile CR to see if they will put up with this nonsense?

    Posted via CB10
    12-07-14 09:12 PM
  16. gariac's Avatar
    He is obviously avoiding the specifics of your question. You will not get an answer. Save your energy.

    Posted via CB10
    Ask a moronic question, don't expect an answer.

    We can only hope he gives up this silliness.

    Posted via CB10
    12-07-14 09:13 PM
  17. modifier's Avatar
    Again I am not privy to LTE tower provisioning. That is proprietary to the cellular provider. Thus all I can say is if the provider desires to do so, they can make a tower have a range of 100km because that is in the standard.
    This is all you needed to say. "I don't know" also would have been an acceptable answer.

    US towers aren't provisioned for 100km even in rural areas. What you've read on Wikipedia doesn't apply here. Equipment upgrades will have to be made first for that range to be considered acceptable and see widespread deployment.

    As it stands, what we in the US see as "LTE" is roughly at 20 to 30km depending on location. 2G and 3G are in the 20 to 25km range. Nothing in the US is currently provisioned anywhere near 100km.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    Last edited by modifier; 12-08-14 at 02:12 AM.
    12-08-14 01:58 AM
  18. gariac's Avatar
    This is all you needed to say. "I don't know" also would have been an acceptable answer.

    US towers aren't provisioned for 100km even in rural areas. What you've read on Wikipedia doesn't apply here. Equipment upgrades will have to be made first for that range to be considered acceptable and see widespread deployment.

    As it stands, what we in the US see as "LTE" is roughly at 20 to 30km depending on location. 2G and 3G are in the 20 to 25km range. Nothing in the US is currently provisioned anywhere near 100km.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    You do not know for a fact that there are no towers provisioned for 100km. However, you are free to give us a listing of the provisioning of every tower in the US. Or do you just make stuff up?


    Posted via CB10
    12-08-14 07:15 PM
  19. modifier's Avatar
    You do not know for a fact that there are no towers provisioned for 100km. However, you are free to give us a listing of the provisioning of every tower in the US. Or do you just make stuff up?
    I know for a fact that US towers are not currently broadcasting 1700MHz and 1900MHz LTE at 100km. I challenged you to find one and the only fact you provided was that you don't have a clue how US towers are provisioned. I can only guess that it's because you couldn't find it via Google or Wikipedia.

    The information is out there. You're looking in the wrong places.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    12-09-14 01:53 AM
  20. gariac's Avatar
    I know for a fact that US towers are not currently broadcasting 1700MHz and 1900MHz LTE at 100km. I challenged you to find one and the only fact you provided was that you don't have a clue how US towers are provisioned. I can only guess that it's because you couldn't find it via Google or Wikipedia.

    The information is out there. You're looking in the wrong places.

    [CB10 / Q10]
    You have a reading comprehension problem. I never said there are any towers at the 100km range. I merely said the standard is capable of it.

    Try to read more carefully before going on a rant.

    Posted via CB10
    12-09-14 06:01 PM
  21. mahesh menon's Avatar
    Its in the normal BB10 settings... Go to Network and Connections, go to the bottom and it should say IMS Status and the switch should be able to turn off and on. IF its greyed out then theres no VoLTE on your network supported!
    I am using bbz30 and looked for the IMS status option its not available for me do I have VoLTE? I am using a jio sim. my os is updated
    02-05-17 07:24 AM
  22. joecool1029's Avatar
    I am using bbz30 and looked for the IMS status option its not available for me do I have VoLTE? I am using a jio sim. my os is updated
    You are not on voLTE.

    Dunno what a jio sim is. Easiest way to see if on voLTE is call will stay on LTE... if drops to 4G/HSPA or GSM you are not.

    Posted via CB10 on me red Blackberry Passport
    02-11-17 02:59 AM
  23. fightonusc's Avatar
    Wow. I'm seeing the date of the original post for VoLTE. There are some crazy informed people here.

    I found out just today trying to move my Q10 between two lines that Verizon is no longer activating the Q10. Thanks to everyone here, I've confirmed my Q10 does support VoLTE. I don't know if that's actually a good thing because now I'm pissed. Kahn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    01-03-19 10:41 PM
123 ... 345

Similar Threads

  1. BlackBerry Q5 on MetroPCS?
    By kingkush in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-22-17, 07:54 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-05-14, 09:09 AM
  3. Have I tried everything to get Playbook OS reloaded?
    By Wayne_Enterprises in forum BlackBerry PlayBook
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-05-14, 12:02 AM
  4. Xls to go isn't working
    By wirenut79 in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-04-14, 07:24 AM
  5. Finally tempted to switch...
    By James Wright4 in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-03-14, 11:49 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD