Latest rumor: Nexus 4 w/32GB, LTE, and CDMA @ Google I/O

Medion

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
1,584
Title says it all. The rumors state that the Nexus 4 will be refreshed in May with 32GB onboard storage, proper LTE support, and CDMA support. Do you believe it?

I personally would have believed the addition of internal storage and LTE support, given that the huge price difference between the Nexus and other unlocked phones didn't generate as much goodwill as expected versus the numerous complaints on lack of internal storage and LTE support. However, CDMA support? All indications were that Google didn't do a CDMA version due to lack of update control on CDMA networks. I could see Sprint caving on this, but Verizon?

Color me skeptical, but this is one I'm iffy on. And if it were to come true, well I'd be more interested in the Nexus but still wouldn't buy one. While the internal storage is enough for me (which means I don't need MicroSD to expand it), and the removable battery on its own isn't a deal breaker for me (just a big deal when combined with other shortcomings), it's too late in the game for a Nexus 4. It's 6-months old now. Since I've waited this long, I want to see what's up Motorola's sleeve. Absolute worst case is that I wait for the Fall release Nexus. If they can shoehorn LTE and higher internal storage now, I'm sure they can do it again in the Fall.
 
Just reading a few of the rumors, but so far is seems like 32GB and LTE are the main changes, and some people are just "hopeful" to see a CDMA version on Verizon. So, CDMA isn't really part of the rumor, it's just being tacked on as an "I wish" by some bloggers.
 
I'd rather see the entire line of Nexus 7 refreshes have the cell radios unlocked by default with no upcharge if the rumors about them switching to a Qualcomm SoC are true.
 
If the CDMA part happened, I would be stunned......and proceed to demand Google to take my money
 
I'd rather see the entire line of Nexus 7 refreshes have the cell radios unlocked by default with no upcharge if the rumors about them switching to a Qualcomm SoC are true.

It has to do with more than the radio. It takes three key parts to make the cellular connection work - the radio, the amplifier, and the antenna. Without all three, you don't get a cellular signal.

Take the Nexus 4, for instance. The radio is a Qualcomm radio capable of supporting LTE. The Antenna is tuned to several frequencies, some of which are supported by LTE on various carriers. However, the amplifier does not support LTE. Due to this, there are workarounds for getting LTE to work, but it comes with heavy limitations.

Just because a tablet uses a Qualcomm SOC doesn't mean that it will have the required amplifier and antenna needed to support cellular. You can expect that those models will cost more, just as they currently do.
 
It has to do with more than the radio. It takes three key parts to make the cellular connection work - the radio, the amplifier, and the antenna. Without all three, you don't get a cellular signal.

Take the Nexus 4, for instance. The radio is a Qualcomm radio capable of supporting LTE. The Antenna is tuned to several frequencies, some of which are supported by LTE on various carriers. However, the amplifier does not support LTE. Due to this, there are workarounds for getting LTE to work, but it comes with heavy limitations.

Just because a tablet uses a Qualcomm SOC doesn't mean that it will have the required amplifier and antenna needed to support cellular. You can expect that those models will cost more, just as they currently do.
If you think about it - the ouster of Andy Rubin could be directly related to this. He has always said that LTE was a PITA and against the spirit of the Nexus devices. Now he's gone and we're seeing these rumors. I wonder if Google has realized that they need CDMA if they want Nexus to go main stream
 
If you think about it - the ouster of Andy Rubin could be directly related to this. He has always said that LTE was a PITA and against the spirit of the Nexus devices. Now he's gone and we're seeing these rumors.

Possibly. I don't think Rubin was against LTE any more than 3G over Edge. I think his concern was that he wanted to make one device model, and that the technology at the time would not allow one model to work on the vast majority of LTE networks. There are now at least 43 recognized LTE bands, with bands 1-25 and 33-43 being actively used by various cellular networks. We do not have the technology today of supporting all of these networks in one device. Europe is currently going through some band consolidation to try to get most operators using similar bands, and the US is actually doing something similar (Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are all now supporting Band 4 for LTE). It's going to take three things to make supporting most LTE bands on one device a possibility;

1. Consolidation of bands. The more operators supporting fewer bands means more carriers supported by one device.

2. More frequencies supported by the radio/amplifier/antenna. I haven't looked at the latest and greatest, but the last Qualcomm chipsets that I looked at could only support 10 frequency ranges, subject to some limitations. For example, they could not support both AT&T and Verizon's 700mhz leases, it was one or the other. Second, they could not support two technologies on one band. IE, if Edge was on 850, then HSPA could not simultaneously be on 850. This is partly why T-Mobile is refarming. They want HSPA+ on 1900 so that LTE can work on 1700 without causing a conflict within the device.

3. Deprecation of older technologies, such as Edge/GPRS. Bottom line is that if a radio can only support 10 bands, and any of them are taken up exclusively by Edge, that reduces the number available for LTE.


I wonder if Google has realized that they need CDMA if they want Nexus to go main stream

LTE, absolutely. CDMA? No. CDMA makes up a large portion of domestic users, but not much on the global front. Verizon is the most important global CDMA carrier, and so far, Verizon has been unwilling to budge on two key areas. First, they won't allow a truly unlocked device on their network. While the Verizon version of the iPhone 5 is unlocked due to some conditions attached to Verizon's LTE spectrum, the ESN is still attached to Verizon, and Verizon won't allow another carrier's iPhone on their network. Google wants the user to literally own the phone and swap carriers at will. Verizon won't allow this. The second issue has to do with software updates, and this is an area that Google needs to budge as much as if not more so than Verizon.

I would honestly be shocked to see Google place another Nexus on Verizon with the same terms that they agreed to with the Galaxy Nexus.
 
Possibly. I don't think Rubin was against LTE any more than 3G over Edge. I think his concern was that he wanted to make one device model, and that the technology at the time would not allow one model to work on the vast majority of LTE networks. There are now at least 43 recognized LTE bands, with bands 1-25 and 33-43 being actively used by various cellular networks. We do not have the technology today of supporting all of these networks in one device. Europe is currently going through some band consolidation to try to get most operators using similar bands, and the US is actually doing something similar (Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are all now supporting Band 4 for LTE). It's going to take three things to make supporting most LTE bands on one device a possibility;

1. Consolidation of bands. The more operators supporting fewer bands means more carriers supported by one device.

2. More frequencies supported by the radio/amplifier/antenna. I haven't looked at the latest and greatest, but the last Qualcomm chipsets that I looked at could only support 10 frequency ranges, subject to some limitations. For example, they could not support both AT&T and Verizon's 700mhz leases, it was one or the other. Second, they could not support two technologies on one band. IE, if Edge was on 850, then HSPA could not simultaneously be on 850. This is partly why T-Mobile is refarming. They want HSPA+ on 1900 so that LTE can work on 1700 without causing a conflict within the device.

3. Deprecation of older technologies, such as Edge/GPRS. Bottom line is that if a radio can only support 10 bands, and any of them are taken up exclusively by Edge, that reduces the number available for LTE.




LTE, absolutely. CDMA? No. CDMA makes up a large portion of domestic users, but not much on the global front. Verizon is the most important global CDMA carrier, and so far, Verizon has been unwilling to budge on two key areas. First, they won't allow a truly unlocked device on their network. While the Verizon version of the iPhone 5 is unlocked due to some conditions attached to Verizon's LTE spectrum, the ESN is still attached to Verizon, and Verizon won't allow another carrier's iPhone on their network. Google wants the user to literally own the phone and swap carriers at will. Verizon won't allow this. The second issue has to do with software updates, and this is an area that Google needs to budge as much as if not more so than Verizon.

I would honestly be shocked to see Google place another Nexus on Verizon with the same terms that they agreed to with the Galaxy Nexus.
Good points. I don't think there's anyway Google will put another phone on Verizon unless they get the same terms Apple does - 100% control over phone software and ability to push updates without getting approval.

On a side note, if a LTE Nexus 4 does come, they are going to need to do something about the battery. 2100 mah is not enough
 
ossibly. I don't think Rubin was against LTE any more than 3G over Edge. I think his concern was that he wanted to make one device model, and that the technology at the time would not allow one model to work on the vast majority of LTE networks. There are now at least 43 recognized LTE bands, with bands 1-25 and 33-43 being actively used by various cellular networks. We do not have the technology today of supporting all of these networks in one device. Europe is currently going through some band consolidation to try to get most operators using similar bands, and the US is actually doing something similar (Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are all now supporting Band 4 for LTE). It's going to take three things to make supporting most LTE bands on one device a possibility;

I wanted to expand on this because, well, I'm bored and wanted to rile up one of the forum 'tards :)

There are 36 LTE bands being used in the world right now for cellular networks (Bands 1-25, 33-43, inclusive). The iPhone 5, the poster child for LTE compatibility, comes in three models; A1428, A1429, and A1429 CDMA.

A1428 supports bands 4 and 17 (2/36, or 5.6% of available LTE bands).
A1429 supports bands 1, 3, and 5 (3/36, or 8.3%).
A1429 CDMA supports 1, 3, 5, 13, and 25 (5/36, or 13.8%).

However, a previous argument from someone on these boards was that the iPhone supported all of those bands simultaneously (bands 1, 2, 4, 5, 13, 17, and 25). By his math, that was 10 bands (it's actually 7 bands). That 7 band support, if it could have been accomplished in one device (it could, if we dropped legacy network support and got rid of the AT&T/Verizon compatibility issue), would result in only 7/36, or 19.4% band coverage.

So, that is why Google was apprehensive about supporting LTE. With the radios that were in mass production when the Nexus 4 was being manufactured, in order to support quad-band GSM and penta-band UMTS (as the Nexus 4 does), only one LTE band could be supported. The iPhone 5 A1428 model supports quad-band Edge, quad-band UMTS, and dual-band LTE. Google didn't want to spring for mono-band LTE support, or restrict GSM/UMTS support for a few more LTE frequencies. Newer radios likely support more than 10 bands by now. I am curious to see what bands are supported if this Nexus 4 rumors turns out to be true.

Good points. I don't think there's anyway Google will put another phone on Verizon unless they get the same terms Apple does - 100% control over phone software and ability to push updates without getting approval.

Actually, that's a concession that Google does have to learn to make. Apple and Microsoft both go through the Verizon approval process (Apple not going through it is a misconception).

Apple and Google both release their "beta" versions of their OS about 6 months prior to generic release. For Apple (and Microsoft), this means testing by OEMs and carriers. By the time you see a rollout to all devices, it's already been tested, you just weren't aware of it. By comparison, Google releases their "beta" to the public via the Nexus program. It takes about 6 months from that release for other OEMs/carriers to roll out their updates. If Google would allow their updates to be tested more openly by carriers/oems, we'd see a much more uniform rollout among devices that are closer to stock. Yes, custom skins would still hold up the process. However, these companies feel obligated to do their custom skins because they need a differentiator to justify the extra long wait.

Google is as much to blame as the OEMs/carriers for delayed Android updates and fragmentation. If they would be more inclusive in their testing, we'd have a more uniform rollout, better support, and less fragmentation.
 
I could see this happening. Google did same thing couple years ago with the Nexus-S. Was originally released on T-Mobile and GSM worldwide carriers in December 2010, and then six months later in May 2011 they released the Nexus-S 4G on CDMA carriers, mainly Sprint. And then again last year with the Galaxy Nexus, Sprint got their own specific CDMA version in April 2012, like six months after the original release from November 2011.

So going off that, I would guess a CDMA Nexus 4 would be for Sprint #1, not sure about Verizon.

I think I read couple years ago the CEO of Sprint was pretty tight with the Google gang, and more open to working with them on bloat free phones to run on CDMA network, where as Verizon was not. So I am guessing the new LTE Nexus 4 will be a Sprint release, and doubtful on Verizon.
 
Normally I don't post on medion's threads out of respect for those who suck at mathematics. But since this is a direct assault on me, I am forced to defend myself.

The whole premise of my argument is that Google should stop supporting CDMA carriers and just support GSM. The second premise is that since google's last two nexus phones has five different models, if it is google's intension to reduce the number of models, than I want to reduce it to three and see what could be possible with current hardware; another reason why 3 is important is that Apple only had 3 too. I designed 3 radios (American/EU/Asian) with different sets of bands that would cover close to 90% of all GSM/LTE carriers. The part where I don't know is whether the antennae (antennas) can be fit in the phone. And one big glaring hole of those is that Germany may lose support inside buildings because I can't fit a lower MHz 3G band. So I suggest adding a fourth phone but there will be a ton of redundancy between the Germany model and the EU one, cause I can't figure the most optimal way, and this also breaks my second premise about the 3 models to rule them all.

Medion just loves to put words in my mouth. He keeps adding CDMA back into the argument when I said to ignore them because GSM is way more universal.

Where I was wrong in the argument was my initial belief in how many bands can qualcomm radios support simultaneously; I was basically expecting a complete dynamic radio system. I have various sources (I quoted like 6 souces) to back up that initial false belief. Can't trust everything on the Internet! What Medion found was a qualcomm documentation released after we started our speculations, which actually listed how many low bands, high end, and super high bands at same time. This is also the one and only time Medion is right about anything we argued about. So I reworked my speculative radios, but the three models to cover a great majority (close to 90%) still holds up. Another discovery at that time is that the Rogers Canada phones such as the Galaxy S3 and the One X seemingly have broken the Qualcomm specs by having an extra band. I still don't know how that works, but if I am giving a extra band to work with, there could be a possibility to even have just two models, but to be on the safe side, three models for a great majority of GSM/LTE is definitely possible if that extra band can be used and pending antenna designs. If I recall correctly, the Rogers SGS3 alone can support over 60%.

I hope this clears things up.
 
Chang3d - you deserve a response because I baited you. Yes, my post was juvenile. It was intended as such. I hadn't been reading your posts for awhile (aside from what others had quoted). I thought the "cassette drive" and a few other things you had come up with were hilarious, if a bit fanboyish. But anyway, I was mainly seeing if you were ready to finally be the bigger man and bury the hatchet. I guess I had gotten my hopes up.

The whole premise of my argument is that Google should stop supporting CDMA carriers and just support GSM.

We agree.

The second premise is that since google's last two nexus phones has five different models, if it is google's intension to reduce the number of models, than I want to reduce it to three and see what could be possible with current hardware; another reason why 3 is important is that Apple only had 3 too.

Whether I agree or disagree is irrelevant. Google chose to focus on one model. Their reasons for doing so are their own. Nothing that you nor I say will change this.

I designed 3 radios (American/EU/Asian) with different sets of bands that would cover close to 90% of all GSM/LTE carriers.

I don't disagree with this. Even Apple supports many carriers with their three models.

http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/

Your problem was in your defensive attitude and your poor math. You kept insinuating that the iPhone supports 10 LTE bands (it doesn't, only 7 across 3 models), and that there were only 14 LTE bands in use (there aren't, there are 36). You stated that 10/14 was more than 70%. You're correct. However, your numerator and denominator were wrong. The correct numbers were 7/36, or 19.4%. So, whenever you claimed that I said "10/14 = 20%", you were once again just making a fool of yourself.

Medion just loves to put words in my mouth. He keeps adding CDMA back into the argument when I said to ignore them because GSM is way more universal.

Not at all. I never even mentioned CDMA in my argument, other than saying that the iPhone has a CDMA model. Conveniently, the iPhone 5 supports 4 LTE bands between the two GSM models, and three more LTE bands (plus two duplicated bands) on the CDMA model. Bottom line is that, well, deleting the CDMA model doesn't help your case. But as for putting words in your mouth? I don't need to. What you post is enough hilarity on its own :)

Where I was wrong in the argument was my initial belief in how many bands can qualcomm radios support simultaneously; I was basically expecting a complete dynamic radio system. I have various sources (I quoted like 6 souces) to back up that initial false belief. Can't trust everything on the Internet! What Medion found was a qualcomm documentation released after we started our speculations, which actually listed how many low bands, high end, and super high bands at same time.

This is where I applaud you. Your problem, however, is your faulty math and how you keep projecting it onto me. But hey, if it makes you feel superior. The math I did was simple, and anyone can follow it. So, I know that for the few who actually care, they can see who is right and who is wrong. You acknowledging it at this point means nothing to me.

. This is also the one and only time Medion is right about anything we argued about.

Correct...well, if you disregard our other arguments. Remember when you insisted that Krait is A15? Yes, you were vehement in that, insulted me quite a bit. You disappeared for about 2 weeks, then came back spouting the virtues of A15 over Krait. There were a few other cases where you disagreed with me, cut yourself off, then a week or two later parroted my ideas as your own. So go ahead and keep feeling superior, because every time you parrot something that I said, I get a grin on my face because we both know that you're admitting to being wrong :)

So I reworked my speculative radios, but the three models to cover a great majority (close to 90%) still holds up.

If it held up, OEMs would do this. The fact that the're not doing it should tell you something. HINT: You're not smarter than these engineers (and neither am I).

nother discovery at that time is that the Rogers Canada phones such as the Galaxy S3 and the One X seemingly have broken the Qualcomm specs by having an extra band. I still don't know how that works,

I'd explain it to you, but then you'd just argue for the sake of arguing, eventually realize that you were wrong, parrot my ideas two weeks later as your own, but still blast me for some reason relevant only to you.

If I recall correctly, the Rogers SGS3 alone can support over 60%.

You're recalling wrong. The Rogers SGS3 supports;
Edge - 850/900/1800/1900 (virtually all GSM networks)
UMTS/HSPA/HSPA+ - 850/1900/2100 (majority of GSM networks)
LTE - 1700/2100 (AWS)

For LTE, that means that it supports the following carriers (and this is a complete listing as of this post):
AT&T (United States)
Alaska Communications (United States)
Alaska GCI (United States)
T-Mobile (United States)
Bell/Virgin (Canada, eh?)
MTS (Canada, eh?)
Rogers (Canada, eh?)
Sasktel (Canada, eh?)
Telus/Koodo (Canada, eh?)
Telcel (Mexico)
Claro (Puerto Rico)

So no, you're not supporting 60% of LTE carriers with just that model. Or, did you change your stance from global support to just North American support, without mentioning it? Big difference.

I hope this clears things up.

Sure does. Anyway, I'm done tearing your post to shreds. I wanted to give you a second chance, and I see that you not only haven't changed, but may in fact be worse. Enjoy the blissful ignorance, because you are going back to ignore. Oh, and for old times sake, please respond to this post and get the last word in. I remember how important that was to you. In fact, I might even read that post for another grin :)
 
that's a pretty weak update.
LTE/CDMA is meaningless for GSM users and the additional space isn't enough to get existing N4 owners to upgrade, but I guess it wasn't aimed for them.
 
Check your sources on the number of LTE bands used by just GSM carriers; that's where you keep adding CDMA carriers back.

P.S. Somehow your memory of your past is totally different from mine. If anyone is posting insults, that is you. In fact, didn't we get a while bunch of people to look over my posts to see if any insults has been typed?
 
I am surprised by the lack of leaks for Android 5.0. If it truly will be announced and previewed at Google I/O next month, and be a huge point update, like going from Gingerbread to ICS, which was a big update, I haven't seen any leaks as to what we can expect.

Will the design and theme be different, like going from GB to ICS ? Will it just be previewed only at Google I/O, and not available until the Fall with the Nexus-Five ? Or actually released in May, or shortly after ?
 
I am surprised by the lack of leaks for Android 5.0. If it truly will be announced and previewed at Google I/O next month, and be a huge point update, like going from Gingerbread to ICS, which was a big update, I haven't seen any leaks as to what we can expect.

Will the design and theme be different, like going from GB to ICS ? Will it just be previewed only at Google I/O, and not available until the Fall with the Nexus-Five ? Or actually released in May, or shortly after ?
The days of showing a new product at some conference and then releasing it to the masses 6 months later are long over. Apple changed this with their product debuts. When people see something they like, they want it now.

I don't recall any major ICS leaks prior to the release of the Galaxy Nexus. I'm not worried.
 
I am surprised by the lack of leaks for Android 5.0. If it truly will be announced and previewed at Google I/O next month, and be a huge point update, like going from Gingerbread to ICS, which was a big update, I haven't seen any leaks as to what we can expect.

Will the design and theme be different, like going from GB to ICS ? Will it just be previewed only at Google I/O, and not available until the Fall with the Nexus-Five ? Or actually released in May, or shortly after ?
There are actually rumors saying Google might delay Android 5.0... but those are just rumors. What is confirmed is that Sony IS contributing to the project.
 
The only new release, that is 99% certain at Google I/O, is the next gen Nexus 7, again made by Asus, but with a higher res screen, maybe little larger screen, 2gb RAM, faster processor, running the latest Android OS.

Now will be getting just 4.3 this Summer, and the full big release of 5.0 KLP, delayed until Fall to come out with the Nexus-Five ?
 
So a lot of webadmins have been seeing Android 4.3 pop up in their server logs.

Looks like we will be seeing Android 4.3 at this years Google I/O and NOT 5.0. I still personally believe that we will see some sort of refreshed Nexus with more storage and possible CDMA/LTE support. You will definitely see a new generation of Nexus 7 running on Snapdragon this time around rather than Tegra.
 
Back
Top