x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Options
    Close




T-Mobile's Samsung Galaxy S III will not run on LTE network

0. phoneArena 25 Jun 2012, 18:56 posted on

T-Mobile has priced its versions of the Samsung Galaxy S III, both 16GB and 32GB models, at the highest price of any U.S. carrier selling the device; even at the highest price poitns, T-Mobile says that its version of the phone will not run on its future LTE pipeline...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:08 2

1. PapaSmurf (Posts: 7272; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Well that was obvious. HSPA 42 competes in Chicago pulling 20-25mbps constantly.

But I seriously don't know why T-Mobile keeps shooting itself in the foot by pricing the phone more than all three carriers...

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:08 3

12. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


because you save 30- 50 bux a month on the plan. You can pay 50 less for the phone once every 2 years.. I'll pay 30-50 bux less a month... see who comes out ahead :)

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 22:06 3

23. PapaSmurf (Posts: 7272; Member since: 14 May 2012)


T-Mobile is way cheaper than Sprint, like about $50 cheaper. I love T-Mobile.

If they would price the phone at $199, they would have more people upgrading. I know a lot of people not getting it because its above the $200 price tag. I've tried explaining its worth it in he long run, but they never listen. -_-

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 01:43 2

26. Forsaken77 (Posts: 545; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)


You're paying less monthly because you're getting worse coverage, overall, than the other carriers. Tmobile is the budget carrier for people that need cheaper prices. So why have the highest price, by $80, of all the other carriers? Doesn't make sense and isn't what their brand represents.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 09:30 1

29. disneydad (Posts: 114; Member since: 26 Mar 2012)


No, metroPCS and Cricket are the budget carriers for cheap phones.
I've had T-Mobile since 2003 and I've never had any major issues with coverage living in NJ and FL.
T-Mobile has reiterated time and again that they are not interested in subsidizing phones.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 10:11 1

35. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


you have the taco mentality of "its better because you pay more".

It was just proven AGAIN to have the same speeds as VZW LTE. Tmobile covers 94-95% of Americans where VZW covers 97%. Yet the plans are nearly double on VZW. It also has more "4g" network than VZW does.
Your paying for the name and tons of advertising.

A friend of mine switched from Tmo to VZW in atlanta, and even with LTE he says he drops more calls than Tmo and has constant voice quality issues. He's mad because he wants to go back to Tmo but doesnt want to pay the tons of contract cancellation fees.

posted on 27 Jun 2012, 19:13

51. phoenixpr (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Mar 2012)


Amen to that. You get for what you pay for. Fisher price service...

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:09 5

2. mas11 (Posts: 1024; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


The sad thing is that they will still call it a "4G" phone even though HSPA+ is more like 3.75G. Now I know Lte isn't true 4G according to the original definition of a 4G network, but it's the closest thing to it. It just annoys me when they market both Lte and HSPA+ as "4G."

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:48 7

6. PapaSmurf (Posts: 7272; Member since: 14 May 2012)


WiMAX is nowhere near 4G and Sprint advertised it as 4G. T-Mobile's 3G as faster than it and that's sad.

HSPA+ 42 dishes out speeds near or sometimes better than LTE. When T-Mobile deploys LTE Advanced next year, its going to be the carrier with the fastest speeds. LTE with HSPA 42 back haul? Hell yeah.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 01:45 1

27. Forsaken77 (Posts: 545; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)


LTE Advance next year? That's overly optimistic. They haven't even put up the regular LTE yet and that takes more than a year.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 02:02

28. gwhyte01 (Posts: 44; Member since: 09 Jul 2008)


They're not going to deploy regular lte. They're going straight to advanced on deployment.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 10:09

34. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


They are installing LTE-10 which is the base for LTE Advance. It wont take them long to basically flip a switch from one to the other. The installs are already in the works.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:50 7

7. Lboogey6 (Posts: 264; Member since: 31 Jan 2012)


Dude come on let it go it's marketing and has proof to be faster than regular 3g it's America we won't reach "true" 4g for a while lol the real liar is the 4s on Att now saying 4g lol.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:13 3

14. Malique001 (Posts: 58; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)


All of these are just all marketing strategies IMO. HSPA+ is like you said 3.75G lmao. Technically there is so "real" 4G except for LTE Advanced i believe.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 09:32 1

30. disneydad (Posts: 114; Member since: 26 Mar 2012)


Still clinging to that? No one has 'true' 4G as you said. Why worry about which technology is being called 4G? HSPA+ gives users significantly increased data speeds over 3G technology.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 13:01 1

40. SmartPhoneStream (Posts: 160; Member since: 21 Jun 2012)


Well if Verizon's LTE is allowed to be advertised as 4G then so should T-Mobile's 4G HSPA+42, because even though on average Verizon's LTE is faster than T-Mobile's HSPA+42, in 11 cities nationwide T-Mobile's HSPA+42 is faster than Verizon's LTE.

http://www.phonearena.com/news/T-Mobiles-HSPA-42Mbps-network-faster-than-Verizons-4G-LTE-in-11-cities_id31387

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:09 2

3. ajac09 (Posts: 1336; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)


no surprise they are gonna release the gs3 with quad core and LTE as soon as there lte advanced network goes live .

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:09 3

4. Krishaun27 (unregistered)


No s**t! For a network that doesnt exist on a phone without the radio to connect to it, common ppl...

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:34 2

5. Birds (Posts: 957; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)


lol, Lets face it! It is not really surprising. But who cares!!!! My cousin's One S pulls thirty megs down and ten megs up!!! That beats any LTE anywhere. lol

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 19:59 4

8. rockstarlive (Posts: 307; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)


Really.....I never knew...Tmobile didn't have LTE

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:01 4

9. eDiesel (Posts: 141; Member since: 17 Mar 2012)


That's the crappiest s3 so far. No exynos quad and no lte. Better off getting the tmo galaxy note.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:07 3

11. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


Tmo was just proven to be as fast/faster than VZW LTE, so I dont know where you get off thinking that. No SGS3 in america has exynos, and the Note uses the Older crapdragon S3 chip which is way less powerful than the S4 and worse on battery life by far.

So no... your not better off getting the note.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:38 3

17. eDiesel (Posts: 141; Member since: 17 Mar 2012)


Don't get me wrong I dislike vzw but they trash tmo I'm most places. Tmo is slow. Vzw is not called the largest and fastest for no reason. Personally I own a note, I don't see much benefit from another dual core , 4.x screen phone that has no lte and is a little faster. Tmo s3 = trash.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 22:04 1

21. PapaSmurf (Posts: 7272; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Thats your opinion, but studies shown otherwise.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 23:50 2

25. eDiesel (Posts: 141; Member since: 17 Mar 2012)


What are these studies you speak of?

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 14:46

45. SmartPhoneStream (Posts: 160; Member since: 21 Jun 2012)


PapaSmurf is correct, studies show that T-Mobile's 4G network is faster then Verizon's LTE in 11 cities. Overall though LTE is faster then HSPA+ but in some areas LTE is slower

http://www.phonearena.com/news/T-Mobiles-HSPA-42Mbps-network-faster-than-Verizons-4G-LTE-in-11-cities_id31387

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 10:07 1

33. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


yet Tmo has a much wider 4g network thats proven to be just as fast as VZW's LTE. They cover exactly 3% more population than Tmo. And they cost 50% more.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:05 3

10. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


Alan, your dead wrong

You DO NOT pay interest on the value plan. You get a super cheap plan in exchange for full priced phones. When you bill the the phone to the account, it is a flat rate, which is the remaining balance after down payment, and nothing else.

The phone is cheaper on Tmobile because the plans are so much cheaper. Even on regular non-value contract, its 80 a month for unl talk text and 2gig of web with no overages. Do the math. You pay a little more up front to save a ton in the end. One month's service pays the difference in the device, and then your saving for the next 23 months compared to every other major carrier. Cheaper plans mean less money for subsidies.

10 seconds worth of research.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 22:06

22. cfprelude (Posts: 115; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)


Hey man. What part of Jax are u in? I've been trying to reach out to u but email me when u have a chance (cfansher@gmail.com) .... Very interested in ur experience (speeds and coverage) with tmo in Jax. And which plans will be my best bet for cheaper than vzw. Thanks!

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 09:38

31. disneydad (Posts: 114; Member since: 26 Mar 2012)


Thank you for your clarification of EIP and Value plans on T-Mobile remixfa. You'd think with the comments on this site that the concept was like trying to grasp the theory of General Relativity.
Everyone needs to move on from the shiny temptress called 'Free Phone'. That 'free phone' makes up the difference in the monthly bill.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:10 1

13. bubbadoes (Posts: 319; Member since: 03 May 2012)


Whats the tmobile moto....largest what!. Say nomore

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:14 1

15. bubbadoes (Posts: 319; Member since: 03 May 2012)


http://www.t-mobile.com/

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:16 2

16. JunitoNH (Posts: 832; Member since: 15 Feb 2012)


So let me get this straight. Phone has a dual core; doesn't or wont support LTE; and it cost more to subsidize. What the heck are or is the advantage to even consider their network?

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:50 2

18. dominojohn (Posts: 1; Member since: 25 Jun 2012)


First post ever on PA. Been reading all the the comments and remixfa's gotten me all excited about Exynos. Besides the point, I agree with Tmos way of doing their subsidies. When they first launched, if you are a phone collector and geek like me, I would be able to take interest free loans on one line for multiple phones albiet I always had to fork over the down payment. At one point when I was a BB adict I would have a 8900, 9700, 9780, and even the Nokia 73mode since all of them supported an older version of wi fi calling (not the advanced version now that has to be pushed out as a sw upgrade to android phones whereas the original version was already preloaded on all BB and the Nokia). It was an awesome way to get all the phones you'd be drooling for but not have to pay for the phones at full price all at once. Of course there wasn't even an ETF. Your obligation was just to pay off the phone (s) then request an unlock and the only drawback was the selection of phones. They finally caught on to this so in order to get a phone on an interest free EIP, you have to pay off the initial phone first, then put down another down payment but at least there is no additional line to activate and as long as you maintain your contract, no ETF of 200 will be charged.

Not to go off on a wild tangent but there is another HUGE reason Tmo phones are much better since the failed merger with ATT. Since ATT had to provide spectrum (I assume AWS) Tmo started to refarm their frequencies with traditional 3G bands (which is a huge factor why adding another band and power amplifier for AWS is a cost/benefit ratio that Apple did not want to entertain for the iPhone but will have to with Iphone 5 {proof in the schematics and other reasons....} so ALL Tmo phones have support for bands I (2100) II (850 ATT) III (900 Japan's DocoMo) IV (AWS) V (1900) for their UMTS HSPA (at least up to 21Mbs). ALL TMO phones for the past year and a half including their White Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G locked. Don't go by the website; you have to look at the supported frequencies on the box and on the device itself but it's true. if you ever want to switch to ATT, you can but just without LTE (700) but unlocking a Tmo phone essentially gets you a 3G/4G phone on either carrier. This is what true unlocking is suppose to benefit the consumers; not an Iphone on EDGE but with the refarming taking place, it all makes sense. BTW, I have the TMo One S, GS III, and GNex and until the first two gets unlocked, I would have a "real" unlocked phone. So if you want real freedom go with T-Mobile unless immediate LTE (which is scarce with ATT) is a necessity don't bother with ATT (or buy the international version then anyway; the GSIII and the GNote would be plenty fast on HSPA+ and Exynos to boot.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 22:16 1

24. PapaSmurf (Posts: 7272; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Your first post can be considered a novel... Haha jk.

Welcome to Phonearena. Your posts are most likely going to get thumbed down because of i5heeps.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 20:52

19. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 2927; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)


Very impressive speeds if you are in the right area. It's a no brainer to get. I usually get 13 mbps down with AT&T. So while I would love having LTE in my area, I can definitely wait as I am loving the speeds and service. Always test out a phone and the service before fully commiting to it. 2 years is a long time if you have crappy service even if you have an amazing phone. I'm really glad Samsung managed to rush these out to the states on all major carriers roughly at the same time and not long after the international version was released.

posted on 25 Jun 2012, 21:36 1

20. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 2927; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)


this is what I get on average at work/city I hang out in most of the time.

http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/458467_10151824895580580_701637997_o.jpg

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 10:14

36. jenna_23 (Posts: 145; Member since: 02 Apr 2010)


Who ever thumbed u down is just hating on u that u got those speeds on atts hspa and not LTE i also get those speeds on atts hspa and on LTE 30-35 MBPS and I noticed the upload speed like in your pic is always faster on atts hspa whether its 3g or 4G than on t-mobile which is good for uploading videos and stuff like that its faster than t- mobile.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 11:39

38. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 2927; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)


Yep it seems like there's always some jealous little troll that has to thumb down people.

I am impressed with HSPA whether it be from AT&T or T Mobile. It's really nice to have a solid network and can have another fast network to run on other than LTE.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 11:59

39. jenna_23 (Posts: 145; Member since: 02 Apr 2010)


I' m sure its remixfa who thumbs down everyone who says something about at&t or Verizon. But anyways its a good thing u posted up your pic so people can see that also atts hspa is capable of getting more than 10 mbps not only t-mobile's hspa cuz most people on here think only t-mobile's hspa gets those speeds.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 13:07

41. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


you shouldnt be so sure. I rarely thumb down anyone for having an opinion. I reserve the thumb down for trolls like Taco that really need a good down-thumbing.

In some markets (not that many though), ATT's HSPA+ can go to 21mb/s if you have a capable phone, like their regular SGS2.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 13:10

43. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


but just to be sure, I DID just thumb you down for assuming it was me without any proof, or asking.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 14:07

44. jenna_23 (Posts: 145; Member since: 02 Apr 2010)


So I don't care I also just thumbed u down WAIT a minute I ALWAYS do.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 16:31 1

46. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 2927; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)


Remix and I are cool so I know it wasn't him. I respect him.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 19:36

48. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


darn skippy :)

posted on 27 Jun 2012, 04:37

49. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 2927; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)


I respect your opinions on T-MOBILE. If I got good coverage with them I certainly wouldn't be on at&t right now. But coverage is very important to a consumer and should never settle for less in their area. You have never bashed me out of fanboyism just because I don't agree with you completely on certain things tho we have agreed on just about everything that I can think of.

I only love at&t because of their awesome speeds and coverage and my galaxy s 3. It's not out of fanboyism nor do I think they are omgg way better than Verizon

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 10:07

32. jenna_23 (Posts: 145; Member since: 02 Apr 2010)


Still the upload speed is crap -_-

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 10:43

37. deeoh1084 (Posts: 48; Member since: 30 Dec 2009)


my question is... why couldn't they just use the quad core exynos processor? i know Exynos only supports up to 21mbps but still i wouldn't mind... stupid T-Mobile...

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 13:10

42. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


its because they are in a numbers war against LTE and dont want to be percieved as slower. TMobile and VZW's LTE are capable and deliver the same speeds, but only when you have a phone that can do HSPA+42mb/s.

I wish they would have brought the Quad Exynos myself, but unfortunately they bow to marketing pressure like everyone else.

posted on 26 Jun 2012, 16:39

47. yamilrx (Posts: 3; Member since: 26 Jun 2012)


The true defenition of LTE is over 100mbs which has only been attained in labs. Eventually it will be here. For those Tmobile hater. I have tried them all except verizon but have done speedtests on Vrz 3g Iphone and you can barely make it to .8mbs. As far as Sprint goes, I broke my contract because I could not stand the slowness. What good is unlimited if you cannot get on because it is too slow, there Wimax was going nowhere and they are bleeding red due to the iphone contract. I have Tmobile and and family has At&T except for the crappy customer service the speeds are on par. Look at the latest speedtest comparison and you will see Tmobile fared well. Remember there HSDPA+ has been around and is used to the traffic compared to ATT and VRZ which have not truly experienced network traffic which brings the LTE to 6mbps or equal to Tmobile. i run a Galaxy nexus and a nexus one on Tmobile and I can tether for free. Try doing that on ATt or Vrz or even Sprint. To me the worst as far as dropped calls, unable to connect and network speed is Sprint. I highly recommend Tmobile as they don't nickle and dime you.

posted on 27 Jun 2012, 10:06

50. fsolarte24 (Posts: 1; Member since: 27 Jun 2012)


"The 16GB version of the Samsung Galaxy S III is $279.99 with a 2-year contract or $229.99 for the value plan for which you pay interest."

This is not true, you do not pay interest on the value plan!!!

posted on 11 Jul 2012, 20:53

52. joisawesome (Posts: 1; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)


"With interest" ......Um, NEGATIVE. On the value plans, there is no charge to finance, and there is no interest on the bill, thanks.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories