Apple Must Approve Carrier LTE Networks Before Allowing iPhone 5 to Connect to Them

[terraphantm]

Originally Posted by tymaster50

doesn't use the same LTE bands and it's not an official carrier so there is really no basis lol

Could always buy the Verizon model, which comes unlocked and has the international LTE bands. So yes, there is a basis.

[nickn]

Originally Posted by gregwyattjr

This is Apple ensuring the best possible experience for the customer.

Really??? I had no idea having no service is better than having poor service...

[thewitt]

Originally Posted by nickn

Really??? I had no idea having no service is better than having poor service...

Since poor service is always reflected back on Apple, then yes they are probably better off...

----------

Originally Posted by johsonka3

This kind of crap goes well with Apple's obsession for control over things like removable batteries, upgradeable RAM, the ability to take back your own media from iDevices, etc.

Hard to defend Apple when history shows the company for its true colours.... often.

Just choose a different phone supplier. There are plenty of options out there.

[AppliedMicro]

Originally Posted by tymaster50

The carrier settings determine if the LTE switch is there or not.

Which carrier settings? With GRPS, EDGE and 3G, I'd enter APN, Proxy, Port, DNS, user name & password - and that's it. In fact, on my carriers, correct APN suffices. Don't you think my carrier knows these settings? And even if there other carrier settings necessary for LTE:

The carrier settings are deliberately held back by Apple (without customer access), as this article and carriers themselves state.

Originally Posted by tymaster50

Well what is the point of having LTE if it doesn't work?

The sole reason for LTE not working is Apple unwillingness to enable it. So yeah... what's the point of advertising LTE support (they advertise LTE band support, not specific carrier support, mind you), if Apple don't provide it?

Originally Posted by NathanA

Was this meant to be sarcasm? As AppliedMicro pointed out, there are many, many carriers that Apple has agreements with to sell iPhone who have never implemented Visual Voicemail.

I guess he was being sarcastic - though it isn't really apparent unless you know the state of visual voicemail support (which I quickly had to took up as well)

[tymaster50]

Originally Posted by AppliedMicro

Which carrier settings? With GRPS, EDGE and 3G, I'd enter APN, Proxy, Port, DNS, user name & password - and that's it. In fact, on my carriers, correct APN suffices. Don't you think my carrier knows these settings? And even if there other carrier settings necessary for LTE:

The carrier settings are deliberately held back by Apple (without customer access), as this article and carriers themselves state.


The sole reason for LTE not working is Apple unwillingness to enable it. So yeah... what's the point of advertising LTE support (they advertise LTE band support, not specific carrier support, mind you), if Apple don't provide it?



I guess he was being sarcastic - though it isn't really apparent unless you know the state of visual voicemail support (which I quickly had to took up as well)

I've seen reports on this site saying there was no enable LTE toggle, only enable 3G in certain countries, then a quick carrier settings update put the switch there. I'm in the US so all the international stuff doesn't apply to me, we have the enable LTE switch no matter what.

[glynhughes]

Originally Posted by NathanA

Was this meant to be sarcasm?

Yes.

[tbrinkma]

Originally Posted by kdarling

The beef seems not to be about testing per se, but about Apple doing the "approving" instead of the carriers.

I'll bet it's "as well as", rather than "instead of". But even then, I sincerely doubt that the manufacturers didn't actually test their hardware on a carrier's network before selling the phones to the carrier (and their authorized sales channels). Maybe Apple's testing process is more involved, than 'typical', but the apparent claim that the manufacturers didn't used to do testing just doesn't feel plausible.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by tbrinkma

Maybe Apple's testing process is more involved, than 'typical', but the apparent claim that the manufacturers didn't used to do testing just doesn't feel plausible.

Yep, phone manufacturers have always had neighboring offices and test engineers dedicated to each carrier's test group.

And yep again, this wouldn't stop the carriers from doing their own usual testing.

---

What's a bit hypocritical about the situation, is that some people slam carriers for taking extra time to test an Android release (especially for the Nexus) for their network, yet praise Apple for doing extra testing.

Extra testing by anyone is always good, and sometimes quite necessary (*). Neither manufacturers nor carriers are delaying to make more money, that's for sure. They want the devices out as soon as possible, but they also want to safeguard their reputation.

(*) Recall that when the iPhone 3GS first came out, there was a bug in the iPhone WCDMA broadband code that caused phones and cells to ramp up power until users on the cell fringe were dropped. Horrible mess, and should've been caught in the most basic testing by AT&T and Apple.

[wesk702]

Thank you for using 4G appropriately. At least the Swiss know what real 4g is.

[boglott]

Originally Posted by wesk702

Thank you for using 4G appropriately. At least the Swiss know what real 4g is.

We only know since the iPhone 3G
That generation-naming was rather unknown in Europe before, since we only had compatible networks using the technologies of the GSMA. The provider and people used the technology names GSM and UMTS when talking about 2G and 3G networks. People knew that if they had a phone supporting GSM, they could use it on the network of any provider they chose. And if it supported UMTS, they additionally could use the faster UMTS network of their provider and its features like video calling.
The 2G/3G/4G naming is mainly useful to subsume incompatible network technologies with similar features and speeds like AMPS/IS-95/GSM (2G) or CDMA2000/UMTS (3G). A situation that we didn't have in Europe since the technology to use was regulated by the governments.

Although Apple made those 2G/3G/4G namings commonly known, the European customer still understands it as an indication for a new incompatible technology, rather than an indication of the quality of service of a provider. So if you want to name something 4G, the European customer doesn't understand that it's just a faster service by its provider, based on the pimping of an existing network, but it's a new incompatible technology (LTE), which needs a new network and new devices to be used.

[mrholder]

Originally Posted by apollo1444

hey mate what country are you in and what is the name of the operator?

apple are dumb even the GS3 is getting LTE support in my country

I'm in the US. C Spire is the carrier.

[marcoluciano]

I've some good news from Europe,

according to some reports on Facebook and Twitter, with the new iOs 6.1 Beta3, LTE is working with these carriers:

• Belgium: Proximus
• Italy: Vodafone IT
• Italy: TIM
• Switzerland: Swisscom

waiting for more reports

[omenatarhuri]

Originally Posted by waldobushman

You bought into LTE because of performance. Since Apple has not yet enabled it, you are likely the beneficiary of not experiencing poor LTE performance over the Finish carriers' network. So instead of complaining about not having the service, you would be complaining because the service would not be working properly.

Uh, alright.

At least Nokia has some models working on LTE here, so it's not so much about the operator as it is about Apple prioritizing. Can't blame em though, it's a rather small market. Sucks for us nevertheless, and some people will choose another phone because of this until it is fixed. Fingers crossed for iOS6.1.