Official Avail. Nov 13th - Android 4.2 - LG Nexus 4 - Asus Nexus 7 - Samsung Nexus 10

[bearxor]

I appreciate a lot of the enthusiasm in the thread, but lets be honest. This isn't going to change the carrier model one bit.

 

[Spicedaddy]

I don't get how the LG Nexus 4 is an example of Google sticking it to the carriers. How is this any different from the Galaxy Nexus?

The price. Unlocked phones don't sell because they're too expensive.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Apparently some people still don't understand what the Nexus is about.

It is not meant to be a "complete" phone, neither of the 4 were. When they were launched, they were either accompanied by better siblings or they
were intentionally lacking in certain areas because they weren't supposed/allowed to draw too much intention. What is the purpose of the Optimus G? Why would LG even bother making it if the Nex4 had LTE and larger storage at $299?
Since inception, Nexus has been about carefully promoting Android without hurting the OEM's tasked with making one. All Google did with the latest phone is compromise less than they did in the past. Including LTE would mean bending over backwards again to please the carriers, more storage would have killed the final incentive to opt for the Optimus G, find me an OEM that would have done that.

1) Then what is it meant to be? A phone missing some important features?
- The Galaxy Nexus severely lacked graphics power. How do you develop graphics intense stuff?
- The LG Nexus lacks LTE? How do you develop LTE based software? Switch toggles for 2G-3G-4G? Auto switching LTE when screen is off (like the 2G/3G auto goggle)? Perhaps creating Tasker profiles to mess with LTE / HSPA connectivity settings?

To me the phone doesn't need to be a killer, but it needs to be balanced, and have an toolset available to developers.

2) Google doesn't have to compete at $299? I think you all were prepared to shell out $399 easily or even $449 for sufficient storage given the comments here.

Of course LG is going to be pissed if you duplicate its phone and undercut them significantly.

3) The Nexus S was priced similarly with the Galaxy S1. The Galaxy S2 didn't launch til 6 months later. The Galaxy Nexus was also priced high $549??? They were also roughly equivalent to then flagship phones.

4) Compromise less? 8gb/16gb to me is a bigger compromise than before. Furthermore, even if specs are consistent with last year's, it's a bigger compromise than before because technology is changing and specs are going up. So the lack of LTE in this year's phone is a bigger deal than last year's phone. It's especially a bigger deal now that Apple's been shown to be able to do it with global LTE, and other handsets such as the HTC One X+, Optimus G, XPeria T, Lumia 920 are all featuring global LTE. It's about the industry standard moving up.

5) Including LTE does not require you to bend backwards to carriers. You can add LTE frequencies without having to sell through a carrier. Is this what carrier subsidies has done to people? That they think the inclusion of a hardware feature is bending backwards to carriers? Is adding 3G UMTS/HSPA bending backwards to carriers? If the idea is you can use this phone unlocked 3G anywhere, you can add 4G LTE frequencies using the same baseband as the iPhone 5 international, and allow this new phone to be used unlocked with LTE capabilities. I don't see how that's bending over to carriers.

 

[quest55720]

I appreciate a lot of the enthusiasm in the thread, but lets be honest. This isn't going to change the carrier model one bit.

It might not but it finally makes pre-paid a reasonable option for those who want a higher end phone. Hell google should team up with strait talk and sell them at walmart and major online retailers. Sell a special bundle 800 dollars for a nexus 4 16 gig and a year of service. I know google does not like the carrier model and to break it there has to be a start some where. This could be it get a few more good phones at a reasonable price unlocked and it will get people over to pre-paid. It is just disgusting how ripped off we are in the US with cell phone plan prices and extremely low data caps.

Unless you are one of the lucky few with a grandfathered in unlimited data plan I see no reason to complain about no LTE. What so you can get to your measily 2 gig cap faster? Not to mention battery life. I will take 3g with the same cap for less than half the price. Yes no SD card really sucks but hey if it can save me 1k a year by getting off the major carriers with my 2 lines then well it is well worth it.

 

[ponyo]

Where is the iPhone 5 pentaband?

 

[vshah]

(2) forgo LTE but make sure that you still get decent speeds (Too bad its HSPA+ 21, and not HSPA+ 42 - but Hey it may still be "Good enough" Honestly I care more about responsivenes/ latency than raw download speed).

apparently it is dc-hspa 42mbps !
http://www.androidcentral.com/fyi-nexus-4-rocks-42-mbps

 

[ponyo]

apparently it is dc-hspa 42mbps !
http://www.androidcentral.com/fyi-nexus-4-rocks-42-mbps

On Google Play tech spec page, it shows HSPA+ 21. So is Google wrong on their own spec page? I doubt T-Mobile is getting their own special version.

https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_4_16gb

 

[magomago]

I don't get how the LG Nexus 4 is an example of Google sticking it to the carriers. How is this any different from the Galaxy Nexus?

1) Ok, so there's no partnership with Verizon

What did that change? Did Google/Samsung sacrifice anything (ok sure some resources) in having a VZW version? Did it significantly negatively impact the HSPA+ international version? Maybe the VZW version left a sour taste in people's mouths because VZW as slow to upgrade, but once again the HSPA+ version was maintained the way it was meant to be.

If anything the LG Nexus cuts out an extra opportunity for VZW users. To me the VZW deal was an extra. Icing on the cake. The basic international version of the Nexus is still offered in both cases. All of a sudden Google's sticking it to the carriers by not offering a VZW version? It's not like the carriers are like "oh crap we're missing out on the Nexus" either because it's only going to work on the GSM carriers just like the previous GSM Nexii anyway.

2) But you bring back T-Mobile

So how is this any different than the Nexus One or the Nexus S? Now it's just another T-Mobile launched Nexus instead of a VZW Nexus. But once again how is it sticking it to the carriers if you're partnering with T-Mobile? Google's just partnering with a different carrier this time. Maybe VZW blew it, but that's besides the point.

My point is you stopped partnering with a larger carrier and ditched them for a smaller one. Still doesn't change the fundamental fact that you need the partnership to sell the phone to Verizon customers in the US. The same goes with Sprint.

3) This phone doesn't fundamentally change the fact that the carriers are still in command.

You're not going to run this phone on a CDMA network, and you can't run it on AT&T LTE. You know why I was upset about not having LTE? In a true suck it manner to the carriers, Google would've added global LTE. Maybe not the American flavors because that would possibly sacrifice international LTE, but at least the global band. And if the could somehow incorporate AT&T (yes AT&T is important because you can use a SIM card and use any SIM-based phone you want) bands, then that would be really sticking it to the carriers. You can't really tell Verizon to shove it because you're not going to be able to use a phone on their network unless you sell it through them.

So essentially, I don't see anything different with this phone at all.

The only difference I see is pricing, and that's not telling the carriers to suck it. It's telling Apple, Samsung, HTC to compete. But since these manufacturers have had ages to sell unsubsidized phones for lower prices, only time will tell if they want to compete.

Partner with Tmobile under Google's terms. Phone is still in control of Google & its the same phone (With the exception of this HSPA+ 42 MB thing)

I don't know/care about this whole "stick it to the Carrier" thing, but it isn't a contradiction.

"You can sell the phone through yourself if you don't touch the Software at all and leave us in control of it. Who is in?"

Verizon: "F that Noise"
Tmobile: "Okay, F it. I'll bite."
AT&T: No one knows (probably rolling in $$ From iphone5)


Its probably why its getting offered through LG as well - they were willing to put the phone together for a particular price, and give up SW control to google.

And when you look at it all at the end of the day, the Nexus 4 delivers. Hardware that compromises less than in the past for what the majority of consumers care about, while maintainiung an insanely great price

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Without me going into the nitty gritty, I agree with everything you said DLeRium.

I wont be getting this phone mainly because Im on Verizon and losing LTE and unlimited data is not worth it. But it is a nice phone and I might consider picking one up before I go to Europe next year.

 

[magomago]

The price. Unlocked phones don't sell because they're too expensive.

I thought the same unless the 350 dollar Galaxy Nexus. Now with a 300 dollars Nexus 4, I'm sold.

Remember, most phones on Contract run you 200 bucks. Once they've been out for a while you can get some good 50 dollar rebates to bring it to 150.


Eventually people will realize that Buying your own phone outright at these prices, and having a contract only for the service is going to be the way to go. But to get to that price, these phones have to be offered at a good price, and 350 is undercutting the 500-600 dollar market by a LOT.

 

[magomago]

1) Then what is it meant to be? A phone missing some important features?
- The Galaxy Nexus severely lacked graphics power. How do you develop graphics intense stuff?
- The LG Nexus lacks LTE? How do you develop LTE based software? Switch toggles for 2G-3G-4G? Auto switching LTE when screen is off (like the 2G/3G auto goggle)? Perhaps creating Tasker profiles to mess with LTE / HSPA connectivity settings?

To me the phone doesn't need to be a killer, but it needs to be balanced, and have an toolset available to developers.

2) Google doesn't have to compete at $299? I think you all were prepared to shell out $399 easily or even $449 for sufficient storage given the comments here.

Of course LG is going to be pissed if you duplicate its phone and undercut them significantly.

3) The Nexus S was priced similarly with the Galaxy S1. The Galaxy S2 didn't launch til 6 months later. The Galaxy Nexus was also priced high $549??? They were also roughly equivalent to then flagship phones.

4) Compromise less? 8gb/16gb to me is a bigger compromise than before. Furthermore, even if specs are consistent with last year's, it's a bigger compromise than before because technology is changing and specs are going up. So the lack of LTE in this year's phone is a bigger deal than last year's phone. It's especially a bigger deal now that Apple's been shown to be able to do it with global LTE, and other handsets such as the HTC One X+, Optimus G, XPeria T, Lumia 920 are all featuring global LTE. It's about the industry standard moving up.

5) Including LTE does not require you to bend backwards to carriers. You can add LTE frequencies without having to sell through a carrier. Is this what carrier subsidies has done to people? That they think the inclusion of a hardware feature is bending backwards to carriers? Is adding 3G UMTS/HSPA bending backwards to carriers? If the idea is you can use this phone unlocked 3G anywhere, you can add 4G LTE frequencies using the same baseband as the iPhone 5 international, and allow this new phone to be used unlocked with LTE capabilities. I don't see how that's bending over to carriers.

1) LTE and More Storage isn't an important Feature.

Perceived speed and smoothness is. The display is really key. Ram probably is because people play games that suck up ram like no tomorrow. The Quadcore Krait was probably at/near the same cost in the quantites that they were buying at. The company I am working for is opting for a certain Quad core processor because the dual core variant is only 5 dollars cheaper, and we aren't pushing high enough volumes that it matters.

2) Maybe others yeah, but my cut off was 350. Maybe 400 if I felt weak. I wouldn't want to pay the extra $$ for the extra space on the phone, and I'm sure other consumers think similarly.

3) Galaxy Nexus price dropped in April to 350 where it sat. That is the sweet spot. 500+? Count me out.

4)Your opinion. I'd rather compromise on space than RAM, Processor, or Display

5) Only Verizon truly has nationwide LTE. HSPA+ (atleast for tmobile) does a great job hanging in there when compared to LTE.
http://images.pcworld.com/images/article/2012/04/wireless_average_speeds3-11348521.jpg

Come on man recognize how incredible this phone is for the price it offers, and how little it compromised compared to the previous Google Nexus phones. And its true: If you want more storage, or LTE, go for an Optimus G. The Nexus 4 is for the rest of us that don't quite care.

 

[magomago]

Without me going into the nitty gritty, I agree with everything you said DLeRium.

I wont be getting this phone mainly because Im on Verizon and losing LTE and unlimited data is not worth it. But it is a nice phone and I might consider picking one up before I go to Europe next year.

Yup. If you are on Verizon and LTE matters to you, this is not the phone to get. Hell, you CAN'T get this phone.

But if you are on Tmobile or AT&T, this phone is an EXTREMELY ATTRACTIVE sell, especially because the only compromises is an LTE radio that has limited use for AT&T's congested network, and more Storage.

And if you are on Tmobile, or about to re sign, the only other phone worth considering is a Samsung Galaxy S3. Even then, it makes so much more financial sense to switch to a Value plan and just buy this phone from the google play store out right. Anyone seriously considering Tmobile should have this phone on the short list of 3.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Where is the iPhone 5 pentaband?

It's not available. But what would pentaband support be helping? T-Mobile. The only reason to offer pentaband would be to sell through a carrier. It's obvious Apple doesnt' really go the unlocked model in the US, so not sure what you're getting at.

If you're trying to insinuate that the exclusion of 4G is like the exclusion of T-Mobile's AWS frequencies, then it's not really a fair comparison. I'm not advocating for adding LTE to please AT&T or Verizon or Sprint of T-Mobile customers. There's no specific carrier target in mind. If this is about an unlocked international phone, then it should add LTE capabilities that serve to support the same target audience. That same target audience will be migrating to LTE soon, and this can be accomplished using the Qualcomm MDM9615 baseband that is used in the iPhone. Or how about the HTC One X+?

What I want is global LTE support which phones like the Lumia 920, Optimus G, HTC One X+ have. If it supports US bands, so be it, but I doubt it will because that's the state of fragmentation we're in. But adding LTE would benefit the billions already served by having UMTS 900/2100 capabilities.

Look, it's unfortunate T-Mobile customers got shafted. But what do you expect when the rest of the world is using GSM 900/1800/1900 technology, UMTS2100, LTE Band 1, etc. etc. Then yes, I think it's a phone manufacturer's priority to address the largest markets first. Customers who choose T-Mobile are also buying into a frequency that's not used. That's something they're getting themselves into. Just like if you choose Verizon, you're choosing CDMA technology, and therefore most likely foregoing the opportunity to freely switch SIMs across networks easily unless you somehow got a global phone.

The LTE strategy seems to be at present:
1) Support global LTE but forego US LTE
2) Support US LTE but forego global LTE

Now which seems more likely given that the unlocked phone model only works for 2/4 US carriers, and that the unlocked phone market is far larger outside of the US? If you all seem to think option 2 is bending over to the carriers because it likely involves selling the phone through the carrier, then that's fine. Tell me what's wrong with Option 1? Does it take away from your Nexus 4? Does it negatively impact your phone?

It only makes sense for Option 1 because it matches the business model of the Nexus 4. Now if there were an option 3 that allows support of global LTE and US LTE in one model, I'd be all for it. That would be the true suck it to the carriers option.

 

[magomago]

apparently it is dc-hspa 42mbps !
http://www.androidcentral.com/fyi-nexus-4-rocks-42-mbps

I'll wait for a google correction. Maybe this is the consolation Tmobile gets it when you buy it through them: you get HSPA+42 isntead of 21.

Not that it matters to me lol; I'm on a AT&T Bold 9000 running on the edge network, so I'll all feel faster haha.

 

[badb0y]

Wow, nice price on the Nexus 4 but goddamn that tablet looks ugly.

 

[SEAL62505]

I couldn't be more excited. I hope the camera can keep up with other recent offerings. $350 is ridiculously cheap for this. So glad I didn't buy a used iPhone 4S...

 

[ponyo]

It's not available. But what would pentaband support be helping? T-Mobile. The only reason to offer pentaband would be to sell through a carrier. It's obvious Apple doesnt' really go the unlocked model in the US, so not sure what you're getting at.
[/B]

It would help million+ people who's currently on T-Mobile and using the iPhone on 2G EDGE. Forget LTE. These people like the iPhone so much that they're willing to put up with 2G. International LTE helps who? It doesn't help me. It doesn't help millions on T-Mobile. If the iPhone had pentaband like the Galaxy Nexus and Nexus 4, it would benefit millions of us on prepaid. I could jump from AT&T to T-Mobile back and forth like I can with Galaxy Nexus. Why would offering pentaband require sell through carrier? I didn't buy my Galaxy Nexus through a carrier. T-Mobile doesn't have to carry it. So why is it OK for Apple not to offer pentaband?

 

[Fire&Blood]

It's not available. But what would pentaband support be helping? T-Mobile. The only reason to offer pentaband would be to sell through a carrier. It's obvious Apple doesnt' really go the unlocked model in the US, so not sure what you're getting at.

If you're trying to insinuate that the exclusion of 4G is like the exclusion of T-Mobile's AWS frequencies, then it's not really a fair comparison. I'm not advocating for adding LTE to please AT&T or Verizon or Sprint of T-Mobile customers. There's no specific carrier target in mind. If this is about an unlocked international phone, then it should add LTE capabilities that serve to support the same target audience. That same target audience will be migrating to LTE soon, and this can be accomplished using the Qualcomm MDM9615 baseband that is used in the iPhone. Or how about the HTC One X+?

What I want is global LTE support which phones like the Lumia 920, Optimus G, HTC One X+ have. If it supports US bands, so be it, but I doubt it will because that's the state of fragmentation we're in. But adding LTE would benefit the billions already served by having UMTS 900/2100 capabilities.

Look, it's unfortunate T-Mobile customers got shafted. But what do you expect when the rest of the world is using GSM 900/1800/1900 technology, UMTS2100, LTE Band 1, etc. etc. Then yes, I think it's a phone manufacturer's priority to address the largest markets first. Customers who choose T-Mobile are also buying into a frequency that's not used. That's something they're getting themselves into. Just like if you choose Verizon, you're choosing CDMA technology, and therefore most likely foregoing the opportunity to freely switch SIMs across networks easily unless you somehow got a global phone.

The LTE strategy seems to be at present:
1) Support global LTE but forego US LTE
2) Support US LTE but forego global LTE

Now which seems more likely given that the unlocked phone model only works for 2/4 US carriers, and that the unlocked phone market is far larger outside of the US? If you all seem to think option 2 is bending over to the carriers because it likely involves selling the phone through the carrier, then that's fine. Tell me what's wrong with Option 1? Does it take away from your Nexus 4? Does it negatively impact your phone?

It only makes sense for Option 1 because it matches the business model of the Nexus 4. Now if there were an option 3 that allows support of global LTE and US LTE in one model, I'd be all for it. That would be the true suck it to the carriers option.

Yes, I expected a $450+ price tag and LTE, I expected more of the same. I also expected the phone to be less appealing overall.

I am positive that, here in the US it won't sell well. I expect it to sell better than predecessors but it won't reach the market share of halo phones because it wasn't meant to. I am very grateful because with this phone, Google is reminding people of what role the carriers have elsewhere in the world, little more than dumb pipelines. IMO, a $300 Nex4 is a genius way of highlighting everything that's wrong with the US market, a monument to the consumer power that is forfeited all for a peanuts subsidy and a (broken) promise of infinite Mbps.

If you want LTE that bad, get the Optimus G. If you want the best of both worlds, Google burned that bridge this time around and rightly so, there is no reason to play along with the carrier "no compromise" charade all over again.
The GNex launch/update delays and other attempts by carriers are exactly opposed to what the Nexus is supposed to be about. Shouldn't be too hard to understand why Google didn't want to do that again.
3-4 months down the road, no one is going to shed a tear/ETF over this phone because market will be populated with 1080p/LTE devices, no one is even going to know about it unless they peak into a T-Mobile store.

 

[Raghu]

Good pricing on the Nexus4, especially for the prepaid guys. 16/32GB for 299/349 would have been perfect.

It will be interesting if Google buys one of the carriers, just like Motorola.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

It would help million+ people who's currently on T-Mobile and using the iPhone on 2G EDGE. Forget LTE.

Millions. A few millions on T-Mobile. How many people use WCDMA Band 1 2100 MHz and are poised to transition to LTE Band 1? Billions.

These people like the iPhone so much that they're willing to put up with 2G.

If they love the iPhone so much they can switch carriers too.

International LTE helps who? It doesn't help me. It doesn't help millions on T-Mobile.

Great for you. Many more use LTE band 1 than T-Mobile's network size.

If the iPhone had pentaband like the Galaxy Nexus and Nexus 4, it would benefit millions of us on prepaid. I could jump from AT&T to T-Mobile back and forth like I can with Galaxy Nexus. Why would offering pentaband require sell through carrier? I didn't buy my Galaxy Nexus through a carrier. T-Mobile doesn't have to carry it.

But you're talking Galaxy Nexus versus iPhone business model. Apple tends to go through carriers. They make the carriers follow their rules, but they still sell through carriers. Google doesn't do that. Of all the Nexus launches, each only goes through 1 carrier in the US. Let's not forget there are hundreds of worldwide carriers still. Google's launching unlocked to the rest of the world.

If Apple were to include pentaband for the sake of t-Mobile, I guarantee it would have a carrier deal. If they were to include pentaband simply because that baseband happened to be the most convenient, then its a mere coincidence. Apple isn't forced to cater to T-Mobile to begin with. It would be a win as users like you could buy unlocked iPhones with 3G access on T-Mobile.

So why is it OK for Apple not to offer pentaband?

It's ok because Apple is a douche. They choose which carriers they want to work with. If they don't work with your carrier, too bad. They weren't in the business of selling you an unlocked phone for you take anywhere in the US. In the rest of the world, Apple is forced to sell unlocked. Blame the issue on the US carriers and the FCC for being idiots and not clamping down on this fragmented mess.

Furthermore, Google's Nexus is designed to circumvent the carriers from the start. If your goal is to sell behind the carriers, then you need to offer connectivity for the unlocked user. I can understand if they don't want to cater to US carrier frequencies because:

a) that would require special hardware
b) that would require dealing with the US carriers

but adding global LTE is a no brainer because:

a) It doesn't significantly impact the cost of the baseband chip
b) It reinforces the concept of unlocked phones which is already popular worldwide by adding new connectivity for users that are already covered by its 3G bands.
c) The iPhone, HTC One X+, Lumia 900, Galaxy S3 LTE, have all shown that it's possible to provide quad band 2G/3G and global LTE support.

The business model of the iPhone and Nexus phones are totally different. To compare Apple's exclusion of 1700 AWS with the exclusion of LTE on the Nexus 4 is ridiculous. It's apples and oranges and doesn't address much.

Instead let's look at Google's words:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nexus-4-does-not-have-4g-lte

GOOGLE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD A CUSTOM PHONE FOR JUST 77 US MARKETS

Yes, but LTE works worldwide too. Other phones have shown that it's possible to build an LTE phone and have global 2g/3G capabilities that the phone already has.

Android head Andy Rubin calls the lack of LTE a "tactical issue," and cites cost and battery life as major concerns with devices that have to support multiple radios. "A lot of the networks that have deployed LTE haven't scaled completely yet — they're hybrid networks [...] which means the devices need both radios built into them," he said. "When we did the Galaxy Nexus with LTE we had to do just that, and it just wasn't a great user experience."

Ok so when I talked about first gen LTE devices having "ok" battery life I got slammed because they were terrible. People applaud 2nd gen LTE devices and 28nm and how it's changed battery life. Heck let's not forget Anand's own tests show that surfing on 4G is more battery efficient than 3G because you spend less time loading pages. You actually get MORE surfing time on 4G. What now Google? And we all know comparing the Galaxy Nexus with 2nd generation LTE isn't accurate at all.

"TACTICALLY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR EVERY NETWORK ON THE PLANET."

WTF Andy Rubin. Adding LTE only EXPANDS on what coverage your phone already provides. It doesn't take away. Your phone already fails to operate on Verizon and Sprint so how is it EVERY NETWORK.

What does the Business Insider say to that?

A series of lame excuses.
Battery life? Cost? Hybrid networks? That hasn't stopped the iPhone 5 and Galaxy S III from becoming smash hits....There's no getting around it, this is a big embarrassment for Google. Although the carriers are mostly to blame, the bottom line is that Google's new flagship phone for the next year will be outdated hardware the moment it's released.

I actually think the carriers aren't to blame unless you're talking about US 4G, but this is what the article focuses on. Adding 4G LTE for global frequencies should be a no brainer.

 

[Sind]

Last worldwide LTE adoption estimate I read was roughly half a billion users by 2015, that was sometime last year.

I think everyone gets you don't like that the phone doesn't have LTE. Great for you, buy something else, but 30 odd pages of spin and complaints on on a low cost high end spec device missing something that is SLOWLY being rolled out is ridiculous. There are plenty of options other than this phone if you need LTE absolutely.

 

[jpeyton]

Nexus 10 hands-on: http://www.viddler.com/v/e53dfbe1

 

[Fire&Blood]

WTF Andy Rubin. Adding LTE only EXPANDS on what coverage your phone already provides. It doesn't take away. Your phone already fails to operate on Verizon and Sprint so how is it EVERY NETWORK.

LTE absolutely implies the following: Launch delay/timing (since carriers potect their halo launches), carrier controlled updates and pressure to modify stock Android are a huge deal as they oppose things Nexus stands for. There simply is no middle ground for google, either they comply with aforementioned in exchange for LTE or they don't. They chose not to. If one has to get LTE, Google argues that Optimus G, their partner's phone is available. Or wait for DLX and it's cousins.

I suspect last time around Google endured it just to get Android more exposure. Now they don't need to. They know that even before the holidays, carriers will launch phones with LTE/1080p and Nexus will once again be the phone that no one talks about.

 

[badb0y]

Nexus 10 hands-on: http://www.viddler.com/v/e53dfbe1

Man dat screen........

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

LTE absolutely implies the following: Launch delay/timing (since carriers potect their halo launches), carrier controlled updates and pressure to modify stock Android are a huge deal as they oppose things Nexus stands for. There simply is no middle ground for google, either they comply with aforementioned in exchange for LTE or they don't. They chose not to. If one has to get LTE, Google argues that Optimus G, their partner's phone is available. Or wait for DLX and it's cousins.

I suspect last time around Google endured it just to get Android more exposure. Now they don't need to. They know that even before the holidays, carriers will launch phones with LTE/1080p and Nexus will once again be the phone that no one talks about.

LTE does not imply launch delay. You don't need to launch an LTE phone THROUGH A CARRIER. Why do you think that LTE implies carrier launch? If this is your logic, then please answer the question I've asked a dozen times now. How is this ANY DIFFERENT than the inclusion of 3G as an upgrade to 2G? Does that require a carrier launch? Why is LTE any different?

Holy crap. If anything look at the US Windows Phone models. They're delayed until the carriers get their act together. The worldwide ones are launching regardless. The Lumia 920 has LTE even on the non AT&T version.

I feel like the misinformation by people is troubling. It goes to show how the carriers have messed with our minds You can launch a goddamn CDMA phone if you wanted to without carrier. That would be useless because Verizon would refuse to activate your phone. Just the fact that LTE equates to US LTE somehow blows my mind. No this isn't the only country in the world and no it isn't the definition of the frequencies the rest of the world uses.