Discussion in 'Moto Q 9h' started by blade242, Apr 12, 2008.
Don't bother, it's a fake.
Did no one read the posts about there were 2 hardware specs for the Q9h.. one on Rogers which was most likely an early model, and then the one in mass production that is ALSO on Rogers as well as AT&T?
2 different FCC ID's
Why are people still going on about this.. Obviously there were 2 hardware revisions of the Q9h.. one WITH WIFI that was released(maybe not even to the public) on Rogers ONLY, but in very small quantities.. and then RE-RELEASED on Rogers and AT&T without WIFI..
I'm still not quite sure why people are still hugging the Q9h's nuts about it having WIFI.. I bet 100 dollars that NONE of the AT&T branded Q9h's have WIFI..
Yah, that's already proven. I've posted att's user manual for the new Q9h. No mention of wifi.
Then why did you ask me to ????
Thought you might have already been working with that person. Wanted to know if you found anything interesting. I honestly, want the wifi thing be real. :frown:
Is it not still possible that ATT still has no intention to enable WIFI on the 6.1 Q9H, but with the software capability now enabled, someone could easily switch reg entries, or what ever is needed, to activate it? This would explain the missing entries in the 6.1 Users Manual...
Don't know why someone would do all the work to activate it and then sell it on ebay though...
Just a thought. Let me know if I'm crazy.
Edit: Citing for previous example of this is with the LG-CU500 (my previous phone). Its got a fully swivleing camera (so faces in towards you or out from the back of the phone. Would be perfect for video calling...then they release the LG0CU500V, with the video sharing. separate "model" supposdedly, but I know for a fact that there is just a firmware update difference between them, and LG had to pull it (the update) right when they issued it, because of the upcomming 'upgrade' from AT&T. One of the reps at my local store had the regular cu500 and was able to upgrade to the new firmware before it got pulled (a matter of hours, as i understand it, between release and retraction). pissed me off.
He does have a point. If nothing else, if I could get my hands on the registry of a 6.1, I could at least duplicate it and see if it will pick up anything.
Heres an interesting tidbit, probably nothing. Actually, I'll post it in the Google thread.
Yeah, It had occured to me that ATT probably wouldnt want to enable WIFI on the Q since they have the tilt (and a few others?) that are the flagship phones with WIFI. Why offer something that does everything that they do, with WIFI, for less. sales would fall, the Q would rise supreme over all other phones, and we would rule the world!!! Muahhhahaha, Muahahaha, Muahahaha!!....ahem, sorry about that...back on track. Yeah, from a sales point of view, WIFI is a hot ticket item that moves phones, and would either not release it on the Q ever, or wait for a new (read: expensive) release to make everybody upgrade. but why design a new circut board when you can have the new stuff on (or maybe just drop in a new chip/memory/etc. and not have to do a new layout to squeez a WIFI chip in.
The FCC report to me seems suspicious too. I figure that they probably have someone who at least knows SOMETHING about phones, since they look at schematics all day, and if they saw something that looked like WIFI but it wasnt reported, they'ed probably ask about it. Motorola, knowing that there was no intention for the Q (current models) to ever have WIFI enabled, could safely say no, it doesnt have it. then, when they go to have the new Super Q (my name for it, you heard it here first. If Motorola trys to rip it off, you all got my back, right?), they can say, ah, here is the WIFI.
BTW, has any electrical engineer looked at those schematics and compared them to a scematic for a phone with WIFI? If there are none on here, I'll try my hand (did some circut design in High School - Built an Electromagnetic Linear Accelerator for my senior project .
My two cents. Or rather, I guess, several dollars, based on how much I wrote...
Actually, I AM a Computer Engineering major. I guess I should be looking those over huh ???? LMAO. Woops.
You won't be able to look at the schematics since they are a "trade secret" and are not included in the public documents available about the phone on the FCC website. You might be able to file a Freedom of Information Act request and get them that way...but I doubt it.
Ah, nevermind then. I thought they were in that post. Since I haven't looked at it, I don't even know. I was out of town when they were posted, and I forgot to look since then,
Yeah, I looked through there. There are the pictures of the main and daughter boards, but the resolution looks to be just low enough that we cannot read the manufacturers off the casings. Anybody out there think they can? Perhaps familiar with them? Oh, and had anybody even ever opened up a Q, maybe one that got dunked? Just to see whats on the boards? I think that would be most conclusive answer; if there is no wifi chip to be found (or soldeing point if its a later upgrade/removal), then there is and will never be wifi.
Looking at the verbage they used in the report to the FCC looks like it probably doesnt though, as they are reporting what the phone is capable of, not what its being released to do. I dont quite know where the FCC got the idea that it listed WIFI/WLAN as a capability. I looked over all the frequency bands listed and there was nothing in the 2.4 or 5.8[correction from 5.2] ghz band range, which as far as I know, is the only two bands WIFI operates in. Am I correct? So wed be talking a jump of 600 mhz from the high band cell to the low band WIFI. Looking at the electronic noise plots at the end, there were some interesting spikes, but either I'm reading the scales wrong, or the spikes are off by a factor of 1000 lower frequency (Mhz not Ghz). That was the only think that jumped out at me.
Any other interpretations?
And for those just joining us, the links to the FCC pages are earlier in this thread (about 2 pages back)
The FCC posed the Wi-Fi question to Motorola due to what they saw in the phones' schematics (which again are not available to the public). The fact that there was no test data for a Wi-Fi chip given to the FCC as part of its Type Acceptence application does not (in my opinion) rule out that the phone is technically able to operate Wi-Fi.
If Motorola did not intend the phone to operate Wi-Fi (even if there may be Wi-Fi hardware installed) it would not need to have that function tested and results given to the FCC.
Case in point; Many of my Ham radio handheld transceivers are capable of transmitting on frequencies outside of the Amateur band (public safety, marine, etc.) but since the transceiver is not marketed to be able to transmit out of band, no technical specifications for the out of band operation were ever submitted to the FCC for Type Acceptence approval of the radio. But, the transceivers do transmit out of band with a simple modification of the radio. (not that one should ever use non FCC Type Accepted equipment in a particular radio service)
Ah, very encouraging news! Has anybody had any luck looking at the actual pictures of the boards? Picking out the chips? Or cracked one open? I myself do not voluenteer (sp) my phone, but if someone has a broken one maybe...?
On a seperate but also interesting sidenote, there has been some hiccups with Xpress mail due to the new update they just pushed out on Friday (i think it was friday). Anyways, its causing all heck of problems for Xpress mail users on smart phones, but the reason why I bring it up is this. The word on the ATT forums is that the update is for WM6.1 compatability (although the credibility for this is not SPARKLING). So, to me, this says WM6.1 should be following soon, since, why would they update the apps if the wm6.1 wasnt soon to follow. Anybody know what kind of time gaps there are between software updates and operating system upgrades, for AT&T?
It is good news, but it doesn't mean the chips made it to the final production run. No one really knows until someone busts one open and has a look.
Update: Im in the process of getting the full schematics for the Q9h :wink: Don't ask.
It depends. Usually apps get updated to work with OS updates AFTER they've been released, so this isn't as common. But, since they've been released with other carriers, this could be why, unless Xpress Mail is AT&T exclusive, which I have no idea if it is or not.
Xpress mail, under that name, is an AT&T exclusive. However, there is virtually identical software, made by the same maker, just branded different, for other carriers. I dont remember the brand and software names off the top of my head, but I've seen a list that has three or four where just the name is changed, basically.
Cant wait for that report on the schematics! :geek:
The AT&T/Cingular branded Xpress Mail client is made by Seven Software
I've got them. Please pm me if you would like a copy to peruse.
WLAN is DEFINITELY on there....
Well, I don't really know what to make of it.
Sometimes, it seems to be referenced as BT_WLAN, which is most likely the BT PAN radio spec. However, that name is usually WPAN, so I don't understand why. BUT, there are references of it without the bluetooth in front of it. As in, WLAN on its own.
I'm afraid my technical skills can't render a definitive answer, but I will show them to someone who definitely knows.
The schematics don't provide the manu's names, only how they interact with them, PCB and hardware wise.
Separate names with a comma.