Who blocks WB-AMR?

[s52d]

Most of our users want voice.
WB-AMR is THE good thing for them, it makes a difference.
For 90% of our users: those who do not care about HSPA+.

Anyhow (AFAIK), so far only O2 in Moldova and England is using it,
and it is on 3G only.

So users making handover to GSM (and every 10th call starting in UTRAN ends on GSM)
will notice sudden degradation - and forget voice was good before.
It has to be on both systems, so complete voice call between two WB-AMR terminals
has same quality.

Terminal vendors do not support WB-AMR: if they support, then it is blocked in the SW.

Infrastructure vendors claim to support it: but they do not tell us why it is not yet
implemented in real networks.

Is it yet another chicken/egg story? Is there something wrong with specs?
Are there problems with legacy terminals?
Are vendors too greedy to overcharge, so nobody wants to buy?

Will it ever happen in CS domain: or we just wait for VoIP/LTEa?

I want High Definition Voice at home and in roaming. When?

BR
s52d

[RandomDude]

I voted "We do not care about voice, action is in HSPA+ and LTE"

My carrier is only interested in NB-AMR simply due to capacity restraints.

[s52d]

Hi!

Questions to the audience:
Why nobody is using WB-AMR on 2G?

What is really problem with legacy terminals?
Is it 3gpp specs problem, or it is just wrong implementation?

On top of it: I heard Nokia is not willing to sell WB-AMR terminals.
Even models supporting it are sold only to some operators.
So, they are not building WB-AMR penetration, thus making it less
attractive for operators to activate.

BR
s52d

[onlygod]

Where can you find a list of phones that support AMR WB?
Vodafone is using AMR WB in some countries.

Most operators are focused on HSPA and they don't have capacity for voice, so they send voice to GSM, which is quite unfortunate.

[s52d]

Where can you find a list of phones that support AMR WB?
Vodafone is using AMR WB in some countries.

Most operators are focused on HSPA and they don't have capacity for voice, so they send voice to GSM, which is quite unfortunate.

Hi!

I heard of some networks using 2g and 3g WB-AMR.
There is a possibility to "blacklist" certain IMEIs, so terminals who
make false claim in either direction (either support or not) can be handled properly.

In my opinion, 3G only is bad: there is high probability for voice call starting on 3G
to end on 2G on one side (one out of 5 calls). Users will notice sudden loss of quality,
due to WB-AMR to FR-AMR change,
so 3G only WB-AMR is actually telling customers "we are bad".

Can anyone with live experience comment on it?

BR
s52d

[s52d]

Hi!

Summary: works. Even some real HD-voice terminals exist.


A bit later...
GSA published list of terminals: (registration needed, but it is GSA so we are)

Access (http://www.gsacom.com/cgi/redir.pl5?url=http://www.gsacom.com/downloads/pdf/GSA_Mobile_HD_Voice_report_030611.php4)

Also, GSMA is working on standardizing HD-voice logo, as well as extending terminal tests.
It is not just codec, voice path shall be good also (two microphones, noise cancellation,
speaker). Results are expected soon.

When looking into proper 2g/3g HD-voice, only latest terminals really works fine,
like Galaxy S 2 and Experia Arc.

Telstra did some nice PR, check video on
HTC Desire S only current Android device to support Telstra’s new HD Voice calling, SGSII shunned | Ausdroid (http://ausdroid.net/2011/06/24/htc-desire-s-the-only-current-device-that-supports-telstras-new-hd-voice-calling-sgsii-shunned/)

BR
s52d