New HTC FCC filing but probably not the Bravo

[JMKosmo]

Does anyone think that it is possible that this new FCC filing (PB31200) could be a Verizon version of the Bravo......I know it's crazy....but just a weird notion I got today.

 

[wonderbread]

So, the FCC has been pretty quiet lately. No new filings today, Monday, because it's a U.S. holiday. The Mobile World Congress started on Sunday and runs through this week so expect a flood of filings tomorrow due to that and due to Monday's filings being held back due to holiday.

 

[wonderbread]

Not quite a shower of filings but HTC has a new one today: PB76100

Looks like a GSM device...

 

[TYM4FN2]

Can anything be made of the fact...that in the label locations for the outside boxing seems to be RED?

 

[wonderbread]

Certainly if someone could find an image or video of the FCC labels for the new devices (Legend, Desire, Touch HD Mini) we might be able to narrow down the possibilities but the back plate would have to be detached AND battery removed in order to see it. I have yet to see a reviewer removed the battery.

I don't know if the red is significant otherwise.

 

[clb]

are the bands for the new filing GSM bands?

 

[wonderbread]

are the bands for the new filing GSM bands?

Yes. There are no CDMA2000 (Verizon) bands tested. The FCC label also shows that it has a SIM card.

 

[DroidAV8R]

I think this phone (PB76100) is the Legend running 2.0 ECLAIR. At the bottom of page 8 of the test report, item no. 4 under section "3.2 EUT Exercise Software" reads:

"EUT Run Test Program "HTC SSD Test-Ver.4.4.13.1.plat_2.0ECLAIR-legend"

Here's the link to the report:

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=1241568&native_or_pdf=pdf

 

[wonderbread]

Mmm spicy meatball. Nice catch. You found this in the standard "Test report"?

Can we find similar clues in the other recent filings?

PB76100: Legend (thanks to DroidAV8R)
PB31200: ?
PB81120: ?
PB99110: ?

Edit: changed PB99100 to PB99110 (99100 is N1)

 

[DroidAV8R]

Mmm spicy meatball. Nice catch. You found this in the standard "Test report"?

Can we find similar clues in the other recent filings?

PB76100: Legend (thanks to DroidAV8R)
PB31200: ?
PB81120: ?
PB99100: ?

Wonderbread, thanks for finding the filing in the first place.

For some reason, my IE keeps crashing now when I try to open these downloads. I think my link is from the WLAN test report. It's a slightly different format than I've seen- I don't recall seeing the software version running on the EUT before.

Anyone want to try and look? I'll grab the MacBook from the wife and try to open the reports on the other phones as soon as she's done with her work...

 

[droidoholic]

The PB99100 is the Nexus One. I thought that one had been established a long time ago. I am anxious to find out what the PB31200 CDMA device is though.

 

[DroidAV8R]

Okay, computer problem solved, and I was able to review the reports of the other devices.

None of the other devices list the software detail that is listed for the PB76100. Most don't list the software version at all, and the ones that do list a generic baseband and s/w version number that is nothing more than numbers and decimals.

I wonder if the info on the Legend was published by mistake?

 

[wonderbread]

Edit: droidholic, you're right. I made a typo. I meant to be referring to PB99110 not PB99100 which HAS been confirmed as N1.

The PB99100 is the Nexus One. I thought that one had been established a long time ago. I am anxious to find out what the PB31200 CDMA device is though.

Well, we established that the PB number is very close to the N1 and that the bands for the new one look like they would support AT&T but as of yet there is no rumored N1 device for AT&T so I don't know that we can call it yet. There is this interesting bit: http://androidforums.com/htc-passion/40355-new-htc-fcc-filing-but-probably-not-bravo-2.html the logic being that since the N1 and Desire are so similar already the AT&T Desire could be the filing in question? Seems the Desire was introduced too recently for that to be the case maybe it's still possible. Any other evidence that PB99110 is N1?

Okay, computer problem solved, and I was able to review the reports of the other devices.

None of the other devices list the software detail that is listed for the PB76100. Most don't list the software version at all, and the ones that do list a generic baseband and s/w version number that is nothing more than numbers and decimals.

I wonder if the info on the Legend was published by mistake?

I also looked through all of the paper work of one of the filings and couldn't find that program name string. It may have indeed been a mistake including that or at least not truncating it.

PB76100 is the Legend, the BGR article says Sprint is getting the Hero2 but is PB76100 the thing that Sprint is getting? Sprint is CDMA2000 also right? But PB76100 doesn't support CDMA2000. Maybe someone can find the original hero filing and see if the bands line up at all.

 

[droidoholic]

Any other evidence that PB99110 is N1?

How about this?

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=1208685&native_or_pdf=pdf

Page 2 says "PB99100 Nexus One" on the label.

Edit: After your edit, I'm with you now. PB99110 = ?

 

[DroidAV8R]

PB76100 is the Legend, the BGR article says Sprint is getting the Hero2 but is PB76100 the thing that Sprint is getting? Sprint is CDMA2000 also right? But PB76100 doesn't support CDMA2000. Maybe someone can find the original hero filing and see if the bands line up at all.

What about the possibility that the Sprint/HTC Hero2 is the PB31200?

 

[DroidAV8R]

How about this?

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=1208685&native_or_pdf=pdf

Page 2 says "PB99100 Nexus One" on the label.

Edit: After your edit, I'm with you now. PB99110 = ?

How about the PB99110 as the Desire for AT&T (BGR is now reporting that the Desire is headed there)?

The Desire is similar in form/features to the N1 (minus a few small differences), so would it make sense that their model numbers are close as well?

 

[DroidAV8R]

Well, we established that the PB number is very close to the N1 and that the bands for the new one look like they would support AT&T but as of yet there is no rumored N1 device for AT&T so I don't know that we can call it yet. There is this interesting bit: http://androidforums.com/htc-passion/40355-new-htc-fcc-filing-but-probably-not-bravo-2.html the logic being that since the N1 and Desire are so similar already the AT&T Desire could be the filing in question? Seems the Desire was introduced too recently for that to be the case maybe it's still possible. Any other evidence that PB99110 is N1?

Sorry wonderbread, I guess I need to read more carefully- As stated in my post above, I agree that the PB99110 very well may be the Desire for AT&T.

 

[wonderbread]

UPDATED the original thread post with a summary of the filings we have been discussing.

What about the possibility that the Sprint/HTC Hero2 is the PB31200?

Maybe, but now that I think of it, Sprint's bands have been discussed and it's pretty much a dead end trying to figure out if it's Sprint or VZW based on supported bands.

Sorry wonderbread, I guess I need to read more carefully- As stated in my post above, I agree that the PB99110 very well may be the Desire for AT&T.

No problem. I think we make the same points about it. My take is that the model numbers are too close to be anything other than an N1 with different band support. I think HTC will differentiate the Desire by more than one digit. That said, I have no clue what else 99110 would be other than an unannounced AT&T N1 which now makes a lot less sense given the BGR rumor that AT&T is bringing home the Desire >_<

 

[wonderbread]

Check this out peeps, here's something I just realized while looking through PB31200 documents again. Basically I think I can identify this phone now.



This is a screenshot I took from the PB31200 filing (unknown CDMA2000 phone). Specifically it's from the "RF Exposure Info - PCE Part 1" document but I believe it shows up in other test reports for PB31200. Those of us who have been snooping around have seen this before but now that this story has come out about the Incredible being spotted in Verizon's inventory with model name ADR6300 I think it may be safe to declare that PB31200 is in fact the Incredible for Verizon Wireless.

Can anyone come up with a theory for why PB31200 isn't the Incredible?

 

[profjoe]

Why do bloggers keep stating that the Legend will be the Hero2 and is coming to Sprint? (Phandroid just did it today!)

There is no FCC-based info that hints this is correct is there? (i.e., am I missing something?)

 

[DroidAV8R]

Check this out peeps, here's something I just realized while looking through PB31200 documents again. Basically I think I can identify this phone now.

This is a screenshot I took from the PB31200 filing (unknown CDMA2000 phone). Specifically it's from the "RF Exposure Info - PCE Part 1" document but I believe it shows up in other test reports for PB31200. Those of us who have been snooping around have seen this before but now that this story has come out about the Incredible being spotted in Verizon's inventory with model name ADR6300 I think it may be safe to declare that PB31200 is in fact the Incredible for Verizon Wireless.

Can anyone come up with a theory for why PB31200 isn't the Incredible?

Wonder, that's a good theory- the battery voltage is even 3.7, just like the N1 (although 1300 v. 1400 mAh).

The only problem I see is that the ADR6300 went through bluetooth cert with v. 2.1+EDR on 1/15/10, and the same docs you have on the PB31200 show that phone as v. 2.0+EDR. Would it make sense to downgrade to 2.0 after 1/15 for purposes of FCC? FWIW, nothing on bluetooth.org about PB31200.

 

[wonderbread]

I don't know how to explain that discrepancy but I think the existence of the 6300 model number in PB31200 has not been explained either if it's not the ADR6300

 

[wonderbread]

The only problem I see is that the ADR6300 went through bluetooth cert with v. 2.1+EDR on 1/15/10, and the same docs you have on the PB31200 show that phone as v. 2.0+EDR. Would it make sense to downgrade to 2.0 after 1/15 for purposes of FCC? FWIW, nothing on bluetooth.org about PB31200.

Alrighty, here we go:
Android&Dom over on the Incredible thread made a good comment that HTC Eris is ADR6200VW and that if the corresponding battery model could be found it may lend credence to PB31200 being the Incredible. Well, sure enough BTR6200 is the OEM battery model for the Eris (link).

So, what's left is explaining the 2.1+EDR and I think I have an explanation: The bluetooth cert got a newer version of the Incredible software.
The bluetooth page (here) lists core version 2.1+EDR as has been stated but it also lists software version 0.68.0.1. The PB31200 filing lists core version 2.0+EDR but in the T-Coil test report it lists a software version of 0.62.0.0. Why give bluetooth a newer version, who knows? Maybe they wanted the 2.1 cert and knew the SAR Testing people don't need the latest SW to do their tests.

PB31200 = Incredible \o/

 

[DroidAV8R]

Alrighty, here we go:
Android&Dom over on the Incredible thread made a good comment that HTC Eris is ADR6200VW and that if the corresponding battery model could be found it may lend credence to PB31200 being the Incredible. Well, sure enough BTR6200 is the OEM battery model for the Eris (link).

So, what's left is explaining the 2.1+EDR and I think I have an explanation: The bluetooth cert got a newer version of the Incredible software.
The bluetooth page (here) lists core version 2.1+EDR as has been stated but it also lists software version 0.68.0.1. The PB31200 filing lists core version 2.0+EDR but in the T-Coil test report it lists a software version of 0.62.0.0. Why give bluetooth a newer version, who knows? Maybe they wanted the 2.1 cert and knew the SAR Testing people don't need the latest SW to do their tests.

PB31200 = Incredible \o/

Well sir, it seems the riddle is solved. Great post. Not thrilled with a 1300mAh battery, but yours and Android&Dom's logic make perfect sense.

 

[wonderbread]

! NEW FILING: PB99300 !
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas...me=N&application_id=610626&fcc_id='NM8PB99300'

CDMA2000