Lol thanks for being patient with me, I get you know. FWIW, I always planned on getting the AT&T model but felt a twinge of jealousy not being able to get a Verizon or SIM free. Now I don't really care.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone X CDMA GSM
- Thread starter Blazinbell
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Heh That's another thing that drives me ******* crazy. I'd like to find the product manager it was that first coined the term "sim free" - when everyone in the industry have called phones either "Sim locked" or "unlocked". Unlocked phones still use SIM cards (at least until the eSIMs take over). Hopefully Apple gets enough of the carriers around the world onboard via the AW3 launch that the 2018 iPhone will have a SKU that is only using the eSIM.
Then they'll just need to get rid of that pesky lightning port in order to give their phone an ISO 22810:2010 (50 meter) water rating.
Then they'll just need to get rid of that pesky lightning port in order to give their phone an ISO 22810:2010 (50 meter) water rating.
As I recall there were some places in Asia with CDMA use, either South Korea and/or Japan.
Seems like the main idea in getting a phone that can support as much as possible is that if you decide to switch carriers for some reason there aren't some that you suddenly can't consider because your phone doesn't support them because they are a CDMA carrier, and similarly if you are going to give your phone to someone at some point or sell it, and they might want to have the freedom to not have to exclude certain carriers simply because the device might not support them.
Right, but, like I said...unless you're primarily on a CDMA carrier, that part of the phone will never be activated.
As for Asia. China Unicom was CDMA....they may be LTE now (last I heard they were UMTS...I'm sure they've updated since).
Japan, really can't see the most tech-hungry country on the planet putting up with CDMA battery life and speeds....everything would have been LTE there before the rest of the world.
South Korea - could be - also possible there could be some in Africa that were lit up recently. (all of these CDMA base stations are likely going very, very cheap on the open market). Qualcomm would have to cut them a licensing deal that they could afford however...
Bottom line...CDMA is all but dead. The sooner the last tower is shut down the better.
Well, in US there's Verizon and Sprint, so at least within a fairly large market like US, having a phone that supports as much as possible to have the ability to go with pretty much any carrier if needed/desired, or to be able to have a slightly better device to give or sell to someone (again from that same point of view), it can make a difference for some.Right, but, like I said...unless you're primarily on a CDMA carrier, that part of the phone will never be activated.
As for Asia. China Unicom was CDMA....they may be LTE now (last I heard they were UMTS...I'm sure they've updated since).
Japan, really can't see the most tech-hungry country on the planet putting up with CDMA battery life and speeds....everything would have been LTE there before the rest of the world.
South Korea - could be - also possible there could be some in Africa that were lit up recently. (all of these CDMA base stations are likely going very, very cheap on the open market). Qualcomm would have to cut them a licensing deal that they could afford however...
Bottom line...CDMA is all but dead. The sooner the last tower is shut down the better.
especially if the intel chip is as bad as my wifes 7
[doublepost=1508534135][/doublepost]
does esim only not violate gsm standards? i was told by a former coworker that it does but i never researched it. does the aw3 only use an esim?
Yes, yes, there were a handful of carriers utilizing CDMA around the world, but that standard lost out and GSM's been the standard for most of the world for the last 10 years. It took some time, but the standards settled and UMTS is where they met....with HSPA being where many made the jump from CDMA. Shortly all of the world will be LTE.
Someone was saying the US government asked the US carriers to keep CDMA going? (think it would be cheaper to give out free cheap Nokia LTE phones).
[doublepost=1508536252][/doublepost]
Umm. eSIM is a GSMA standard. The great thing is, it has the potential to make roaming a lot easier....no need for dual-sim phones anymore....you can easily load a half dozen carrier profiles on your device. Hopefully they'll make it geo-aware and auto-switching (in time).
Well, whatever all of that might be, I was simply pointing out why it might matter to various people basically (even if they are on a GSM carrier at the moment).
If Verizon and Sprint had shut down their CDMA networks this year like the Canadian carriers had, then all of the US would be using the same iPhone model. (Edit: Sorry...models - colour and capacity)
The only reason that Apple's been using the Intel modems (well, they're slightly cheaper...a few $, not much) is because they've been in nasty litigation with Qualcomm. Which is unfortunate, as they make a better modem than Intel does. It's entirely a political move.
Qualcomm shouldn't have rocked the boat with Apple...now they're likely to lose that business.
Well, again, at the moment, it can still play a role for some people.If Verizon and Sprint had shut down their CDMA networks this year like the Canadian carriers had, then all of the US would be using the same iPhone model. (Edit: Sorry...models - colour and capacity)
The only reason that Apple's been using the Intel modems (well, they're slightly cheaper...a few $, not much) is because they've been in nasty litigation with Qualcomm. Which is unfortunate, as they make a better modem than Intel does. It's entirely a political move.
Qualcomm shouldn't have rocked the boat with Apple...now they're likely to lose that business.
my apologies, i apparently had bad information however this conversation happened before apple came out with their esim.
the intel modem on my wifes 7 is garbage. when she finally got her s8 it got reception where her 7 didnt.
People who can't afford a new phone (which is why the carriers should give them out for free so they can shut down the CDMA base stations and stop paying Qualcomm their licensing fees).
Verizon's LTE coverage:
Sprint's LTE coverage:
So, why keep the CDMA networks in place? (when these are about the last one's left in the world???)
[doublepost=1508538047][/doublepost]
Yep, Apple tried embedded SIMs before, but we're now on the second revision to the eSIM standard and the GSMA is pushing it, so hopefully we see all of the carriers get onboard and we can get rid of the SIM slot on our phones!!!
Qualcomm's really going to miss all of that licensing revenue from CDMA (they owned the protocol). UMTS, HSPA and LTE were developed by a group of companies (of which Qualcomm is one), but they won't have those rich royalty revenues anymore.
What it does mean is that there's going to be good competition between Intel and Qualcomm in the modem market....and that can only be good (long term) for consumers. Me, I hope this nastiness between Apple and Qualcomm dies down soon and hopefully see both vendors modems back in the Apple lineup ongoing.
Not really sure about that, nor do the consumers really have much control over that. Again, simply commenting on the aspect of why some people might care about getting a device that still supports CDMA in addition to GSM.
Heh. Dude. You're like a dog with an old shoe!!
Ok, fine. There's lots of people that would rather use CDMA and have abysmal battery life compared with LTE. Gotcha. Enjoy it while it lasts...whatever stipulation the US gov made to these carriers to leave them up, it'll be short lived.
i dont care who makes the modems as long as i get reception. thats part of the reason i never upgraded from my 6s plus but i will most likely be getting the x now. on apple devices with the esim are they carrier unlocked or not?Yep, Apple tried embedded SIMs before, but we're now on the second revision to the eSIM standard and the GSMA is pushing it, so hopefully we see all of the carriers get onboard and we can get rid of the SIM slot on our phones!!!
Qualcomm's really going to miss all of that licensing revenue from CDMA (they owned the protocol). UMTS, HSPA and LTE were developed by a group of companies (of which Qualcomm is one), but they won't have those rich royalty revenues anymore.
What it does mean is that there's going to be good competition between Intel and Qualcomm in the modem market....and that can only be good (long term) for consumers. Me, I hope this nastiness between Apple and Qualcomm dies down soon and hopefully see both vendors modems back in the Apple lineup ongoing.
Seems like you are stuck on talking about CDMA and it's downsides and support and all that, which is all good and fine. It's just not really related to the part that I was commenting on, which simply had to do with why, at least for now, some people might want a device that supports it (even if they currently might not need it). That's basically it, anything beyond that is a separate discussion that I wasn't really commenting on (even though for some reason it's being brought up as replies to my posts).Heh. Dude. You're like a dog with an old shoe!!
The X doesn't have an eSIM yet (hoping Apple makes that change next year). The Apple Watch has an eSIM - all indications are there aren't any carrier SKU's for the watch.
They could still "carrier brand" the iPhone's with eSIM's for specific carriers as they do today (but, most countries have been banning carrier locking of devices) - just a matter of time until it happens in the US. Then all of the devices will be the same.
I really do hope that Apple and Qualcomm patch things up soon. Hopefully the Intel modem in the X models for the GSM carriers performs a lot better. The coverage on the X may be a lot better too - wonder if the stainless steel ring on the outside is the antennae? (ooh...antennaegate 2?)
You're holding it wrong!!! [doublepost=1508539225][/doublepost]
Ok. Please tell us what would be the usefulness of having a CDMA iPhone (with the exception that the Qualcomm modem performs better than Intel on GSM networks).
Again, after all the discussion about?
As mentioned just a few posts ago:
Both carriers (Sprint and Verizon) offer both CDMA as well as LTE networks. They have nationwide coverage of both. The CDMA network has the advantage of being slower and using more battery.
Migrating to other carriers. Umm. Again, there's maybe a couple outside of the US....so what's the benefit there again?
The benefit for some that was stated a number of times as far as someone having the option to use another carrier that uses CDMA and/or giving or selling their device and providing more options with it to someone who would get it and might be on those carriers or might consider using those carriers. All fairly straightforward and simple.
CDMA vs GSM | Betamax vs VHS
Each has advantages over the other. The best technology doesn't always win out. There use to be hundreds of cell phone companies making technology decisions about which one, how much it cost, what you got for it, etc. IIRC GSM got a big leg up because of interoperability and standardization between countries (EU). Once you have various systems out there then you play chicken and egg.
It cost a lot of money to convert between standards. Look at LTE vs WIMAX. Sprint bet on rolling out WIMAX being able to roll it out a lot earlier. They have spent a lot of money converting the WIMAX equipment to be LTE.
They are digital and just a few years ago the analog bands were retired (2008). That put a giant crimp in rural coverage. Going digital meant the companies had to deploy a lot more antennas and still ended up with a lot of holes in coverage.
Remember when the iPhone came out att took a lot of heat from dropped calls, weak signals, etc. A lot of that is the shorter range of digital signals and GSM had less range than CDMA. While Verizon and Spring had analog networks to fall back on and provide wide coverage in rural areas.
Each generational leap in technology allows more data, users. I remember in the 60's my father got a car phone in his company car. There was a 2-3 year waiting list to get one. Not to mention that the numbers of them that could be deployed around similar area was in the hundreds, not hundreds of thousands or millions like now.
I've seen an article that Verizon is moving up it's sunset date on CDMA. Aiming for 2020?
Each has advantages over the other. The best technology doesn't always win out. There use to be hundreds of cell phone companies making technology decisions about which one, how much it cost, what you got for it, etc. IIRC GSM got a big leg up because of interoperability and standardization between countries (EU). Once you have various systems out there then you play chicken and egg.
It cost a lot of money to convert between standards. Look at LTE vs WIMAX. Sprint bet on rolling out WIMAX being able to roll it out a lot earlier. They have spent a lot of money converting the WIMAX equipment to be LTE.
They are digital and just a few years ago the analog bands were retired (2008). That put a giant crimp in rural coverage. Going digital meant the companies had to deploy a lot more antennas and still ended up with a lot of holes in coverage.
Remember when the iPhone came out att took a lot of heat from dropped calls, weak signals, etc. A lot of that is the shorter range of digital signals and GSM had less range than CDMA. While Verizon and Spring had analog networks to fall back on and provide wide coverage in rural areas.
Each generational leap in technology allows more data, users. I remember in the 60's my father got a car phone in his company car. There was a 2-3 year waiting list to get one. Not to mention that the numbers of them that could be deployed around similar area was in the hundreds, not hundreds of thousands or millions like now.
I've seen an article that Verizon is moving up it's sunset date on CDMA. Aiming for 2020?
Last edited:
hopefully the coverage on the x is at least as good as my 6s plus. since im gsm itll be the intel chip so hopefully its better than the 7.The X doesn't have an eSIM yet (hoping Apple makes that change next year). The Apple Watch has an eSIM - all indications are there aren't any carrier SKU's for the watch.
They could still "carrier brand" the iPhone's with eSIM's for specific carriers as they do today (but, most countries have been banning carrier locking of devices) - just a matter of time until it happens in the US. Then all of the devices will be the same.
I really do hope that Apple and Qualcomm patch things up soon. Hopefully the Intel modem in the X models for the GSM carriers performs a lot better. The coverage on the X may be a lot better too - wonder if the stainless steel ring on the outside is the antennae? (ooh...antennaegate 2?)
Last year when I bought the iphone 7, I bought a verizon phone pre-order even though I have T Mobile as I wanted the GSM and CDMA capability. However, this presented a few snags.
1) In order to pre-order a verizon phone, you do need a verizon phone number. And everything I have read, it has to be a post paid (and not pre-paid account). To get around this I used my partner's verizon number. And you will need the last 4 of the SSN to confirm. This presents a problem if you do not know someone with a verizon number who is also willing to let you use it to buy the phone
2) If you do buy Verizon, even though the phone is technically a sim free unlocked phone, when my phone came in the mail, I still needed to activate the new sim to the linked Verizon phone number. This involved setting up the new phone and porting it to the new sim, and then switching that sim to my partner's old phone, as this process inactivates the old verizon sim. Then I simply, switched my current Tmobile sim into the verizon phone.
It seems ridiculous in my mind that this is the process one goes through, even when buying the phone outright at full price without a contract.
The alternative is to buy the factory carrier unlocked iphone, however, those phones are always released after the initial release date which means you may not get the phone until weeks or months after release date. This wait may be magnified especially if demand is high or supply is short, as it is anticipated this year.
OMG this is the most coherent explanation I've seen of exactly what the constraints are and how this really works. Thank you for this. The process is utterly ridiculous - clearly this whole thing is designed to try to keep people on their existing networks. I can't believe how much influence the carriers continue to have over Apple. Paying > $1k (iPhone X) and not getting the exact product you want is frustrating.
I am disappointed that Apple isn’t offering a SIM free version of iPhone X, so I ended up ordering a T Mobile GSM version and plan to activate on my existing AT&T service. I went through the same ordeal when the iPhone 7 was released. I have service with AT&T but I wanted the CDMA version for greater flexibility in switching carriers. When I bought my iPhone 7+ (Verizon) I ordered the phone from Apple by enrolling in the Apple upgrade program and selecting in store pick up. I was then able to walk in to the Apple store and pick up the phone without a Verizon account and purchase the iPhone ourtright rather than enrolling in the upgrade program. I then activated my iPhone on AT&T and its worked fine.