iTunes on Motorola Phones

[Lanbrown]

OK, so do so. CDMA samples power levels every couple milliseconds and adjusts accordingly.
You could, but then somebody would just point out that one bad implementation doesn't mean a standard is bad.
Umm, no, most SIM cards are locked. T-Mobile will reportedly unlock your SIM card after 4 or 6 months if you get to a knowledgable rep. and they have a 'good' policy.
Calling plans have the cost of a phone built into them, that's the way US providers work. Yeah, it sucks, but c'est le vie. For some people money is an object.
So, the GSM providers chose CDMA - that's telling, isn't it?
Are you accounting for the added users per cell? Even GSM backers admit that CDMA is typically less expensive per user to deploy.
Are you running Windows on a Dell?
Did you expect them to ditch compatibility with their installed base? And, I can still intercept a GSM call because it uses FDMA for channel allocation.

Motorola on their first CDMA phone made their phone 600 mw, where the spec called for 200. An analog handheld operated at 600. Guess what, the phone was a complete failure as the performance was lousy.

I never said the standard was bad. I showed ONE instance, which is enough to make that a mute point.

No, the phone is locked. I can use my SIM card in any unlocked phone. If the phone is locked, the SIM will only work if it's from the same provider the sold the phone. I have multiple phones and move my SIM card easily between them and only one phone was purchased from the carrier. If I try to use the SIM in a phone from a different provider that’s locked, it will not work. This also means if someone wants to go from one carrier to the next, their phone won’t work with the new carrier until it’s unlocked.

It’s true they subsidize the cost, but whenever you want a new phone they want you to sign a new contract. However, not all carriers offer all of the phones. You may want something different then what they offer. In the CDMA world, you need to provide them the ESN of the phone for it to work. Some carriers can be picky about adding a phone they do not sell.

CDMA is a technology, nothing more. There are different flavors of CDMA. TDMA is used more then CDMA. Cable modems currently use TDMA; telco-switching equipment does as well. If you make a call, it is GSM.

Have you seen the CDMA equipment? If you look at the 2G CDMA equipment, the equipment was huge. Verzon uses Nortel equipment a lot. First generation sites were two cabinets, second generation was one. It's competitors are half the size and offer the same capacity. It is also just added on to the switch rather then being integrated in. This requires more work for routine maintenance.

And you don't think someone can't listen in to a conversation that is made by a CDMA phone?

Even a CDMA switch uses TDMA.


The 2.5, 2.75 and 3G are mainly used for data applications, with a few being used for voice.

 

[Lanbrown]

As stated above, the non US 3G standard is NOT the US (qualcomm) CDMA cell phone system thing, both are CDMA in it's real sense: Code Division Multiple Access, a spread spectrum modulation, but they are not the same. The non US 3G standard is called UMTS, and they call the modulation W-CDMA to make it sound a little better than CDMA (which it probably is).

So saying that the US went it's own way is still valid, and also that the US may have to pay a little more to go their own way again. US even tried to make Iraq CDMA to get a wider spread outside the US.

Qualcomm still makes money on UMTS as they hold many patents on CDMA. The royalties they are receiving are ever increasing and will probably soon surpass those of their preferred CDMA.

The US won't have to pay anything, carriers like Verizon and Sprint will end up paying more. AT&T Wireless, Cingular and T-Mobile will all be using UMTS, as will some other providers.

 

[AmigoMac]

I was referring to the 3G standard that the GSM providers are using; hence the 3G GSM compared to the 3G services that the CDMA carriers in the US are using.

The CDMA carriers could have used UMTS but they chose not to. There is a migration path to UMTS but not from EV-D0 to UMTS, well, at least not an easy one. So it was a failure because Verizon and Sprint made it a failure.

If you have a 3G phone, the 3G is not the portion that is used to make the phone calls.

I know the bands are different. I have extensive background in mobile communications.

Pls again, there is NO 3G GSM, GSM is one step forward from TDMA and AMPS, 3G is UMTS in europe or CMDA2000 in USA, is exactly the same as if you referred to the first 15 AL PB as a Titanium... , it's based on it but is different... I need you extensive background to clarify what 3G portion you mean to, what is 3G for you? , I need to extend my foreground

I hope you are not talking about GPRS/EDGE when saying 3G GSM ...

 

[jerk]

Qualcomm still makes money on UMTS as they hold many patents on CDMA. The royalties they are receiving are ever increasing and will probably soon surpass those of their preferred CDMA.

Yes, they would patent every darn screw if they could so that they will always be able to get money from each other, and trade patents with each other which is actually an important piece of this business.

The US won't have to pay anything, carriers like Verizon and Sprint will end up paying more. AT&T Wireless, Cingular and T-Mobile will all be using UMTS, as will some other providers.

And where are Verizon's and Sprint's CDMA markets again? I don't say that it will be much more expensive, since I have no idea about that, but I do say that that is where the cost will end up, if any.

 

[Lanbrown]

Pls again, there is NO 3G GSM, GSM is one step forward from TDMA and AMPS, 3G is UMTS in europe or CMDA2000 in USA, is exactly the same as if you referred to the first 15 AL PB as a Titanium... , it's based on it but is different... I need you extensive background to clarify what 3G portion you mean to, what is 3G for you? , I need to extend my foreground

I hope you are not talking about GPRS/EDGE when saying 3G GSM ...

I was REFERRING to the 3G services being offered by the GSM carriers. Their 3G is different from the 3G services being offered from the CDMA carriers. So if someone just says 3G, you don't know which they are talking about.

Once again you are wrong; UMTS is available in the US as is CDMA2000. UMTS is not Euro limited. Both are 3G, both are different from one another though.

 

[Lanbrown]

And where are Verizon's and Sprint's CDMA markets again? I don't say that it will be much more expensive, since I have no idea about that, but I do say that that is where the cost will end up, if any.

And where are AWE, Cingular and T-Mobile USA again?

Let's try it a different way. The equipment makers can make one piece of equipment and use it anywhere in the world, the frequencies just need to be changed. This allows more to be sold and thus their costs can be recouped much more quickly and thus, prices can be lower. Compare that to CDMA, which has a much smaller user base. Which equates to higher prices.

 

[AmigoMac]

I was REFERRING to the 3G services being offered by the GSM carriers. Their 3G is different from the 3G services being offered from the CDMA carriers. So if someone just says 3G, you don't know which they are talking about.

Once again you are wrong; UMTS is available in the US as is CDMA2000. UMTS is not Euro limited. Both are 3G, both are different from one another though.

When you talk about 3G, you SHOULD know what they are talking about, those "3G services" are known as 2.5 G, it's the introduction, people must know what they might be able to get if they move to 3G, I know UMTS is US available but as US operators decided to stay by CDMA2000 and no Euro-operator has CDMA2000, then is known that UMTS is the european standard .... Again, GSM (GPRS/EDGE) & CDMA-ONE are still 2G, anything they give as 3G service is just a small look into new possibilities, those services are 2G and known as 2.5 G , pretty different

 

[voodoofish]

I can see Apple co-branding a phone built by someone else, but not build their own phone. There are a huge number of international, federal, industry, and carrier regulations that cell phones have to conform to, and the system interoperability testing is hideously complex (it makes 802.11 look like a walk in the park). Apple would basically have to hire away a substantial chunk of the RF and test engineers presently working for the current cell phone manufacturers to get the necessary experience up front, and build a substantial new testing infrastructure before it could even begin to consider building its own phone from scratch. Not impossible, true, but expensive and time consuming, especially to build just one product instead of an entire product line. How much easier would it be to let one of the existing companies handle the phone hardware design, test, and manufacturing, leaving Apple to concentrate on the handset design, user interface, and phone features -- convincing the various carriers to support the more advanced ones (like a music store) that would need back end support to function?

There's actually a really good article about that here - http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2628495


It talks about how you can now use off the shelf components etc. to make your own mobile phone cheaply, which is what some network operators are doing in Europe to try and integrate their network services tightly into the phone. I've used Orange's SPV before, but it runs Windows Mobile and so is like the least user friendly phone I have ever used. This could be an easy way for Apple to make their own phone, although I don't know if they actually would.

 

[voodoofish]

When you talk about 3G, you SHOULD know what they are talking about, those "3G services" are known as 2.5 G, it's the introduction, people must know what they might be able to get if they move to 3G, I know UMTS is US available but as US operators decided to stay by CDMA2000 and no Euro-operator has CDMA2000, then is known that UMTS is the european standard .... Again, GSM (GPRS/EDGE) & CDMA-ONE are still 2G, anything they give as 3G service is just a small look into new possibilities, those services are 2G and known as 2.5 G , pretty different

They actually also use UMTS in Japan (not on NTTDoCoMo though, it's on Vodafone and another carrier I think), and I'm pretty sure they use it in Asia aswell. AT&T wireless also use UMTS (http://www.attwireless.com/umts/), so actually it is not just the European standard but a global standard.

I think you have 2G, 2.5G and 3G all mixed up, GPRS is 2.5G and EDGE sometimes refered to as 2.75G. In Europe we've had 3G for over a year, and the only things on it that aren't available on 2.5G are video calling and higher-quality streaming video clips. Three (the oldest 3G network) also offers enhanced location based services, but I think that is only on handsets with built in GPS.

 

[voodoofish]

I'm not sure what you mean about that "3G GSM" phones use a portion of GSM, I hope you meant, that it is necessary to include both systems into one phone because you may want to change your platform on the way, what if you have your phone on UMTS mode and receive a call on your GSM side? it requires a lot of work, between antenna, filters, decoders and channel detectors to build this... UMTS works from 1.9 GHz to 2.1 GHz
GSM bands are different... 850/1900 USA 900/1800 Europe

Perhaps they mean that 3GSM (the GSM association renamed UMTS to 3GSM to make it clear it's the upgrade path from GSM) phones can seamlessly fall back onto GSM networks without dropping the call. I'm on Three, which doesn't have a GSM network. You can roam onto one at no cost, but this means that dropped 3G calls won't fall back onto the GSM network as they are not actually the same network (the base station have separate network codes etc.). My dad works for a GSM network though, and his 3G phone will switch between 3G and GSM networks during a call seamlessly because they are the same network (ie. have the same network code etc.).

 

[voodoofish]

Qualcomm still makes money on UMTS as they hold many patents on CDMA. The royalties they are receiving are ever increasing and will probably soon surpass those of their preferred CDMA.

I recently read that 25% of Qualcomm's royalties are now from UMTS and barely anyone uses it compared with GSM, so once it takes off the royalties are likely to be huge.

 

[stephenli]

They actually also use UMTS in Japan (not on NTTDoCoMo though, it's on Vodafone and another carrier I think), and I'm pretty sure they use it in Asia aswell. AT&T wireless also use UMTS (http://www.attwireless.com/umts/), so actually it is not just the European standard but a global standard.

NTTDoCoMo's 3G service "FOMA" is using UTMS (in a older standard though). Another carrier KDDI AU is using CDMA 2000, they are already progress to CDMA 1x EV-DO (2.4Mbps), which they claim themselves as "boardband mobile phone". UTMS and CDMA 2000 are both global standard.

In addition, the oldest 3G carrier is not "3", but NTTDoCoMo.

 

[voodoofish]

If you have a 3G phone, the 3G is not the portion that is used to make the phone calls.

Acctually it is, at least on UMTS. 3G has higher call capacity than GSM, so when many of the European carriers are criticised for paying so much for 3G lisenses, sometimes the argument is put forward that they where worth it for the extra call capacity alone (although to be honest I've never really had a problem placing calls on a GSM network).

 

[voodoofish]

NTTDoCoMo's 3G service "FOMA" is using UTMS (in a older standard though). Another carrier KDDI AU is using CDMA 2000, they are already progress to CDMA 1x EV-DO (2.4Mbps), which they claim themselves as "boardband mobile phone". UTMS and CDMA 2000 are both global standard.

In addition, the oldest 3G carrier is not "3", but NTTDoCoMo.

I was talking about in the UK, as the other 3G carriers here so far only let you use data-cards on their 3G networks and so do not actually have any other "3G services" besides data (data is really the only useful 3G service, everything else other than video calling can be done on 2.5G and no one wants video calls anyway. Three sells is self over here on voice calls at under half the price of the GSM networks). There's not too much point talking about Japanese carriers as their phones tend not to work elsewhere in the world (apparantly they can roam on GSM networks but I don't think you could just import them and stick a SIM in, except for the Vodafone 3G phones of course.).

Also, having CDMA 2000 in two countries does not really make it global - you could argue that CDMA is global, but in reality it is not used outside of North America, South Korea, India and Australia, whereas the only one of those countries where GSM is not used is in South Korea. I can already roam in a number of countries with my UMTS phone (eg. Italy, Hong Kong, Japan, Australia) and not only that but can also use it to roam on existing GSM networks. I doubt there are many 2G networks to roam on with a CDMA 2000 phone, let alone 3G ones - it is hard to tell, since whenever I go on the international bit of a CDMA carrier's website it just goes on about GSM handset rentals

You can find a list of all the GSM networks around the world here - http://www.gsmworld.com/roaming/gsminfo/index.shtml

 

[djdarlek]

I wonder if iTunes would work with this sexy phone - to be released tomorrow and be available to buy in Sept. If so, I'm getting one!

I'm sure this is somewhere on the board.. but over here without a contract they are going to cost £700!!!! Thats nearly $1400!

What pains me more is why they chose to work with Motorola? Who the hell has a Motorola phone? I have been consistantly impressed by Sony Erricson's efforts for the last couple of years, and there are so many Mac-ish programs that intergrate well with those handsets (romeo/salling clicker/address book)!

As for why they didnt plump for Nokia the no.1 handset maker.. they probably wanted someone that designs classy phones, not ugly, boring and common phones.

 

[AmigoMac]

They actually also use UMTS in Japan (not on NTTDoCoMo though, it's on Vodafone and another carrier I think), and I'm pretty sure they use it in Asia aswell. AT&T wireless also use UMTS (http://www.attwireless.com/umts/), so actually it is not just the European standard but a global standard.

I think you have 2G, 2.5G and 3G all mixed up, GPRS is 2.5G and EDGE sometimes refered to as 2.75G. In Europe we've had 3G for over a year, and the only things on it that aren't available on 2.5G are video calling and higher-quality streaming video clips. Three (the oldest 3G network) also offers enhanced location based services, but I think that is only on handsets with built in GPS.

I do Know the existence of UMTS in asia, but still there is a "Japan WCDMA" standard, they adopted it first that europe, when I said some posts ago that UMTS failed to be the "Universal" thing it should be , it's because of the existence of CDMA2000 and it makes the next step in mobile communications and it will be 4G, I'm not mixing 2G, 2.5G and 3G , I'm slowly clarifying that it's not proper to say 3G GSM when talking about the third generation of mobile communications, I said already that GPRS/EDGE services are part of the 2G and it's kinda example of what people can get when/if moving to 3G, it will be slower than people think, maybe more than 10 years because GSM has got a lot of money from operators and big companies, GSM (2G) won't be forgotten it will be there till people find it slow and boring when other people can get better services and the prices will be competitive, ... what do you mean with "The old 3G network" when 3G is just born ... Oh and sure, Europe has UMTS, vodafone going ahead because of their market position and investment, but not for over a year, in Germany is less than that and still other countries have to start...

UMTS should be "Universal"
GSM should be Global ...
ohhh! and 3GSM is still 2G but with some 3G services, so it won't be more than 2.5 G

 

[Lanbrown]

Pls again, there is NO 3G GSM, GSM is one step forward from TDMA and AMPS, 3G is UMTS in europe or CMDA2000 in USA, is exactly the same as if you referred to the first 15 AL PB as a Titanium... , it's based on it but is different... I need you extensive background to clarify what 3G portion you mean to, what is 3G for you? , I need to extend my foreground

I hope you are not talking about GPRS/EDGE when saying 3G GSM ...

3G is not tied to a specific spec/standard. UMTS is 3G; EV-DO is 3G. Since they are quite different, one needs to know which 3G someone is talking about. All GSM carriers will be offering UMTS, not EV-DO. Verizon and Sprint will offer EV-DO. How did US operators decide to stay with EV-D0 when UMTS is being offered in the US?

I never said GPRS/EDGE was 3G. CDMA is one step from AMPS as well. First generation was AMPS. Second generation was GSM, TDMA and CDMA. Third generation is UMTS and EV-DO, both of which use CDMA technology. GPRS/EDGE as well as 1XRTT are in between 2G and 3G.

You are the one that is confused.

 

[Lanbrown]

I recently read that 25% of Qualcomm's royalties are now from UMTS and barely anyone uses it compared with GSM, so once it takes off the royalties are likely to be huge.

Yes and Qualcomm will be forced to accept it and not treat it like the redheaded stepchild like they do now. The GSM base is huge compared to IS-95 (CDMA) and once it's gets to over 50% they cannot deny it.

 

[Lanbrown]

Acctually it is, at least on UMTS. 3G has higher call capacity than GSM, so when many of the European carriers are criticised for paying so much for 3G lisenses, sometimes the argument is put forward that they where worth it for the extra call capacity alone (although to be honest I've never really had a problem placing calls on a GSM network).

Suuuuuure they do. Nokia has the 6630 (not released that supports UMTS) and that’s it for UMTS supported phones from them. Wow, look at the choice one has. While there are some 3G phones out there, the installed base is very limited. Even that Nokia phone will use the GSM network for calls and use the 3G portion for data. Down the road they will converge.

 

[AmigoMac]

*Cough*

3G is not tied to a specific spec/standard. UMTS is 3G; EV-DO is 3G. Since they are quite different, one needs to know which 3G someone is talking about. All GSM carriers will be offering UMTS, not EV-DO. Verizon and Sprint will offer EV-DO. How did US operators decide to stay with EV-D0 when UMTS is being offered in the US?

I never said GPRS/EDGE was 3G. CDMA is one step from AMPS as well. First generation was AMPS. Second generation was GSM, TDMA and CDMA. Third generation is UMTS and EV-DO, both of which use CDMA technology. GPRS/EDGE as well as 1XRTT are in between 2G and 3G.

You are the one that is confused.

Originally Posted by Lanbrown

3G GSM is called UMTS, which is CDMA. The CDMA providers in the US decided not to adopt what the GSM providers were going to use and continue to go their own way. This only means it costs them more money to buy equipment. Economies of scale are in favor of GSM. Even a 3G GSM build out uses GSM for the phone portion.


*Cough*

You started mixing concepts

I will put it this way...

- When you say 3G GSM you meant 3GSM which is really 2.5 G

- I never read the post about 3G GSM = UMTS

- UMTS uses WCDMA

- When I say UMTS is the european standard is because in Europe there is no CDMA2000 operator, I know that asia has 3G services as well but still divided into US & Europe ...

 

[Lanbrown]

Originally Posted by Lanbrown

3G GSM is called UMTS, which is CDMA. The CDMA providers in the US decided not to adopt what the GSM providers were going to use and continue to go their own way. This only means it costs them more money to buy equipment. Economies of scale are in favor of GSM. Even a 3G GSM build out uses GSM for the phone portion.


*Cough*

You started mixing concepts

I will put it this way...

- When you say 3G GSM you meant 3GSM which is really 2.5 G

- I never read the post about 3G GSM = UMTS

- UMTS uses WCDMA

- When I say UMTS is the european standard is because in Europe there is no CDMA2000 operator, I know that asia has 3G services as well but still divided into US & Europe ...

I never mixed anything. I think you are cofused when someone says CDMA that you think they are the same.

Who in Europe is using CDMA2000? You say it's still divided.

Direct from the GSM Association:
"3GSM represents third generation services delivered on an evolved core GSM network. 3GSM services are delivered at a technical level on third generation standards developed by 3GPP, which utilise air interfaces for W-CDMA and, in some specified markets, EDGE."

 

[notmyname21]

iPhone, iMove

You know what this also means?

The excellent possibilty of an iPod PDA or a Newton, or something of that sort... if Apple developes iTunes for a cell phone, imagine what they could do with it for their own (future) products!

iPhone, welcome to planet Jobs.

I've been waiting for an Apple cell-phone. And this might be the first step towards the iPhone, or iMove in the PDA case.

 

[ClimbingTheLog]

Wrong. It's the handsets which are locked.

Go Google for 'default SIM PIN'.

SIM cards can have a PIN # and some providers set it and program the phone to automatically enter it.

You have to get the default PIN # from them to use the SIM in a different phone.

 

[ClimbingTheLog]

As stated above, the non US 3G standard is NOT the US (qualcomm) CDMA cell phone system thing, both are CDMA in it's real sense

Right, it doesn't matter who the vendor is, CDMA is the superior modulation. You get better coverage, lower cost, higher call density, better security and less interference than if you're using FDMA/TDMA.

You may very well be able to get GSM cell antennas for less than CDMA, I don't know, but if you have to put up 3x more cell sites it's going to cost more than if you just buy more expensive antennas to begin with.

Now if Motorola would just bring out the software-defined radio phones, like they promised last year, the issue would be largely moot.

 

[Stella]

Motorola phones are popular in north america. I didn't see one until I came to Canada, and really, the majority of them SUCK. They are very backwards compared to other manufacturers such as SE, Nokia, Siemens etc.

Again, its apple's short-sightedness, catering for the usa... if Apple had vision, they would be partnering with SE or Nokia which are popular worldwide.. Motorola phone are popular only in north america.

What pains me more is why they chose to work with Motorola? Who the hell has a Motorola phone?