Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
@Kdarling,

You seem to forget Nokia also has phones that go to the Internet. Just because the iPhone is not used in large amounts does not mean that GSM data is not used. Maybe I am wrong but you show a typical US based myopic view of all things US. If the iPhone never existed and the US never used GSM, it would still survive and be used by more people than CDMA. Which goes to prove that GSM sells while CDMA doesn't.
 
It's mute point because it doesn't matter as we are talking about the USA carriers.

What matters in this case is whether CDMA is a good service in the USA and most importantly is CDMA and the iPhone a good match in the USA?

Both CDMA and gsm at least where I live are equally reliable.

Marc

1. It's moot point, not mute point.

2. People travel outside the US.
 
2. People travel outside the US.

Agreed. People here completely forget this, and only tailor their answer to the small world that they live in (read: only where they go daily in life). If One has friends outside of the country they live in, and want to visit them, chances are that CDMA doesn't exist where they live. So you're stuck either with no phone at all, or high international roaming charges, both of which people complain about.

But that's the price you pay with CDMA.

BL.
 
1. It's moot point, not mute point.

2. People travel outside the US.

I understand people travel outside the USA but one should choose the best coverage where they reside. If CDMA is better coverage where they reside they shouldn't make their decision on gsm because they might travel if gsm is not as good.

If CDMA offers better service than gsm where you reside why would you gsm even though you would travel outside the USA?

If you are a frequent traveler that's a different story.

Marc
 
I understand people travel outside the USA but one should choose the best coverage where they reside. If CDMA is better coverage where they reside they shouldn't make their decision on gsm because they might travel if gsm is not as good.

If CDMA offers better service than gsm where you reside why would you gsm even though you would travel outside the USA?

If you are a frequent traveler that's a different story.

Marc

See my post. Because you would have a working phone outside the USA.

BL.
 
You seem to forget Nokia also has phones that go to the Internet. Just because the iPhone is not used in large amounts does not mean that GSM data is not used.

Begging your pardon, but you seem to be extremely confused as to what my posts were about. Perhaps you arrived in the middle of the thread? They have nothing to do with GSM vs CDMA usage, or their relative popularity.

My responses only address the oft-repeated, but demonstrably incorrect, assertion that the larger world GSM market for all phones (mostly cheap dumb ones) automatically translates into a similarly larger market for an expensive iPhone, that would supposedly dwarf a CDMA iPhone market.

To sum up: It's quite possible that iPhone sales from the 200 million sub North American CDMA market would end up almost as large as the iPhone sales we've seen from a billion GSM subs around the world.

.
 
If those events are outside the US, you're screwed. If you decide to travel out of the US, your iPhone is useless as a phone. Port your account to Sprint or any other CDMA network? No-can-do. I can take my GSM iPhone to Optus in Australia, Softbank in Japan, O2 in the UK, T-Mobile in Germany, Orange in France, or Rogers in Canada. All I'd need is the sim card for that network. Verizon, China Telecom (or China Unicom, whichever one is CDMA in China), and Sprint can't. So not only would you be locked to that CDMA network, you're locked to that carrier, and to the country it is used in.

That is why CDMA doesn't scale well with portability. VZW and Sprint will always have that problem as long as they keep their current CDMA network. When they get rid of it, they'll be on an even keel. Until then, GSM > CDMA.

BL.


You travel to all of those places? My bet is that 80% of iPhone users on AT&T in North America don't travel outside of the U.S. Maybe once a year, for vacation perhaps - but the majority of people don't. And when you're travelling in a different country, most iPhone users WONT use data - it will cost a fortune. So why not buy a cheap GSM prepaid phone for that purpose? I got a Nokia prepaid phone shipped from AT&T for $8. Travel to Europe, buy a sim card there, and use that.

I like being able to use my phone anywhere in the world too - but how often in the past 3 years that I've had an iPhone have I had to use it? Once, when I took a cruise - and I had my phone shut off because I didn't want data roaming, and had no reason to make phone calls. I've gone all over the U.S., including hawaii, and I'd be fine with CDMA anywhere. AT&T's network SUCKS BALLS in Chicago. I'm so fed up with them, and can't wait to go to Verizon. Try loading ANYTHING in Chicago's loop - good luck. And then I take the train back out to the suburbs, and there are 5 dead zones on the train line - the train line which is the busiest in all of Illinois, where over 10,000 people travel daily. I watch as Tmobile and Verizon/Sprint users browse the web and make calls - and I'll make a call, and see a landmark and be like "oh crap i'm going to lose you..." and it drops. I can't stream music at all either - constantly buffering/loading.

Perhaps AT&T's network is good elsewhere. But in Chicago is sucks. I'd rather go with slower speeds with a solid signal than with AT&T's **** network.
 
What if Apple just releases an iPhone model that supports both CDMA and GSM (including all existing UMTS bands)

Kinda like what RIM did with some of their Blackberry CDMA models, they also supported a GSM band which made roaming possible.
 
I just can't imagine not being able to sell my iPhone since it is an $800 phone that I'll be stuck with if I'm on CDMA.
 
GSM. SIM cards make more sense these days. Wherever you go, you can just buy a new SIM card and plug it into your phone and get service. Also, it's easier to replace if it ever breaks and it's just nice to have that option to be able to unlock your phone on other GSM networks. Also, if your phone breaks, the SIM card will still hold your info like contacts, phone number, etc. so you can just get a different phone and it would still work.
 
What if Apple just releases an iPhone model that supports both CDMA and GSM (including all existing UMTS bands)

That's a popular idea, and is possible.

I just can't imagine not being able to sell my iPhone since it is an $800 phone that I'll be stuck with if I'm on CDMA.

First, the $800 isn't realistic. Almost everyone gets it subsidized for $100-200. Second, there is a good market for used phones amongst CDMA users.

GSM. SIM cards make more sense these days. Wherever you go, you can just buy a new SIM card and plug it into your phone and get service.

Most iPhones sold are permanently locked to their carrier. That's why they often don't make the best choice if someone wants a phone for world travel.

Also, if your phone breaks, the SIM card will still hold your info like contacts, phone number, etc. so you can just get a different phone and it would still work.

Not on an iPhone. It has no way of transferring contacts from phone to SIM.

Between that and the locking, it's pretty clear that Apple didn't use GSM for its usual benefits to the user, but only as a way to make money for itself.
 
Only if it's unlocked

See my post. Because you would have a working phone outside the USA.

BL.

Only if it's unlocked. Which, due to some unfortunate coincidences, is impossible for me right now.

Oh, yes, AT&T will let me use data and phone service if I go abroad. They will just charge me thousands of dollars for the privilege, that's all.

-fred
 
You travel to all of those places? My bet is that 80% of iPhone users on AT&T in North America don't travel outside of the U.S. Maybe once a year, for vacation perhaps - but the majority of people don't.

But you're missing the point. I don't HAVE to travel to all of those places (and for the record, I've spent a lot of time between here (USA), Canada, New Zealand, and Australia). As long as I may have the need to travel to any of those places, especially for an extended period of time, I won't have to worry about huge charges. I would rather have the ability to use a GSM phone in those areas than be stock without one at all, thanks to having a CDMA phone.

Only if it's unlocked. Which, due to some unfortunate coincidences, is impossible for me right now.

Oh, yes, AT&T will let me use data and phone service if I go abroad. They will just charge me thousands of dollars for the privilege, that's all.

That's my point. Int'l roaming and data and the costs for that, versus a jailbreak/unlock (free) and a sim card out of a vending machine. Pop the card in, and you're good to go. And yes, they do sell sim cards in vending machines overseas.

BL.
 
I prefer to be able to do data and talk at the same time.

So that means GSM for me.

Ditto!

I can't wait till many of the Verizon fanboys switch over and loose this feature. Then just MAYBE they'll want their GSM iPhone back.
 
Wow, 70 threads later... I still say GSM. CDMA's only advantage is the fact that it was in North America first, and therefore has more towers - there are some places where there simply aren't the same amount of GSM towers yet. For example, I've found that if you head anywhere north of Portland, ME, on the 95 your service is spotty, and that's where the CDMA band would take over for you. Best of both worlds? https://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/11/mid-2011-iphone-to-utilize-dual-mode-gsm-cdma-chip-skip-4g/
 
Wow, 70 threads later... I still say GSM. CDMA's only advantage is the fact that it was in North America first, and therefore has more towers - there are some places where there simply aren't the same amount of GSM towers yet. For example, I've found that if you head anywhere north of Portland, ME, on the 95 your service is spotty, and that's where the CDMA band would take over for you. Best of both worlds? https://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/11/mid-2011-iphone-to-utilize-dual-mode-gsm-cdma-chip-skip-4g/
CDMA's real advantage is that you need less towers to cover the same area as you do with GSM. That's it.

Personally, I've found (in the US at least) that I've usually got good coverage and speed in most areas of the country. Big cities with high populations are where it suffers and that's only because of lack of 3G speed.
 
CDMA is "popular" in the US and Latin America, but the rest of the world relies on GSM. China, India, Europe (where phone penetration has exceeded 100%) all use GSM. Compare this to the US market and you have a much bigger market outside of the US than in the US.

In reality, it all depends on whether it makes economic sense. There's no point spending however many dollars on developing a CDMA phone unless revenue exceeds development cost. However, in developing a CDMA phone you're instantly taking away one of the iPhone's strengths as a "worldwide phone". I can use my GSM iPhone in the States, just try using your CDMA phone here in Ireland.

China and India have 2 of the top 3 CDMA carriers in the world.


Try again.


Edit: can't use my old CDMA phone in Ireland, true...but I never go there so who cares. I have used my CDMA phone in both China and Korea.
 
CDMA's real advantage is that you need less towers to cover the same area as you do with GSM. That's it.

Personally, I've found (in the US at least) that I've usually got good coverage and speed in most areas of the country. Big cities with high populations are where it suffers and that's only because of lack of 3G speed.

eh? why? if you are talking about max distance to tower limit of GSM, 95% of the time that is null due to general RF performance of handsets not being able to go that distance regardless what tech you are using. In addition, that limit doesn't exist with HSPA, as well as GSM sites can be configured to go beyond the initial limit.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.