Steve Jobs Wanted Original iPhone to Have No SIM Card Slot, Says Former iPod VP

[4jasontv]

We already knew this, or is this just interesting notes from Tony's discussion?

That was my first thought too. I am to tired to look it up, but I thought we previously saw an article about this on Mac Rumors.

How often do you really need to activate new phones? This should of course be done digitally.

I know you had some responses related to multiple numbers and whatnot, but also some people have different color iPhones to match their outfits.

In North America back in the 90s and early 2000s, a lot of people were convinced CDMA was going to be the dominant standard. I stuck with GSM anyway, which turned out to be the right decision.

CDMA was better than GSM. Edit: that sounded far less subjective in my head, so let me revise. For non-international customers (mostly US) it was a better experience.

One of the reasons VZW outperformed ATT was because of CDMA handover used a 'warm handshake' that ensured the new tower verified it had the call before the old tower let go. This made CDMA have far fewer dropped calls than GSM. EVDO gave CDMA a data performance edge over TDMA and FDMA used in GSM and VZW was aggressive about deploying it, because (I am pretty sure) it was a fairly painless update. But, the warm handoff process from EVDO to LTE came with a cost of battery life because, especially in the early days of LTE, the handoff occurred way more than it needed.

When Verizon launched VoLTE (Voice over LTE) they started to silently roll out equipment that used a cold handoff process. If you are a long-time VZW customer and feel like they have more dropped calls than they used to... your area might be more sensitive to this.

LTE, which uses OFDMA, is sometimes called a grandchild of GSM because its evolutionary path is inspired by GSM technology. However, I would be hesitant to say that legacy GSM customers benefited more than legacy CDMA users.

CDMA did not use a SIM for the account. It used a different protocol to verify a valid account.

It used the hardware-baked International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI). It was a replacement for the Electronic Serial Number (ESN) used in the '80s and '90s. Actually, that's not 100% true. MEID replaced ESN, and IMEI replaced MEID. Why?
ESN is an 11-digit decimal number and due to the popularity of wireless devices, we ran out shortly after Y2K. MEID is 14-digit hexadecimal that had support for substantially more devices than ESN.

So why did IMEI replace MEID? IMEI is a 15-digit hexadecimal and that extra digit allows carriers to ban hardware from being activated.

I know none of you asked for that, but I have been sitting on that for years with no outlet to share. It feels good to finally use it.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Normal people leave their phones at home when traveling abroad? Since when? Do those people have jobs?

Apparently that person is not thinking, observant or perhaps lives in some special bubble where that's what THEY do... so naturally everyone else does too. I suspect people would leave their luggage... and maybe a spouse or child at home... before they would leave their phone.

There's some people who I think if it came down to either an arm/leg or their phone, they would sacrifice the limb.

There's been more than one story of people taking life-threatening risks to retrieve a lost phone and sometimes ending up with the wrong* outcome.

*which means DEAD for those unable to assess the worse outcome.

 

[Doomtomb]

Shows you just how far design would go

 

[ruka.snow]

Normal people leave their phones at home when traveling abroad? Since when? Do those people have jobs?

Having a job does not necessitate having a phone with you at all times. You can pick up your emails from your company provided laptop if it is a work trip. Your personal phone is not required for work and certainly not required for going abroad on holiday.

 

[Benjamin Nabulsi]

iPhone mini shouldn't have had a sim card tray.. but at this point all phones should drop it.

 

[alexandr]

Given the current lack of global eSim support, I think current models that have one physical sim while offering support for dual eSim are best. Doing away with a physical sim may not be the greatest idea just yet. Of course Apple is known to remove things like headphone jacks a bit early

 

[HarryDevlin]

Rumors have suggested Apple could soon release an iPhone without a physical SIM card slot, and it turns out that if that's accurate, Apple would be realizing Steve Jobs' vision for the original iPhone, according to former iPod VP Tony Fadell.

Fadell was recently interviewed by journalist Joanna Stern for a special event at the Computer History Museum to promote his new book Build: An Unorthodox Guide to Making Things Worth Making, and during the conversation Fadell revealed that Steve Jobs wanted the iPhone to be a seamless device that didn't include a SIM card slot.

Instead of relying on GSM cellular technology, Jobs was apparently more interested in using CDMA to connect iPhones to cell towers and cited Verizon's nascent use of the technology, which allows supporting phones to link directly to the carrier's network.

Fadell said he had to show Jobs market data to convince the former Apple CEO that CDMA adoption was too low for it to be a feasible option for the iPhone.

In fact, Apple did eventually release a SIM-less iPhone, but not until midway through the normal iPhone release cycle in January 2011, when it launched a CDMA version of the iPhone 4 for the Verizon network. The SIM card slot returned on the CDMA-equipped iPhone 4S, but the slot wasn't supported by Verizon.

Late last year, Brazilian website Blog do iPhone claimed that iPhone 15 Pro models might not have a physical SIM card slot in at least some countries and regions.

Soon after the story broke, MacRumors received a seemingly legitimate document from an anonymous tipster indicating that Apple had advised major U.S. carriers to prepare for the launch of eSIM-only smartphones as soon as September 2022.

Given the alleged September 2022 deadline, it is possible that Apple might remove the physical SIM card slot on some iPhone 14 models, rather than some iPhone 15 models as originally rumored, but nothing is definitive at this point.

One obstacle is that eSIM functionality is not available in all countries, so iPhones sold in some areas will need to continue to offer a nano-SIM slot. In countries where a SIM-free iPhone is available, it may be optional, with consumers still able to choose a version with a SIM. There are more than 60 countries that support eSIM, with a list available on Apple's website.

Apple is expected to introduce the iPhone 14 models at an event that's likely to be held in September 2022, if Apple follows previous launch timelines.

(Via 9to5Mac.)

Article Link: Steve Jobs Wanted Original iPhone to Have No SIM Card Slot, Says Former iPod VP

Sometimes I'll take along an old phone when I go bicycling or hiking or traveling, not wanting to take along a large screen, expensive, phone. It's easy to just swap the SIM card from the phone I normally use. eSIM will be a pain in the butt. We already have had a taste of that with the old CDMA phones that lacked a SIM card.

OTOH, if eSIM swaps are as easy as scanning a QR code then it would not be a big deal, other than being a huge security risk.

 

[gsurf123]

I’m over the stories by former employees talking about things that did not happen 15 years ago. One could probably write a book about things Steve Jobs wanted and either were not practical or were impossible when asked for.

 

[macguru212]

I still prefer a physical card - past 2 iPhone migrations have been disastrous because Apple store folks said "eSIMS are used now and we don't need the old one". Each time I had to pop in my old SIM to get things working. so whatever

 

[tfresquezdxs]

That was my first thought too. I am to tired to look it up, but I thought we previously saw an article about this on Mac Rumors.

I know you had some responses related to multiple numbers and whatnot, but also some people have different color iPhones to match their outfits.

CDMA was better than GSM. Edit: that sounded far less subjective in my head, so let me revise. For non-international customers (mostly US) it was a better experience.

One of the reasons VZW outperformed ATT was because of CDMA handover used a 'warm handshake' that ensured the new tower verified it had the call before the old tower let go. This made CDMA have far fewer dropped calls than GSM. EVDO gave CDMA a data performance edge over TDMA and FDMA used in GSM and VZW was aggressive about deploying it, because (I am pretty sure) it was a fairly painless update. But, the warm handoff process from EVDO to LTE came with a cost of battery life because, especially in the early days of LTE, the handoff occurred way more than it needed.

When Verizon launched VoLTE (Voice over LTE) they started to silently roll out equipment that used a cold handoff process. If you are a long-time VZW customer and feel like they have more dropped calls than they used to... your area might be more sensitive to this.

LTE, which uses OFDMA, is sometimes called a grandchild of GSM because its evolutionary path is inspired by GSM technology. However, I would be hesitant to say that legacy GSM customers benefited more than legacy CDMA users.

It used the hardware-baked International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI). It was a replacement for the Electronic Serial Number (ESN) used in the '80s and '90s. Actually, that's not 100% true. MEID replaced ESN, and IMEI replaced MEID. Why?
ESN is an 11-digit decimal number and due to the popularity of wireless devices, we ran out shortly after Y2K. MEID is 14-digit hexadecimal that had support for substantially more devices than ESN.

So why did IMEI replace MEID? IMEI is a 15-digit hexadecimal and that extra digit allows carriers to ban hardware from being activated.

I know none of you asked for that, but I have been sitting on that for years with no outlet to share. It feels good to finally use it.

Only chiming in on the CDMA was better than GSM part

I have to disagree with that, you seem to have completely skipped over 3G era of cellular tech. Both CDMA and GSM had their own versions of 3G and GSM 3G could and was in many cases better than CDMA 3G. GSM had HSPA+ which was theoretically faster than WCDMA and in many cases was (early day LTE was sometimes slower than HSPA+). Also GSM could handle simultaneous voice and data which was not supported on CDMA. Also GSM phones could be unlocked and used on other GSM carriers, CDMA phones were extremely hard to get working on another CDMA carrier. Also not to mention how many carriers in the world actually did the big move from switching their networks from CDMA to GSM such as telus and bell as well as telstra in Australia. It wasn't cheap for them to that kind of a move but they felt it was worth it and the way of the future.

 

[EugW]

CDMA was better than GSM. Edit: that sounded far less subjective in my head, so let me revise. For non-international customers (mostly US) it was a better experience.

One of the reasons VZW outperformed ATT was because of CDMA handover used a 'warm handshake' that ensured the new tower verified it had the call before the old tower let go. This made CDMA have far fewer dropped calls than GSM. EVDO gave CDMA a data performance edge over TDMA and FDMA used in GSM and VZW was aggressive about deploying it, because (I am pretty sure) it was a fairly painless update. But, the warm handoff process from EVDO to LTE came with a cost of battery life because, especially in the early days of LTE, the handoff occurred way more than it needed.

That may be true, but there are a few issues with this argument. BTW, I'm in Canada, but the technology adoption was similar to the US.

1) People travel. CDMA was basically useless outside of North America. I was not a big traveler but the thought of having to buy or rent a phone just to get reception in another country didn't sit well with me. (Back in the day in Europe and Asia, a lot of the hotels had phone rental services, particularly aimed at North American guests. As expected, they were horrendously expensive.)

2) I actually started on a lower cost CDMA network in the late 90s. I lasted less than a week because it was a total disaster in terms of reliability. Missed calls, straight to voicemail, and repeatedly dropped calls. I switched to a similar cost GSM network and all the problems disappeared. Granted, the CDMA carrier was smaller carrier competing on cost (clearNET), but so was the GSM carrier I switched to (Fido). They were both later bought out the bigger mainstream carriers (Telus and Rogers respectively). I found out later that part of the reason my GSM carrier did so well at that time is because they had a much denser tower network. Instead of going for broad coverage all over, they went for dense coverage in major metropolitan centres (where I happened to live). It meant I had worse coverage in rural areas, but I didn't care as much about that.

3) GSM had better phones. The best phones would sometimes start off as GSM-only, and then eventually get released as CDMA. I still remember a common practice was that small phone shops would have guys go over to Asia or whatever and bring back a stack of cutting edge GSM world phones. These phones wouldn't show up on the domestic mainstream retail market until months later, if ever.

IOW, while CDMA had some technical advantages, in actual practice a lot of the time these advantages were outweighed by various disadvantages.

 

[jlc1978]

Having a job does not necessitate having a phone with you at all times.

That depends on the job. Some people need to be available 24x7.

You can pick up your emails from your company provided laptop if it is a work trip.

That assumes you need to take a laptop. Some trips a phone us a lot more convenient; plus you need not start it up, connect to a hotspot (since you don’t have a phone) to get email.

Your personal phone is not required for work and certainly not required for going abroad on holiday.

Some people like to be able to contact family members even when abroad; and for some personal and work phone are the same.

 

[elvisimprsntr]

While I like SIMs, cutting down old SIM cards to nanoSIM dimensions is generally not recommended. The reason for this is that the spec for nanoSIM is thinner than microSIM.

Because of this, old microSIMs cut to nanoSIM size can sometimes get stuck in some phones. It's not that common, but it's common enough to be a concern.

When a carrier charges a $30 activation fee each time, a $5 SIM cutter paid for itself several times over on the first occurrence.

 

[Sir_Macs_A_Lot]

Wow! Even during that time, Steve was ahead of the time.

He should have stuck with it. Other phone manufacturers would have followed Apple's lead, countries would have moved quicker to adopt eSim and it would have already become the standard.

Phone makers could have still produced a physical sim card version of their phones to sell in countries where needed. It's not like they are limited to only making one version of their phone anyway.

 

[EugW]

When a carrier charges a $30 activation fee each time, a $5 SIM cutter paid for itself several times over on the first occurrence.

They charge you US$30 just to use a new SIM card? Really?

Here in Canada it's usually CAD$10 (US$8) for a new SIM card (or occasionally free if you're really lucky). Yes you can save money by using an old one, but the point was there are technical reasons not to do this, the biggest being the thickness of the nanoSIMs is not the same. There have been reports of people doing this and then having to go to the repair shop to get it removed, because the cut-down card is too thick for the tolerances of the phone. Depends on the phone design though.

There may be a $30 charge if you activate a new line with a new number, but that's a different story. If you just want a new SIM card on the same line, there isn't that $30 charge.

 

[diamond.g]

They charge you US$30 to use a new SIM card? Really?

Here in Canada it's usually CAD$10 (US$8) for a new SIM card. Yes you can save money by using an old one, but the point was there are technical reasons not to do this, the biggest being the thickness of the nanoSIMs is not the same. There have been reports of people doing this and then having to go to the repair shop to get it removed. Luckily it's not usually iPhones though.

There may be a $30 charge if you activate a new line with a new number, but that's a different story.

AT&T loves to charge a $30 activation fee. Sometimes you can get it waived.

 

[4jasontv]

Only chiming in on the CDMA was better than GSM part

I have to disagree with that, you seem to have completely skipped over 3G era of cellular tech. Both CDMA and GSM had their own versions of 3G and GSM 3G could and was in many cases better than CDMA 3G. GSM had HSPA+ which was theoretically faster than WCDMA and in many cases was (early day LTE was sometimes slower than HSPA+). Also GSM could handle simultaneous voice and data which was not supported on CDMA. Also GSM phones could be unlocked and used on other GSM carriers, CDMA phones were extremely hard to get working on another CDMA carrier.

I did skip over 3G, but mostly because the leapfrog game makes comparisons outside of narrow windows difficult. HSPA+ is really 3.5G, so should it be put up against 3G or 4G? Do you know what I mean? I mentioned EVDO, which was CDMA's 3G only because it ended up being a nuisance in the conversion to LTE. Pre-2007 I find 3G speeds fairly irrelevant.

Simultaneous Voice and Data was a nice feature, but most of its value fell within a 3-year window. I am sure you are going to respond that sending MMS while on a call was huge, but not nearly as big as web browsing while talking.

That may be true, but there are a few issues with this argument. BTW, I'm in Canada, but the technology adoption was similar to the US.

1) People travel. CDMA was basically useless outside of North America. I was not a big traveler but the thought of having to buy or rent a phone just to get reception in another country didn't sit well with me. (Back in the day in Europe and Asia, a lot of the hotels had phone rental services, particularly aimed at North American guests. As expected, they were horrendously expensive.)

That's why I made the point of excluding international travel. It's an unfair point since it has nothing to do with CDMA vs GSM itself, but rather an adoption of the standards.

2) I actually started on a lower cost CDMA network in the late 90s. I lasted less than a week because it was a total disaster in terms of reliability. Missed calls, straight to voicemail, and repeatedly dropped calls. I switched to a similar cost GSM network and all the problems disappeared. Granted, the CDMA carrier was smaller carrier competing on cost (clearNET), but so was the GSM carrier I switched to (Fido). They were both later bought out the bigger mainstream carriers (Telus and Rogers respectively). I found out later that part of the reason my GSM carrier did so well at that time is because they had a much denser tower network. Instead of going for broad coverage all over, they went for dense coverage in major metropolitan centres (where I happened to live). It meant I had worse coverage in rural areas, but I didn't care as much about that.

I suspect the benefit came from the frequency and not the standard used. Low-cost CDMA networks typically ran on a higher frequency spectrum that required more towers to cover the same area.

3) GSM had better phones. The best phones would sometimes start off as GSM-only, and then eventually get released as CDMA. I still remember a common practice was that small phone shops would have guys go over to Asia or whatever and bring back a stack of cutting edge GSM world phones. These phones wouldn't show up on the domestic mainstream retail market until months later, if ever.

IOW, while CDMA had some technical advantages, in actual practice a lot of the time these advantages were outweighed by various disadvantages.

Subjective, but you are not wrong.

Again, this wasn't a feature of GSM but of the international popularity of the standard. International markets had access to new devices earlier, and since international markets were more likely to support GMS the hardware was able to get to the US faster. GSM networks having access to newer/better phones doesn't make GSM better.

 

[darngooddesign]

I thought Apple's decision to go with AT&T's GSM, instead of Verizon's CDMA, was due to their not trying to control the iPhone and building Visual Voicemail, rather than eSIM vs SIM.

 

[ruka.snow]

That depends on the job. Some people need to be available 24x7.



That assumes you need to take a laptop. Some trips a phone us a lot more convenient; plus you need not start it up, connect to a hotspot (since you don’t have a phone) to get email.



Some people like to be able to contact family members even when abroad; and for some personal and work phone are the same.

It is illegal to have to be on the clock 24/7

You can take a phone with you, it is not the normal.

Being able to contact family while abroad can be useful, but that doesn’t mean you need to take your own phone with you.

You are right to say you can do these things and these things are important to some people. But most don’t need to and won’t so let’s not design phones for extreme use cases. You know when I go abroad my phone would stop functioning due to the extreme cold or heat or humidity. But I don’t expect my phone to be designed to work in environments that even my pro cameras struggle because like someone that needs their phone with them on a business trip, I am in a extreme minority.

 

[4jasontv]

I thought Apple's decision to go with AT&T's GSM, instead of Verizon's CDMA, was due to their not trying to control the iPhone and building Visual Voicemail, rather than eSIM vs SIM.

There was considerable contention over VVM being free on the iPhone. At the time Verizon was still charging a fee for regular Voice Mail.

 

[EugW]

BTW, I dislike Visual Voicemail. I always specify premium voicemail-to-text (which includes an audio file in the message), as it is more flexible.

The carriers are annoying on this because whenever I get a new line or switch carriers, I specifically tell them I do not want VVM and want voicemail-to-text but if they know I have an iPhone they always set it up as VVM, and forcing me to call back to get it straightened out.

 

[4jasontv]

It is illegal to have to be on the clock 24/7

We call it being 'on-call.' You can be scheduled for 12 hours, be on call for 12-hours, and then have another 12-hour shift.

Although The most I have ever seen is 32 days in a row. Typically it's only 14 days.

 

[darngooddesign]

You can take a phone with you, it is not the normal.

Being able to contact family while abroad can be useful, but that doesn’t mean you need to take your own phone with you.

You are right to say you can do these things and these things are important to some people. But most don’t need to and won’t so let’s not design phones for extreme use cases. You know when I go abroad my phone would stop functioning due to the extreme cold or heat or humidity. But I don’t expect my phone to be designed to work in environments that even my pro cameras struggle because like someone that needs their phone with them on a business trip, I am in a extreme minority.

Considering phones are now most people's primary or secondary camera, not to mention all the other features phones provide which are particularly helpful when traveling, people who don't take a phone on trips/vacations are probably in the minority. Requirement, no; common-place, yes.

 

[elvisimprsntr]

They charge you US$30 just to use a new SIM card? Really?

$5 for the SIM, $30 to activate. It's like pulling teeth to get them to wave the fees.

 

[EugW]

$5 for the SIM, $30 to activate. It's like pulling teeth to get them to wave the fees.

Wow, that's highway robbery.

Is this just a US thing? This is not a thing in Canada (unless you're activating a new line). AFAIK, this is usually not a thing in most of Asia or Europe either but I could be mistaken.