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 and Simcard
- Thread starter DeadSirius
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it's not, but the bits that are supposed to give you the high data rates are just a form of wideband CDMA that have NOTHING to do with GSM/GPRS/EDGE.HSDPA is not CDMA-only.
B
I'm not the one implementing them on GSM networks
Good thing too.
Note that all of the major US carriers operate as a bunch of regional entities who each may or may not "get" something or implement it correctly. So you might find a region that has deployed HSDPA correctly right next to one that hasn't for the same provider.
Unfortunately there really isn't one provider that "just works" in all respects. They all suck in one way or another and it may vary by region.
B
Telstra here has one of the world's largest HSDPA networks. It runs at a theoretical maximum of 3.6mbps with a normal rate of around 1.8mbps. Later this year it will get an upgrade to 14.4mbps with a normal rate of 7.1mbps.
It operates at 850MHz giving it good building penetration and overall range. The coverage is very good from metro areas to the rural regions. It covers over 98% of the population and it 100% HSDPA so that no matter where you go you'll never get that drop down to EDGE or GPRS data transfer rates.
I really hope the iPhone supports this sort of technology because it's clearly where it's all going at the moment.
As for regular CDMA - we're phasing out the last pockets of it now, it's basically dead here.
It operates at 850MHz giving it good building penetration and overall range. The coverage is very good from metro areas to the rural regions. It covers over 98% of the population and it 100% HSDPA so that no matter where you go you'll never get that drop down to EDGE or GPRS data transfer rates.
I really hope the iPhone supports this sort of technology because it's clearly where it's all going at the moment.
As for regular CDMA - we're phasing out the last pockets of it now, it's basically dead here.
I don't see why either... Why can't the USA just be like the rest of the world and have all their phones unlocked?
In South Africa you don't even find locked phones
Not only do they get charged for receiving calls but their mobile numbers are the same as landline numbers so they get charged long distance if they use their mobile to call across the country. If they move they have to change their mobile number or they'll get charged long distance even if they're calling someone in the same room.
I really like our system of mobile phones having their own area code so that call rates are all the same and as for paying to receive calls - blergh! Every mobile number in Australia starts with 04 followed by the 8 digit number so that no matter where I am in Australia I get charged the same rate for the call. I also know if I'm calling a mobile too.
The carriers have all the power rather than the consumer, they get the good phones later than everyone else (except the iPhone of course), all their phones are locked and the networks are crap with different carriers having different coverage. If I were an American I'd be dead-set outraged.
um few points I would like to correct on your post. Yes the US get charge for incoming calls but the first min is always free (if you go over a min it a friend) and yes sms you get charged on incoming.
But cell phones are NOT charged long distanced. They have NOT been charged long distance for longer than I have had a cell phone which is 8 years so far. Long disance calls cost the same as any other call.
Now international calls are a different story but that the sam over seas as well.
Alright well I'll retract my statement about the long distance stuff but do you have to change your mobile number if you move? I had to in Canada and US mobile numbers seemed pretty damned similar to US landline numbers.
I still can't get my head around paying for incoming calls. That's flat out robbery. Why don't the US consumers fight back against that. How can you guys possibly think that paying for calls you don't make can be an OK way to practice business? I'd be flat-out appalled at the situation.
That's a rotten state of affairs.
EDIT: Did you say you get charged for incoming SMS too? WTF!! How can you guys put up with that crap? That's totally f***ed.
Its called a monopoly. The government barely lifts a finger on these issues while the wireless carriers conspire to set contract terms and phone locks. When Sprint first came around, business contracts were never an issue and then when they got popular some idiot in corporate decided to yank the rug from under consumers and start making people do 2 year term contracts. In addition to that we have ATT and Verizon who keep gobbling up companies and the US government keeps approving these buyouts. The bigger they get the more leverage power they have in Washington so when Verizon cripples their phones or ATT sells off their wireless division to Cingular only to turn around and buy all of Cingular no one bats an eye.
How about when your carrier sends you an sms and charges you to receive it? T-mobile does this to me all the time. They send me spam sms messages about new features and charge me $0.25 to receive their crap message.
Really? Last time I checked GSM networks are actually expanding, with providers switching their networks over from CDMA to GSM all the time.
CDMA is the network that's giving way to GSM. With good reason: GSM is the standard in most of the world outside North America.
Not to mention that most of the best phones are GSM phones, including the iPhone.
I can see the logic behind paying for incoming calls. Generally the first incoming minute is free with all carriers. If you talk longer than that it is your choice. So while you are technically not 'making' the call, you are accepting it and participating in it. In and of itself this doesn't sound ridiculous, but when you start comparing to other countries and realizing they don't pay for incoming calls, then it makes you angry.
Most US consumers don't know about the cell phone set-ups in other countries, so they have nothing to compare it to. Looking at it from that standpoint, it doesn't seem like an unfair business practice or anything.
It's just too bad CDMA easily has better call quality than GSM.
It's not as bad as it sounds because our cell phone rates are pretty affordable. Mine was $39.99/month before I was married and I got enough minutes that I never ran over even with heavy usage. Plus, with Cingular any unused minutes rollover to the next month. So by the end of the year I had so many extra minutes I could talk on the phone for a straight week and never roll over.
Yes we do and that is the one thing that ticks me off. Although with Cingular when they send their own messages they're free. I have to tell certain friends of mine to not send text messages because I get charged for them (only $0.10 but still).
Data plans here are insane though. It's so ridiculous that I don't even use the data portion of my phone. It makes it useless with the screen size they offer on most phones.
I've noticed good 3g data coverage with Sprint and they've been upgrading their current 3g network from a maximum of 1.1 Mbps to 3.1 Mbps. However, it covers cities of 100,000 or more. Smaller areas get EDGE-like speeds, which are still faster than dialup. It's maddening when I'm using the phone as a modem.
I noticed that Sprint are already planning their new network using a much, much faster (280 Mbps?) technology but I'd wish they'd work with the other carriers to produce a unified data standard.
It's sad that we consumers in the U.S.A. have little power but it's almost always that way concerning business. This state even passed a law so that no city or county could pass a law concerning the use of mobile phones while driving.
Sprint has been offering free incoming calls plans lately but then, you're also paying for those indirectly since other calls cost more. I've noticed that service seemed as it was going cheaper but it's rebounded.
MetroPCS recently came to this area and they're offering unlimited calls per month and no contract. However, those nice phones have high prices and simple features are add-ons.
Eventually, the U.S. market might become better but monopoly seems to be more than a game here.
I'd say in my experience that it can go either way. Sprint/Cingular/Tmobile all have very acceptable call quality to me. This can obviously vary with phone, location, etc. Most of the time bad call quality for me is coming from someone else's phone due to a poor mic or something else on their end. My biggest annoyance on all phones is the voice delay. Its very slight, but truly annoying when you and the other person start saying something at the same time, then you both stop and say go ahead, and its just frustrating.
Also even if CDMA had better call quality I would be glad to take slightly reduced quality for the extended battery life of GSM phones. My old Nokia would go 3-4 days and my newest phone hits 6-7 days. All the CDMA phones I have owned have never made it past 2 days, 1 day if you have a few conversations.
All the next generation data services being deployed worldwide use one form or another of wideband CDMA, including the "3GSM", "UMTS", "HSDPA" etc.. networks that GSM carriers are deploying left and right.
This is not 1xRTT or EVDO, nor is it likely that the networks will interoperate, but it is still CDMA.
B
i have verizon CDMA and i have to say i get crystal clear calls with land lines and CDMA phones from it. it actually sounds better than my home phone. then i call my friend with cingular gsm and can barely understand what hes sayin. his service cuts out and theres static, etc. GSM phones also interfere with other electronics. u always know when yur gettin a call on one cus your tv or radio or anything else starts making a weird noise. that doesnt happen with cdma
Hmm. Can't say I've experienced any interference with other electronics with any sort of cell phone - CDMA or GSM.
I still prefer GSM - it's more versatile and works at least as well as CDMA.
OH man... If you think the US has cell phones bad, you should try Canada!
We're like the Americans, except we get phones even LATER and we pay more per month for the same highway robbery. Go figure that I pay upwards of $50 per month on a 3 year contract from Rogers Wireless and I dont even HAVE voicemail. My phone is also several years old (more than 3) and they won't even give me a free one unless I resign to another 3 year contract. Oh and BTW all phones sold here are locked, and they charge you about 20-30 dollars to unlock a phone. A while back I accidentally washed my phone and had to get a different one... the cheapest I could do was to buy a $150 phone and unlock it, because my carrier wouldnt give me a replacement unless I extended my contract.
Oh, and not only do they charge long distance to call within the country, I can't call outside of my city without paying long distance.
I think mobile phones are as close to sanctioned robbery as you can get in this great white north
For example: Motorola Razr V3 = $199.99 with 3 year contract
LG Chocolate = $129.99 with 3 year contract
HP iPaq.... As low as, ladies and gentlemen, $649.99 with an easy 3 year contract!
Yeah... for those who cant afford such luxuries, you can get a pager with 320 character memory (whats that, about 5kb?) for $49 if you take up a 3 year ball and chain...
We're like the Americans, except we get phones even LATER and we pay more per month for the same highway robbery. Go figure that I pay upwards of $50 per month on a 3 year contract from Rogers Wireless and I dont even HAVE voicemail. My phone is also several years old (more than 3) and they won't even give me a free one unless I resign to another 3 year contract. Oh and BTW all phones sold here are locked, and they charge you about 20-30 dollars to unlock a phone. A while back I accidentally washed my phone and had to get a different one... the cheapest I could do was to buy a $150 phone and unlock it, because my carrier wouldnt give me a replacement unless I extended my contract.
Oh, and not only do they charge long distance to call within the country, I can't call outside of my city without paying long distance.
I think mobile phones are as close to sanctioned robbery as you can get in this great white north
For example: Motorola Razr V3 = $199.99 with 3 year contract
LG Chocolate = $129.99 with 3 year contract
HP iPaq.... As low as, ladies and gentlemen, $649.99 with an easy 3 year contract!
Yeah... for those who cant afford such luxuries, you can get a pager with 320 character memory (whats that, about 5kb?) for $49 if you take up a 3 year ball and chain...
I've lived for long period in both the US and Europe with prepaid plans and contracts on both sides of the ocean...
Following this thread, I notice some important things going over people's heads because they only know one system or the other. Hopefully I can clear some of these things up-
In the US-
Yes, you pay for incoming calls and incoming SMS/texts, BUT it's not as bad as you think. Carriers offer packages of allowed minutes or "talk-time" (both incoming and outgoing), which are very reasonable. You just have to watch your minutes and not go over, and you can easily spend 8 hours on the phone for about $40/month. Also, the numbers are the same as land lines. This means that to call a cell in the US costs the same as calling a land line...this is relevant for those of you outside the US. What this means is, if you stay in your package, you can call anywhere in the US or Canada at no extra charge, just your "minutes". If it weren't for terrible international calling rates, there would be no need for a landline in the US.
"The Rest of the World"-
No, you don't pay for incoming anything-which is logical and better. On the other hand, the rates for calling a cell versus a land line are MUCH different. In Germany, for example, it's something like 3 cents versus 20 cents per minute. That's why people send so many more texts! Based on my knowledge, you can talk much more on a cell phone in the US than in Europe for the same price.
In summary-carriers all over the world generally suck for one reason or the other.
Following this thread, I notice some important things going over people's heads because they only know one system or the other. Hopefully I can clear some of these things up-
In the US-
Yes, you pay for incoming calls and incoming SMS/texts, BUT it's not as bad as you think. Carriers offer packages of allowed minutes or "talk-time" (both incoming and outgoing), which are very reasonable. You just have to watch your minutes and not go over, and you can easily spend 8 hours on the phone for about $40/month. Also, the numbers are the same as land lines. This means that to call a cell in the US costs the same as calling a land line...this is relevant for those of you outside the US. What this means is, if you stay in your package, you can call anywhere in the US or Canada at no extra charge, just your "minutes". If it weren't for terrible international calling rates, there would be no need for a landline in the US.
"The Rest of the World"-
No, you don't pay for incoming anything-which is logical and better. On the other hand, the rates for calling a cell versus a land line are MUCH different. In Germany, for example, it's something like 3 cents versus 20 cents per minute. That's why people send so many more texts! Based on my knowledge, you can talk much more on a cell phone in the US than in Europe for the same price.
In summary-carriers all over the world generally suck for one reason or the other.