Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the flexibility
offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also. Then
to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from the old
phone and insert it in the new phone.
> Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the flexibility
> offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also. Then
> to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from the old
> phone and insert it in the new phone.
My first guess would be it's from the legacy AMPS system. CDMA was
developed ("perfected") by Qualcomm, a US company. In the US, AMPS was
the national standard, and it was mandated that AMPS be mainted for a
period of time (I think it's 2007 or 2008 when it no longer needs to be
maintained). Because of that requirement, the natural upgrade path of
carriers would be a similar type of system that would use the ESN for
authentication. CDMA in Korea, which is compatible with CDMA in North
America uses the R-UIM, a card similar to SIM and interchangeable with SIM (which allows GSM subsribers to roam on CDMA while in South Korea.
>> Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the flexibility
>> offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also. Then
>> to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from the old
>> phone and insert it in the new phone.
>
>My first guess would be it's from the legacy AMPS system. CDMA was
>developed ("perfected") by Qualcomm, a US company. In the US, AMPS was
>the national standard, and it was mandated that AMPS be mainted for a
>period of time (I think it's 2007 or 2008 when it no longer needs to be
>maintained). Because of that requirement, the natural upgrade path of
>carriers would be a similar type of system that would use the ESN for
>authentication. CDMA in Korea, which is compatible with CDMA in North
>America uses the R-UIM, a card similar to SIM and interchangeable with
>SIM (which allows GSM subsribers to roam on CDMA while in South Korea.
>
>TH
In the case of the country where I live in I think that the omission
of R-UIM cards was by the teleco a method of stopping the parallel
importing of CDMA phones. There are heaps of companies parallel
importing GSM phones and selling them are far less prices than the GSM carriers do..
But it would have been nice to have R-IUM cards from day one on CDMA..
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:54:59 +1200, Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>In the case of the country where I live in I think that the omission
>of R-UIM cards was by the teleco a method of stopping the parallel
>importing of CDMA phones. There are heaps of companies parallel
>importing GSM phones and selling them are far less prices than the
>GSM carriers do..
Who? I can't see that anyone is selling any phones for "far less"
than the carriers, it is all very expensive here in the US IMHO.
Please post the identity of anyone who sells any phones for far less.
At least in the US. I'll buy one.
In the US the selling of discounted phones branded to carriers seems
to be a mechanism designed solely to keep subscribers signed up for 2
year contracts, one after another. To build "loyalty" by liquidated
damages.
It is pretty obvious most of these phones don't cost $200-$500. But
if you don't sign up for a contract you just have to pay.
> It is pretty obvious most of these phones don't cost $200-$500.
Oh, it is? I disagree. it' SEEMS obvious because you're accustomed to
a carrier eating the $200-500 of each phone, but I'm sure you'd be quite
unhappy if the subsidy system goes away.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
"Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospamforme.com> wrote in message
news:XPk%d.113372$bu.77453@fed1read06...
> Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the flexibility
> offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also.
> Then to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from the
> old phone and insert it in the new phone.
John S wrote:
>>Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the flexibility
>>offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also.
>>Then to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from the
>>old phone and insert it in the new phone.
> Because SIM's are unique to GSM.
Heh, definitely not true.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Per Isaiah Beard:
>Oh, it is? I disagree. it' SEEMS obvious because you're accustomed to
>a carrier eating the $200-500 of each phone, but I'm sure you'd be quite
>unhappy if the subsidy system goes away.
Not me. Just thinking about bundling phone and carrier upsets me.
I'm sort of unbundled on the tMobile accounts I recently set up bc I purchased a
used phone for one. I think bundling is the pits.
--
PeteCresswell
In message <%kG%d.1238$H06.1134@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net> "John
S" <johndsummers@teraearthlink.net> wrote:
>
>"Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospamforme.com> wrote in message
>news:XPk%d.113372$bu.77453@fed1read06...
>> Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the flexibility
>> offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also.
>> Then to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from the
>> old phone and insert it in the new phone.
>
>Because SIM's are unique to GSM.
>
Thanks for playing, but no they are not. Modern iDEN phones have SIM
cards as well.
There is nothing unique about GSM that makes GSM more or less adaptable
to SIM cards, just that SIM cards were designed into the spec.
--
"These, and other cliches will be available to you all for one more
day of training, with me"
-- Jack O'Neill
some sat phones use sim cards as well. Also SIMs are used for the TDMA half
of GAIT phones.
Stu
"DevilsPGD" <ihatespam@crazyhat.net> wrote in message
news:fphu315taus6vmk6hslbu1ina417iuhkq9@beta.readfreenews.net...
> In message <%kG%d.1238$H06.1134@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net> "John
> S" <johndsummers@teraearthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospamforme.com> wrote in message
>>news:XPk%d.113372$bu.77453@fed1read06...
>>> Why are there no Sim cards for CDMA phones? It seems that the
>>> flexibility
>>> offered by the GSM Sim cards could be implemented on CDMA phones also.
>>> Then to switch phones, all you have to do is remove the Sim card from
>>> the
>>> old phone and insert it in the new phone.
>>
>>Because SIM's are unique to GSM.
>>
>
> Thanks for playing, but no they are not. Modern iDEN phones have SIM
> cards as well.
>
> There is nothing unique about GSM that makes GSM more or less adaptable
> to SIM cards, just that SIM cards were designed into the spec.
>
>
> --
> "These, and other cliches will be available to you all for one more
> day of training, with me"
> -- Jack O'Neill
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:58:32 -0800, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>>Just thinking about bundling phone and carrier upsets me.
>>I'm sort of unbundled on the tMobile accounts I recently set up bc I purchased a
>>used phone for one. I think bundling is the pits.
>
>Carriers bundle phones with service to convince you to go with their
>service as an incentive to use them. That's why they either give you
>a phone or severely discount the price of the phones for use on their
>service.
The part that irritates me is that I strongly suspect that I'm paying
for all those camera phones that people choose while I just stick with
plain-vanilla...
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:21:47 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote:
>>Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> It is pretty obvious most of these phones don't cost $200-$500.
>
>Oh, it is? I disagree. it' SEEMS obvious because you're accustomed to
>a carrier eating the $200-500 of each phone, but I'm sure you'd be quite
>unhappy if the subsidy system goes away.
No, I would prefer the subsidy system went away. Then the phones
would be sold in a competitive market by the manufacturer, and prices
would decline. Take a look a the price of laser printers, used to be
$1500. Now you can buy one for $99, or even less. Market forces at
work. The manufacturers are duking it out. Cellular handset
manufacturers have only a few customers, the carriers.
It is hardly in the customer's best interest for Motorola and Samsung
to sell phones to carriers for $63 and have the carrier put a $299
price tag on it, but it's free if you sign a contract.
The minute rate/monthly rate you pay is subsidizing that cost, but the
cost is really only the $63.
If I could buy that phone on the competitive market it would probably
cost me $99 or less, and my minute usage rate would no longer have to
be as high as it is to subsidize it.
Cellular carriers have a very high customer acquisition cost. I heard
$450 a while ago. That of course includes advertising, the "free"
phone, salesman commission and overhead. So no wonder they want badly
to lock you in.
There used to be a 6% commission paid in perpetuity to the activating
dealer. Not sure if that is still going on but only a fool wouldn't
realize that is in your bill every month.
In message <28g041hckqe6d1nvblqta9t7257j5dsf27@4ax.com>
"Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:21:47 -0500, Isaiah Beard
><sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote:
>>>Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>>>
>>> It is pretty obvious most of these phones don't cost $200-$500.
>>
>>Oh, it is? I disagree. it' SEEMS obvious because you're accustomed to
>>a carrier eating the $200-500 of each phone, but I'm sure you'd be quite
>>unhappy if the subsidy system goes away.
>
>No, I would prefer the subsidy system went away. Then the phones
>would be sold in a competitive market by the manufacturer, and prices
>would decline. Take a look a the price of laser printers, used to be
>$1500. Now you can buy one for $99, or even less. Market forces at
>work. The manufacturers are duking it out. Cellular handset
>manufacturers have only a few customers, the carriers.
Printers aren't a fair comparison though, because they too are
subsidized. The manufacturer loses money on virtually every SOHO
printer sold, but makes it up in the recurring charges (the ink/toner)
--
"If it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent
that year in college"
-- Lewis Black
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:26:44 -0800, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>>The part that irritates me is that I strongly suspect that I'm paying
>>for all those camera phones that people choose while I just stick with
>>plain-vanilla...
>
>No one is forcing you to use a plain or fancy phone.
The idea is, though, to the extent that others choose fancy phones, my
plain-vanilla phone becomes more expensive.
Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
> <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote:
>>Oh, it is? I disagree. it' SEEMS obvious because you're accustomed to
>>a carrier eating the $200-500 of each phone, but I'm sure you'd be quite
>>unhappy if the subsidy system goes away.
>
> No, I would prefer the subsidy system went away. Then the phones
> would be sold in a competitive market by the manufacturer, and prices
> would decline. [snip rest of analysis]
Linear Mode
