Why no Sim Cards for CDMA

clifto wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> <[email protected]> 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]
>
> I couldn't have said that better.

I'll jump on this bandwagon. I also hate the subsidy system (and I don't
care it's for cell phones, printers, or DBS systems).

I can buy a low-end PC, with monitor, for under $500. A cell phone is
not some kind of magical device that should command the same price. And
regardless of what is said about "how expensive" cell phones really are,
or the "that's the way it is" argument, in the absence of a true open
market we can't know for sure what phones would sell for today.


--
Mike

---

› See More: Why no Sim Cards for CDMA

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:34 -0700, DevilsPGD <[email protected]>
wrote:

>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)
Not really. That's why I mentioned laser printers. Inkjet, I agree
with you. I don't see anything like those dynamics working in the
laser printer area.

In message <[email protected]>
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:34 -0700, DevilsPGD <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>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)
>Not really. That's why I mentioned laser printers. Inkjet, I agree
>with you. I don't see anything like those dynamics working in the
>laser printer area.

Perhaps, perhaps not. But if you look at some of the SOHO laser
printers and look at the pagecount/$ of those cartridges vs the business
line of laser printers, there is often a difference.

Worse, the numbers are even harder to compare because of RET, %
coverage, draft vs normal defaults which are different in different
printers.


--
News: CIVIL SERVANT STAYS AWAKE ALL SHIFT LONG
"Man, I've really got to cut back on the caffeine" he says

Here ('_www.taiwan-electronics.itgo.com_'
(http://www.taiwan-electronics.itgo.com/)) it is possible to order 2
mobile phones free of charge!

I once have already ordered. Second time any more do not give!

It is necessary to write to them the letter correctly only.

It is the Taiwan company.


--
Sulimak
brought to you by http://www.wifi-forum.com/

Isaiah Beard wrote:

> 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.
>
Yup, My UMTS Data card uses a SIM.
--
Dave

David W Studeman wrote:
> Isaiah Beard wrote:
>
>>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.
>
> Yup, My UMTS Data card uses a SIM.

UMTS = WCDMA is an enhanced version of the GSM system infrastructure
with the old TDMA air interface (not to be confused with the old U.S.
"TDMA" = IS-136, which is another TDMA protocol) updated with a CDMA air
interface. The SIM card works in the with identification
/authentication/ etc features of the GSM infrastructure, the air
interface being irrelevant.

CharlesH <[email protected]> wrote:

>David W Studeman wrote:
>> Isaiah Beard wrote:
>>
>>>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.
>>
>> Yup, My UMTS Data card uses a SIM.
>
>UMTS = WCDMA is an enhanced version of the GSM system infrastructure
>with the old TDMA air interface (not to be confused with the old U.S.
>"TDMA" = IS-136, which is another TDMA protocol) updated with a CDMA air
>interface. The SIM card works in the with identification
>/authentication/ etc features of the GSM infrastructure, the air
>interface being irrelevant.

I was under the impression that WCDMA was originally developed by
Qualcomm in the US as the next step in it's CDMA development but
couldn't get a foot into Europe because of it's mandated GSM networks
policy, so Qualcomm sold it to Ericcson who GSMized it to get it
into Europe. However I could be wrong. Just strange that it's has
the letters CDMA in the title not WGSM

Mutlley wrote:
> I was under the impression that WCDMA was originally developed by
> Qualcomm in the US as the next step in it's CDMA development but
> couldn't get a foot into Europe because of it's mandated GSM networks
> policy, so Qualcomm sold it to Ericcson who GSMized it to get it
> into Europe. However I could be wrong. Just strange that it's has
> the letters CDMA in the title not WGSM

WCDMA stands for Wideband Code Division Multiple Access. "Wideband",
because it uses a wider band per "carrier" (5MHz, I think) than the the
version of CDMA used by by "CDMA" providers (1.25MHz). CDMA is a general
term that refers to a technique of spreading multiple data streams
across the same frequency band, and using complicated mathematics to
extract the original data streams. The details are different, but WCDMA
is as much a CDMA protocol as the older IS-95 and newer CDMA2000 used by
"CDMA" providers. WCDMA is just the air interface; the UMTS
specification describes the overall network, of which the air interface
is just a small part, and (with WCDMA replacing the current air
interface) it is an extension of the current GSM spec, mainly to support
high speed data.

CharlesH <[email protected]> wrote:

>Mutlley wrote:
>> I was under the impression that WCDMA was originally developed by
>> Qualcomm in the US as the next step in it's CDMA development but
>> couldn't get a foot into Europe because of it's mandated GSM networks
>> policy, so Qualcomm sold it to Ericcson who GSMized it to get it
>> into Europe. However I could be wrong. Just strange that it's has
>> the letters CDMA in the title not WGSM
>
>WCDMA stands for Wideband Code Division Multiple Access. "Wideband",
>because it uses a wider band per "carrier" (5MHz, I think) than the the
>version of CDMA used by by "CDMA" providers (1.25MHz). CDMA is a general
>term that refers to a technique of spreading multiple data streams
>across the same frequency band, and using complicated mathematics to
>extract the original data streams. The details are different, but WCDMA
>is as much a CDMA protocol as the older IS-95 and newer CDMA2000 used by
>"CDMA" providers. WCDMA is just the air interface; the UMTS
>specification describes the overall network, of which the air interface
>is just a small part, and (with WCDMA replacing the current air
>interface) it is an extension of the current GSM spec, mainly to support
>high speed data.

Thanx for the info Charles