Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Verizon / September 2008
Why is Verizon always behind in releasing Palm Treos? GSM the new wave?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
RandyF - 05 Sep 2008 13:32 GMT Sprint, T-Mobile, name it. The GSM standard phones are released often months before Verizon. Is CDMA more difficullt to manage? According to a recent report, GSM services in the US appear to be outpacing growth in Europe. Should we all be switching to GSM systems?
I will also postthis message in the Palm and Treo groups.
Larry - 05 Sep 2008 14:06 GMT RandyF <rmfine@gmail.com> wrote in news:8d6943f7-d8e2-463c-a8fa- 9418bce05d7e@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
> Sprint, T-Mobile, name it. The GSM standard phones are released often > months before Verizon. Is CDMA more difficullt to manage? According > to a recent report, GSM services in the US appear to be outpacing > growth in Europe. Should we all be switching to GSM systems? > > I will also postthis message in the Palm and Treo groups. It takes time to rewrite the firmware to delete all the functions Verizon thinks they're gonna sell back to you. CDMA has nothing to do with it. Alltel sells CDMA phones with all the manufacturer's features still functional right away.
Hobbling up a phone must be a pain in the a.s....
SMS - 05 Sep 2008 16:26 GMT > Sprint, T-Mobile, name it. The GSM standard phones are released often > months before Verizon. Is CDMA more difficullt to manage? According > to a recent report, GSM services in the US appear to be outpacing > growth in Europe. Should we all be switching to GSM systems? CDMA continues to grow at a faster pace in the U.S., and around the world, than GSM. This is particularly interesting since it's really only Verizon in the U.S. that's gaining subscribers, Sprint is shrinking.
Europe is the holdout for CDMA voice, though they use CDMA for 3G.
Todd Allcock - 05 Sep 2008 17:42 GMT > Europe is the holdout for CDMA voice, though they use CDMA for 3G. While the 3G data system used there (and here) by GSM operators is based on CDMA, it's pretty disingenuous of you to simply say "they use CDMA for 3G" since that implies some level of compatibility or interoperability between 3G CDMA systems like Verizon and Sprint use, and European 3G GSM systems, and, as you know, there is none.
While I conceed there are a few technical advantages to CDMA, for all practical purposes, GSM is the only "worldwide" standard for international travellers, since, while CDMA is becoming more common in other countries, very few CDMA handsets work on other countries' systems, and international CDMA roaming agreements are few and far between.
All this will hopefully become moot in the future, as both GSM and CDMA carriers adopt a single 4G standard like LTE.
SMS - 05 Sep 2008 18:56 GMT >> Europe is the holdout for CDMA voice, though they use CDMA for 3G. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > very few CDMA handsets work on other countries' systems, and international > CDMA roaming agreements are few and far between. Huh? Every country I've been to with my CDMA handset (all in Asia) roaming was available. In fact I had to turn off the handset because I didn't want to rack up insanely high roaming charges.
Bottom line is that if there's a CDMA system in the country, you're almost certain to be able to roam on it. These countries include China, Taiwan, Guam, Guatemala, Indonesia, Vietnam, Israel, India, New Zealand, Thailand, Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, and South Korea.
If there's a GSM system in the country as well then it's usually better to buy either a country-specific prepaid SIM card or a global prepaid SIM card.
CDMA will never have worldwide voice coverage equal to GSM, but in fact CDMA is growing at a faster rate due to the deployments in very populous countries where the GSM network is overloaded.
Todd Allcock - 05 Sep 2008 20:12 GMT >>> Europe is the holdout for CDMA voice, though they use CDMA for 3G. >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Guam, Guatemala, Indonesia, Vietnam, Israel, India, New Zealand, Thailand, > Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, and South Korea. Yeah, you got me. I knew there was a lot of compatible CDMA in Asia, but I hgad no idea it was all accessable with a US phone. You're right about the rates, though- OUCH! It makes overpriced GSM roaming look like a bargain, comparitively!
The real problem is outside Asia, since the frequencies are different than North America. There's a reasonable amount of CDMA in Europe, Africa, New Zealand, etc. operating outside 800/1900, and no "world" CDMA phones are available in the US that I know of, (other than those that also incorporate GSM.)
> If there's a GSM system in the country as well then it's usually better to > buy either a country-specific prepaid SIM card or a global prepaid SIM > card. Depends on the duration of the trip and the roaming rate, IMO, but for long trips I agree.
> CDMA will never have worldwide voice coverage equal to GSM, but in fact > CDMA is growing at a faster rate due to the deployments in very populous > countries where the GSM network is overloaded. It's easy to "grow at a faster rate" when you're the distant second. GSM is mature and built-out worldwide. There's really nowhere else for it to go, whereas CDMA has a big wide world to expand to. Again, hopefully, the mobile operators worldwide will see the advantage of adopting a single future standard allowing interoperability across the globe, as Verizon seems to be doing with the planned deployment of LTE, like it's European partners at Voda. That would allow Verizon to offer CDMA handsets here that could roam in Europe on 4G, and allow Voda's European customers to roam here without Voda paying their competitiors like AT&T and T-Mobile for the roaming airtime when a perfectly good 45% Voda-owned Verizon signal is in the air all around their customers roaming here.
SMS - 05 Sep 2008 21:30 GMT > The real problem is outside Asia, since the frequencies are different > than North America. But the good thing is that the Asian CDMA frequencies are the same as the U.S. ones, unlike GSM.
There is some 450MHz, some 2100 MHz, and some WLL 800 MHz, but it's mostly 800 MHz Cellular, and 1900 MHz PCS. The list is at "http://www.cdg.org/worldwide/index.asp"
There's only a little bit of 800 MHz Cellular in Europe, but that's only because the governments wouldn't permit it, not because the carriers didn't want it.
Dennis Ferguson - 05 Sep 2008 23:40 GMT >>> While I conceed there are a few technical advantages to CDMA, for all >>> practical purposes, GSM is the only "worldwide" standard for [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > rates, though- OUCH! It makes overpriced GSM roaming look like a bargain, > comparitively! While on the topic I find it truly amazing that all the AT&T ads I seem to see now never mention their domestic network and instead are about how many other countries their phones work in where the competitor's phones don't (one of those ads was a lie, too, the one where, judging from the language, the guy is either in Hong Kong or Guangdong and is about to call his business contact "stinky fish face"; US CDMA phones work fine there) when they price that service at such get-rich-quick rates that you don't really ever want to use it.
However, it used to be that CDMA roaming was something of a bargain, relatively speaking. When Verizon priced most roaming at $1.29/minute there was some value there (and when it was $0.69/minute + outbound call charges it was quite cheap), but now that they've recently cranked the standard price up to $2.00 per minute they've pretty much matched AT&T's outrageous rates. And that's not even mentioning the practical annoyances of roaming with a CDMA phone, like finding that your phone book entries don't work, having to do detective work to figure out how to dial a call, and not being able to forward the phone when you are overseas, drawbacks which I used to think were a reason why Verizon would always need to price International roaming below the GSM operators. I was wrong.
> The real problem is outside Asia, since the frequencies are different than > North America. There's a reasonable amount of CDMA in Europe, Africa, New > Zealand, etc. operating outside 800/1900, and no "world" CDMA phones are > available in the US that I know of, (other than those that also incorporate > GSM.) This is true even in east Asia. Japan has CDMA2000 operators, but US CDMA2000 phones don't work there.
>> If there's a GSM system in the country as well then it's usually better to >> buy either a country-specific prepaid SIM card or a global prepaid SIM >> card. "If there's a GSM system"? I travel with a quad-band GSM/UMTS2100 phone now and there is no country I've been to, or even know of, which doesn't have an operator the phone can use.
> Depends on the duration of the trip and the roaming rate, IMO, but for long > trips I agree. Even for short trips I find the global roaming SIM I have (from Celtrek) to usually be worth while. The rates are often better (and sometimes much, much better) than the US carriers, and they seem to let you go a long time without using or topping up the SIM without cancelling it. It also fixes the problems I had in countries where it is either not possible or annoyingly expensive for non-residents to get local phone service (Costa Rica and Japan are the problems like this for me).
Since I'm sometimes paranoid about being left without phone service, however, I also don't travel without a postpaid SIM from somewhere to fall back on in an emergency. They don't run out of credit, they don't rely on screwy call-back dialing, and you can use one to make a call just about everywhere it is possible to make a call.
But, while I do subscribe to the theory that there's no such thing as carrying too many phones (or SIMs) while travelling, it has been a while since I could find a reason to carry a CDMA phone anywhere outside of the US/Canada/Mexico area my plan covers. CDMA roaming no longer has a price advantage, and I know of no place where a CDMA phone would work but my GSM/UMTS travel phone wouldn't.
Dennis Ferguson
SMS - 06 Sep 2008 04:23 GMT > While on the topic I find it truly amazing that all the AT&T ads I > seem to see now never mention their domestic network and instead are > about how many other countries their phones work in where the competitor's > phones don't If I had AT&T's domestic network, which is ranked so poorly in virtually every independent survey, I wouldn't mention it either. For a lot of their U.S. subscribers I expect that working in Europe is a big plus that with Verizon requires a rental phone to use your U.S. number.
> "If there's a GSM system"? I travel with a quad-band GSM/UMTS2100 phone > now and there is no country I've been to, or even know of, which doesn't > have an operator the phone can use. Yes, with the UMTS 2100 you're covered even in the CDMA countries like South Korea.
Dennis Ferguson - 05 Sep 2008 20:37 GMT >> Sprint, T-Mobile, name it. The GSM standard phones are released often >> months before Verizon. Is CDMA more difficullt to manage? According [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > world, than GSM. This is particularly interesting since it's really only > Verizon in the U.S. that's gaining subscribers, Sprint is shrinking. Given that he's talking about phones Verizon sells (compared to phones that, say, AT&T sells), when he says "CDMA" he really means "CDMAOne/CDMA200", as opposed to "GSM/UMTS" (but you knew that, right?).
Given this, I can't think of any conditions under which your assertion above about worldwide growth would be true. In terms of the percentage rate of subscriber growth, the CDG says that CDMAOne/CDMA2000 subscribers increased by about 16% in 2007, while 3G Americas says GSM/UMTS subscribership worldwide increased by about 22% in the same year. In terms of the total number of subscribers, CDMAOne/CDMA2000 added about 64 million in 2007 while GSM/UMTS added about 622 million. GSM/UMTS has an 87% market share among worldwide wireless subscribers, a statistic which all by itself explains why manufacturers bring GSM/UMTS phones to market well before bothering with CDMA versions. There's no need to obfuscate that.
Note that google finds lots of sources for these numbers, e.g.
http://www.cdg.org/worldwide/cdma_world_subscriber.asp http://www.3gamericas.org/PDFs/tech_stats_March_2008.pdf
I wouldn't mind knowing how you reached your conclusions.
> Europe is the holdout for CDMA voice, though they use CDMA for 3G. No, I think you are somehow making the equation "3G" == "data" and that's not how it works. A European (or an AT&T customer for that matter) who is using 3G for data is also using 3G for voice, so there's lots of "CDMA voice" in Europe. It just isn't the kind of CDMA which Verizon sells phones for, it is the kind of CDMA which GSM/UMTS operators sell phones for.
Dennis Ferguson
|
|
|