TechWeb: "GSM Based phones can usually be used in many non-U.S. countries."

In article <pqrjn2dn2a6l66c0prbgkuokluu0n6sjej@4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:10:02 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <4579c6a4$0$82534$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>
> >... However the story is different in Korea, where
> >it's relatively easy to use a CDMA phone, as well as in China, India,
> >etc. New CDMA networks are being deployed in a lot of countries, and
> >coverage is expanding in existing countries. It's not that these
> >countries were so keen on a second standard, but in the densely
> >populated countries, they needed the higher efficiency of CDMA.
>
> In fact CDMA2000 is on the decline, but in and out of the USA; e.g.,
> signs that India may switch from CDMA2000 to GSM.

in fact, cdma is the fastest growing technology in china. you need to
stop talking about things you are ignorant of, john. doing so, as you
do often lately, makes you look silly and lessens your credibility to
speak to any subject you might know something about.

In article <jgkeegan-CC377F.22141708122006@individual.net>,
"james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <pqrjn2dn2a6l66c0prbgkuokluu0n6sjej@4ax.com>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:10:02 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> > wrote in <4579c6a4$0$82534$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
> >
> > >... However the story is different in Korea, where
> > >it's relatively easy to use a CDMA phone, as well as in China, India,
> > >etc. New CDMA networks are being deployed in a lot of countries, and
> > >coverage is expanding in existing countries. It's not that these
> > >countries were so keen on a second standard, but in the densely
> > >populated countries, they needed the higher efficiency of CDMA.
> >
> > In fact CDMA2000 is on the decline, but in and out of the USA; e.g.,
> > signs that India may switch from CDMA2000 to GSM.
>
> in fact, cdma is the fastest growing technology in china. you need to
> stop talking about things you are ignorant of, john. doing so, as you
> do often lately, makes you look silly and lessens your credibility to
> speak to any subject you might know something about.

Anus navas worships Nokia. Whatever Nokia claims or says must be right.
Actually, this is another case of navas cut and paste.

At 08 Dec 2006 10:55:44 -0800 Joel Kolstad wrote:

> > "Both T-Mobile and Cingular had an advantage not available for
> > Verizon and Sprint users: their GSM-based phones can usually be
> > used in many non-U.S. countries, CR observed."
>
> "Usually" is probably rather overstated: Unless someone specifically
> purchased an unlocked phone from their U.S.-based GSM carrier, I'd
> say the odds of the average person having such a phone is perhaps...
> 1 in 10?


Others have pointed out it's pretty easy to get a phone unlocked by
Cingular or T-Mo, but forgetting that, an unlocked phone is NOT required
for international roaming- both Cingular and T-Mobile have roaming
agreements with other GSM carriers worldwide. The rates are certainly
high vs. using prepaid SIMs abroad, but they require no hassles on the
users part- dial the customer's US cellular number and it rings wherever
(albeit for $1-5/minute depending on location!)




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12njd9i6m51h090@corp.supernews.com...
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4578a722$0$82615$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> "Both T-Mobile and Cingular had an advantage not available for Verizon
>> and Sprint users: their GSM-based phones can usually be used in many
>> non-U.S. countries, CR observed."
>
> "Usually" is probably rather overstated: Unless someone specifically
> purchased an unlocked phone from their U.S.-based GSM carrier, I'd say the
> odds of the average person having such a phone is perhaps... 1 in 10?

Absolutely incorrect. You do not need an unlocked phone to have service.
If your phone functions on the 900/1800/1900 GSM frequency bands and your
local service provider has a roaming agreement with the overseas provider
your phone will work. However you per minute cost might be through the roof,
so by having an unlocked phone you can purchase a local SIM card and get
much better rates.
>
> Granted, trying to use a CDMA phone outside the U.S. is probably a 1 in
> 1000 shot; I'd be surprised if we could find anyone who has successfully
> taken, e.g., a Sprint phone and gotten it to work in, say, Japan. But
> perhaps I'm horribly mistaken...
>
>
>
>

John Navas wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:10:02 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <4579c6a4$0$82534$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

> In fact CDMA2000 is on the decline, but in and out of the USA; e.g.,
> signs that India may switch from CDMA2000 to GSM.

And then, again, they may not. (The roaming revenue from the overseas
GSM users is hard not to go after, so lets get enough of a network
going
so we can rake in the roaming revenue! Aren't free markets great?)

John Navas wrote:

> CDMA2000 is actually on the decline, with Nokia having abandoned it,

Here're two of Nokia's new phones for VerizonWireless (cdma2000 EV-DO)

http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/6315i/0,7747,,00.html
http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/6305i/0,7747,,00.html

There are more cdma2000 phone on the Nokia USA web site.
Look for model numbers ending in "i".
So, obviously, Nokia hasn't abandoned cdma2000.


> and even Qualcomm is hedging its bets.
How, by taking advantage of revenue they could gain by leveraging
their intellectual property and give stockholders dividends by
producing
W-CDMA chips, or by buying an OFDM patent bearing company, and buying
Bluetooth
and WiFi companies? Qualcomm is aiming to be a behemoth in wireless
(can you blame them?), and is making a lot of money selling wireless
chipsets.

Aren't truly free markets great?

> Kindly take your CDMA2000 trolling someplace else.

cdma450 demonstrates, even in Europe, that European government policies
can't totally "snuff out" the free market, although a Swedish carrier
who wanted to
offer cdma450 was denied permission to do so by the government. cdma450
is blooming
where it fills a market need. More carriers around the world are
expanding their cdma2000 markets. And, where cdma2000 and W-CDMA
compete head-to-head NTT DoCoMo lost
subscribers due to wireless number portability. (They lost them to
cdma2000 operator
KDDI.)

You accuse him of being the troll? You've demonstrated that you haven't
researched your conjectures and are also indicating that you anti
free-market and pro-government regulation. Why?

At 09 Dec 2006 10:18:46 -0800 carcarx wrote:
>
> Here're two of Nokia's new phones for VerizonWireless (cdma2000 EV-DO)
>
> http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/6315i/0,7747,,00.html
> http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/6305i/0,7747,,00.html
>
> There are more cdma2000 phone on the Nokia USA web site.
> Look for model numbers ending in "i".
> So, obviously, Nokia hasn't abandoned cdma2000.

Nokia has stopped producing new CDMA handsets. According to an article I
read a couple of months ago, they are now having their CDMA phones built
for them by two companies, Pantech and someone else I've forgotten
(Samsung maybe?) So the only thing Nokia is building for CDMA phones
going forward is their logo!

In article <nospam-CDD256.23053708122006@news-fe-03.texas.rr.com>,
sw <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> In article <jgkeegan-CC377F.22141708122006@individual.net>,
> "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <pqrjn2dn2a6l66c0prbgkuokluu0n6sjej@4ax.com>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:10:02 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> > > wrote in <4579c6a4$0$82534$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
> > >
> > > >... However the story is different in Korea, where
> > > >it's relatively easy to use a CDMA phone, as well as in China, India,
> > > >etc. New CDMA networks are being deployed in a lot of countries, and
> > > >coverage is expanding in existing countries. It's not that these
> > > >countries were so keen on a second standard, but in the densely
> > > >populated countries, they needed the higher efficiency of CDMA.
> > >
> > > In fact CDMA2000 is on the decline, but in and out of the USA; e.g.,
> > > signs that India may switch from CDMA2000 to GSM.
> >
> > in fact, cdma is the fastest growing technology in china. you need to
> > stop talking about things you are ignorant of, john. doing so, as you
> > do often lately, makes you look silly and lessens your credibility to
> > speak to any subject you might know something about.
>
> Anus navas worships Nokia. Whatever Nokia claims or says must be right.
> Actually, this is another case of navas cut and paste.

i admit it .... i am astounded at the volume of incorrect information
he puts out.

On Dec 9, 2:57 pm, Todd Allcock <eleccon...@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
> At 09 Dec 2006 10:18:46 -0800 carcarx wrote:
>
>
>
> > Here're two of Nokia's new phones for VerizonWireless (cdma2000 EV-DO)
>
> >http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/6315i/0,7747,,00.html
> >http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/6305i/0,7747,,00.html
>
> > There are more cdma2000 phone on the Nokia USA web site.
> > Look for model numbers ending in "i".
> > So, obviously, Nokia hasn't abandoned cdma2000.Nokia has stopped producing new CDMA handsets. According to an article I
> read a couple of months ago, they are now having their CDMA phones built
> for them by two companies, Pantech and someone else I've forgotten
> (Samsung maybe?) So the only thing Nokia is building for CDMA phones
> going forward is their logo!

So, Nokia's not paying anything to those companies to build the phones
and not getting
any profit from putting their names on those phones?

At 10 Dec 2006 12:53:46 -0800 carcarx wrote:

> > So the only thing Nokia is building for CDMA phones
> > going forward is their logo!
>
> So, Nokia's not paying anything to those companies to build the
> phones and not getting any profit from putting their names on
> those phones?
>

Of course they are, but Nokia is a phone manufacturer. I'd say that
letting others do the manufacturing for them is close enough to "getting
out of the CDMA business."

According to the RCR News article that explained it a few months ago,
it's sort of a test and they've already ended the relationship with one
of the two OEMs.

I suspect this is Nokia's way of keeping their brand name top of mind
with CDMA customers until such time they "come to their senses" and
switch to GSM. It also helps them maintain market share vs. Motorola
which they're having difficulty with these days, particularly in the US.