Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why no Sim Cards for CDMA

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 3:13:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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.

-mij

More about : sim cards cdma

March 20, 2005 8:59:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 12:13:43 -0800, "Mij Adyaw"
<mijadyaw@nospamforme.com> 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.

The newest phones have a card slot for a R-UIM which is the CDMA
equivalent to SIMs used in GSM and iDen.

R-UIM is used in China. Some people have said that the reason a
removalbe card such as R-UIM hasn't been adopted by North American
CDMA operators is that it would give the consumer too much ease in
changing handsets. Also North American CDMA operators customize their
handsets so they're not completely compatible with other CDMA
operators which is generally not the case with GSM even though GSM
operators have handset manufacturers use special firmware that will
hard code data settings for handsets especially made for them. OTOH
if you get your handset from an independent dealer often there is no
special firmware modifications so you can use any operator.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 12:21:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

> 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
Related resources
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 3:54:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Tropical Haven <user@example.net> 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.
>
>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..
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 3:55:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 5:21:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
March 21, 2005 8:46:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 11:42:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"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.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 11:42:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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.
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 11:42:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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
March 22, 2005 1:58:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:46:29 -0500, "(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid>
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.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 5:45:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 11:10:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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.
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 1:58:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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...
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 6:34:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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
March 22, 2005 10:26:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:58:56 -0500, PeteCresswell <x@y.z.Invalid>
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.

Subsidy is part and parcel or the way cell phone service is sold in th
is country and in most countries for that matter.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 10:32:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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]

I couldn't have said that better.
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 11:27:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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.
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 7:07:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:34 -0700, DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
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.
March 23, 2005 11:01:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:27:42 -0500, PeteCresswell <x@y.z.Invalid>
wrote:

>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.

The point is you don't have any alternative. As long as free or cheap
phones are being handed out you might as well take advantage of it.
There's no advantage not to. It's highly unlikely that the business
model for cell phones will change since people love to get the free
stuff. Most people would scoff to have to pay over $100 up front for
a phone.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 4:01:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In message <p31441d6mlb1kn6oqnohkslf374lrentoc@4ax.com>
"Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:34 -0700, DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
>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
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 4:50:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

I can see something like R-IUM cards come into play one day.
I can also see a card in a CDMA phone that will hold your ringtones,
games, photos ect. Also contain all the things that a SIM card does
(*All in one card*). :wow: :bow2:


--
agentHibby
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cell Phone Forums: http://cellphoneforums.net
View this thread: http://cellphoneforums.net/t170151.html
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 9:25:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

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
!