AT&T Plumps for Windows-based Handset

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-5076129.html' target='_blank'>http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-5076129.html</a><br /><br /></div>C|NET has published their own article about the announcement today, and there are some addition points of information in it. Worth a read!<br /><br />"AT&T Wireless is picking up a Motorola smart phone powered by Windows software, a lift to Microsoft as it tries to gain a foothold in the phone market. The cellular carrier plans to announce Monday that it will begin selling Motorola MPx200 handsets in the United States by the end of the year. Motorola and Microsoft jointly developed the handset, which uses the Windows Mobile operating system for smart phones, according to Microsoft. <br /><br />The smart phone is expected to debut in Europe next month through carrier Orange, with the U.S. launch following in the fourth quarter. It will use GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications)/ GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) cellular networks. Microsoft and Motorola are expected to work together to market the phone and to encourage developers to create applications for the device."

[TomB]

Would someone please explain what the difference / advantage is between CDMA, GSM and GPRS networks other than different formats? What about Sprint's wireless 160Kb/s digital data network? What format is that and which technology is the best for voice AND data?

[randalllewis]

I am as delighted as everyone for this big deal for our favorite OS, but come on, can Motorola make something other than a clamshell phone? Do we know if other styles will be part of this alliance between Moto and Micro? And what is this NO BLUETOOTH! I guess I won't be trading in my Nokia 3650 this year.

[brntcrsp]

I am as delighted as everyone for this big deal for our favorite OS, but come on, can Motorola make something other than a clamshell phone? Do we know if other styles will be part of this alliance between Moto and Micro? And what is this NO BLUETOOTH! I guess I won't be trading in my Nokia 3650 this year.

Patience, mon ami. It has been announced that there will be another phone released sometime early next year that will include Bluetooth, and a camera. It's in one of the articles on the front page. So good news, phone with your features will be out in less than 6 months, bad news, you're stuck with the clamshell from Motorola for a Smartphone..

[mkrisher]

TomB. To learn more about GSM/CDMA, check out a recent post by Beattie (http://www.watchco.com/item.html?UCIDs=858006%7C1039670&PRID=975289) that breaks it down pretty well. Note: be sure to read the comments, there are some corrections to the post. Overall its a good break down.

I second Randal about No Bluetooth. Why Not? Price point maybe. I would guess that Nokia has the mass production/cost reduction thing down a little more than Motorola, but we'll get there. I am assuming MS will realize really quickly that they are going to need it in the next Smartphone announcement.

I am wondering if AT&T plan to lock the phone down at all. No one is going to buy this expensive thing if they can't install anything on it. AT&T actually have a good relationship with their developer community so I am hoping they will not follow Orange's footsteps and lock this phone down.

My two cents.

[Jason Dunn]

Would someone please explain what the difference / advantage is between CDMA, GSM and GPRS networks other than different formats? What about Sprint's wireless 160Kb/s digital data network? What format is that and which technology is the best for voice AND data?

This would make a good front page post, but for now, here's a quickie:

GSM and GPRS are the same thing. GPRS is the data-only side of GSM.
CDMA is a competing technology to GSM.
1XRTT is a high-speed data version based on CDMA.
Sprint's wireless network is 1XRTT.

I hope this helps a little. :-)

[Jason Dunn]

I second Randal about No Bluetooth. Why Not? Price point maybe.

Actually, since we know that Smartphone 2003 (or whatever it's called) has Bluetooth support, I think it's probably a matter of Moto not wanting to go with a third party to make it work - they'll just wait for the built-in support.

[mar2k]

Is anyone else stunned by the fact this is not a tri-band 850/1800/1900 phone. Forget lack of Bluetooth and the slow TI processor. I mean, this seems to be the biggest disappointment of all and severely limits where you will be able to pick up coverage with this phone.

GSM coverage in the US is spotty at best and a lot of these areas being rolled out are GSM 850, not 1900 as the carriers cannot get access to the 1900 band in all areas so they are overlaying their TDMA networks with GSM 850 in those areas. The fact that this phone will only work in GSM 1900 areas is a joke. What is the point? I'd rather buy the overseas version, at least it works worldwide, or just about any unlocked Smartphone would work with the same 1800/1900 bands this one will.

Glad to see a Smartphone is finally coming to the US, but what good is it if you barely pick up a signal to make a call? :x

[Jason Dunn]

Is anyone else stunned by the fact this is not a tri-band 850/1800/1900 phone. Forget lack of Bluetooth and the slow TI processor. I mean, this seems to be the biggest disappointment of all and severely limits where you will be able to pick up coverage with this phone.

I have to admit that I'm pretty ignorant about this point, but it does sound like a problem. Seems odd too - almost all new phones are tri-band "world phones" aren't they? This does seem like a step backwards. :?

[sweetpete]

Actually, what we need is a "quad-band" phone now. 850/900/1800/1900 MHz are the 4 GSM frequencies in use.
I recall reading here or at PPCT that someone is releasing such a "world" phone, but I can't recall who. Janak, it was in response to you so do you remember? :)

[mar2k]

I have to admit that I'm pretty ignorant about this point, but it does sound like a problem. Seems odd too - almost all new phones are tri-band "world phones" aren't they? This does seem like a step backwards. :?

Yes, its incredible, a Smartphone finally comes to the US and its severely crippled in that it is only a dual band 1800/1900.

Look at the full line of Cingular and AT&T high-end phones, Nokia 3650 etc., they are ALL tri-band 850/1800/1900 phones so that they will operate in all GSM areas in the US. This Motorola Smartphone will only operate in that GSM 1900 band. Its crazy, really. I guess we will all sit around a wait for generation 2 of this phone (that and sit around and read all the complaints about coverage from the people who do purchase this phone). Big mistake!

[sweetpete]

they are ALL tri-band 850/1800/1900 phones so that they will operate in all GSM areas in the US.

Actually, most tri-band phones sold in the US and Canada are 900/1800/1900 including the Nokia 3650 you mention. There are now several dual-band phones that AT&T and others carry which are 850/1900 and intended for the NA market (Nokia 3300, 6800, etc.), but this is a more recent phenomenon.

[mar2k]

Actually, most tri-band phones sold in the US and Canada are 900/1800/1900 including the Nokia 3650 you mention. There are now several dual-band phones that AT&T and others carry which are 850/1900 and intended for the NA market (Nokia 3300, 6800, etc.), but this is a more recent phenomenon.

Actually you are right, the dual band 850/1900 handsets are what I was thinking about, the Nokia 3650 that Cingular carries is this dual band 850/1900. GSM 900 and 1800 bands are pretty much worthless in the US, though. If you are going to go dual band why not 850/1900. What is the point of 1800/1900 dual band, its quite a waste, no?

[rbrome]

Is anyone else stunned by the fact this is not a tri-band 850/1800/1900 phone. Forget lack of Bluetooth and the slow TI processor. I mean, this seems to be the biggest disappointment of all and severely limits where you will be able to pick up coverage with this phone.

I have to admit that I'm pretty ignorant about this point, but it does sound like a problem. Seems odd too - almost all new phones are tri-band "world phones" aren't they? This does seem like a step backwards. :?

First, there are different band combinations that can be "tri-band" or "dual-band". A tri-band phone is a world phone, although an "Americas tri-band" provides different roaming options than a "European/traditional" tri-band. Most dual-band phones are not world phones - they work on one side of the pond or the other - although there are some dual-band GSM 900/1900 phones that are world phones.

And there are still plenty of dual-band phones out there - tri-band is fairly common these days on high-end GSM phones, but I wouldn't say it's standard.

What's really odd about this phone (the MPx200), though, is that the European version is a traditional tri-band (GSM 900/1800/1900), but the U.S. version is only dual-band 1800/1900.

Normally when a U.S. version has different bands, it's because the U.S. version adds one or both U.S. bands in place of one or both European bands. But in this case, all they did was remove one European band, which just decreases roaming options for U.S. customers. Instead of a trade-off, we just get plain short-changed.

What's even more odd is that they eliminated the 900 band, which is the older and more widespread band in Europe and Asia. There's still plenty of GSM 1800 in Europe and Asia, but the coverage is inferior. I've never heard of a GSM 1800/1900 phone before - I think this is a first, and a very puzzling one!

[rbrome]

Actually you are right, the dual band 850/1900 handsets are what I was thinking about, the Nokia 3650 that Cingular carries is this dual band 850/1900.

You're thinking of the Nokia 3600.

GSM 900 and 1800 bands are pretty much worthless in the US, though. If you are going to go dual band why not 850/1900. What is the point of 1800/1900 dual band, its quite a waste, no?

1800/1900 will give you coverage with most of AT&T's GSM network today (GSM 1900), and GSM 1800 networks throughout Europe, Asia, and Brazil. But you would want GSM 900 to get the best coverage overseas, and in a year or so, you will definitely want GSM 850 to take advantage of AT&T's quickly-expanding GSM 850 coverage (their GSM 1900 is kinda spotty and 850 will fill in the gaps).

Bottom line, a good world phone for AT&T or Cingular these days needs to be quad-band. With T-Mobile, tri-band GSM 900/1800/1900 is still fine. If you don't need overseas, GSM 850/1900 is what you want for AT&T and Cingular.

[rbrome]

Actually, what we need is a "quad-band" phone now. 850/900/1800/1900 MHz are the 4 GSM frequencies in use.
I recall reading here or at PPCT that someone is releasing such a "world" phone, but I can't recall who. Janak, it was in response to you so do you remember? :)

The NEC 515 is already out and is quad-band. AT&T offers it.

The soon-to-be-released Motorola V600 and V500 are also quad-band.

I'm not aware of any quad-band smartphones just yet.

The Motorola A760 Linux phone was going to be quad-band at one point, but then they backtracked and released it as a dual-band model for Europe and Asia only.

[mar2k]

Bottom line, a good world phone for AT&T or Cingular these days needs to be quad-band. With T-Mobile, tri-band GSM 900/1800/1900 is still fine. If you don't need overseas, GSM 850/1900 is what you want for AT&T and Cingular.

Exactly my point...If they were going to make it dual-band, why not GSM 850/1900 for maximum coverage in the US, why 1800/1900, it totally baffles me. The phone is crippled from day one.

Argh! The V600 and V500 look great, Bluetooth, integrated camera, quad-band. Why can't this Smartphone have those specs. I suspect the next generation of this phone will, I just don't want to wait that long. :cry:

[Jerry Raia]

Well I guess this means no new phone for Verizon either. :(