US far behind?

[tregnier]

I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but I've been looking for a Pocket PC phone and have been really surprised at the lack of new/better products here in the US vs. other countries. I just read a review of the Orange SVP M2000 that seems to be just what I'm looking for.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=3097

I am so impressed by what I see overseas. What is it with our market? Don' t we sell enough here to have leading-edge products...at least available to us?

Very weird. :confused totally:

[kaitanium]

its a known fact that other counties usually get the good stuff, if the good stuff isnt exclusive for them, then at least it will be released much later down the road in the US. but if you want that svp, verizon and cingular have equivalents. that thing is old tech compared to the htc universals and wizards that are coming out

[Duncan]

Simple.

The vast majority of the world runs phone networks on the GSM system using three internationally agreed frequencies. The USA, in the interests of deregulation, allowed for a free for all in systems used (which meant most operators went for the CDMA system - incompatible with most of the world) but restricted the frequencies available to GSM providers - meaning that many phones and network areas in the US are restricted to a frequency not used in the rest of the GSM world.

In the GSM using world this consistency meant rapid development of digital networks and an explosion in mobile phone usage - helped by the fact that you could travel all through Europe with the same phone. In the US the market was slow to take off, split, with poor network capabilities and lack of effective roaming. Not to mention a complete failure of imagination on the part of mobile networks.

This means that GSM mobile phone users are now measured in the billions. US mobile phone users are measured in the double digit millions (and GSM users only a part of that). Let me put this in context - if we stood in a UK high street I would feel safe and confident betting you a large sum of money that, given 10 stones to throw, every single one of them would hit a mobile phone user. I wouldn't even think of making the same bet in the USA - not even in the heart of New York.

You want to develop a capable and inovative phone based device - which market does it make economic sense to market to?

[kaitanium]

makes sense. i dont like cdma, is it cheaper or soemting for companies to run that network?

[Duncan]

makes sense. i dont like cdma, is it cheaper or soemting for companies to run that network?

Doubtful. GSM is effectively a 'free' standard. CDMA is pretty much owned outright by Qualcom and is thus a privately owned standard.

[robber]

What is the matter with CDMA???

The only advantages that GSM has is international capability and slightly better battery life. Maybe the SIm card would be looked at by some as an advantage...

In the US there is really no choice IMO. CDMA all the way.

-rob

[Duncan]

What is the matter with CDMA???

The only advantages that GSM has is international capability and slightly better battery life. Maybe the SIm card would be looked at by some as an advantage...

In the US there is really no choice IMO. CDMA all the way.

You don't see international capability as a major advantage?

1) If I travel to America my mobile phone will still work on one of the GSM networks there. If you bring your CDMA phone to Europe you're stuffed. I can also use my GSM phone in Australia, India, Africa, the Middle East, China and much of Asia - not so a CDMA phone.

2) SIM cards - the advantanges of them for the consumer are many (I can walk into a huge number of shops and replace my GSM phone easily - keeping my SIM card). Plus it makes GSM more secure.

3) Variety of phones. The GSM market absolutely dwarfs the CDMA one (eight times as many users - and GSM numbers are growing many times faster than for CDMA) - thus more and better phones are offered for GSM, for cheaper prices.

4) CDMA is a privately owned standard - with obvious implications (dependence on one company for improvements, patent issues, cheaper GSM phones etc.)

5) GSM has superior voice quality.

6) You do have a choice in the US. My understanding is that GSM is a considerably better choice there than it once was.

[robber]

Thanks for the post.

International capabilites are an advantage, no doubt, but my post specifically speaks to the US.

The bottom line here is that if you want 3g data capability you need CDMA.

For $15 US month I get anywhere from 400-2000kbps with EVDO. GSM users are getting roughly 150kbps with their "new" edge service. And most GPRS/Edge users pay a lot more.

In the US there is just no other choice than CDMA if you want to do data.

Sprint (USA CDMA) is also the only provider in the US currently with a wm5 handset.

CDMA over here sounds just as good as my companies ISDN PRI so I question how GSM can get better than that.


-rob