Debunk: sleep easy, the iPhone's still a quad-band worldphone
There's been a lot of buzz these past couple days about the iPhone's FCC filing and what it says -- or rather, what it doesn't say -- about the handset's internals. The fear basically revolves around the fact that a lack of testing on the GSM 900 and 1800MHz bands indicates that it lacks those bands entirely, but we can assure the globetrotters out there jonesin' for an iPhone come next month that there'll be a full range of RF spectrum waiting for you. How do we know? Well, first of all, in the year 2007 (or 2005, for that matter) it's simply idiotic to release a wide-appeal phone with any fewer than four GSM bands. Quadband GSM chipsets have been commodity items for some time now and add virtually no expense to a handset's internals. Second of all, quadband phones never have their non-US bands mentioned in a filing, particularly in a test report. Follow the break for a walkthrough of exactly what we mean.Let's take a look at a released phone that we know to be quadband -- that is, a phone that supports GSM on the 850, 900, 1800, and 1900MHz bands, offering coverage pretty much anywhere in the world that a GSM tower exists. For our purposes, we'll pick on the RIM BlackBerry 8800. You're going to get a frightening peek into our daily FCC-lurking insanity here.
So that's our little tutorial into the deep, dark annals of FCC madness. It's a place we prefer not to go unless we have to, and a place we recommend our readers never venture. When a device like the iPhone gets blessed, though, it's pretty hard to avoid. Of course, "quadband" doesn't mean "unlocked" in this case -- AT&T still stands in your way regardless of where you plan on using the phone -- but at least you won't be stuck with nothing more than a fancy lookin' iPod once you hop the pond.
Filed under: Cellphones, Handhelds
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
CaptSaltyJack @ May 18th 2007 9:38PM
[insert stupid comment that in no way contributes to the article or the discussion]
www.mystupidwebsitenoonegivesashitabout.com
I'm going to start flagging all you 'tards down as spam. Idiots.
Now, on topic: I would be surprised if the iPhone wasn't a world phone. The thing I'm wondering about, though, and I'm sure people already know the answer, but.. is it HSDPA?? I will be severely disappointed if it's not. HTC is doing it with their Windows Mobile phones, so I would hope Apple will go that route too.
telepheedian @ May 18th 2007 4:54PM
Absolutely, it better be, half of the free with contract phones they sell now are world phones.
Miguel Gomez @ May 18th 2007 5:12PM
The official website has been updated. It now doesn't have the FCC disclaimer on the bottom, and, more importantly, confirms that the iPhone is, indeed, quad-band.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/technology/specs.html
beanspants @ May 18th 2007 5:35PM
yes, the iphone will work in Europe, and all of its advanced features will follow you from the US to there as well.
Surur @ May 18th 2007 5:50PM
Actually the only advanced network dependent feature is the visual voice mail, and this apparently needs special Cingular servers, so I'm not so sure "all your advanced features" will follow you around when you roam on another network. Why are you so sure it will?
uclatommy @ May 18th 2007 6:33PM
Who here is going to be camping out in front of an apple store for an iphone next month?
Ben @ May 18th 2007 7:18PM
What I want to know is, will it be available SIM-free this summer? Any thoughts?
Zeus the God @ May 18th 2007 7:32PM
Ok, I don't like the iPhone, but please, people, please, don't start shit. I'm tired of all the anti-Apple, anti-Microsoft, and anti-whatevercompanypeoplehate shit.
It's annoying. Be mature and most of all, be respectful.
That's all.
Reluctant Hero @ May 18th 2007 7:50PM
The real question is if the iPhone will get 3G. Cingular's EDGE network isn't that great.
VJH @ May 18th 2007 8:55PM
As was mentioned above, Apple's spec sheet was updated to indicate that the iPhone will be quad band GSM. And that direct information also moots the whole post. However, Chris's argument that the FCC not testing or mentioning the non-US 900/1800 GSM bands on the Blackberry 8800, or any number of quad band phones, can somehow be used as a proof of those same bands being included in the iPhone is utter nonsense. The FCC would describe and test a dual band 850/1900 phone exactly the way they described for both the iPhone and BB 8800. So it just does not follow that the lack on information on the two non-US bands has any significance about their absence or inclusion in a device. In this case a lack of information means that there is simply no information. Which essentially means that Chris' very long 'proof' can be distilled to, "The iPhone will be quad band GSM because other recent GSM phones released in the US were quad band."
That's a pretty darned convincing argument, eh.
quasimoto @ May 18th 2007 9:30PM
So in being quadband, meaning, if unlocked, I can use it in another country and not from cingular right?
Zeus the God @ May 18th 2007 9:52PM
Yeah, see, CaptSalty, that's exactly what I was looking for. Just to prove that there is always a tard that will start shit for no reason.
I'm interested on reading what people think about the iPhone, so I asked you all to be respectful, so that people who want to know the (engadget) public's opinion, don't have to sit here and wade through a bunch of fanboy/troll bullshit.
chad @ May 24th 2007 11:22AM
Who are you kidding Zeus. You're the biggest ad hominem instigator on this site? How many times have you stepped into a article just to interject your evasive $.01 (not matter how ludicrous) and dismissed any other opinion from the start? STFU kid, and keep moving. Disagree? Should I copy your lame, baseless, and sometimes nonsensical posts like I have in other threads?
Mike @ May 18th 2007 10:58PM
Did anyone read the fine print on the bottom of the apple specs page?
http://www.apple.com/iphone/technology/specs.html
It says rechargable batteries will have to replaced after a certain amount of recharges... Does this mean the batteries will be removable, or the phone will have to be sent in for service?
Zeus the God @ May 18th 2007 11:52PM
@Mike:
Well, I would believe so, as Apple did the same with the iPod. I know it's comparing apples to oranges, but unless that dark patch on the blue-print is a battery compartment, I would say they did the same as the iPod.
Big @ May 19th 2007 7:27AM
Te Iphone is going to be a failure and here is why:
#1 ITS TOO EXPENSIVE. How many people are really going to spend “PS3-type $” on a cellphone? The only people who are going to have it are celebrities, businessmen who get it on their company’s credit, and people who simply must show off by having one of these on their waist band. I bet they won’t sell more than 25,000 units each year (worldwide).
The Iphone won’t start to really sell until Cingular can offer a decent lop off of the price with a 2 year contract.
#2 PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE IPODS.
Th Iphone is less than 10 GB. Many Ipod users right now either have the IPOD Nano or the IPOD 30 GB. Most of these IPOD owners have SIDEKICK 2/3’s, a Motorola RAZR or a BOOST MOBILE/ NEXTEL Phone. They would end up basically re-buying a phone on a different network – abandoning their phone number and re-buying a SMALLER IPOD that their music from the previous model won’t entirely fit on.
#3 STOP COMPARING THE IPHONE to the MOTO RAZR.
The Motorola RAZR is the fastest selling, most popular cellphone in cellphone history because of its unique style. But, RAZR’s weren’t moving as fast as they are now when they were first released because they cost over $500 (closer to $600) and were not supported by any more than Cingular.
The Iphone faces the same problem. It took almost 2 years for the RAZR’s sales to skyrocket. If the Iphone lulls for that long, by the time it becomes inexpensive, it will be extremely obsolete (due to NAND Hard Drives becoming more prevalent and due to its by then, bulky, dimensions). Needless to say, other companies will release PDA phones with better features than Iphone, leaving Iphones for anyone stupid enough to purchase a 2 year old, obsolete piece of junk.
plaidpjs @ May 19th 2007 3:14PM
It always amazes me that there is at least one person posting the most non-sensical rationale as to why the iPhone is going to fail. In this case you even went so far as to as to break it out into bullet points, so please allow me a moment to respond:
1 - The idea that the iPhone is too expensive is near ridiculous when you factor in everything that is a part of it and what comparable phones have sold for or will sell for in the market. For a completely concise refute of this oft cited argument, please refer to roughlydrafted.com. They have several thorough and well written articles regarding this subject.
But, right off the top, let's take the LG Prada phone that people have been raving about, although it has no significant storage, a lackluster media player, and a shoddy interface. That phone, unlocked and in the "wild", is ~ US$750.
2 - My god... this is the kicker of all kickers of an argument, especially when you read the rampant number of anti-Apple fanbois that posted in the 100 millionth iPod article comments, all of whom were screaming how unrealistic a number that was to be happy about because oh so many people owned one or more iPods, even at the same time.
But, let's be honest, the iPhone won't fit a lot fo people's entire library. Thing is, it shouldn't have to, nor will it be a detractor. No one, absolutely no one, has made or will be able to make the be all and end all portable device until our technology ius much past where it currently is. And, even then, someone will probably still expect it to do something it never will. That's why we have a society that tasks their devices.
For instance, I currently use my SLVR as my mobile music playing device, because it also allows me to take phone calls as necessary and be in almost constant contact. However, I don't use it as my PMP in the car. There I use my 60GB iPod so I have access to all my music and media at once. And, similarly if I am travelling for any length of time.
There are a significant number of people who do comparably the same thing. Adding an iPhone will give me the same functionality I currently enjoy, but with greater storage, a much more visible screen for watching video content, a super-easy to use interface, and a completely clean syncing environment to my computer of choice, a Mac!
Even better, I now get to wrap in my currently abandoned use of a PDA. Which, while not being paraded about as much as everything else, the iphone is in spades!
3 - Why not compare it to the RAZR? It was a cutting-edge phone at the time of its release and it was $600 when first released. It dropped to $499 after a year and $399 about 6 months later, and all along it was STILL selling. That device was nothing compared to the iPhone and the new RAZR is still far from being as storage and feature rich.
So, why not compare the iPhone (nearing release) and the RAZR (when it was first released)?
Further, all of your suppositions in this section of your post assume that the iPhone stays stagnant, that as it is released in June, it will still be in 2 years. That's unrealistic. Also, you suppose, but offer no proof, that other phone makers will offer products with features better than the iPhone. Yet, to-date, the only phone announced that is as feature comparable, happens to also be a Chinese, not currently in existence, look-a-like, rip off of the iPhone.
A first gen iPhone, while probably being far from obsolete in two years, will also be up to being replaced by the second generation model, which if consistent with Apple's working model, will have features or implementations of features that its competitors do not.
Ciao!
Laugh Often @ May 21st 2007 3:47AM
I was a consultant who worked closely with Motorola, Nokia, Samsung and the RIM group at the executive levels. Therefore, I am speaking from a vantage point that the average cell phone user, techi or sales reps are not privy too.
There has never been a loyalty buyer or cult following in history like there has been for the ipod (70 million sold). The market is nowhere near saturation and the cell phone world is much larger, (975 million annual cell phones, to be exact). The RAZR is a toy compared to most PDA's, which is sad considering the PDA world is a very confusing one. The January pre-launch iphone global advertising, has already created an explosive desire for apple's new unit. I can positively predict that iphone will be the greatest demand mobile unit since the ipod explosion in 2003 when Apple opened their ipod/itunes to PC/Microsoft users..
Regarding the Quad Band discussion's: It is obvious that the average American cell phone user is not an educated one. For those of you out there who care to learn a "nutshell" of the wireless/cell history in the US, I will attempt to help you out a little. This history study will help you understand why certain wireless service providers have more dropped calls and are more expensive. By the way...this is the info the wireless companies don't want you to know.
The first wireless platform was Analog which has poor clarity and doesn’t allow for digital features. The second technology platform was CDMA (Code Divisible Multiple Access) which provided clearer reception and digital features. The third was TDMA (Time Divisible Multiple Access) this was introduced by AT&T. The problems with both CDMA and TDMA are much the same....the signal is DIVIDED amongst multiple users. Which explains the many drop calls or congestion that you may experience during high call volume times (like 5:00pm rush). The two primary companies who use CDMA are Sprint and Verizon. TDMA is very rarely used...thank God! The final platform is GSM (Global Systems for Multiple access). The name alone should tell you that this technology is GLOBAL. The GSM technology does not operate on a divisible platform but an inclusive platform. This provides less drop calls and congestion. The GSM platform requires that the your cell phone have a SIM card (Subscriber Identification Module). This is a far superior platform technology than CDMA and TDMA. The two major users of GSM in the us are Cingular(AT&T) and T-Mobile. To be brief, the reason why Apple decided to use Cingular(AT&T) as the primary service provider is simply because of the GLOBAL aspect of GSM and the fact that Cingular/Yahoo worked diligently to provide the iphone user with both push technology and yahoo email.
The bottom line: GSM is GLOBAL and Quad Band is GLOBAL...ipods are GLOBAL and iphones will be GLOBAL!!!
PEOPLE WILL PAY $500 or $600 TO OWN AN IPHONE….I guarantee it!
I apologize if my attempts to be brief and simplistic have confused you even more. I hope this helps out a little.
Big @ May 19th 2007 7:32AM
GSM 900 and 1800 are used in THE MIDDLE EAST, AFRICA, ASIA and EUROPE.
I plan to be in Beijing in 2008 so if I were buying one of these, it would be useful to have these bands.
The only other people I think will really appreciate it are the British/UK citizens who shop in American Best Buys - but I doub't they'll be able to use their own networks since you probably won't be able to unlock the phone from the Cingular network.
jimgirardi @ May 19th 2007 9:04AM
Of COURSE its quad-band! It would make no sense otherwise. Too bad it won't work in Japan though... the Japanese GSM networks (Softbank & Parts of DoCoMo) run at 2100 MHz. Oh well.
Mark @ May 20th 2007 4:23AM
Actually - Japan doesn't have GSM at all. It's not only about the different frequency operating here - it's a different network standard, it's not called GSM. To my knowledge Japan and Korea are the only countries in the world that don't have GSM signals. Hurray for proprietary systems! Friends and relatives love it when they get to Narita airport and they find out their phones don't work, yet they can go on some island in the middle of the Indian Ocean or anywhere else on the planet and their phones do work thanks to GSM being omnipresent.
jimgirardi @ May 20th 2007 7:22AM
Actually they DO have GSM. Lived there for several years and when Vodafone bought J-phone, they started a GSM network. Also, FOMA uses GSM for part of its service so yes, GSM does exist but it is a proprietary version. If you use T-Mobile or Cingular, you can get a 5-band GSM phone (which includes 2100 MHz) for international use that WILL work in Japan, you are just limited to your choices.
Matt @ May 19th 2007 12:52PM
I just read through all posts on this subject and wanted to comment as well... I'd assume that people who read engadget are a bit more technologically educated than an average joe so WHY in the hell would anyone ask questions like "Will it be HSDPA, will it run on Cingular's 3G network, will you be able to buy it unlocked or is it quad band etc etc". Have you been living under the rock for the past six months???? Apple announced that Cingular would be the exclusive carrier at launch (so that translates into "No, you can't buy it unlocked on the street"). Apple said the phone will run on Cingular's EDGE (that means NO 3G, no HSDPA...which also means this phone won't work in Japan as Japan does not have 2/2.5G GSM networks at all (according to http://www.gsmworld.com/roaming/gsminfo/index.shtml )
So before you post a silly question - why not reading about the product on manufacturer's website first). I'd believe the manufacturer first and not rely on "it is / No it isn't a Quad band" comments.
Teggie @ May 19th 2007 2:55PM
Why is it "of course" quad-band? As far as anyone knows, the core of the iPhone will be an Infineon chip set. The latest GSM/EDGE phone released with an Infineon chipset was the LG Shine, which is a tri-band phone. So really, it wasn't a safe bet at all. Still, it's an important part of the feature set.
Big @ May 19th 2007 8:13PM
#1 THE IPHONE IS TOO EXPENSIVE
For a bulky PDA phone with a huge screen that yells *break me !*, the Iphone is going to be a highly desireable piece of equiptment that everyone wants and few can afford.
When I say "afford" I'm not talking about these people out there who are going to try and buy it on their near-maxed out credit cards... I mean people who can seriously walk into their nearest cell phone dealer and say "give me that $600 phone right there with a 2 year contract".
Its a PDA? SO WHAT!?! Its too damned expensive for a large number of people out there - which will cause its sales figures to be SLOW.
Over time it will start to sell (with promotions) but up front, its too expensive for the mass market.
And how about those DATA PLANS?
Why don't you tell us how much the typical CINGULAR DATA PLAN is for a device like this? You'd better believe, your $600 Iphone will be costing you no less than $60 +tax/per month.
right away, you just cut out the teenager market, the prepaid cellular market and the budget conscious user market.
The only people who could seriously be looking at the Iphone are working for a company who is going to pay their bills. My mother and my Aunt for example are NY Board of ED PRINCIPALS making $110,000 a year. They are getting their Iphones THROUGH THE SCHOOL and not going to pay a DIME for them. Just like how they have "free" Blackjacks right now.
Your typical busniessman/business woman or high paid worker might be able to work Cingular's numbers but not many others can.
#2 My point about people already having Ipods (and other MP3 players) is VALID.
Many people who couldn't afford Ipods got theirs for birthdays or Christmas. I doubt many people who want this phone will be getting it when it is released unless they have mega-bucks to burn.
You could simply by a PDA phone made by another company, buy a $100 4GB SD card and have a cheaper cellular PDA than this piece of overpriced garbage.
#3 Comparing Iphones to Razr's is stupid.
The Razr was a PHONE. Nothing more than a PHONE when it was released.
It didn't have GPS, didn't have MP3 playback and didn't have much else until later in its life.
Iphone however wants to be a phone, a mass audio storage device and a PDA.
Iphone wants to be all these things with a huge touch screen *ahem* (you'd better have one hell of a warranty on that).
plaidpjs @ May 19th 2007 9:17PM
Big,
First... aren't you just a gleaming pot of angry!
Second... what rock have you been living under that you seem to think the iPhones price tag is going to exclude the teenage market? These same teenagers are getting things that are just as expensive. I see more teenagers carting around full-size iPods and Blackjacks, then I do adults, and those two items together are equal to the price of the iPhone, if not more in several circumstances.
Third... I'm sorry to tell you, but when you start racking up feature compatible equipment, you invariably get to the same price point as an iPhone, only difference is, the iPhone doesn't require anyone to cart around an expansion card or two for storage.
Fourth... you haven't laid finger one on the iPhone yet it's a peice of garbage, about the only thing I can see you saying that qualifies anything for being a piece of garbage is its price. Well, then i guess we better get the garbage pail because that will be an awful lot of current technology under your standard. Or, is it just because it's an Apple product?
Fifth... what logic is it that you use to first surmise that because people already have an iPod they won't want an iPhone or, after that point is shot down, that everyone who does own an iPod got it for a Birthday present or Christmas and hence can't buy an iPhone on their own because they won't have the cash? That is some angry first-grader logic in my book. Your point still has no validity.
Sixth... actually, because the RAZR was JUST a phone and nothing more makes the comparison people are using even more relevant. Almost 3 years ago a phone and nothing more than a phone (a skinny one if we must say anything) was released at a $600 price point and sold well. It couldn't do MP3 playback, it didn't have web browsing or email capabilities, but it sold well and became one of the most successful phone launches to date.
Hmmm... now, come on, anyone can see the extrapolation there. The iPhone is more than just a phone, it does more, has more, and will be capable of more! It is coming out with a similar price point nonetheless... so, stop with the impracticality already... it is a valid comparison for pricing and success potential.
So... buh-bye!
Next!
Big @ May 19th 2007 10:12PM
Just like all other apple products, the Iphone will be a fad item that is obsolete and pales in comparison to many other better items.
I didn't realize Apple had you on the corner making money for them.
My mistake.
jimgirardi @ May 20th 2007 7:25AM
Just based on basic empirical data alone... if you count Apple's record for creating "fads," A. they do pretty damn well (i.e. the iPod), and B. they last a pretty damn long time (i.e. the iPod; i.e. it is still the most popular media player).
crescentdavid @ May 20th 2007 2:09PM
My condolences to Mark Ziegler, whom, I'm assuming, did all this research, only to have Apple scoop him on its own site.
Question: can you folks just call up companies like Apple and ask specific questions like "will this product cover GSM 900 & 1800?" The kind of questions which don't give away any trade secrets or pricing? Or do companies just say "buzz off."
Actually curious.
pnjunction @ May 20th 2007 3:43PM
Who cares how many bands of GSM suckage it has? CDMA is better.
The only advantage of GSM is that you can use more crappy networks around the world. Stupid idea anyways, often you will have a $1000+ bill waiting for you when you get home. See: SIM card fraud.
Technologically, it's frequency-hopping vs spread-spectrum. No contest. Look it up.
Rich @ May 21st 2007 6:13AM
Laugh Often: GSM _is_ a form of TDMA. It's just one that works quite well...
chad @ May 24th 2007 11:02PM
Not only what Rich said, but you could paraphrase everything you just said by simply stating that GSM is the global de facto standard with 2 billion subscribers. One reason why is SMS which is heavily used in other parts of the world.
I don't pretend to be an expert, but to go on and argue that GSM is better than its own channel access method (TDMA) or that its better than its 3G Successor is plain wrong. Sure UMTS extends GSM, but [gprs] just isn't scaling to the bandwidth that either cdmaOne (US),cdma2000 (US), or w-cdma (Japan)provides for data users.
fifthbullet @ May 21st 2007 7:53AM
for people who are here for the sake of argument, USD600 on a cell phone is considered NOTHING outside US and Europe.
Asian network provider normally doesn't subsidies handset even for new subscriber, and it's very normal for us to pay something near USD400 to USD700 for a new technology...
bare in mind that students who is spending their parents money is the biggest market over here, not the executive class. and what's more interesting is that most of us chance handset every time when there is an innovative product launch, and those around me already ask their friends in US to get them the iphone when it launch... we "smugger" phone from oversea when it's not available here :P and many people here don't mind even if they need to pay up to USD900. many of us does that during our school days when RAZR V3 launch, so does the time of nokia 8500 and the list goes on...
whether iphone will be a flop or not, we shall see
chad @ May 24th 2007 10:44PM
Don't know what part of Asia you speak of, but Japan (and I'm guessing Korea) certainly do subsidize handsets. I'll go on a limb and say China just makes their own copycat of practically everything and then sells it at discount to avoid licensing costs. The Philippines definitely jacks people for overpriced and unsubsidized phones.
chad @ May 24th 2007 11:43PM
I should say one more thing to be fair [and balanced]. Once UMTS and HSDPA become more widespread in the US (i.e. full T-Mo deployment), the distance between GSM and CDMA w/EVDO will be narrower. I don't believe GSM will ever close the gap on the forefront of cell technology that is Japan though.
BTW, I have a GSM smartphone.