maemo.org - Talk

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   Nokia N900 (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond) (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=33328)

Laughing Man 2009-11-07 15:31

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Haha, hell no. Not with the way Verizon gouges you with that.

Ayle 2009-11-07 21:02

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
What's wrong with EDGE? If it's anything like the iphone wifi will be the prefered data connection as it sucks less power than UMTS.

LurkerX 2009-11-07 21:07

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayle (Post 368359)
What's wrong with EDGE? If it's anything like the iphone wifi will be the prefered data connection as it sucks less power than UMTS.

Yes wifi sucks less power, but some of use don't have wifi everywhere we want to use a phone. I spend large chunks of every day in locations where I have GSM/CDMA2000 coverage, but no wifi. And EDGE is SLoooooooooooowwwww. If I'm going to be burning battery on Edge or GSM, I prefer GSM so that I have usable speed.

Ayle 2009-11-07 21:27

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LurkerX (Post 368365)
Yes wifi sucks less power, but some of use don't have wifi everywhere we want to use a phone. I spend large chunks of every day in locations where I have GSM/CDMA2000 coverage, but no wifi. And EDGE is SLoooooooooooowwwww. If I'm going to be burning battery on Edge or GSM, I prefer GSM so that I have usable speed.

EDGE is a GSM protocol. I think you meant UMTS.

Arrancamos 2009-11-08 00:37

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnx (Post 368020)
@Arrancamos: Alright. You figured it out. There were no technical, marketing or demographic reasons. We all tried to trick you but you were too smart for us. Nokia specifically crippled the N900 just so you couldn't use it. Also: They've been following you. Know that car that always parks on the corner of your street for hours everyday? Yup. It's Nokia corporate spies out to get you! Run!

-John

PS: Honestly interested to see if you can find any *currently shipping* phone with quad-band WCDMA...

http://www.nokia.co.uk/find-products...specifications
LoL?

Operating Frequency
  • Quad band EGSM 850/900/1800/1900
  • WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100

Fargus 2009-11-08 00:39

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by les_garten (Post 367950)
OK, so you go on the cheap and make your device non functional on the biggest cell Data network in the US? TMO is number 4 in the US, without a deal that move makes no sense to me.

Maybe the USA is not a primary market for the device?

les_garten 2009-11-08 00:52

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 368481)
Maybe the USA is not a primary market for the device?

No need to still be sore about that 1776 stuff!

:D

texaslabrat 2009-11-08 00:56

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrancamos (Post 368480)
http://www.nokia.co.uk/find-products...specifications
LoL?

Operating Frequency
  • Quad band EGSM 850/900/1800/1900
  • WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100

obviously a misprint. From the n97-mini manual (https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/f...ive_or_pdf=pdf):
Quote:

About your device

The wireless device described in this guide is approved for
on the (E)GSM 850, 900, 1800, 1900, and UMTS 850, 1900,
2100 networks. Contact your service provider for more
information about networks.
and from the FCC test documentation (https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/f...ive_or_pdf=pdf):

Quote:

1.1. EUT and Accessory Information
The EUT is a 7-band (GSM850/900/1800/1900 and WCDMA Band I/II(1900)/VIII) mobile phone with GPRS,
EGPRS, Bluetooth and WLAN. Bluetooth and WLAN are tested with maximum rated TX power.
Unless you are suggesting that Nokia purposely lied to the FCC in order to hide the fact that they had a quad-band device?

Fargus 2009-11-08 01:08

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by les_garten (Post 368495)
No need to still be sore about that 1776 stuff!

:D

I couldn't careless about it. Nothing to do with my heritage, I just live here. I was merely trying to point out that not everything has to have a US focus. Nokia is a european company, maybe for the novelty they decided to look at markets that suit their operating mode more closely.

Arrancamos 2009-11-08 20:02

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
and the point of this topis is?

whatever, they can handle it, if there are regulations ok. but at least they could release 2 n900 version with 2 triband types. is that so hard? no!!

Pedro??

Benson 2009-11-09 04:03

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 367953)
Are we clear now? If someone can pull a certification for the N900 on other frequencies then it might support this debate if not then it's pointless as at very least you would be operating illegally.

Well, technically, if it had some magic band capabilities, but no FCC/equivalent certifications, and if they happened to overlap amateur radio bands, the possibility for legal ham operations is there. :p But still pretty pointless for most, and of course there are no such capabilities anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrancamos (Post 367819)
the deep point is that there is no technological issue about enable all bands on a desired celular phone. This practice is nothing new.

This tells me you've never built a radio, not even the VHF and lower ones you make reference to. I have (specifically, a Part 15 VHF WFM transmitter), and as an electrical engineer and a licensed amateur radio operator, I like to think I know what I'm talking about.

There _is_ a technological issue, because cost, complexity, and physical size are all under tight constraints here.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrancamos (Post 368958)
and the point of this topis is?

whatever, they can handle it, if there are regulations ok. but at least they could release 2 n900 version with 2 triband types. is that so hard? no!!

Not an issue of regulations, simply of hardware. But either way, no. It's not hard. No harder than, e.g., releasing two versions of the N95. Note that there was about 6 months delay from the initial N95 release (useful throughout most of the world) to the 850/1900 release (useful mainly in North America). As anyone would expect, they try to hit the big market first, and then fill in the niche cases with specialty models.

So you can expect to wait a few months after the main N900 release (useful throughout most of the world, including urban areas in the US) to the 800/1900 version (useless outside N. & S. America, but significantly expanding rural coverage in the US, and.adding coverage in markets without a network in the AWS band, e.g. Canada and S. America.).

Will there be such a release? Of course I don't know, since they haven't announced anything about it, but it seems likely enough. However, it'll definitely be a while if it does happen.

aironeous 2009-11-09 04:28

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by les_garten (Post 367950)
OK, so you go on the cheap and make your device non functional on the biggest cell Data network in the US? TMO is number 4 in the US, without a deal that move makes no sense to me.

Exactly........seems destructive to me unless you are trying to push back against att to let them know to increase their speed. Tmob is going to hspa+ 28mps maybe this is to send a message to att.

texaslabrat 2009-11-09 05:01

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by aironeous (Post 369216)
Exactly........seems destructive to me unless you are trying to push back against att to let them know to increase their speed. Tmob is going to hspa+ 28mps maybe this is to send a message to att.

That...and the fact that the "non functional" part in les_garten's post seems a bit over the top, wouldn' t you say? Just because 3G isn't available doesn't mean it won't function at all....voice still works and most apps will run just fine on EDGE (though slower, of course).

sjgadsby 2009-11-09 05:11

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by texaslabrat (Post 369230)
That...and the fact that the "non functional" part in les_garten's post seems a bit over the top, wouldn' t you say?

Yes.


aironeous 2009-11-09 05:36

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
sh*t a data plan monitor? Good f'n idea.

les_garten 2009-11-09 05:39

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sjgadsby (Post 369235)

How many days did it take you to do that? :D

Bruce 2009-11-10 17:33

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
N97 mini is on the NokiaUSA site now
http://www.nokiausa.com/find-product...specifications

# Quad band EGSM 850/900/1800/1900
# WCDMA 850/900/1900/2100

Johnx 2009-11-12 10:20

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
@Bruce: looks like a typo: http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...7&postcount=89

Edit: Oops. I didn't quite get what Bruce was getting at. Sorry for totally missing it, Bruce. :) (Editing to avoid bumping the thread.)

Bruce 2009-11-12 17:11

Re: Why not support AT&T 3G Bands? (Peter please respond)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnx (Post 373359)

First it was a misprint on the NOKIA UK website now it is on the NOKIA USA website.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:49.

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8