Slashdot Mirror


Why Unlocked Phones Don't Work In the US

schnell writes "Unlocked cellular devices have long been a part of the wireless landscape in Europe and elsewhere. But longtime industry analyst Andrew Seybold explains why that model doesn't work in the US due to technology and frequency differences, and why LTE adoption may not make things any better."

23 of 442 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Technology and frequency differences? You've got to be shitting me. They don't work because the cell operators are greedy assholes.

    1. Re:Yeah right. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Technology and frequency differences? You've got to be shitting me. They don't work because the cell operators are greedy assholes.

      It would be interesting if the cell phone manufacturers offered a swappable, standardized radio module that would pop in and out like the battery. That way you could buy an expensive smartphone, and leverage that investment by just picking up a new radio module to move to a new network. Of course, the reality is that these pricks can't even agree on a particular power plug, so I wouldn't hold your breath and besides, they're perfectly happy if you are forced to buy a brand-new phone just to go to a different wireless provider.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Yeah right. by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Other than Apple who is not using the micro USB interface these days?

    3. Re:Yeah right. by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Informative

      Galaxy line uses micro USB.

    4. Re:Yeah right. by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know it's against Slashdot tradition, but I'd recommend that you RTFA. The summary gave me the same impression - that it would be some corporate fluff piece about how it's a good thing that the networks are screwing you - but the article itself is actually a very well reasoned technical explanation of the various bits of spectrum (and the the protocols running on them) in use today and in the near future, and how these often interfere with interoperability.

    5. Re:Yeah right. by Cimexus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. Using the technology as an excuse completely sidesteps the real issue here.

      Especially the 'differing frequencies' argument - haha wtf? Every GSM phone under the sun these days is at least tri-band and generally quad-band, which means it will work on almost any GSM network in the world. Differing frequencies is NOT a barrier to unlocked phones. Hell, I'm a dual Australian and US citizen and spend a lot of time in both countries, and I use my iPhone 4 (GSM quadband) in both countries without problems. It's an Australian-market iPhone 4 which means it's unlocked from the factory (or more accurately, was never locked in the first place). I have a Vodafone AU SIM in it and it roams quite happily in the US on either AT&T or T-Mobile (although T-Mobile is EDGE only for data due to them using a weird uplink frequency for UMTS/HSDPA ... EDGE is still fast enough for most things though)

      The only 'unique' thing about the US market, technology wise, is that the big carriers are split between GSM (AT&T, T-Mobile) and CDMA (Sprint, Verizon). So if you had an unlocked phone of either variety in the US, your choices would be restricted more than they would be in other markets. But there would still be ~some~ choice. And the technology itself doesn't preclude unlocked phones (which you CAN get in the US, e.g. via Newegg ... it's just that the carriers themselves don't usually offer unlocked phones in their stores, and won't offer you a plan that doesn't include the handset repayments component - T-Mobile excepted).

      So basically, yeah, the US market has come to accept 'cheap upfront phone then pay it off over a 24 month contract' business model as the norm, whereas in other countries, it's usually only an 'option' rather than the norm. But the carriers could offer SIM-only/Bring Your Own Phone plans any time they wanted. It's not a technology issue - it's an issue of the phone companies liking the current model (since it gives them more predictable income when they can tie customers in for two years at a time), and the average consumer not really knowing that there are alternatives.

    6. Re:Yeah right. by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except that these barriers are all really nothing more than a chicken-and-egg problem. Nobody builds a phone that can do all the HSDPA bands, but that's not because it's hard. The only customers who care about the 1700 MHz band are in the U.S. and Canada on carriers that don't sell unlocked phones, and there are no laws requiring unlocking. As a result, those customers don't expect to be able to move from one carrier to another without unlocking. As a result, the handset manufacturers don't need to build phones that allow this. As a result, the chipset vendors largely haven't bothered to design the chips to make this possible.

      If you can build a 5-band handset, a 6-band handset is really only incrementally harder. Even a 12-band handset is only incrementally harder when you factor in electronically tunable antennas into the mix.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    7. Re:Yeah right. by MtHuurne · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is a reason for that: after the EU said "either you lot pick a single charger plug or we'll do it for you", the phone manufacturers decided to standardize on micro USB. You'll find that most of the other differences between the US and EU cell phone markets are also due to pressure from the EU: cell operators are not nicer on this side of the pond, they are just kept on a tighter leash.

    8. Re:Yeah right. by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you're misunderstanding the idea here. The point is, even if you are willing to shell out the extra money to get an unsubsidized unlocked phone, you're generally still stuck on a given carrier anyway. I can't just take my AT&T phone and hook up to Verizon's or Sprint's network because their networks are different technologies.

      Even switching to T-Mobile, which should be possible because both AT&T and T-Mobile are GSM, doesn't really work because AT&T and T-Mobile use different frequencies for 3G. For example, if you bought a Nexus One, you would have had to have chosen whether you wanted the T-Mobile version or AT&T version, and there was never the option of using the Nexus One on Verizon. It wasn't because the Nexus One was locked.

      That doesn't mean the carriers aren't greedy assholes. It means that getting the phones to be unlocked doesn't really solve the problem.

    9. Re:Yeah right. by gandhi_2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Imagine... a radio system that is capable of receiving and transmitting on one of several frequencies. And switching between frequencies on command.

      What a wonder future that would be!

    10. Re:Yeah right. by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Unfortunately, a standardized plug does diddly if you don't standardize how to charge.

      There are a few billion ways you can charge from USB. There's the good old dumb "assume 500mA" method - where you assume you can draw 500mA from USB. Works fine for PCs and their chargers, but not so much if your USB host is power-limited.

      Then there's the USB charging spec - where the charger shorts D+ and D- lines, and the device assumes it can draw the appropriate amount of current as the charger it comes with - 500mA, 800mA, 1A, 2A. Again, no standard on how to pick the current, so a device is free to draw as much as possible.

      There's the Apple method, where resistors on D+ and D- lines tell the device how much power the charger can provide to prevent drawing too much power (iPods start at 100mA until enumerated at 500mA or more, or connected to a charger where it can select 500mA, 1A or 2A).

      There's also using the ID line with resistors that identify the device - an ADC converts the voltage to identify the accessory (charger, car kit, high-current charger, etc).

      There's also the USB high power spec, but that's for USB hosts that can provide more power.

      Even worse, I've seen some devices destroy the charger because they assume the manufacturer's charger and draw more current than the charger can provide.

      Fun fun fun.

      Anyhow, at least for iPhone users, you can buy iPhones in Canada which are fully unlocked from Apple stores in Canada. I've seen a number of US people come to Canada to buy unlocked iPhones.

    11. Re:Yeah right. by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually MiniUSB is more fragile:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiniUSB#Durability

      The newer Micro-USB receptacles are designed to allow up to 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal between the receptacle and plug, compared to 1500 for the standard USB and 5000 for the Mini-USB receptacle. This is accomplished by adding a locking device and by moving the leaf-spring connector from the jack to the plug, so that the most-stressed part is on the cable side of the connection. This change was made so that the connector on the less expensive cable would bear the most wear instead of the more expensive micro-USB device.

    12. Re:Yeah right. by buchanmilne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It would be interesting if the cell phone manufacturers offered a swappable, standardized radio module that would pop in and out like the battery.

      It would be much more interesting, and much less expensive, pose no unresolved technical challenges, if the shared-majority wireless operators in the US (Sprint, Verizon), would just use an existing swappable, standardised user identity module, like R-UIM cards. However, they are too concerned with fighting each other to realise that their technology has already lost, due to not being viable in other countries (where R-UIM is a requirement, but all decent phones are made for Sprint and Verizon, almost exclusively without R-UIM support). Not separating the number from the phone makes it too much of a hassle for users to switch phones, sell used phones, travel without roaming etc. (and of course, switching networks, which is what they are actually after, but damaging the whole CDMA market in the process), which are all trivially possible with GSM.

      Maybe they could allow roaming to more than just a handful of international CDMA operators. For example, there are multiple CDMA operators in many African countries, (including some that have tens of thousands of US citizens working in them), but not one is supported for roaming by Verizon or Sprint. Verizon seems to have more limited roaming than the cheapest crappiest GSM operators, and Sprint mostly provides roaming via GSM operators (so, if you travel, you already need a dual-tech phone, or two phones, why not just use GSM all the time?).

      Huawei (who makes a lot of CDMA-based gear, both telco-side and handsets, mostly for China Telecom I guess) has a nice article covering the issues with CDMA roaming. Most of them are due to "American mindset" that is inherent in CDMA and CDMA deployments. Of course, Huawei is punting their solutions to these problems, but waiting for all CDMA operators to refresh their kit will make you old.

      Also, maybe if CDMA operators had consistent international dialing/number representation formats (like the +XX convention used by all GSM operators), users would figure out how to actually make international calls via CDMA. But, who needs numbers that don't start with a "1" anyway ...

      That way you could buy an expensive smartphone, and leverage that investment by just picking up a new radio module to move to a new network.

      At the moment, 52% of US subscribers can't even move between operators that use the *same* baseband modules (vs less than 15% worldwide). Maybe you should try and solve that problem first.

  2. Re:Every Network Is Different by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, breaking up Ma Bell was a terrible idea. I just loved having to pay rent on every phone in my house every month, because you weren't allowed to own your own phone.

    You know nothing.

  3. Spectrum issue by thogard · · Score: 4, Informative

    NATO split up the spectrum after WWII so that European military radios were on the US civilian frequencies and vice versa. The reason was so the US military could take its radios into Europe and use their default channels and not conflict with the allied military radios that were already there.

  4. Re:Why should they? by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Informative

    "When the dominant model is to buy the phone with the plan"

    Have you thought that it might be the case that that's the dominant model because that's all the telcos offer?

    Nobody is telling that telcos should gift away expensive smartphones but that you should be able to choose between a locked subsidized mobile with a data plan *or* a cheaper data plan without the mobile.

  5. The problem is not locked vs unlocked by PsychicX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's popular to talk about why 'unlocked' phones, but I would wager that the vast majority of unlocked phone buyers do not care that the phone is unlocked. It's irrelevant. We're not planning to switch networks. It's the contract that is the problem. Locked phones are fine as long as they're off contract. And off contract is exactly where cell companies don't want their customers to be.

  6. Re:Takes some patience and creativity by Cimexus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yeah Japan is even worse than the US in that regard - although SoftBank runs a GSM network so theoretically an unlocked quadband GSM phone (like the iPhone 4) should work in both the US and Japan with just a SIM card change.

    I say 'theoretically' though because although there's no ~technical~ reason why this can't work, it won't work in practise since they won't let the phone actually connect to the network unless its a recognised IMEI from a contracted phone that they already sold you ;)

  7. Re:Takes some patience and creativity by Microlith · · Score: 4, Informative

    Japan is the holdout; you have to have a local phone. AFAIK, there is no common phone that will in both US and Japan just by swapping a SIM card.

    Not on 3G, but if your phone supports the European 3G bands it'll work fine in Japan. My N900 served me quite well while I was over there in August on NTT DoCoMo's FOMA 3.5G network, even all the way out in Tochigi prefecture.

    Of course, I only get 2.5G in the US on AT&T, but them's the breaks when you buy what you want rather than what you're offered.

  8. Whether or not the technical issues are true... by Constantin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The main point of the article should have been that the EU created a competitive landscape by restricting competitors to interoperability standards that do not exist in the USA - i.e. allowing customers to go from carrier to carrier without the need for a new phone. Here in the US, you are automatically subsidizing a new phone when you sign up for service with any major wireless company - and if you don't use the subsidy by buying a new phone every two years, then you're leaving money on the table. Yes, a waste, but that's what evolved over here vs. the general EU model of the customer providing the phone and the carrier supplying the SIM (though subsidized plans exist).

    Me, I'd prefer the ability to switch carriers and not to have this hidden subsidy. If the phone works and you're happy with it, why quasi-require the owner to chuck it for a new model? Just more e-waste with no tangible benefit except for those that like to further line the pockets of wireless carriers through the use of additional (previously unreachable) services. I also like that the EU mandates that the caller to the cell pays for the call. Seriously cuts down spam calls - because calls to cell phones are 5x more expensive than landline calls. An additional benefit is the possibility of giving a phone to your kid and being able to call them at will - but they cannot make calls unless they refill the SIM bank account.

    Anyhow, IIRC, the iPhone 4 has two external antennas that are nominally tuned to certain frequencies but which through some electronic happiness inside can actually cover a wider variety of frequencies than the one that they are 'naturally' resonant on. So your signal quality on a 700MHz band using a nominal 850MHz antenna may not be great, but it may still work. The current iPhone 4 is capable of handling signals ranging from 850MHz-2.4GHz... so the current design limitations may be just that, limits by design to lock folk into AT&T in the US market. Then again, I don't know enough about all the technologies, compatibility issues, etc. to say for sure that it can be done.

  9. Re:Why should they? by spisska · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a bit more to it than that. If you travel in Europe for business, you're going to be visiting different countries. They're all on the same GSM standard, but roaming and out-of-network rates have traditionally been extortionate.

    When I lived there in the late '90s, early '00s, I knew plenty of people who carried multiple phones -- one with their primary number, another with their 'other network' number, and sometimes a third that they could swap pay-as-you-go cards into when travelling.

    When I lived in Slovakia there were two carriers, one owned by Orange the other by DT (later T-Mobile). All outgoing calls were metered. Calls in-network were reasonable but out of network -- i.e. from Slovak T-Mobile to Slovak Orange, cost something like five times as much. Calls elsewhere in the EU could approach 20 times as much.

    The carriers didn't want to sell unlocked phones, but that's what people demanded. Generally you couldn't buy an unlocked phone from a carrier, but if you already had one, they were happy to sell you a SIM.

    Everybody age 16 to 25 either could unlock a phone themselves or knew someone who could. Everyone knew someone that age. Also, most people who wanted one bought an unlocked phone from sources other than the carriers.

    Plus, it was much more common for people to buy the phone and use a pay-as-you-go service rather than get a subsidized phone as part of a fixed contract.

    The carriers wanted a long-term plan system like exists here but the market wasn't interested, for many reasons including those mentioned above.

    But if it cost a US user 20x as much to call someone in another state, things might have worked out differently.

  10. Four-band GSM phones: Use them worldwide. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative

    Four-band GSM phones work fine in the U.S., and all over the world. T-Mobile has a pre-paid plan for 10 U.S. cents per minute for those who don't often use a cell phone. T-Mobile will unlock the phones for you when you have been on their network for 3 months, if I remember correctly.

    When you arrive in Campos do Jordão, Brazil, for example, just buy a SIM card for $7.50 U.S., and you will have a local number to give to anyone you meet there. And, of course, Google has cheap rates to every country, so people in the U.S. can call you while you are in Brazil.

    1. Re:Four-band GSM phones: Use them worldwide. by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's no longer the case - the Nokia N8 supports UMTS bands I, II, IV, V, and VIII so it will work with AT&T and T-Mobile in the US and with most other providers worldwide.