Slashdot Mirror
Apple vs. Nokia, RIM and Motorola On Nano-SIM Standard
angry tapir writes "Next week, two proposals for a new, smaller SIM card, dubbed nano-SIM — one backed by Apple and the other by Nokia, Research In Motion and Motorola Mobility — will go head-to-head as ETSI (the European Telecommunications Standards Institute) decides which card future smartphones and tablets will use. Measuring approximately 12 millimeters by 9 millimeters, the new SIM will be about 30 percent smaller than the micro-SIM. The thickness of the cards has been reduced by about 15 percent, according to Giesecke & Devrient. The nano-SIM is also approximately 60 percent smaller than traditional-size SIM cards."
After a certain point, you may as well forget the SIM and just build it into the device.
Items that are meant to be removeable and transferable need to be large enough for a consumer to manipulate with their fingers.
I travel quite a bit. The old ones were easier to see in case you put in on a flat surface while changing it out and you could put it in your wallet in a credit card slot while being reasonably sure it wouldn't fall out.
And drop the micro-SIM at the same time? It isn't like the SIM is too big, and having more than one standard means one can't interchange SIMs between phones (or tablets) without adapters. The "extra" size of the normal SIM in comparison with the micro (and now the nano) SIM isn't enough to make an impact on phone size, and the micro-SIMs are easier to lose. Also, the adapters don't work on all phones.
What will these coprprate beheoths be charging for the manufacturing license?
Apples and my personal definition of Reasonable in Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory are kilometers apart.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Is there *really* a need for a *slightly* smaller SIM??? Or is this just yet another planned obsolescence strategy by the handset manufacturers... Seems like micro-SIM is small enough and nano-SIM isn't all that smaller... just getting us to buy new handsets or make obsolete our old SIMs... with little additional point...
Beyond a report in the FT and this from Computer world, there is this from The Register
"Despite repeated enquiries, Nokia has failed to provide any confirmation or denial of the Financial Times's report (behind paywall) that Nokia – concerned that Apple is poised to grab the lion's share of patent revenue – has proposed an alternative design to the proposed nano-SIM technology to standards body ETSI.
It's an interesting idea, though hard to credit as there's no trace of such a filing at ETSI"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/22/nokia_apple_sims/
Could someone with a credible source could post a link.
Watch those corners
What was the compelling reason for developing this? An overwhelming consumer need? Not really. It's not like folks are/were clamoring for something that's even smaller and easier to lose. Perhaps the reason was to claim a certain coolness factor in that it could be accomplished. Like making a teeny, tiny credit card that people could lose on a frequent basis.
Perhaps the smaller form factor lowers manufacturing, production, and distribution costs by 60% as well? Or having a different SIM card receptacle in devices would mandate consumers belly up to the bar. Those could be the only other justifications that I could see.
Remember when the iPad shipped with a Micro-SIM, the main reason was because they didn't want people swapping SIM cards from their iPhones (remembering that Personal Hotspot is disabled with a lot of carriers). What's the point in bringing out lots of standards when they aren't being adopted. I hope the ETSI tells them all to go away until Micro-SIM is actually being widely used first.
Why do we still need a physical simcard ? it seems to me its essentially a private key stored on a chip (possibly in a non-extractable form). Why not just email digital certificate style keys to customers, and have them 'insert' them into phones using established file transfer techniques (protected by a password as well, which is required when installing the key). This would also make james bond style dual+ simcard phones very easy to implement (or maybe not if you need 2 radios...).
Even better, let any phone log onto any network, and auth the user at that stage (ie, unauthed phones can connect to auth server only, and only get phone service etc if they enter the correct creds).
Having physical simcards is wasteful as well - for example in the UK the cheapest way to get mobile broadband is a £80 12 month prepay simcard with 3, but every year i go in to the shop and ask if i can put another 12 months on, but they make me buy a new card and bin the old one...
Since the other 3 companies are/soon will be bankrupt, I think that means Apple wins by default. Asking RIM's opinion about future standards is like asking a 105-year old terminal cancer patient what he wants for his 120th birthday party.
What do we need a smaller SIM for, I can side with the microsim as it does save what appears to be wasted space, but who needs a smaller SIM? If this is a push towards making devices smaller and more compact then I think were going to far. Why not just get rid of the SIM and go SIM-L:ESS? It would be be a better solution to the issue.
they've been on the receiving end of RAND abuse, but I've never heard of them extracting unreasonable tolls/terms on any standards-contributed RAND technology.
These guys all have it wrong. The Subscriber Identity Module should be embedded in the subscriber, not the phone.
Have gnu, will travel.
Two competing and incompatible standards of the same form factor? We've seen this act before...
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
If they build in there should be a way to have a dual build in or a have a temp sim for roaming?
"the new SIM will be about 30 percent smaller than the micro-SIM
"The nano-SIM is also approximately 60 percent smaller than traditional-size SIM cards."
Is it a SIM or nano-SIM? A new standard to replace all, or a new standard to replace smaller-than-SIM SIMS?
Anyways, I love the idea of burning the SIM into the device. Someone just got wooshed by the whole SIM concept....
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Which is why it goes to ESTI and only one gets approved. That one is then adopted as the standard.
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
Apple, like all other GSM/UMTS manufactures pay a licensing fee to companies like ORGA and Nokia to use the SIM cards. I will also point out that from the beginning, Apple did not want to use a SIM card. However, the SIM is a core requirement to using the GSM and UMTS standards. It is additionally required for both PTCRB and GCF certification schemes.
One of the main benefits of the SIM / USIM is portability. The core spec was designed such that you could insert your SIM into any phone and be billed accordingly. It was actually against the rules to have a SIM locked phone back in the old days.
No, Apple doesn't care how big it is, because lets face it, the SIM is not big. Apple is more interested in controlling the standard. Then, suddenly, ORGA, Nokia and even the carriers will need to pay Apple to use the new SIM format.
Keep in mind though, it is not only carriers and phone makers who are effected. There are many smaller companies who have invested millions into the development of test equipment and software to test the current format of SIM.
These are not competing standards. These are competing proposals for the same standard. Small but significant difference.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Why on earth?
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
I just wish SIM-type options for CDMA devices would improve. While UICC/RUIM cards exist, US telecos and phones don't seem to support it very well.
So they can obsolete all the existing phones.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Apple is using this to try to get patent control over their competitor's technology. They've tried it before, they're trying it again.
Really. That's the major problem right now in mobile and computing devices, especially when you're talking about tech from companies like RIM, Nokia, Apple, and even Motorla (regardless of whether Google owns them or not).
coding is life
I'm waiting for the pico-SIM myself. By that time, the iPhone 7 will be as big as an Osborne 1 and SIM cards will look like coffee grounds.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Because of stupid prior art and technological incompetence judges /stupid patent system Apple has managed to become one hell of a patent troll these days, suing the daylights out of rival companies for the most ridiculous arguments any half brained moron would phantom...but they stick, give them a goddam saying in that matter that will only produce a heap of lawsuits and marginal tech benefits.
Apple is a huge engineering company which has been around for decades--they hold thousands of patents covering all sorts of technology--including patents involved in many standards, most of which are licensed under FRAND terms. Frankly, you make yourself look like an idiot by claiming otherwise.
Ever heard of IEEE 1264 (Firewire)? H.264?
nm
Anybody remember the memory cards that were offered by some vendors - mainly Sandisk - some years ago? It was a memory card that could be inserted into a GSM phone in place of its SIM. Whatever happened to that - one would think that if that was there, then it could substitute the need for the phone to have its own memory (aside from the baseband/apps flash needed for the OS) and include things like contacts, and other external apps that are downloaded to the phone. Phone manufacturers could then choose whether to provide separate micro-SD slots or not - for instance, one could keep contact info in the SIM memory cards, while videos, music and other things could be in the micro-SD card. So whatever happened to those SIM memory cards?
Problem w/ building the SIM into the device is that each phone would be locked to a carrier even after the 2 year subscription is over. I think after that time, a customer should be free to use that phone w/ whichever carrier s/he wants
The original poster made some vague claim about Apple abusing RAND terms; I've yet to hear any examples of them doing that. Then you made some jackass comment about how they haven't invented anything which would ever appear in a RAND standard, which I easily refuted. And now you are saying that none of it matters because they haven't invented anything related to mobile telephony?
Well, whatever, I'll bite...obviously that is stupid because they have a huge mobile telephone business which nearly ever manufacturer is desperately trying to copy. I'm not sure how they could get there without inventing anything, and they have lots of patents on a lot of deeply technical problems they encountered along the way. They also own a lot of LTE patents acquired from Nortel for $4.5B.
You have been completely destroyed and it was the easiest thing I did all day.