When and will GSM tri band phones die?

Will tri band GSM phones become a thing of the past? When?

I and many of my friends are waiting to buy a new phone, a world phone, but the offerings are so limited.

Buying a 'world' tri mode phone, seems so short sided. Why haven't all the manufacturers just dropped the tri band phones, keep the cheaper 850/1900 usa phones and the 900/1800 other country phones, and make everything else a quad band phone?? Surely the volume of production will bring the quad phones down... and they all don't need cameras in them. Why limit the quads to the high end only??

Whether one buys a tri band (900/1800/1900, euro world) or (850/1800/1900 usa world) leaves one handicapped in the other country. Like buying a car with 3 wheels. 1800 is not the most widest used freq. in europe; 1900 doesn't have the whole footprint in the usa either.

This question i suppose is indirectly addressed to phone manufacturers (Nokia listen, Moto, thanks but keep it up but make the low end quads too.)

I don't these guys realize the volume of users sitting on the sidelines waiting for more selection. Well, I guess I'll keep carrying around two phones for another year.

 

The USA offerings on Wcdma from Nokia 6651 and Motorola A 845 have wcdma on 1900 only. The Nokia is single band gsm also, but the Nokia 9500 and A845 are triband.

I see no reason not to make them quad, esp. since they are meant for the high end business user. I wonder what the real issue is.

 

My question was on the incompatibility of the frequency spectrums used in the US versus most of the world, not the end of GSM or Wcdma. Unless the entire globe agrees on the same frequency, there is a market need for more quad phones, whether it is wcdma or GSM.

 

I couldn't disagree more. There are many foreigners in this country (students,transfered employees,visitors to transfered families, those on vacation) that often live or visit outside the big US cities. Just like us, they want full coverage or at least uncongested airwaves. Likewise for students (working or travelling), business travelers and visitors to families in small european towns. I personally know a few dozen foreigners who could use this solution. They live and play in the rural us and visit family back home. Likewise for americans who travel a lot or even only a bit (like students).

The mobile phone is becoming an universal traveling companion, like an atm card. It should be a inexpensive option that gives the biggest footprint.

Well, 2008 is a long way off. No reason to live in the dark ages now, and suffer one band short, because the future may be different. GSM quad band will give the biggest footprint today, worldwide, for voice communications.

I guess most of us would go for a quad phone if there were more and the price was right. Part of our make up in belonging to these forums. I also think the mgfr would see sales increase. :twocents:

 

I hope that your market judgement is wrong... a Quad band Nokia would be really sweet, IMO. I think it would be as popular as the Moto V400, V600 series.

 

The thing is a european buying a tri band phone might opt for a 900/1800/1900 unit. Then ,as you say, they would lose the 850 for the infrequent trip to the USA. And Bobo point is well taken about 850 and prenetration into buildings, etc. Would he really buy a US triband for a few trips here.

The silly thing I see now is nokia (and others) making the same model phone in 2 versions: one for the Euro market, the other for the US market...whether it is tri band or dual band. This is got to cost more in mgfr, distribution, shipping, serial markings, etc. With volume, a single quad phone has got to be cheaper.

There is not some weird patent issues involved? Moto have a patent on a quad chip?

Anyhow, my crystal ball predicts tri band will diminish and quad will take over. GoodmanR, I'm sure you didn't opt for the Quad Vseries because of the camera. Given a choice and good marketing, I believe many users would dump their tri's for a quad on the reason of 'what if I really need it on that island that has only one freq,and I picked the wrong one?' Of course, being a exotic island it would be GSM only, unless it were Long Island, NY and you also have to worry that you picked the right carrier too!

 

Sorry, I guessed wrong.
But, the Blackberry 72xx series is a good case in point. I think they are nominally the same units,

7210 900/1900Mhz [one world/one USA freg] (I think att dropped this one)

7230 900/1800/1900 [both world/one USA freg] $499

7280 850/1800/1900 [one world/both USA freq] $399

The Treo 600 is quad band for $549 (not sure how to compare this one to blackbury 72xx).

All available from ATT wireless. What a stock room nightmare and not a huge price difference.

 

Something I just discovered while answering another thread.

I wouldn't be surprised if all the V series phones used the same quad chip with a software/hardware disable function for the unwanted freq. market. But why?

It seems that the tmobile V600 is only tri band (900/1800/1900)! see:Tmobile V600 Also for the Rogers version of the V300; it is 850/900/1900, yes that is right. The Tmo V300 version is 900/1800/1900

Does anybody with a Tmo V600 know if it can hit the missing band at 850Mhz (aka 800Mhz). Is this real or just advertising. I cannot image that they have a separate product line with different chips in them.

Maybe it will be the future...really want only a tri band? No problemo... let me take it to the back room and make an adjustment for you.

 

Perhaps pretty old news (from Aug 2003), but from Qualcomm, the CDMA guys, a Quad Band GSM (850/900/1800/1900) chipset with WCDMA(UTMS) at 1900,2100Mhz.

QUALCOMM’s radioOne® quad-band GSM/GPRS with WCDMA (UMTS) chipset solution eliminates the need for intermediate frequency (IF) signal conversion. This solution enables worldwide GSM and WCDMA (UMTS) roaming with a dual-mode, dual-band WCDMA (UMTS) transmitter and receiver, and quad-band GSM/GPRS transceiver. Qualcomm quad GSM/wcdma

Key Functionality
Support for dual-band WCDMA (UMTS) operations at 1900 MHz and 2100MHz

Support for quad-band GSM transceiver operations
(GSM850/900/1800/1900)

Reduces bill-of-materials (BOM) costs by decreasing parts count.

My point, I think tri band GSM phones will disappear over time and be replaced by Quad band phones as phones move to some future generation.

Maybe they will sell some to Nokia on discount.

 

I certainly agree with everything you say. Nokia does have other supplies to chose from beside Qualcomm, like Texas Instruments (and Analog Devices, Philipps, and other big and small ones). Clearly, business is business, and Qualcomm wants to sell chips and Nokia want to sell phones regardless of carrier platform. They should come to a consenus.

My information is that average Quad Band GSM chips run about $3 each. I don't see why they should be reserved for the high end market. I'd throw in $3 at the local store to have one.

But I think the real reason is that the new chips coming out (ie Quad band) are so integrated that they support 4Megapixels cameras, bluetooth and a bunch of other neat stuff, that it seems to be high end. It is like cars, the price for a $24K car has stayed about the same for while, but alot of extras are now part of the base model that one use to pay as options.