why did europe have GSM only

They don't know any better...:lol: :evillaugh

I think CDMA is illegal in most of Europe, outlawed by the government.
CDMA is like a bomb to them, you can't own or use that technology.

I'd just like to see some more CDMA/GSM hybrid phones.

 

The reason why is because all the countries in the EU settled on a Standard that all the equipment vendors in Europe could live with (Nokia, Ericsson, Alcatel, Matra/Nortel). Also at the time GSM was much farther ahead in development (it was developed in the early 90's) and no one even knew if CDMA would even work.

 

I've read about the CDMA technology on various websites,
like CDMA Development Group, Wikipedia & Mountain Wireless

Not sure the exact website URL right now,
but there are many threads on WA that also explain that CDMA is against the law in most of the European Union.

 

The GSM standard was first published in 1990 based on a resolution by European nations to create a standard for mobile phones. CDMAone was first standardized in 1995. That's the first answer.

Remember though that CDMAone/CDMA2000 are the standards like GSM, while CDMA and TDMA are the air interfaces.

GSM could have gone with a CDMA air interface. CDMA was used in GPS way before mobile phones. It was known that a CDMA system would theoretically have a larger capacity and resistance to noise and interference, but the implementation was difficult. TDMA could be implemented cheaper, smaller, and faster--especially with 1980s technology when they were developing the standard. Ease of implementation is answer number 2.

I believe that Qualcomm had patents for some of the critical techniques even before CDMAone was standardsized, so that would be reason number 3.

It's not that CDMA is outlawed in Europe, its that GSM was mandated by law. Wikipedia mentions a memorandum of understanding by 13 original countries. I'm not sure, but its likely that those 13 countries created legislature to back the international agreement.

 

The reason Europe is "only" GSM is because the goverments realized early on that it would be anarchy if each country had it's own technology, and all the countries agreed to conform to one technology for the sake of cohesiveness, so you could drive from Spain to Finland and not have to stop and buy a new phone with a different technology in every country. Call it "European socialism" but GSM was forced on everyone.

In the USA, then "free market" was left to decide what technology would win and which would lose. It seems GSM and CDMA both came out pretty much equal. Which you could say is bad in a way for consumers, because having 2 dominant technologies creates confusion (ie: how many people ask "can I use my Sprint phone with AT&T? No? Why not?)

For the history of GSM here's a timeline:
GSM World - GSMA History

PS- CDMA came later to Europe, and mostly in East Europe. But it's a very, very small presence. Alot of people don't even know it exists.
PPS- WCDMA (UMTS) is the successor of GSM, and is also based on CDMA, but used in a different way and not patented by Qualcom (as CDMA is).

 

The had us beat by years here, they ditched their Analog in the early 90's. Here it is over 17 years after Europe ditched analog and we still dont have compatible standards in the US.

Its kinda funny really that they took the American Standard TDMA made it better 8 timeslots versus TDMA's 3 and put GSM into use in the early 90's and in the US alot of carriers didnt use the TDMA standard until the mid to late 90's.

TDMA also was re-created in Nextels iDEN as well as resurrected in EV-DO

 

I often see mention of CDMA being illegal in Europe, but that is not the case, as others have pointed out. There are CDMA networks in Europe although they tend not to be very big and some are used for providing internet access to remote regions rather than for mobile networks.

Certain frequency bands are mandated for certain technologies in the UK e.g. 900 and 1800 MHz are only to be sued for GSM networks. Perhaps that is where the confusion comes from as one wouldn't be allowed to create a CDMA network using those frequencies although one could, in theory, create a CDMA network using a different frequency band assuming one had a license to do so.

It's also worth pointing out that there is no one body that makes rules for all of Europe. The EU doesn't cover all of Europe, and it is up to individual nations to decide what they will do with their telecoms infrastructure.

 

I agree. To me the choice between network standards is largely irrelevant to consumers. As far as I can see most consumers care about how much their service will cost; if it will do what they want it to do, and if it is reliable. What technology is being used, whether it be CDMA, GSM, HSDPA or two tin cans on a string doesn't appear to be a major factor.

 

Qualcomm does have patents that affect UMTS running on WCDMA. They may even have some that affect OFDMA in 4G UMTS (LTE).

 

"In 1982, the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) created the Groupe Spécial Mobile (GSM) to develop a standard for a mobile telephone system that could be used across Europe.[6] In 1987, a memorandum of understanding was signed by 13 countries to develop a common cellular telephone system across Europe."

See: GSM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Basically it was a mandate by the EU to have an EU-wide standard that would work seamlessly across the whole of the EU. GSM was that answer. Other countries in the world saw the success of GSM in Europe and decided to adopt the standard in those non-European countries. If you read the wikipedia article above it will give you some information on what has happened and what's happening with GSM.

 

How about a link to something official saying CDMA is illegal in Europe. A WA thread is not proof.

 

Each country used their own legislation to conform to the memorandum of understanding. Some of them most likely required GSM only, hence CDMA would be "illegal". Others simply specified that GSM be used on certain frequencies. That's where the rumors probably started. Much like in the US, blocks of the spectrum are designated for certain services.

 

IFAST International SID Ranges (Country Sort) lists all allocated CDMA SIDs for each country,
but somewhere on the site it explains that not every county uses their allocated SIDs.

Most countries (even most in Europe) have CDMA SIDS assigned to them,
but the only CDMA used in Europe is in some parts of Eastern Europe on the 450 Mhz bands.
(900 & 1800 bands are required to be GSM - so CDMA is illegal in these bands in most of Europe....)

Why allocate CDMA SIDs for counries that will never use the CDMA technology?

 

Is that your understanding that CDMA is illegal or are you just making some assumption? How about a reference that we can see that it's illegal?

 

No I didn't assume it wasn't 100% illegal,
it's just that GSM is required by law in Western Europe,
so thats like another way of saying CDMA is illegal,
because the allocated bands don't allow it. (Only on 450 MHZ in Eastern Europe.)

here's one ref with the same info:

http://forums.wirelessadvisor.com/w...s/55110-cdma-market-to-shrink.html#post380922

 

You certainly have a "strange" way of implying that something is illegal.

 

I'll agree, just because someone (Strunke) says something doesn't make it so.

 

CDMA isn't technically illegal in most of Europe but it was illegal in practice. You just couldn't use it on most spectrum without violating your license. Other places required at least one carrier to have GSM in any given area. When CDMA finally arrived the uphill clime was too great technically and politically. Some countries allow CDMA at 450mhz but that came late enough that no one was worried that cdma would suddenly screw things up.

The biggest reason nowadays is that its easier to continue following the gsm->wcdma->lte path than it is to migrate to cdma and than to lte. Even if you wanted to go to cdma, you'd have to spend a huge amount of money buying carriers and replacing their tech. It just isn't worth it. Perhaps if the RUIM thing had taken off CDMA would have gained more ground.

 

What I don't understand about CDMA is if it was so advanced why did they leave out features that came standard with GSM such as SIMs and why text messaging was an afterthought.

 

I thought in some countries CDMA used SIM cards. I think it had to do more with Verizon & Sprint not wanting to adopt that technology, because it gave them more control over the devices.

-Jay

 

Yeah, I think its more about them wanting control, not forgetting a "feature". SIMS aren't all that great though--they're a poor solution to storing contacts, and most people never touch their SIM--some think they'll void the warranty by messing with it. They would be nice to have though.

 

I'm talking the original specifications. CDMA didn't have either in the original specification.

As far as "not willing to adopt" another example is billing. Many carriers in Europe bill to the exact second and start billing after the person answers as opposed to send-to-end billing and full minute rounding as carriers do here. It's a leftover tradition from the analog AMPS days. It's to the carrier's advantage to round to full minutes and use send-to-end billing.

 

SIM cards are absolutely superb! They're a marvellous solution for storing contacts as I can easily transfer my contacts, and my phone number, between handsets within a few seconds. It's simple and even rather elegant. I'm not sure about where you are, but here in the UK many people swap their SIM card between handsets.

@all

I was reading the above debate on CDMA being illegal and it seems to be something of a strange debate. Basically CDMA is not illegal as a technology in most European countries (I can't say all because I don't know if it is legal in every European country). Each country will reserve certain frequency bands for mobile phones and they may mandate that only a certain technology can be used on those bands, usually GSM or UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA. It isn't that GSM is mandated as the only technology allowed, it is simply that it is mandated as the technology allowed on the frequencies made available. If a network had spectrum that could be use for anything then they could deploy a CDMA network or anything else they liked. Legality doesn't really come into it, rather it's more a case of one technology being given preferential treatment.

 

I'd rather not deal with SIMs & RUIMs anyway.
If a GSM phone is lost or stolen, the SIM may get put into a different phone, and SIM has lots of personal info.

But with CDMA, the ESN & HEX codes attach a CDMA phone to a CDMA network, a lot more secure in my opinion.
If a CDMA phone is stolen or lost, you can simply ask CS to remove the phone & ESN from your account.

To change CDMA phones, just read the ESN / HEX to the CS rep, dial *228, option 3,
and the phone resets, it's simple, and worth it versus SIM / RUIM in my opinion.

 

Don't American networks block SIM cards? In the UK if you loose your handset you ring your network and they will block your SIM card and your phone so that neither can be used on any network in the UK. The network then send you out a new SIM card with your same number that you can pop into a new handset.

I'm not at all sure why people steal phones here to be honest, once they're reported as stolen they're essentially paperweights.

 

SIMs could be blocked I believe on US networks, but thats just accessing a network,

the memory is saved on the SIM, and anyone who gets a hold of the SIM
still has access to personal info stored on the SIM, at least thats what I think....

I don't think a carrier can send out a signal to delete personal info stored on a SIM card.