Single-Chip GSM Phone on Virtual Horizon?

An anonymous reader writes "There's still the alphabet soup and corporate conflicts regarding cell phone standards in the U.S. but... there might be some hope for a single-chip GSM phone, which might open up some interesting possibilities."

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this your problem, or Slashdot's? What do you think?

Now, here are some essential bits for you. GSM is a second-generation, all-digital mobile-phone standard used all over the world except some major parts of North America. The multi-user access scheme is a (somewhat weird, IMHO) mix of frequency and time multiplexing; there's no CDMA involved. It has been design with lots of competing providers and networks in mind, therefore it has great roaming capabilities. Furthermore, since most billing mechanisms (outside of North America, that is) involve NO AIRTIME CHARGES, and actually provide for cheaper in-network connections than those of stationary phones, GSM captured the market overnight. Most GSM-covered countries (including ones far less wealthy than US and Canada) sport coverage and penetration rates that still sound like science fiction over here (US/CAN). GSM also comes with cheap cross-provider messaging (called SMS) which is as popular as actual phonecalls especially among the poor population.
There are pop-machines with phonenumbers attached to them, from which you can buy your daily dose of Canned Capitalism (COKE) by dialing the number -- the cost will be charged on your phonebill. This is just one example of things those "less developed" countries already have. Now, imagine what possibilites does a one-chip GSM phone open up in societies where almost everybody has a cellphone!

From EETimes (CommsDesign)

[LBrothers]

A slightly more well known source reports on the TI GSM chip [commsdesign.com].

GSM : Global System for Mobile Telecommunications

[LBrothers]

You can always Google for the history of GSM, as well as tons of resources on the spectrum and technologies behind GSM.

Re:blech.

[karmawarrior]

I do. cdmaOne doesn't provide basic functionality such as personal mobility (the ability to seperate your account information from the hardware you're using at the moment), a global number space, ISDN connectivity, and system-implemented network features, and the security is tough enough for my purposes - a casual snooper is going to have problems locating and fixing on a single conversation, a more highly placed snooper is likely to have access to the underlying network anyway.

UTMS, the next generation of GSM, includes all of the above features and provides a variety of air-interface technologies including CDMA, so the capacity issue isn't going to last very long. As far as I see, cdma2000 still lacks the above basic features, which I find absolutely increadible especially as GSM networks have been around now for much longer than IS-95 based stuff.

I was very relieved when AT&T started providing GSM in my area, after living here four years with only IS136 (D-AMPS/TDMA), cdmaOne, and NexTel networks available. Having used both IS136 and cdmaOne networks, I felt I was giving up a huge amount to use them, and coming back to GSM has been a joy. Just being able to have a PDA phone again (not really a great idea on a non-GSM network - if you can't leave your PDA at home without losing your connectivity, who wants such a thing?) has been fantastic.

Re:Out of date already.

[spakka]

Since GSM never really took off in the US, why not work on getting GPRS standard accepted in the US

Because GPRS is part of GSM.

USA != The World

[halftrack]

Aargh ... Why are you being so difficult? Most western countries have agreed to adapt GPRS as a temporary standard before a UMTS-net is up and running. You are moving towards isolation regarding mobile technology, that isn't good. Not for you and not for the other 95.5% of the world population. (world PopClock [census.gov] and cia factbook [odci.gov])

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it that whenever someone mentions European GSM/GPRS coverage, someone else must try and convince everyone else that the US has better land-line coverage?

Here is a quick hint for you: The US telephone network is at best directly comparable to 90% of the European Union member countries land line networks. The GSM/GPRS coverage is in addition to a perfectly fine land line network.

Stop trying to delude yourself. The US lags behind on telecoms infastructure.

Re:blech.

[Anonymous Coward]

CDMA (IS-95) is NOT encrytped in the US or in any equipment exported from the US (government regulation). My company makes equipment that listens on CMDA calls every single day.

GSM is encrypted just about everywhere with varying levels of security. GSM encryption was purposly weakened by the EU so that various government entities could listen in.

Stop spreading your CMDA vs GSM FUD.

The only relevant measure of CDMA vs GSM success is subscribers 650 million (GSM) versus 125 million (IS-95).

Re:blech.

[Magnus Pym]

Lack of personal mobility is a deployment issue, not something intrinsic to CDMA. The network operators don't want you to have the same number when you switch carriers... basically to increase the hassle of switching.

In the US, the cost of the phone is subsidized by the carrier. On the day you sign up for service with Verizon (for e.g.), Verizon spends about 100-300 dollars on you. The Motorola phone that costs 29.95 at Radio Shack probably costs $300.00 if you buy it yourself. That is why the cell-phone business model involves the lock-in period. You can blame the business model if you wish, but the fact remains that cell phones would be far less popular in this country if the user was expected to buy the phone.

As for the upgrade schedule of GSM... the next step is Wideband CDMA, which works over 5 MHz spectrum. Don't hold your breath waiting for it to arrive... the equipment is at least 2-4 years away from general availablility.

Meantime, the US version of CDMA (CDMA2000) is marching ahead. The voice part is well-entrenched. The 3G version (which works over 1.25 MHz, enabling carriers to use their existing spectrum as opposed to having to aqcquire new, continuous chunks of 5Mhz spectrum) is available today, you can buy service from Sprint and Verizon. Nortel, Lucent, Motorola and Samsung have mature Base Station implementations.

The data part of CDMA2000, 1xEVDO, will be available early next year in commercial versions. Nortel, Lucent and Samsung are trialing their implementations with different carriers as you read this. 1xEVDO provides a 2.4Mbps shared pipe over 1.25Mhz spectrum and kicks the ass of UMTS and Wideband CDMA. UMTS offers only a few hundred kilobits per second, and Wideband CDMA offers a max of 2Mbps over a 5 Mhz spectrum.

The rest of the World has already made up its mind as to what it prefers. Most carriers in North America and Asia (in particular, Korea) have decided to go with CDMA2000 as opposed to Wideband CDMA.

In short, Europe is not going to be ahead in wireless for much longer.

Magnus.

Re:blech.

[Syre]

um... UMTS (not UTMS) is more like CDMA because it IS CDMA.

GSM is a TDMA (time division multiplex) protocol and UMTS is a CDMA (code division multiple access) protocol.

More information on cdma and UMTS [cellular.co.za] and on GSM and TDMA [networkmagazine.com].

Re:blech.

[Wireless Joe]

According to this [gsmworld.com] GSM World article, security is not much of a problem any more. "A new security algorithm, known as A5/3, will provide users of GSM mobile phones with an even higher level of protection against eavesdropping than they have already. It will ensure that even if a prospective attacker manages to pull a GSM phone call out of the radio waves, he will be completely unable to make sense of it, even if he throws massive computing resources at the task.

Passives = discretes

[hackshack]

Passives are "dumb" components- resistors, capacitors, diodes, etc. This is in contrast to ICs, or chips. Less passive components are better... easier to design for, faster assembly, smaller board size, more energy efficiency, and less suppliers / stock to worry about.