Need advice on selecting first phone in seven years.

[Crashdamage]

How do I ensure that my phone is compatible with as many 3G or faster data networks as possible? Are there ANY phones out there that are compatible with BOTH AT&T and T-Mobile's data networks, simultaneously?

I don't know much about CDMA phones - never had one, never wanted one - but I don't think there are any that will work on both major CDMA networks, Verizon and Sprint.

As for GSM phones, it's not really complicated. If you buy an unlocked phone just be sure the phone covers whatever 3G frequency your provider uses. As with CDMA, there are 2 major GSM providers, AT&T and T-Mobile. Check specs for phones that cover their 3G frequencies I listed in post #15. There may be a few phones that will work on both. The Nokia N8 comes to mind, but it runs Symbian, not Android. If you use another carrier, again remember just be sure the phone you buy covers whatever 3G frequency they use.

If you decide to go with T-Mobile don't worry about the AT&T buyout. It may never happen and even if it does nothing will actually change for at least 20-24 months. If T-Mobile phone like HTC G2 like mine or a MyTouch 4G suits you, buy it and enjoy.

 

[Moleculor]

again remember just be sure the phone you buy covers whatever 3G frequency they use.

Grr.

Ok.

NOTHING on this page says "3G frequency".

It has

GSM frequencies
UMTS frequencies

I've asked four times, four different ways, and I can't seem to get a straight answer: WHAT determines "3G" compatibility? Is it GSM, UMTS, or something else entirely?

EDIT: Ok, someone in another thread answered me:

Both GSM and UMTS can carry data - UMTS faster, HSPA (using UMTS) faster still.

GSM = 2G, EDGE = 2.5G, UMTS = 3G, HSPA = 3.5G, HSPA+ = 3.75G, LTE = 4G.

That still leaves the following:

And if it's UMTS, why the HELL can't I get a phone that does both 1700 and 1900 frequency bands?

They're all:

1700/2100
900/2100
900/1700/2100

850/1900/2100
800/850/1900/2100

But none seem to mix the 800/850/1900 with the 900/1700. And IF (and that's a VERY big "if", which is why I'll keep asking until I get a straight answer) I understand this mess correctly, I can't get data service (at 3G speeds or better, which is the only thing that matters, since I hear EDGE is worthless) with BOTH carriers (AT&T/T-Mobile) unless it mixes those two sets of frequencies. And that doesn't make any sense to me (why wouldn't manufacturers want their phones to work on more networks? They'd sell more phones!), which is why I think I'm confused.

And while I'm on the subject, how's 4G come down? What specification/statistic/whatever should I be looking for on phones for 4G compatibility?

 

[EarlyMon]

Actually, just in my opinion, I think you're being a smart consumer, but it's possible you're overthinking it a bit.

If you really must go GSM (and the CDMA dodo-bird comment is way off, btw), I'd recommend the Nexus S on T-Mobile - it's a great phone, it's pure Android, you won't get left behind as Android advances.

Tech Specs ? Nexus S

As for the multiple frequencies - if you go with TMo, and AT&fail succeeds in snapping them up, it'll be their problem to provide you with a handset that will work properly on the new network.

The reason you can't find a phone that covers all of those frequencies comes down to the power of the dollar bill - the carriers specify what they want, they specify devices to lock you in to their service, the candidate phones get FCC approved and then they're set in concrete.

So - rely on your consumer rights in this decision because you're simply not to going to find the radio combos you're looking for - and there's no pressing need.

That's all predicated on TMo having the service you need in the areas here you'll be.

As for Microsoft syncing, Windows 7, etc - only lame makers tie people to desktop OSes (and those exist) - in general, using a decent Android phone presents no issues with dealing with it from the desktop.

Finally, fwiw - my advice is obviously not predicated on widest service - it's predicated on a guessed understanding of your remark regarding wiretap issues.

Sorry if this is a step backwards, but it's my opinion.

 

[Moleculor]

Damn.

So, basically, there's no such thing as an unlocked cell phone that you can use on multiple networks, the system is very well designed to funnel people into forcing them to choose a specific carrier, and there's no point to buying a cell phone first (GSM or otherwise) and then trying to shop for a service second in order to maintain freedom of choice for later dates. The cell phone companies essentially have me by the nose, regardless of what I buy.

That's the exact opposite of what I wanted to hear. :|

Well, looks like I need to stop shopping for a phone, and start shopping for a service then, since I'll be owned by them for a couple years. If they've got me locked to their service regardless of what I do, I might as well sign a contract, and that means I might as well consider CDMA phones too.

Anti-consumer crap. :| Not happy.

Ah well, thanks for the answers. I've got some contemplation to do. Especially since all the thought I've put into this over the last six months to a year just went flying out the window.

(And the wiretapping thing is more of a "pro-vs-anti-consumer philosophy" thing. Warrantless wiretaps aren't supposed to happen any more, but if a company willingly signed up for the program, it shows a lack of respect for their customers, and I wanted to financially support the companies that refused. Principle, y'know? Bleh.)

 

[Crashdamage]

What specification/statistic/whatever should I be looking for on phones for 4G compatibility?

OK, without getting too technical...
The service AT&T and T-Mobile advertise as 4G is really 3G with HSPA+. Think of it as 3G with turbo boost kicked in. It is pretty fast, actually faster than Sprint's version of 4G called WiMax and fairly widely available.

WiMax is not compatible with anything but Sprint 4G phones like the EVO. So Sprint and their partner Clearwire are kinda out on their own with WiMax. It's fairly fast but not as widely available as HSPA+ and hard on batteries.

True 4G is coming with LTE service. It will make both CDMA and GSM go the way of the dodo bird eventually because all major carriers (yes, including Sprint) will be going LTE in few years. Right now only Verizon has LTE service and it is in limited areas and with only one phone available - the Thunderbolt. It's fast, but large, heavy, kinda pricey and has poor battery life if you use the LTE 4G.

GSM will hang on longer than CDMA because:
a. GSM is more popular in NA and far, far more popular in the rest of the world.
b. Unlike CDMA you can talk and access data at the same time. That's mostly why Verizon is really pushing out their LTE network as fast as possible and sooner than they really wanted to.
c. With HSPA+ GSM can offer very good data speeds with small equipment upgrade costs and so stay competitive with LTE longer than CDMA. T-Mobile is kicking their HSPA+ network up to 42mbps (theoretical speed) in some markets right now.

So GSM will be around for years, particularly for low-cost providers.

LTE service will be good in that it's really fast and eventually replaces all this confusion with a single worldwide system that handles voice and data.

LTE will be bad, at least early on, in that it still has some technical glitches and is very hard on batteries. A combination of those factors is why there is only one LTE phone so far in the US and it's so big and heavy. And why there's no LTE-equipped iPhone on Verizon. And LTE, being new and shiny, will no doubt give providers reason to charge more.

 

[Gmash]

The samsung galaxy indulge on metro pcs is also lte 4g. They actually beat verizon to market.

 

[Crashdamage]

Oops - you're right. I just don't keep up with what regional or small carriers do. I travel too much to use them.

 

[EarlyMon]

Molecular - Yep, you've got it - that's why in the US when someone wants a phone, first question is always what carrier? And if they don't have one, many of us advise - first pick your carrier, then your phone.

If you're old enough to remember the famous words of Ernestine the operator (fictional character by Lily Tomlin) - We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company!

Despite all of the changes that have gone down since then - that part hasn't changed.

I wasn't misunderstanding your position on warrantless wiretapping - I was simply asking if you knew who else was involved besides AT&T, because honestly I don't recall.

Everything Crashdamage said correct (he didn't need to hear that, but I thought you'd like corroboration). I'd only add that 4G has become a football because the spec'd requirements for it became a moving target - so, once the specs were recently finalized, the ITU came out with a statement that said (and I'm not making this up) that US efforts at WiMAX, LTE and HSPA+ could all be called 4G despite not meeting spec because they were major leaps forward over 3G.

As for a 4G system that will actually meet the new, final spec, we're hoping that LTE Advanced or WiMAX 2.0 will fit that bill. With the expectation of a big LTE build-out here in the US, I have no clue if we'll see an upgrade to LTE Advanced or not. And with the Sprint/Clearwire debacle, I'm not sure if we'll ever see WiMAX 2 or not.

We really do a need a world spec and common capability. While many countries are GSM, not all are, some are CDMA, so right now just voice on international travel can get messy, as we seem to all know.

VoLTE (voice over LTE) or VOIP with any sufficient tech would go a long way to solving the problem. Probably a pipe dream when cheap GSM handsets are ubiquitous and just plain work.