I use windows tablets at work that have the GOBI card which is a world wide card. If the iPad uses the same then it will work on any carrier any place any time.
That said having WiFi Hot Spot on a iPhone would be just as good as having a MiFi and connecting the iPad to it.
I use windows tablets at work that have the GOBI card which is a world wide card. If the iPad uses the same then it will work on any carrier any place any time.
Gobi is certainly an option. It’s already mini-PCIe like the current iPad 3G card. I’m not sure if the card will fit in the space, if the power drain is within Apple’s requirements, or if the cost is low enough for their needs.
The 2000 models don’t support AWS so T-Mobile USA and some other carriers are excluded, but I do recall reading about a 3000 model that does have AWS as an additional UMTS frequency band. That would pretty much make it a universal model across the globe.
PS: I can only find Gobi in a shipping product in the $200 to $250 range.
Apple will have an another event by the end of the month to release new iPads and Macbooks! the next-gen iPad will have both GSM/HSPA+ and CDMA variants. .
Let's not forget that Verizonwireless sells several CDMA phones that work globally (most Blackberries for starters). If these multi-standard phones are no big deal to make and sell then certainly a multi-standard iPad can't be any big deal to pull off, either.
Let's not forget that Verizonwireless sells several CDMA phones that work globally (most Blackberries for starters). If these multi-standard phones are no big deal to make and sell then certainly a multi-standard iPad can't be any big deal to pull off, either.
I don?t know why this keeps being said. They don?t. They never have. Having GSM/UMTS and CDMA does not make a phone work every where. You still need to have the appropriate frequency bands to make them work on all GSM/UMTS and CDMA networks. This is possible to have, but it comes at a cost that is much more than the price tag, which is why all phones are not made ?world mode? phones.
Have you noticed any increase in 3G speed in your area (Foreclosure Valley? - hope it loses its moniker soon, by the way). I've noticed since last weekend an increase of 2x-3x in download speed, and an increase in upload of 5X, all around the area encompassing Palo Alto/Mtn View//Sunnyvale. Guess ATT "turned on" their HSPA+ fiber in time with the Verizon launch, just so they could say Verizon's 3G speed in "living in the slow lane".
Nah! Just ran some tests and it is slower than 1 month ago... I have always had difficulty getting consistent times.
We live in Antioch and the 3G coverage got pretty good about 1 year ago. I can be in the middle of a park and can pretty reliably stream video to my iPad over 3G from NetFlix or ServeToMe -- a few hiccoughs, but acceptable.
I also, regularly run EvoCam with 4 videos when we're away for extended periods -- it does a good job too.
I don’t know why this keeps being said. They don’t. They never have. Having GSM/UMTS and CDMA does not make a phone work every where. You still need to have the appropriate frequency bands to make them work on all GSM/UMTS and CDMA networks. This is possible to have, but it comes at a cost that is much more than the price tag, which is why all phones are not made “world mode” phones.
This is what Verizonwireless touts for the BB 9650 which I imagine is typical for what they call "Global Ready":
Devices come with a Pre-Installed SIM Card that are both CDMA and GSM Capable. Voice service in over 220 countries, data in over 200 countries, more than 125 with 3G Speeds.
It might not technically be "everywhere" but I'm sure it has to be considered "most everywhere". What do you think are the three most important countries it won't work?
Gobi is certainly an option. It?s already mini-PCIe like the current iPad 3G card. I?m not sure if the card will fit in the space, if the power drain is within Apple?s requirements, or if the cost is low enough for their needs.
The 2000 models don?t support AWS so T-Mobile USA and some other carriers are excluded, but I do recall reading about a 3000 model that does have AWS as an additional UMTS frequency band. That would pretty much make it a universal model across the globe.
PS: I can only find Gobi in a shipping product in the $200 to $250 range.
II have a question. Do these cards like the Gobi Card also support voice -- in other words, could a "World iPad" be used as a phone in a pinch, especially with earphones and microphone?
This is what Verizonwireless touts for the BB 9650 which I imagine is typical for what they call "Gobal Ready":
Devices come with a Pre-Installed SIM Card that are both CDMA and GSM Capable. Voice service in over 220 countries, data in over 200 countries, more than 125 with 3G Speeds.
It might not technically be "everywhere" but I'm sure it has to be considered "most everywhere". What do you think are the three most important countries it won't work?
Check out the specs. It has a single UMTS frequency band. That means Verizon (or Sprint if you have their model) will not on any carrier in N. America except that CDMA carrier, unless you want to use GSM ?2G? because those 4 bands are required for global GSM access. Now, that does allow it to be used in A good part of Europe, Asia, some of Africa and Oceania, as well as Brazil on select carriers, but that still isn?t going to fly for Apple?s product because it?s not a Verizon or Sprint-focused product.
The only way this would work is if they use a Gobi card which essentially does reduce all limitations, but again that comes with a cost. A cost that you know is real because all phones are using all cellular network types and radios within.
Check out the specs. It has a single UMTS frequency band. That means Verizon (or Sprint if you have their model) will not on any carrier in N. America except that CDMA carrier, unless you want to use GSM ?2G? because those 4 bands are required for global GSM access. Now, that does allow it to be used in A good part of Europe, Asia, some of Africa and Oceania, as well as Brazil on select carriers, but that still isn?t going to fly for Apple?s product because it?s not a Verizon or Sprint-focused product.
The only way this would work is if they use a Gobi card which essentially does reduce all limitations, but again that comes with a cost. A cost that you know is real because all phones are using all cellular network types and radios within.
But isn't that a moot point? Verizonwireless isn't trying to make their stuff run on AT&T's network or anyone else's in N. America. What their customers want are devices they can take to Europe and Asia and have them work without fuss. And that's what they do.
But isn't that a moot point? Verizonwireless isn't trying to make their stuff run on AT&T's network or anyone else's in N. America. What their customers want are devices they can take to Europe and Asia and have them work without fuss. And that's what they do.
It?s not a moot point, it?s the point. They are clearly trying to limit the usability of the device when in the US. That also means limiting the usability else as collateral damage.
My problem is with saying how these phones exist in droves and work great all over the world despite the drawbacks to chip size, power efficiency, cost to manufacture and license, and the number of radios Apple would hev to add to make it viable for them thus adding even more cost to the previous issues. The bottom line is you can?t look at the 9650 and say that is the solution for Apple?s phones because it?s not.
My problem is with saying how these phones exist in droves and work great all over the world despite the drawbacks to chip size, power efficiency, cost to manufacture and license, and the number of radios Apple would hev to add to make it viable for them thus adding even more cost to the previous issues. The bottom line is you can?t look at the 9650 and say that is the solution for Apple?s phones because it?s not.
The difference here is that we are not talking about a phone but an iPad where there is more internal volume to provide a solution - perhaps one less expensive than something required for a phone-sized device. There is no doubt that there would be additional hardware and licensing cost to go this route. But there would also be the benefit of streamlined production and inventory management as well as some pretty nice bragging rights.
If anyone can do this, it is Apple: they not only have the best-selling tablet to drive economies of scale, they also have that massive war chest to work out some pretty sweet deals with their vendors.
The difference here is that we are not talking about a phone but an iPad where there is more internal volume to provide a solution - perhaps one less expensive than something required for a phone-sized device. There is no doubt that there would be additional hardware and licensing cost to go this route. But there would also be the benefit of streamlined production and inventory management as well as some pretty nice bragging rights.
If anyone can do this, it is Apple: they not only have the best-selling tablet to drive economies of scale, they also have that massive war chest to work out some pretty sweet deals with their vendors.
Yeah, and I made mention of the specific chips that could potentially work. Qualcomm even licenses the chip so others can make them. Apple would probably the largest producer of Gobi mini-PCIe chips if they went they route, perhaps even making keeping it close to the current 3G upgrade price.
This might be about the iPad right now, but the mention of smartphones can do it so easily wit no drawbacks is a fairly common topic. There is something that makes us think Apple can do anything so if one company makes a product that has do it then Apple is suppose to be able to do it better, even if the physics don’t support it. For instance, how many are expecting LTE in the iPhone 5 simply because there are some large LTE smartphones arriving this year?
It?s not a moot point, it?s the point. They are clearly trying to limit the usability of the device when in the US. That also means limiting the usability else as collateral damage.
My problem is with saying how these phones exist in droves and work great all over the world despite the drawbacks to chip size, power efficiency, cost to manufacture and license, and the number of radios Apple would hev to add to make it viable for them thus adding even more cost to the previous issues. The bottom line is you can?t look at the 9650 and say that is the solution for Apple?s phones because it?s not.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. My view is customers want an iPad that works most places in the world. I take it your view is customers want an iPad that works on everyone's network. I'll stick to my view that customers aren't necessarily concerned about their iPad bought at a Verizonwireless store working on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint... but that it works on British Telecom, Deutche Telecom, etc.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. My view is customers want an iPad that works most places in the world. I take it your view is customers want an iPad that works on everyone's network. I'll stick to my view that customers aren't necessarily concerned about their iPad bought at a Verizonwireless store working on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint... but that it works on British Telecom, Deutche Telecom, etc.
I?m not exactly sure what you?re disagreeing with. Wasn?t the inital reasoning for the ?world mode? iPhone/iPad so it could connect with CDMA/EV-DO as well as the GSM/UMTS networks it currently supports? Why would anyone expect Apple to drop 4 of their UMTS bands just to add CDMA/EV-DO support for Verizon? That makes no sense to add CDMA to support Verizon just to shun the rest of N. America, including AT&T.
This might be about the iPad right now, but the mention of smartphones can do it so easily wit no drawbacks is a fairly common topic. There is something that makes us think Apple can do anything so if one company makes a product that has do it then Apple is suppose to be able to do it better, even if the physics don?t support it. For instance, how many are expecting LTE in the iPhone 5 simply because there are some large LTE smartphones arriving this year?
I definitely understand your point and I don't see Apple trying to shoehorn this into a phone device but I think it could work to Apple's advantage in the iPad.
I think Apple will resist any "checklist pressures" to include LTE in the next iPhone upgrade. I think the focus will be on faster processor, memory and, maybe, a newer version of the PowerVR graphics processor.
I?m not exactly sure what you?re disagreeing with. Wasn?t the inital reasoning for the ?world mode? iPhone/iPad so it could connect with CDMA/EV-DO as well as the GSM/UMTS networks it currently supports? Why would anyone expect Apple to drop 4 of their UMTS bands just to add CDMA/EV-DO support for Verizon? That makes no sense to add CDMA to support Verizon just to shun the rest of N. America, including AT&T.
I don't think I could have been more clear but I'll try again. What I'm sure VZW wants to provide is a device that works on their CDMA network in the USA and common networks outside the USA where their customers may travel. Frankly, if this doesn't meet the criteria of "Global Ready" I don't know what does. They couldn't care less if an iPad they sell runs on AT&T's network. I seriously doubt their customers do, either, as long as they have data connectivity in France, China, Israel, etc. in addition to their home base of the USA... which I'm sure they will. If this view is wrong then say, for the first time, why.
Comments
That said having WiFi Hot Spot on a iPhone would be just as good as having a MiFi and connecting the iPad to it.
That comment is wrong in so many ways, funny, but wrong.
I know. Sometimes I can't help myself!
I use windows tablets at work that have the GOBI card which is a world wide card. If the iPad uses the same then it will work on any carrier any place any time.
Gobi is certainly an option. It’s already mini-PCIe like the current iPad 3G card. I’m not sure if the card will fit in the space, if the power drain is within Apple’s requirements, or if the cost is low enough for their needs.
The 2000 models don’t support AWS so T-Mobile USA and some other carriers are excluded, but I do recall reading about a 3000 model that does have AWS as an additional UMTS frequency band. That would pretty much make it a universal model across the globe.
PS: I can only find Gobi in a shipping product in the $200 to $250 range.
My crystal ball says:
Apple will have an another event by the end of the month to release new iPads and Macbooks! the next-gen iPad will have both GSM/HSPA+ and CDMA variants. .
Or how about one pad with both
Let's not forget that Verizonwireless sells several CDMA phones that work globally (most Blackberries for starters). If these multi-standard phones are no big deal to make and sell then certainly a multi-standard iPad can't be any big deal to pull off, either.
I don?t know why this keeps being said. They don?t. They never have. Having GSM/UMTS and CDMA does not make a phone work every where. You still need to have the appropriate frequency bands to make them work on all GSM/UMTS and CDMA networks. This is possible to have, but it comes at a cost that is much more than the price tag, which is why all phones are not made ?world mode? phones.
Dick, Happy Holidays!
Have you noticed any increase in 3G speed in your area (Foreclosure Valley? - hope it loses its moniker soon, by the way). I've noticed since last weekend an increase of 2x-3x in download speed, and an increase in upload of 5X, all around the area encompassing Palo Alto/Mtn View//Sunnyvale. Guess ATT "turned on" their HSPA+ fiber in time with the Verizon launch, just so they could say Verizon's 3G speed in "living in the slow lane".
Nah! Just ran some tests and it is slower than 1 month ago... I have always had difficulty getting consistent times.
We live in Antioch and the 3G coverage got pretty good about 1 year ago. I can be in the middle of a park and can pretty reliably stream video to my iPad over 3G from NetFlix or ServeToMe -- a few hiccoughs, but acceptable.
I also, regularly run EvoCam with 4 videos when we're away for extended periods -- it does a good job too.
I don’t know why this keeps being said. They don’t. They never have. Having GSM/UMTS and CDMA does not make a phone work every where. You still need to have the appropriate frequency bands to make them work on all GSM/UMTS and CDMA networks. This is possible to have, but it comes at a cost that is much more than the price tag, which is why all phones are not made “world mode” phones.
This is what Verizonwireless touts for the BB 9650 which I imagine is typical for what they call "Global Ready":
Devices come with a Pre-Installed SIM Card that are both CDMA and GSM Capable. Voice service in over 220 countries, data in over 200 countries, more than 125 with 3G Speeds.
It might not technically be "everywhere" but I'm sure it has to be considered "most everywhere". What do you think are the three most important countries it won't work?
Gobi is certainly an option. It?s already mini-PCIe like the current iPad 3G card. I?m not sure if the card will fit in the space, if the power drain is within Apple?s requirements, or if the cost is low enough for their needs.
The 2000 models don?t support AWS so T-Mobile USA and some other carriers are excluded, but I do recall reading about a 3000 model that does have AWS as an additional UMTS frequency band. That would pretty much make it a universal model across the globe.
PS: I can only find Gobi in a shipping product in the $200 to $250 range.
I found these:
http://www.google.com/search?q=GOBI+...w=1645&bih=910
II have a question. Do these cards like the Gobi Card also support voice -- in other words, could a "World iPad" be used as a phone in a pinch, especially with earphones and microphone?
.
This is what Verizonwireless touts for the BB 9650 which I imagine is typical for what they call "Gobal Ready":
Devices come with a Pre-Installed SIM Card that are both CDMA and GSM Capable. Voice service in over 220 countries, data in over 200 countries, more than 125 with 3G Speeds.
It might not technically be "everywhere" but I'm sure it has to be considered "most everywhere". What do you think are the three most important countries it won't work?
Check out the specs. It has a single UMTS frequency band. That means Verizon (or Sprint if you have their model) will not on any carrier in N. America except that CDMA carrier, unless you want to use GSM ?2G? because those 4 bands are required for global GSM access. Now, that does allow it to be used in A good part of Europe, Asia, some of Africa and Oceania, as well as Brazil on select carriers, but that still isn?t going to fly for Apple?s product because it?s not a Verizon or Sprint-focused product.
The only way this would work is if they use a Gobi card which essentially does reduce all limitations, but again that comes with a cost. A cost that you know is real because all phones are using all cellular network types and radios within.
Check out the specs. It has a single UMTS frequency band. That means Verizon (or Sprint if you have their model) will not on any carrier in N. America except that CDMA carrier, unless you want to use GSM ?2G? because those 4 bands are required for global GSM access. Now, that does allow it to be used in A good part of Europe, Asia, some of Africa and Oceania, as well as Brazil on select carriers, but that still isn?t going to fly for Apple?s product because it?s not a Verizon or Sprint-focused product.
The only way this would work is if they use a Gobi card which essentially does reduce all limitations, but again that comes with a cost. A cost that you know is real because all phones are using all cellular network types and radios within.
But isn't that a moot point? Verizonwireless isn't trying to make their stuff run on AT&T's network or anyone else's in N. America. What their customers want are devices they can take to Europe and Asia and have them work without fuss. And that's what they do.
But isn't that a moot point? Verizonwireless isn't trying to make their stuff run on AT&T's network or anyone else's in N. America. What their customers want are devices they can take to Europe and Asia and have them work without fuss. And that's what they do.
It?s not a moot point, it?s the point. They are clearly trying to limit the usability of the device when in the US. That also means limiting the usability else as collateral damage.
My problem is with saying how these phones exist in droves and work great all over the world despite the drawbacks to chip size, power efficiency, cost to manufacture and license, and the number of radios Apple would hev to add to make it viable for them thus adding even more cost to the previous issues. The bottom line is you can?t look at the 9650 and say that is the solution for Apple?s phones because it?s not.
My problem is with saying how these phones exist in droves and work great all over the world despite the drawbacks to chip size, power efficiency, cost to manufacture and license, and the number of radios Apple would hev to add to make it viable for them thus adding even more cost to the previous issues. The bottom line is you can?t look at the 9650 and say that is the solution for Apple?s phones because it?s not.
The difference here is that we are not talking about a phone but an iPad where there is more internal volume to provide a solution - perhaps one less expensive than something required for a phone-sized device. There is no doubt that there would be additional hardware and licensing cost to go this route. But there would also be the benefit of streamlined production and inventory management as well as some pretty nice bragging rights.
If anyone can do this, it is Apple: they not only have the best-selling tablet to drive economies of scale, they also have that massive war chest to work out some pretty sweet deals with their vendors.
The difference here is that we are not talking about a phone but an iPad where there is more internal volume to provide a solution - perhaps one less expensive than something required for a phone-sized device. There is no doubt that there would be additional hardware and licensing cost to go this route. But there would also be the benefit of streamlined production and inventory management as well as some pretty nice bragging rights.
If anyone can do this, it is Apple: they not only have the best-selling tablet to drive economies of scale, they also have that massive war chest to work out some pretty sweet deals with their vendors.
Yeah, and I made mention of the specific chips that could potentially work. Qualcomm even licenses the chip so others can make them. Apple would probably the largest producer of Gobi mini-PCIe chips if they went they route, perhaps even making keeping it close to the current 3G upgrade price.This might be about the iPad right now, but the mention of smartphones can do it so easily wit no drawbacks is a fairly common topic. There is something that makes us think Apple can do anything so if one company makes a product that has do it then Apple is suppose to be able to do it better, even if the physics don’t support it. For instance, how many are expecting LTE in the iPhone 5 simply because there are some large LTE smartphones arriving this year?
It?s not a moot point, it?s the point. They are clearly trying to limit the usability of the device when in the US. That also means limiting the usability else as collateral damage.
My problem is with saying how these phones exist in droves and work great all over the world despite the drawbacks to chip size, power efficiency, cost to manufacture and license, and the number of radios Apple would hev to add to make it viable for them thus adding even more cost to the previous issues. The bottom line is you can?t look at the 9650 and say that is the solution for Apple?s phones because it?s not.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. My view is customers want an iPad that works most places in the world. I take it your view is customers want an iPad that works on everyone's network. I'll stick to my view that customers aren't necessarily concerned about their iPad bought at a Verizonwireless store working on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint... but that it works on British Telecom, Deutche Telecom, etc.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. My view is customers want an iPad that works most places in the world. I take it your view is customers want an iPad that works on everyone's network. I'll stick to my view that customers aren't necessarily concerned about their iPad bought at a Verizonwireless store working on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint... but that it works on British Telecom, Deutche Telecom, etc.
I?m not exactly sure what you?re disagreeing with. Wasn?t the inital reasoning for the ?world mode? iPhone/iPad so it could connect with CDMA/EV-DO as well as the GSM/UMTS networks it currently supports? Why would anyone expect Apple to drop 4 of their UMTS bands just to add CDMA/EV-DO support for Verizon? That makes no sense to add CDMA to support Verizon just to shun the rest of N. America, including AT&T.
iPads are very popular to take on trips. Your Verizon CDMA iPad will not work in Europe! (or any other cool place.....unless you think China is cool)
Won't work? You mean I won't be able to turn it on? Can't load photos off my camera? Check my email using wi-fi?
What I would like to see in the iPad 2 space:
1) a model supporting all major cell radios -- current through 4G (LTE or whatever)
2) offered by Apple, resellers at a MSRP without contract
3) PayGo data plans by carriers -- ala the current ATT monthly plan
4) Carrier option to offer lower (subsidized) price with contract
5) Any carrier that sells iPad agrees to provide PayGo/Roaming support for iPad purchased elsewhere
This would put Apple firmly in control of its product pricing and product features.
With choice of any cell carrier, customer can pick and choose what best suits him?
This "Global iPad" will set the standard for how "Global iPhones" are offered when the technology is available.
I 2nd that motion!
This might be about the iPad right now, but the mention of smartphones can do it so easily wit no drawbacks is a fairly common topic. There is something that makes us think Apple can do anything so if one company makes a product that has do it then Apple is suppose to be able to do it better, even if the physics don?t support it. For instance, how many are expecting LTE in the iPhone 5 simply because there are some large LTE smartphones arriving this year?
I definitely understand your point and I don't see Apple trying to shoehorn this into a phone device but I think it could work to Apple's advantage in the iPad.
I think Apple will resist any "checklist pressures" to include LTE in the next iPhone upgrade. I think the focus will be on faster processor, memory and, maybe, a newer version of the PowerVR graphics processor.
I?m not exactly sure what you?re disagreeing with. Wasn?t the inital reasoning for the ?world mode? iPhone/iPad so it could connect with CDMA/EV-DO as well as the GSM/UMTS networks it currently supports? Why would anyone expect Apple to drop 4 of their UMTS bands just to add CDMA/EV-DO support for Verizon? That makes no sense to add CDMA to support Verizon just to shun the rest of N. America, including AT&T.
I don't think I could have been more clear but I'll try again. What I'm sure VZW wants to provide is a device that works on their CDMA network in the USA and common networks outside the USA where their customers may travel. Frankly, if this doesn't meet the criteria of "Global Ready" I don't know what does. They couldn't care less if an iPad they sell runs on AT&T's network. I seriously doubt their customers do, either, as long as they have data connectivity in France, China, Israel, etc. in addition to their home base of the USA... which I'm sure they will. If this view is wrong then say, for the first time, why.