Sony Ericsson TM506
WCDMA 1700 / WCDMA 2100. Does that mean European use for the latter?
Usually, I see phones for T-Mo mention only WCDMA 1700. But since it also says WCDMA 2100, does that mean worldwide use as well?
...
Yes.
Note that this isn't always the case when reading specs on AWS phones elsewhere. Some companies refer to AWS as 1700/2100, which implies European roaming even when that isn't the case.
We don't do that, though. We refer to the AWS band as simply "1700" for clarity. If we list "2100", that means the European 3G band.
Note that this isn't always the case when reading specs on AWS phones elsewhere. Some companies refer to AWS as 1700/2100, which implies European roaming even when that isn't the case.
We don't do that, though. We refer to the AWS band as simply "1700" for clarity. If we list "2100", that means the European 3G band.
...
Sweet. That's awesome. A 3G T-Mobile phone that will work on other worldwide 3g networks as well. Although I wish they start making quad-band WCDMA phones now. Kinda like 850/1700/1900/2100.
...
When I chatted online with a SE rep, he stated that the UTMS 1700 band listed on the Xperia, is only for Japan. I thought it was AWS 1700. They need to start making Quad-band 3G. The Tri-band 3G phones are starting to get annoying.
...
terryjohnson16 said:
When I chatted online with a SE rep, he stated that the UTMS 1700 band listed on the Xperia, is only for Japan.
I don't think that's right. That's not what we've been told.
...
It's a thought.
However, I don't think a soul outside of the industry knows what the WCDMA "IV" band means. Plus I think it's important to be consistent across technologies. There's no terminology in use for a "CDMA IV" band, for example. "1700" makes more sense to me because you can use it easily for both WCDMA and CDMA.
As for just "AWS", that's also a thought, but "1700" is more consistent with the way all other bands are described.
The European 3G band is technically more like 1900/2100, but everyone seems happy to keep it simple by calling it the "2100" band.
I'm not quite sure why some companies want to make it complicated with the AWS band. "1700" is perfectly simply and sensible in my opinion.
The only issue I know of ...
(continues)
However, I don't think a soul outside of the industry knows what the WCDMA "IV" band means. Plus I think it's important to be consistent across technologies. There's no terminology in use for a "CDMA IV" band, for example. "1700" makes more sense to me because you can use it easily for both WCDMA and CDMA.
As for just "AWS", that's also a thought, but "1700" is more consistent with the way all other bands are described.
The European 3G band is technically more like 1900/2100, but everyone seems happy to keep it simple by calling it the "2100" band.
I'm not quite sure why some companies want to make it complicated with the AWS band. "1700" is perfectly simply and sensible in my opinion.
The only issue I know of ...
(continues)
...
The unidirectional support for the AWS 1700 is band is crazy. More phones need to have AWS.
When do you think more phones will have AWS support, and how long before Canada and the rest use AWS.
When do you think more phones will have AWS support, and how long before Canada and the rest use AWS.
...
