Re: World Phones
- From: John Navas <spamfilter0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:54:37 GMT
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 16:53:32 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
<paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in <44D7D27C.B0B71F86@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
John Navas wrote:
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 06:50:10 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in <44d74513$0$96191$742ec2ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
In the US:
I know why the phone maker's do this, it's easy to take a 900, 1800,
1900 and change it to a 800, 1800, 1900, but it's a pretty worthless
phone since in Europe and Asia you really want to have both 900 and
1800. When you buy a prepaid SIM, you don't want to worry about the band
that the carrier uses, especially when you're not really able to
communicate all that well with the seller.
It's actually a practical and low cost way to have both US and non-US
models. Many people don't care about international roaming.
But then, why not make a dual band phone and save even more? The
tri-band seems to be halfway to a true 'world phone'. Those that need
the roaming feature are certain to pay for one more band. Those that
aren't can get a dual band phone and save their money for the
Presumably because there's not enough cost saving to make it worthwhile.
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>