Finally they put clarification on the on-line shop: http://us.direct.openmoko.com/products/neo-freerunner
Sold Out? 900Mhz variant stock is due on on july 15th -- Arie On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 20:02, michael shiloh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wow! Thanks for the great information. Mind if I quote this on my blog > (with > proper credit)? This is good reference material. > > Michael KA6RCQ > > > > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:54:15PM -0700, michael shiloh wrote: >> >>> The Neo Freerunner is tri-band available in two versions: >>> >>> The so-called "850 MHz" version supports 850MHz, 1800MHz, and >>> 1900MHz >>> The so-called "900 MHz" version supports 900MHz, 1800MHz, and >>> 1900MHz >>> >>> As you can see, both version support 1800MHz and 1900MHz. >>> >>> The reason for these two versions is that some rural regions in the USA >>> use >>> 850 MHz instead of the more-or-less world standard of 900 MHz. There may >>> be >>> some rare places in the rest of the world that use 850 MHz, but for the >>> most >>> part the 850 MHz version is considered the USA version, and the 900 MHz >>> version is suitable for just about everywhere else in the world. >>> >> >> No, that's not really true. >> >> The world standard for AMPS (the original cell phone system) was 800 mHz. >> When GSM was created it was western European only and could not interfere >> with AMPS phones. Since 900 mHz is a restriced band in ITU regions 1 and >> 3 (Europe, Africa, Asia), but not in the U.S. its users were forced off >> and it was given to the GSM system. >> >> In region 2 (the Americas) it is open to unlicensed low power use and >> Amateur >> radio. >> >> The major difference of over the air transmission is that AMPS used a wide >> FM voice channel with a seperate digital control channel, GSM used TDMA >> (sharing a single digital channel by giving each user a fixed time to >> transmit). GSM can share the same channel between control and "data" >> (digital voice). >> >> By the early 1990's AMPS cell phone channels had become overcrowded and >> there >> were several methods developed to alivate the problem. One was N-AMPS >> (narrow >> band FM voice) and another D-AMPS (digital AMPS similar to GSM's TDMA). >> >> In Israel Cell-Com (1993-1994?) started out with D-AMPS, Pelephone started >> with AMPS and switched to N-AMPS, with not much success. >> >> In the U.S. the 1900 mHz band (similar to the 1800mHz band opened in Zones >> 1 and 3) was opened. The lower end of the band overlaps the 1800mHz band, >> but some of it was already in use, so they are not the same. The 1900 mHz >> band was opened for PCS (Personal communications services) and almost >> anyone >> could get a PCS license (they were auctioned off) and open their own >> cellular >> phone service. >> >> The PCS cells had a very small range, so the only ones that were bought >> were in highly populated areas. Some PCS operators used GSM, but many did >> not. 1900 mHz band GSM phones are technicaly the same as 1800mHz GSM >> phones, >> with different firmware and regulatory approval. Since the U.S. market >> was small, there was no incentive to spend a lot of money on GSM phones >> for it, and there small cost of converting an 1800 mHz design to a >> 1900 mHz one was worth it. 1900 mHz GSM coverage peaked around the year >> 2000 with about 80% of the U.S. population covered, but only about 20% >> of the area. >> >> Meanwhile, AT&T Wireless had upgraded their 800 mHz AMPS network to >> D-AMPS, >> and they covered 100% (in reality not quite, but close enough) of the >> continental U.S., and most of Hawaii, and some of Alaska. >> >> In 2002 they completed a deal where Ericson would manufacture base >> stations >> compatible with their D-AMPS ones that supported mixed GSM/D-AMPS service, >> so they could switch one channel at a time. Nokia got the contract for >> their handsets. Due to the way GSM names its networks, the 800 mHz >> AMPS/N-AMPS/D-AMPS channels are called GSM 850. >> >> AT&T sold their cellular network and it has changed names. >> >> Now in 2008, the situation is that almost all of the U.S. (except for >> a few national parks, etc) is covered with the GSM 850 network that >> at one time belonged to AT&T Wireless (I don't know their current name), >> there is still the "spotty" GSM 1900 mHz coverage, and the only 1800 mHz >> network in zone 2 is in Brazil. >> >> In Israel, Orange's 900 mHz network coversalmost all of the terriory >> with from the Golan to Eilat, the Jordan river to the Med. The gaps that >> exist in areas controlled by the PA is due to a non competition >> agreement with Pal-Tel (partialy owned by Shimon Peres) and not >> technical reasons. >> >> When they decided to get into the high-speed data business they opened >> an 1800 mHz network. Due to the higher frequency, it's coverage is >> "spotty". In flat places, e.g. the costal plain, it works well, in >> hilly places, e.g. Jerusalem, high buildings and hills cause it to >> have "holes" in the coverage. >> >> Orange phones that are not used for data are programmed to use 900mHz >> first and fall back to 1800 mHz, which is why phones sold by other >> people may or may not work properly. They are programed the other way >> and don't switch to 900 mHz properly. >> >> Cell-Com has an 800 mHz D-AMPS network, and an 1800 mHz GSM network. >> Coverage is supposed to be good, but it still has the technical problems >> of 1800 mHz. I assume at some point they will convert their 800 mHz >> network to GSM 850, but I have no idea when or if they will abandon it >> due to lack of use and bandwith. >> >> I have no idea of what Pele-Phone is doing, but information would be >> appricated. >> >> >>> If Orange uses 900 MHz as Shachar says, you should wait for the 900 MHz >>> version. >>> >> >> That's an interesting question. If you use Orange near the coast, then >> you probably will be ok with the 850/1800/1900 version. If you plan to >> travel to Europe or the U.S. it should be fine as both are well covered >> with 1800mHz (Europe) and 850 mHz, US. (I don't know what's going on in >> Canada or Mexico). The 900mHz version would be better, but how much is >> up to speculation. I can lend anyone who wants to find out a dual band >> (900/1800) handset which has to manually switched so you can try one >> band or the other. >> >> If you use Cell-Com, then either version will work and have the same >> results >> here. >> >> If you plan to travel the world, the 900mHz version would be better, >> but be aware the GSM coverage is not universal and there are countries >> where it will not work at all. The big two I know of are Japan and Korea. >> >> It will also not work outside of big cities in the U.S. For example, >> New York City has GSM coverage, Albany (the NY state capital) does not. >> >> Note that when the GSM system was designed, it was illegal to take a >> cell phone across most international borders. The idea was for example, >> when you reached the French/German border, you turned in your rental >> car (which had a cell phone built in), took your SIM (with your phone >> number attached out of the cell phone), walked across the border and >> got into a new rental car with a different cell phone. You put your >> SIM in it and were back "on the air". >> >> The idea persisted, for example it was illegal to bring an Israeli cell >> phone into Egypt until a few years ago. I have no idea what they did >> if there was one built into your car and you drove there. >> >> Geoff. >> -- >> Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel [EMAIL PROTECTED] N3OWJ/4X1GM >> >> -- Arie
