[url]http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/16/8978539/embedded-sim-card-apple-samsung-involvement[/url]
[quote]The SIM card as we know it may be about to disappear. According to the Financial Times, Apple and Samsung are in discussions with mobile carriers to help develop and implement a new SIM card standard that could make it easier to switch between service providers. The report refers to the new standard as an embedded SIM — or an e-SIM — which would remain inside the phone and give consumers the ability to switch carriers without getting a new card, rather than locking them into a specific carrier, as they do now. That means no more swapping SIMs to switch phones or carriers; it would all be done through an interface on the device.
The new standard is expected to be ready sometime in 2016, but we've already seen Apple take a step toward this type of card. Last year, it introduced LTE iPads that included something called the Apple SIM, which offered people a choice between multiple carriers and in some cases the ability to switch carriers when they liked. Getting rid of the SIM card tray, if not also the SIM card itself, would give Apple and other phone manufacturers the ability to make their devices a bit thinner, which is something they'll like however slight the difference is. The Financial Times reports that it doesn't expect the Apple SIM to disappear just yet — it's entirely possible that it could show up in an iPhone before the e-SIM arrives.[/quote]
But they're so cute
Great another reason why your phones back shouldn't come off even though it makes disassembly so easy
That sounds insane. When i worked in telecoms sim swaps were one of the most common procedures i performed, they always seemed to be the first thing to go on older phones that had been looked after, and it fixed like 90% of network issues without having to investigate further.
If you're gonna overhaul the standard why not get rid of SIM entirely and replicate it in the baseband, rather than plopping another pointless chip on the mainboard?
Sprint already does this to some of their phones
Why not just create a universal simcard? It seems far easier and less wasteful to create something that can be switched between phone and can be given an unlimited amount of numbers if the user decided to switch numbers of course.
because most people don't even have a phone for three years now.
[QUOTE=green bandit;48225576]Sprint already does this to some of their phones[/QUOTE]
That's CDMA in general.
It's also a great way to render existing phones obsolete.
If this would mean I could buy any phone and put it on Verizon I'd be happy. But for some reason I think big red will find a way to lock out phones that aren't approved by them :( why can't I buy any phone I want and use it with any network?!?! Hopefully this will help solve it but I doubt it.
Yes perhaps easier to switch carriers but more difficult to switch phones surely
[QUOTE=Killuah;48225642]It's also a great way to render existing phones obsolete.[/QUOTE]
What? No it doesn't. Older phones will work just fine, they're not going to just say "we're doing this now, so all your phones won't work anymore. Buy a new one."
That's suicide, and it's ridiculous.
This is only a good thing and a long time coming.
I have actually had customers come to me with their brand new phone, not an hour out of the box, because they've damaged the pins of the SIM slot trying to put their SIM in incorrectly. They can't return it to the shop - it's been physically damaged and all warranties are void.
There are now 3 different SIM card sizes, people tend to use adapters if they have a smaller SIM or try to just cut down larger ones leading to all manner of problems. I often see people that got their SIM out of the phone but not the adapter, which then catches the pins of the SIM reader, so they force it...
Also SIMS put in incorrectly, the wrong way, upside down, jammed in place, held in with card or tape...
Modern phones tend to need some sort of cage or tray to sit the sim card into - these get lost or damaged too.
There are so many pitfalls working with SIM cards for the general public. Removing them is a no-brainer that should have been done a long time ago.
[QUOTE=woolio1;48225913]What? No it doesn't. Older phones will work just fine, they're not going to just say "we're doing this now, so all your phones won't work anymore. Buy a new one."
That's suicide, and it's ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
Consumers wouldn't buy any of those e-SIM phones if it was like that.
[QUOTE=subenji99;48225944]
There are so many pitfalls working with SIM cards for the general public. Removing them is a no-brainer that should have been done a long time ago.[/QUOTE]
i have never known anybody to put in a simcard in wrong or even break one
[QUOTE=Trumple;48225902]Yes perhaps easier to switch carriers but more difficult to switch phones surely[/QUOTE]
You'll just have a setup menu where you enter a unique identifier (your IMSI) and pick your network of choice. Network locked phones would merely restrict that choice.
SIM cards already are such an identifier, just the phone reads it from the card rather than the user being asked to enter it. There's more to a SIM card but the IMSI is all this new system would need.
[editline]17th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=ashrobhoy;48225989]i have never known anybody to put in a simcard in wrong or even break one[/QUOTE]
What an insightful personal anecdote, however I work in mobile phone repair.
So what does this mean for used phones?
[QUOTE=ashrobhoy;48225989]i have never known anybody to put in a simcard in wrong or even break one[/QUOTE]
I fucked up a work laptop by shoving one in with the wrong size adaptor. they shipped it to IT main offices and issued me a new laptop.
[QUOTE=QuinnithXD;48226309]So what does this mean for used phones?[/QUOTE]
Go into settings, change the device ID to one given to you by your new carrier.
So basically nothing.
cdma has done this since 1957
[QUOTE=Sableye;48225516]Great another reason why your phones back shouldn't come off even though it makes disassembly so easy[/QUOTE]
I'm not a moron. I should be able to switch out my battery as I am able to with my remote control, and I should be able to replace memory no problem. Any company that won't let you do that thinks you're an idiot.
I hate internal batteries. I see them as a way for the manufacturers to force obsolescence. A smartphone battery will only last a couple of years generally, and people that aren't tech savvy will just write the perfectly good phone off.
Also if an internal battery expands it's going to break stuff rather than just pop off your back cover.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;48226458]I'm not a moron. I should be able to switch out my battery as I am able to with my remote control, and I should be able to replace memory no problem. Any company that won't let you do that thinks you're an idiot.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say it's a "thinks you're an idiot" problem. Phones made specifically for the non tech-inclined (jitterbug, among others) have replaceable batteries.
It's more a problem of Apple doesn't want people opening their phones, because they don't want to have to mar their design with a back hatch (Although, to be fair, their designs aren't getting better), and have to deal with covering up all the circuitry and generally just adding bulk to the phone, all the while introducing more points of failure, and more that can go wrong. If under 99% of use statistics, the battery lasts long enough, why worry about the other 1%?
If it's a big enough concern, most people consider that when buying their phone. Same with RAM, it just adds more that can go wrong to their products when most people buying them never worry about upgrading it in the first place. You build to suit your consumers, it's just good business.
[editline]16th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=subenji99;48226508]I hate internal batteries. I see them as a way for the manufacturers to force obsolescence. A smartphone battery will only last a couple of years generally, and people that aren't tech savvy will just write the perfectly good phone off.
Also if an internal battery expands it's going to break stuff rather than just pop off your back cover.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, and there's that. Got to drive that yearly release cycle somehow.
Man, this sounds like a great way for malicious third parties to track consumer habits and citizen communications without having to bribe/crack each carrier individually.
[editline]16th July 2015[/editline]
:tinfoil:
[QUOTE=Killuah;48225642]It's also a great way to render existing phones obsolete.[/QUOTE]
Kind of the point of making them emulated, because there's all sorts of legacy devices that need to still run
it's shaping up more and more like I'm going to be keeping my GS5 forever
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;48225555]If you're gonna overhaul the standard why not get rid of SIM entirely and replicate it in the baseband, rather than plopping another pointless chip on the mainboard?[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure that's what they're doing:
[url]http://www.gsma.com/connectedliving/embedded-sim/how-it-works/[/url]
The embedded-SIM spec is designed to allow a change of operator without having to have the phone reprogrammed the same was as on CDMA. It's all to be done over the air.
[QUOTE=DogGunn;48227001]I'm pretty sure that's what they're doing:
[url]http://www.gsma.com/connectedliving/embedded-sim/how-it-works/[/url]
The embedded-SIM spec is designed to allow a change of operator without having to have the phone reprogrammed the same was as on CDMA. It's all to be done over the air.[/QUOTE]
OTA updates just seem to be the worst idea for semi-sensitive infrastructure like this. Hate to be tin-foil hatey, but its a great attack vector for malicious trojans.
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;48227192]OTA updates just seem to be the worst idea for semi-sensitive infrastructure like this. Hate to be tin-foil hatey, but its a great attack vector for malicious trojans.[/QUOTE]
Yeah it doesn't sound the greatest. Something could go wrong, suddenly all phones have the same SIM ICCID. GG
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;48227192]OTA updates just seem to be the worst idea for semi-sensitive infrastructure like this. Hate to be tin-foil hatey, but its a great attack vector for malicious trojans.[/QUOTE]
It'd be heaven for man in the middle attacks.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.