backtop


Print 69 comment(s) - last by StriderRyo.. on Apr 1 at 12:15 PM

If Apple's subsidiary bid is successful, it will be able to force everyone to use its proposed nano SIM standard

Inside every GSM 3G-compatible phone or device is a tiny card dubbed a "SIM" (subscriber identity module).  The chip is a hunk of plastic with a computer chip in it, carrying your subscriber information.

I. Bye-bye Micro SIM (3FF)

But traditional SIMs are big.  They're bulky.  In a game where every millimeter matters, the SIM's large form factor and the ensuing large adapter deliver a double-blow to smartphone internals space-wise.

The answer seems clearly to downsize the SIM.  That's where things get interesting.  Europe -- one of the largest GSM markets -- is currently debating whose standard to make official SIM wise.  The issue is about to come to a vote by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and their decision could have a bearing on global adoption.

In one corner is Apple, Inc. (AAPL).  Apple's proposed "fourth generation form factor" (4FF) "nano SIM" is essentially a current-generation micro SIM with the surrounding plastic hacked away.  While trimming plastic seems like it would be poor fodder for a patent, Apple indicates it owns intellectual property on the trimming procedure (surprised, anyone?).  But here's the catch -- if it gets made the official standard, sources say it won't charge anyone royalties.

On the other side are a handful of competing proposals from Google Inc.'s (GOOG) new subsidiary Motorola Mobility, Nokia Oyj. (HEL:NOK1V) -- the world's largest maker of tradition phones -- and Canada's Research in Motion, Ltd. (TSE:RIM).  Their designs are more ambitious.  Similar to the microSD card, they adopt a new form factor, with smaller pins and a locking design.

SIM Card designs
Apple's design (right) is essentially a current gen. SIM card with the plastic trimmed off.  The rival designs (left) resemble a microSD card, and feature a more robust, brand new form factor.
[Image Sources: The Verge (top, bottom right; bottom left); Inventor Spot (top left)]
(Click image to enlarge.)

The trio of rivals -- one Android phonemaker (Motorola), one Windows Phone maker (Nokia), and one BB 10 phone maker (RIM) have formed an unlikely alliance to oppose Apple, given their similar designs.  Presumably, if they win they will seek some sort of combined licensing from Apple.

II. Nokia Blast Apple's Design's Technical Flaws, Apple's "Free" Rhetoric

Nokia is particularly vocal about the issue and what it views as obstructionism from Apple.  In a statement it writes:

We are not aware of any Apple Intellectual Property which it considers essential to its nano-SIM proposal. In light of this, Apple's proposal for royalty-free licensing seems no more than an attempt to devalue the intellectual property of others.

In other words, Nokia believes Apple does not own patents on its nano SIM and is merely offering its non-existent property "for free" in a bid to either get its bare-bones proposal adopted, or else force others to offer royalty-free licensing on technology they paid to develop (versus Apple's virtually free plastic-shaving approach).

SIM card
Apple's proposed "nano SIM" solution essentially just cuts away the plastic surrounding the central chip and pads.  Apple claims to have patented the approach and is looking to use its financial might to overrule a coalition of rivals. [Image Source: Free Stock Images]

Nokia also claims that Apple violates a requirement of the ETSI, which states that the new nano SIM (4FF) design must be designed in such a way that it can't be shoved in current-generation slots.  Writes the ETSI:

The design of the fourth UICC form factor shall prevent the 4FF from becoming jammed in a Mini-UICC reader. An example is that if the 4FF is turned 90 degrees and it fits perfectly into the Mini-UICC reader (4FF length = Mini-UICC width).

While Apple's design clearly violates that design paradigm and is less of an innovative leap, it does have the backing of European cell-phone carriers, in that it will be fee-free.  Further, the Apple design is reportedly more fragile.  This could work to carriers' advantage as it could force customers to keep SIM-switching to a minimum.  In fact, the Apple design is so damage-prone it would reportedly require a special protective drawer.  A source states, "Phones would need to be re-engineered with this in mind."

III. Apple's Vote Grab Would Give it a Death-Grip on EU Standards Board

Many people are disappointed that the long promised reprogrammable SIM card (something carriers are understandably opposed to) has not yet been pushed forth by any of the major players as the successor to 3FF.  That issue aside, Apple's push to peddle its SIM solution is an important one, as Apple is essentially looking to seize control of Europe's industry regulatory board.

The ETSI is supposed to be a democratic corporate construct in which every major phonemaker has a strong voice.  Apple, however, isn't interested in democracy, unless it's democracy by the dollar.  

Apple money
Apple is trying to appoint itself ruler of the ETSI board with 270 votes, thanks to its record profits.  Nokia currently has the most votes of anyone -- 92. [Image Source: SomanyMP3s]

The company is trying a rather clever ploy, reportedly registering six of its subsidiaries as voting members.  Each of these could draw as many as 45 votes, essentially multiplying Apple's voting power by six, if the effort is approved.  The Apple ploy comes thanks to a loophole in ETSI rules that states that any company with $8B in revenue can become a registered member with up to 45 votes according to the Financial Times.

The situation creates a dilemma for the ETSI, as Apple's status as the world's most profitable tech company looks to allow it to essentially annoint itself monarch of the ETSI -- unless there is a rules change to prevent multiple subsidiary registration.

Nokia currently controls 92 votes, but unlike Apple it has not tried to game the system -- nor does it likely have the capacity to.  Indeed, given the $8B USD revenue requirement, it is unclear if any other company could use Apple's unique vote-grabbing approach.  The loophole is enabled by the fact that Apple is so massively profitable that individual nation-level subsidiaries in Europe are as profitable as entire other top companies.

Nokia actively opposes Apple's vote power-grab.  The decision on membership will come down later today.

If Apple prevails, it will almost certainly not only win the passage of its standard, but also gain a virtual monopoly to dictate its will on the European Union when it comes to standards.  Needless to say, Nokia, et al. will be loathe to let that happen.

If Apple gets its way consumers may be hurt, but the company will gain a powerful bargaining chip.  After all, there is one tiny exception in the Apple "free" licensing scheme, reportedly -- licensees must offer "same terms in accordance with the principle of reciprocity".  In other words, Motorola and Samsung's would likely be forced to hand their 3G patents to Apple for free -- if they wanted to do business in Europe.

This could be just as bad for Nokia as it would be for the Android phonemakers.  After all, Nokia has fought bitter battles with Apple in court in the past.  The last thing it needs is for Apple to not only gain a key bargaining chip in the form of the SIM standard, but also to see its rival become undisputed monarch of the standards board, voting-wise.


Sources: FOSS Patents, The Verge, IDG, Financial Times



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

why do we need SIM cards?
By michaelklachko on 3/27/2012 4:18:26 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone knows why not get rid of removable SIM cards completely, and implement ability to store user configuration externally (cloud/local PC)?




RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By Fanatical Meat on 3/27/2012 4:36:13 PM , Rating: 3
sim cards don't really hold much info. They hold the phone number, phone book and general operating instructions for the phone. Cloud storage would be great for music & pictures but everything else really needs to be kept on the device. Also it makes warrentee & phone transfers easier.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By michaelklachko on 3/27/2012 4:40:44 PM , Rating: 2
But why do you want to store it on removable media? There's plenty of internal storage in your phone to hold a phone book.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By JediJeb on 3/27/2012 5:07:26 PM , Rating: 5
One reason is that if you buy a new phone you could not simply move your SIM to the new phone and immediately begin using it. You would have to take it to the phone company to have them activate your new phone by downloading your info to it. Phone book storage is just an extra bonus in the SIM, what really matters is your subscriber information that is stored on it. The SIM made it easier than having to setup your account to match the Electronic Serial Number(ESN) built into each phone back in the Analog days.

You also would not want to make the phones without the SIM where you just input your subscriber information or anyone could just clone your information and use your account to make expensive international calls leaving you with the bill, which was something that often happened back in the days of the ESN which could be grabbed right out of the air with a modified ESN reader.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By michaelklachko on 3/27/2012 6:30:52 PM , Rating: 2
Why would you need to take your phone to the phone company to activate it? It can be done over the phone. If I want to switch to a new phone on CDMA service, I just call the customer service, tell them the ESN, and they enable it. Once the phone is activated, it should be able to download everything it needs from the cloud, or from a local PC.

If making a call to customer service to activate service is too much trouble, they can make it accessible via the web, where you would sign in to your account, and activate a new phone yourself.

I just don't see why anyone would want to deal with removable SIM cards.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By Ticholo on 3/27/2012 7:15:41 PM , Rating: 3
I'm sure apple ruined that by patenting a "method of calling customer service to activate features in mobile devices".
Their innovation is that the person on the other end of the line answers on a headset where the plastic has been trimmed to its bare essential.
But no worries. They'll be nice about it and let everyone use those headsets.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By shabby on 3/27/2012 10:57:46 PM , Rating: 2
That actually sounds like something apple would patent, a smartphone with select features, kinda like windows home/pro/ultimate.

iPhone lite - a dumb smartphone just for calls/sms
iPhone web - calls/sms and browsing
iPhone social - calls/sms/browsing/social apps
iPhone plus - a smartphone that does it all


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By V-Money on 3/27/2012 8:34:32 PM , Rating: 2
There are many benefits to sim cards. For one, switching phones takes seconds and doesn't require you to call. Most importantly though, it lets you use it on any phone you choose. For instance, I have T-Mobile and I purchased a Galaxy Nexus from overseas and switched the sim card, if it didn't use a sim I wouldn't be able to use this phone because its not a T-Mobile phone.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By kittypuncher on 3/28/2012 5:19:23 AM , Rating: 3
Exactly. I use 2 phones regularly but keep the same number. 1 phone when I'm home in the UK, and another phone every couple of weeks when I go to mainland EU. I do this because I don't want to lose my Galaxy S2 abroad, plus I like to travel with something smaller. Having a SIM setup allows me to do this in seconds. I would shoot myself if I had to call my carrier each time I needed to do this. :)


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By piroroadkill on 3/28/2012 7:43:03 AM , Rating: 2
SIM card is still way more convenient. If your phone is out of juice, but you have a spare old Nokia lying around with some battery life left, just flip the card out, pop it in, resume calling..


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By ritualm on 3/28/2012 5:04:54 PM , Rating: 2
Are you stupid? The security implications of a remotely hosted SIM information system are huge. Obviously none of these matters because you don't work on IT security issues.

Having everything on the cloud really sucks when you lose your persistent Internet connection. But that's nothing: There are lots of people and organizations who will absolutely love to do everything using your credentials, at your personal and financial expense... and since it's not theirs, they could care less if you ended up bankrupt or serving prison time by hijacking your already-authenticated ID.


By nuarbnellaffej on 3/27/2012 5:08:25 PM , Rating: 1
So if ur phone gets smashed, wet, etc and stops functioning u can retain your contacts, most ppl with sim cards hav back up phones to use temporarily when their current phone breaks.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By AnnihilatorX on 3/27/2012 5:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
Then your phone will be incapable of data/phone calls unless you plug it into a PC (to obtain necessary network information, ID, etc). Some people would not want that.

Although the complete GSM protocol can be revamped to deliver SIM information through detecting the phone hardware ID and look up a database, that's a radical and probably won't happen.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By rs2 on 3/27/2012 10:57:17 PM , Rating: 2
That would create a chicken-and-the-egg problem when dealing with a new device. The device would lack the SIM information required authenticate with a carrier, and would thus be unable to retrieve its own identity information from the web-based host. Moreover, if there is not *something* on the device to securely and uniquely identify it and its user, how does one go about mapping a device to a hosted SIM "card"? And do you really want to create a possible attack vector under which anyone who can convince the web-based host that they're your cell phone can download all the information that is stored in your SIM?

I think keeping the SIM information external to the device creates many more problems than it solves.


RE: why do we need SIM cards?
By retrospooty on 3/28/2012 8:16:28 AM , Rating: 2
"That would create a chicken-and-the-egg problem when dealing with a new device. The device would lack the SIM information required authenticate with a carrier"

No, it wouldnt. Verizon and Sprint have millions nad millions of customers that do it with every new phone they ever get. It works just fine. Got a new phone? Go to the website and put in the new ESN for your account. No access to the web? Call support


By dark matter on 3/27/2012 4:07:47 PM , Rating: 2
The world is fucking mad. I'll leave you all to it.

But yet still dickheads claim Apple is the innovation king.

Yeah, cutting away the plastic to make it smaller is clearly innovative.

Getting a patent on that...

Bollocks.




By GPig on 3/27/2012 4:29:58 PM , Rating: 5
There is of course a way to bypass Apples "cutting away of plastic" patent - Make the F'ing SIM card the right size in the first place!


By JediJeb on 3/27/2012 5:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
Standards agencies should have no one company with a majority of votes, actually the companies that would benefit from the standards should all be non voting members and the actual voting members be independent. Once a standard is agreed upon it should be made open and all companies can use that patent to make their devices so everyone can inter-operate as they should.

The SIM design standard should be just like a paper standard. Just as in the US standard paper size is 8.5"x11". What would happen if all of a sudden HP decided it was better to make printers that used 8"x11" paper? Things that are to be used across all platforms such as SIM cards should be considered a non-patentable object and if you design one you must allow your designs (if accepted by a standards institute) to be used by everyone openly.


By Solandri on 3/28/2012 3:07:19 AM , Rating: 5
It's happened before. Microsoft bought enough votes to make Open Office XML (basically the regular Office app formats) an ISO "open" standard, to help it stave off OpenDocument. Many countries were starting to require that all government documents be released in an open format. This threatened Office's dominance because it meant other apps would be able to open and render those documents as well as Office could. So Microsoft just gamed it to make their proprietary format an "open" standard - one so complex, inconsistent, and convoluted that only the MS Office apps could always open them correctly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML#Stand...

Democratic processes fail when the voting constituents allow themselves to be bought. On the one hand, shame on Microsoft and Apple for pulling this sort of stuff. On the other hand, if the voting members don't vote honestly, the all manner of corruption inevitably follows. At moderate levels those doing the bribing are to blame. But at some point you get to a state like corruption in Asia, where you basically have to bribe officials to get any legitimate work done. If you try to work honestly without bribes, you go out of business.


By Omega215D on 3/27/2012 5:39:25 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-Nokia-and-RIM...

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Small-nano-SIM-card...

There was an earlier story on Phonearena about the Apple SIM. There was a chance that Apple would become the standard and they would hold a patent on SIM cards... and well, you know what would happen.

I'd rather Nokia or RIM create the new standard than Apple. Of course there's no real good reason to create a new standard in the first place.


By jnemesh on 3/27/2012 7:31:44 PM , Rating: 4
It's just not a day for you unless you show up trolling with your Apple crap, is it Tony? I have been reading your crap for months...why dont you find another site to troll, NO ONE here appreciates your opinion!


By StriderRyo on 4/1/2012 12:15:40 PM , Rating: 1
That would be a better point if Apple's move wasn't just as bad as any other, the problem is that it boils down bad for all of us as consumers, it's not Apple vs. everyone else, it's all these guys vs us.


By Reclaimer77 on 3/27/2012 8:30:34 PM , Rating: 1
Pretty much lol.

Hey guys, I just patented a new light weight construction process for automobiles. I took a stock Nissan Maxima, but this will work with most auto's, then I removed the doors, the hood, and the trunk and both bumpers!

The result is a lighter and smaller vehicle. I really think this should be the new standard and am seeking patent approval. With any luck I'll be able to force all companies to adopt it. For "free", of course.


RDRAM
By torpor on 3/27/2012 6:25:01 PM , Rating: 4
This "we'll let you have our patented stuff for free if you adopt the standard" bit was tried by Rambus.

Of course, Rambus then pulled the rug out from the industry. I doubt it's been forgotten.

By doing so, Rambus pushed RAM prices up, nuked the Pentium 4, and opened the door for AMD to dominate speed wars for a time.

I doubt the industry is going to be kind to this.




RE: RDRAM
By TakinYourPoints on 3/27/12, Rating: -1
RE: RDRAM
By Reclaimer77 on 3/27/2012 8:58:13 PM , Rating: 1
Learned their lesson? If only. Apple was as greedy then as they are today. Their Firewire license "fees" were outrageous. Extortion. Not to mention that Firewire was simply IEEE1394, an open standard, and Apple had no right to seek fees for an open standard. But since when has that ever stopped them?

What really put the nail in Firewire's coffin was Apple's idiotic decision to use a different connector for Firewire 800 devices, making them incompatible with older devices natively. USB, serial ports, SATA, SCSI etc etc, speed upgrades are transparent to the end user and backwards compatibility isn't an issue. Why Apple thought changing that paradigm was a good idea is beyond me.

Apple lifted the license scheme from Firewire in 1999, but apparently by that point the damage was already done to the format. USB remained "good enough" for the industry at large.


RE: RDRAM
By TakinYourPoints on 3/27/12, Rating: 0
RE: RDRAM
By Reclaimer77 on 3/28/2012 10:32:02 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Why do you bring up FW as an example when they have done the exact opposite strategy for over a decade?


Because it's one that makes them look bad. Duh :)

quote:
A smaller SIM isn't (assuming you meant isn't here) only a benefit to Apple's own mobile devices, which is why they aren't putting a license fee on it. They want it everywhere, meaning it becomes an inevitability in future iPhones which are then smaller and make better use of the internal space.


That's fine. However it seems like Apple's approach is saying that they have a better idea, they want to FORCE standardization of it, then give it away for free.

Also given their current legal war against the tech industry at-large, people are probably understandably suspicious that Apple has such selfless aspirations at heart.

Yeah lets adopt a standard from a company who's most likely to turn around and sue you for your use of it? No thanks.


RE: RDRAM
By TakinYourPoints on 3/29/2012 2:10:44 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Because it's one that makes them look bad. Duh :)


At least you admit you're a silly troll, haha


RE: RDRAM
By TakinYourPoints on 3/29/2012 2:15:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also given their current legal war against the tech industry at-large, people are probably understandably suspicious that Apple has such selfless aspirations at heart.

Yeah lets adopt a standard from a company who's most likely to turn around and sue you for your use of it? No thanks.


Except that numerous software and hardware standards that Apple devised and then released royalty free have been used by other companies for years with no legal repercussions for anyone. Why should anyone be afraid?

Using a royalty free standard that Apple released to the wild is so far away from breaking a patent or not paying a license fee, they are two completely different things. It is bizarre that somebody would draw a line between the two.


RE: RDRAM
By retrospooty on 3/28/2012 8:07:45 AM , Rating: 2
"Learned their lesson? If only. Apple was as greedy then as they are today"

Yes, this is also why Apple is the only major cell phone manufacturer that hasn't caught up with the rest of planet Earth and use micro-usb.


Cue Imperial March
By geddarkstorm on 3/27/2012 3:57:17 PM , Rating: 5
Soon Apple will dissolve the Senate, and the takeover will be complete.




RE: Cue Imperial March
By LordSojar on 3/27/2012 4:16:39 PM , Rating: 5
Execute Order i66.


Here is the best background article I have seen
By Tony Swash on 3/28/2012 5:58:51 AM , Rating: 1
Here is the best background article I have seen on the details of the patent issue itself.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/03/apples-us-paten...




RE: Here is the best background article I have seen
By ritualm on 3/28/2012 4:51:56 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yay, trolling for FOSS (which is so unabashedly pro-Apple) and supporting the fruit company as if Tim Cook's paying you to astroturf these threads.

Enjoy your zombie-flavored Kool-Aid, douche.


By Tony Swash on 3/28/2012 7:24:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh yay, trolling for FOSS (which is so unabashedly pro-Apple) and supporting the fruit company as if Tim Cook's paying you to astroturf these threads.

Enjoy your zombie-flavored Kool-Aid, douche.


Does you head contain an actual thought about the issue under discussion?


By Cheesew1z69 on 3/29/2012 5:49:29 PM , Rating: 2
Except, he is right, you are a Apple troll...plain and simple...


Size matters
By chµck on 3/27/2012 9:08:24 PM , Rating: 2
Proposing newer, smaller sim cards would be a step forward to making phones smaller, which I can support. I just don't want apple to be the one doing this; they aren't competition friendly.
The designs from nokia or rim would also be better, not simply taking what we have now and cosmetically altering it.
apple->minimalistic black rectangles
nokia->41mp cameraphones that compete with DSLRs.




RE: Size matters
By xdrol on 3/28/2012 3:59:51 AM , Rating: 2
FYI, the previous form factor is exactly the same size (or at least height, width is ~1mm bigger..), only it has connectors on the side, not at the bottom.


RE: Size matters
By ritualm on 3/28/2012 7:16:56 PM , Rating: 2
I'd rather the new SIM card not resemble conventional microSD cards. It won't end well usability-wise.


Classy
By Tony Swash on 3/28/2012 5:38:28 PM , Rating: 2
Nokia is threatening the ETSI that it will refuse to license patents it holds that it believes to be essential to Apple's proposal should that design be selected over its own.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/28/2908116/nokia-li...

quote:
In other words, Nokia's saying, "pick our standard or no one gets a nano-SIM."




RE: Classy
By Iaiken on 3/28/2012 8:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
I think a more accurate way to rephrase nokia's message is:

quote:
If Apple cheats to win the contest, we will torpedo thier standard.


What I find amazing is just how willing you are to look right past Apple's massive breach of ethics here. Seriously, get a mind of your own.


RE: Classy
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/29/2012 6:18:03 PM , Rating: 2
He looks past anything and everything they are doing. It's not just this.


You've come a long way baby
By DiscoWade on 3/27/2012 6:28:52 PM , Rating: 2
I remember the first digital phone I had. It was a Motorola and it took a SIM card the size of a credit card. I gave that phone to my mom when I upgraded to the Ericsson T68i, a phone so good that I still use it from time to time (because it is completely unlocked). That was a long time ago, my carrier was BellSouth. I bought my first digital cell phone in the late 90's. How quickly things change.




Nokia Response
By Iaiken on 3/28/2012 4:55:06 PM , Rating: 2
Today Nokia officially declared that if Apple manages to game the system and vote itself IP dictator, Nokia will sue to prove that it is released from it's existing obligations to license it's existing patents under the old terms. This would effectively torpedo Apple's new standard as there are over 50 existing Nokia technology patents that would be relevant to the new standard.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/28/nokia_sim_...




le sigh..
By Richlet on 3/28/2012 1:32:22 PM , Rating: 1
All I can read from the reaction to this article is that only uneducated douchebags purchase apple products.




Pathetic
By Tony Swash on 3/27/12, Rating: -1
RE: Pathetic
By messele on 3/27/2012 4:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
Apple also ruined my computer by removing floppy drives, parallel and serial ports and by shrinking the video port to 20% of it's original size.

The complete bastards!


RE: Pathetic
By xti on 3/27/2012 5:12:35 PM , Rating: 2
you think they ruined your computer...look what they did to DT!!! it's like...i can almost hear the hatred of apple when i read the articles.

I am trying to work on my diet just so I am on the can less and dont have the urge to read this anymore.


RE: Pathetic
By messele on 3/27/2012 6:03:04 PM , Rating: 3
I thoroughly approve of my daily diet of Daily Turd bilge.

Anti-Apple nerd-rage is currently powering the lighting in my entire house and the laptop I type this on. OTT anger is saving the planet!


RE: Pathetic
By JediJeb on 3/27/2012 5:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yes it is sad, I now have all this perfectly good working equipment and no place to plug it into now.


RE: Pathetic
By arnold123 on 3/27/2012 5:25:13 PM , Rating: 2
I ain't complaining coz apple is trying to make something better , but coz they patents such silly things like removing a few cm of plastic or having a sliding action to unlock (or any of their other stupid patents) which are more design and less tech. If any other company does it is considered anti competitive practice but apple gets away with it.


RE: Pathetic
By Tony Swash on 3/27/12, Rating: -1
RE: Pathetic
By Decom on 3/28/2012 10:12:35 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
All SIM characteristics are patented. The alternative version is patented in just the same way by other companies. Apple offered to enter a formal agreement to make any patents it held in relation to the new SIM design available to all royalty free. The bogey man is only scary if you keep your eyes covered.


Tony, your rose tinted glasses in regards to Apple, I believe stop you from objectively looking at an article and weighing in on it in a non biased manner.
The moral backlash against Apple and their business practices is well founded -:

Trying to patent a nano-sim which has been shaved of plastic, and then not charging royalties for said nano-sim is laughable at best.
Trying to twist the other manufacturers arms into getting what they want in a cross licensing deal, effectively forcing them to hand over items royalty free for tech they paid to develop.

Although Apple's design is probably the "Least Controversial" it simply does not meet the ETSI's design parameters, in that is can be inserted into current generation sim slots.Apple's design is reportedly more fragile, damage prone and would also require a slot or drawer for it to work.
This tech is over 2 decades old, why not time to have a complete overhaul, or at least look at some alternative designs.

Apple's power grab - registering subsidiaries in trying to maximise it's voting block and game the system, again morally offensive and questionable at best.
If this is allowed, and hopefully it wont, could lead to a dictatorship in declaring standards across the industry, something that no one wants, especially from a consumer point of view.

How you can look at what's happening in this "Sim Battle" and be ok with Apple's standards and business practices, and them come on singing their praises simply dumbfounds me.
We all get that you love Apple's products,user interfaces and profitability, but defending them in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary that they are against everything that is good for the industry and the consumer is getting a bit long in the tooth.
You are always telling people to go look at the facts and stop yammering from preconceived notions, I suggest you follow your own advice once in a while.


RE: Pathetic
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/28/2012 11:27:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
How you can look at what's happening in this "Sim Battle" and be ok with Apple's standards and business practices, and them come on singing their praises simply dumbfounds me.
It's simple really, look at who you are talking to.


RE: Pathetic
By Tony Swash on 3/28/2012 5:52:21 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Tony, your rose tinted glasses in regards to Apple, I believe stop you from objectively looking at an article and weighing in on it in a non biased manner.
The moral backlash against Apple and their business practices is well founded -:


There is no Apple backlash. Apple is wildly popular, its products sell like hotcakes and Apple recently got the top slot as the most respected brand in the 2012 Harris Poll.

http://hereisthecity.com/2012/02/14/google-slips-i...

The 'backlash' is only amongst a tiny group of embittered techies whose opinions have almost no consequence. In order to understand how the real world works one needs a sense of perspective and one's own position in it.

quote:
We all get that you love Apple's products,user interfaces and profitability, but defending them in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary that they are against everything that is good for the industry and the consumer is getting a bit long in the tooth.

That must be why all the European carriers are backing Apple's proposal. Nobody here remotely cares one way or another about SIM card standards. The only real thing about the SIM standard anybody should really care about is that there is one. What people are all excited about is that there is another arena of battle between Apple and it's competitors which offers another opportunity to cheer anybody who is doing anything as long as it's against Apple.


RE: Pathetic
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/29/2012 5:46:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
whose opinions have almost no consequence
Just as much as your does...


RE: Pathetic
By TakinYourPoints on 3/28/2012 1:48:24 AM , Rating: 2
DT, where rhetoric, opinion, and bias get the circlejerk while historical fact gets downvoted.


RE: Pathetic
By bug77 on 3/27/2012 5:10:43 PM , Rating: 2
The facts? That article doesn't even mention Apple's attempt to buy its votes. Did you mean the facts that suit you instead?

And writing "Apple's design is in many ways the least controversial" in all caps, big, bold and italic font is supposed to mean what? Was one of the requirements for the new SIM to not be controversial?


RE: Pathetic
By Mong00se on 3/27/2012 6:21:24 PM , Rating: 2
Dido, you beat me to it. Lets not forget Apple is trying to bypass a democratic process by forcing the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law. All of these phone makers are supposed to get a FAIR say, Apple is trying to have more than their fair say so they can have their way.


RE: Pathetic
By Mong00se on 3/27/2012 6:29:10 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I should add my opposition is based more on their methods than the accaual SIM. If their solution really was the best available, and the ETSI really was looking out for the consumer/marketplace, wouldn't they win regardless?


RE: Pathetic
By Tony Swash on 3/27/2012 7:06:34 PM , Rating: 2
This an outrage - it's almost as bad as

MyiPadGetsAsWarmToTheTouchAsAndroidTabeltsGate.


RE: Pathetic
By Iaiken on 3/27/2012 7:10:16 PM , Rating: 2
Think Different: It's not whether you win or lose, cheat to win.


RE: Pathetic
By sprockkets on 3/27/2012 7:40:42 PM , Rating: 1
You are right. Why don't you then stop wasting your time reading this site and trolling for -1 ratings and read the verge 100%?

Or better yet, go to apple insider where 99% of posters will agree with you?


RE: Pathetic
By retrospooty on 3/28/2012 8:10:53 AM , Rating: 1
" What a bunch of hysterical ninnies and what a silly sensational article. Are you all so afraid of Apple? Pathetic."

People have had it with Apple's shenanigans. That's all. Honestly, I am tired of reading about their latest crapfest. Just make products and STFU.


RE: Pathetic
By ritualm on 3/28/2012 5:20:43 PM , Rating: 1
Bill Gates said it best:
"I can buy 1% of you. I can buy 100% of you. Or I can go into this business myself and bury you."

If you aren't scared, try going back to the 1920s, with Henry Ford's infamous "you can have any color you want... as long as it's black."


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki