SIM vs. USIM speed on 3G

[Yasmin]

Hi,

I would be interested in knowing whether the customer experience is EXACTLY the same for a Vodafone customer using a 2G GSM SIM compared to one that uses a 3G USIM? What differences, if any, are there? In fact, if I can get a generic answer on this, that would do too. I'm only asking about Vodafone as I've heard other operators only provide access to their 3G network if and only if you purchase a USIM.

[Ben]

Hi Yasmin,

Welcome to Talk3G!

As far as I understand it (and I'm sure the others will correct me if I'm wrong) the SIM is only used to authenticate onto the network. Therefore, if the SIM is capable of authenticating the customer onto the 3G network then the SIM will have no other bearing on the experience at all.

[Yasmin]

Hi Ben,

Thanks for your reply! So, if my Network Operator allows 2G authentication for their 3G network, there shouldn't be any issues and the experience would be the same? i.e., teleconferencing, data downloads etc. would be just as fast as that on a USIM?

A related question, I was reading about ITM-2000. Are 2G SIMs compliant to this standard? I hear it is only for 3G

[Yasmin]

In addition, I would also like to know how mobile operators control whether or not the GSM 2G SIM is allowed to have access to 3G services. Can anyone help me here?

[DBMandrake]

All the networks except Orange have only sold/provided 3G USIM's for at least the last 2-3 years, probably longer. A 3G USIM is fully backward compatible with a networks 2G coverage and all but *VERY* old 2G handsets. The only exception is that Orange (as recently as a year ago) were still selling 2G GSM SIM's over the counter when purchasing a Pay&Go SIM. Why they do this I do not know, this happened to me when I was buying a Pay&Go SIM from each of the networks a couple of years ago for signal testing. The symptom of this is a 3G phone will only get a 2G signal with such a SIM. They may or may not be still doing this.

I'm not really sure what it is you're trying to find out about the difference between 2G and 3G SIM's. The short answer is that a 3G SIM has extra authentication "services" in it which are able to authenticate on a 3G network, which a 2G only SIM does not. This is because 3G/UMTS uses a different authentication mechanism and crypto algorithm than 2G GSM. a 3G USIM contains backward compatible "services" for authenticating on a 2G network as well.

The only issue is that some very old 2G only handsets (think around 2000 and earlier) did not support the USIM spec properly thus could not use such a SIM, but all phones sold for at least 7-8 years now support it. Even my 2002 era Nokia 6100 2G only phone supported USIM's, so its a non-issue today unless you have a real dinosaur :)

[Ben]

Indeed, we have a Nokia 8210 (2000-2001?) at the office that still gets used for testing with modern SIM cards and that's fine - but then Nokia always were good with that sort of thing. If only everyone implemented SMS as they did!

Providing the SIM is capable, I assume mobile networks can still provision access to the 2G and 3G networks independently if they wish...

[mikebaywok]

Thanks for the info guys. It is really interesting to see what will be the next thing in SIMs. There was a rumour that iPhone 5 would have the SIM embedded.
Lets see what will follow in the future in this crazy industry!:)online poker machines (http://pokiesmachines.net/online-poker-machines)

[htcaddict]

Thanks for the info guys. It is really interesting to see what will be the next thing in SIMs. There was a rumour that iPhone 5 would have the SIM embedded.
Lets see what will follow in the future in this crazy industry!:)online poker machines (http://pokiesmachines.net/online-poker-machines)

WHAT? embedded SIM? Apple, why are you trying so hard to make us hate you?

[Ben]

WHAT? embedded SIM? Apple, why are you trying so hard to make us hate you?
It's not necessarily a bad thing. I could mean that you pick your network from within the software on the phone itself, rather than having to swap out physical SIMs :)

[Hands0n]

Precisely. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that a mobile network operator needs to have branded SIMs of their own. Before SIM each handset was registered to networks very simply, and could be moved from one to the other. All that is needed is for the operator to register the SIM's own unique details, match the mobile number to that and job done! Removable SIMs are an anachronism.

[Wilt]

Seems like a good idea on the surface, but looking a little deeper - at the moment, if you buy an unlocked handset you are at liberty to insert whatever sim card you please into the handset and it will work.

However, with an embedded SIM Apple gets control over what networks can be selected. Small MVNO who doesn't want to/can't pay Apple the admin fees to have their information added to the software? No dice.

I would feel uncomfortable with any manufacturer having that much control over my device - and I suspect the MNOs would too.

[DBMandrake]

Seems like a good idea on the surface, but looking a little deeper - at the moment, if you buy an unlocked handset you are at liberty to insert whatever sim card you please into the handset and it will work.

However, with an embedded SIM Apple gets control over what networks can be selected. Small MVNO who doesn't want to/can't pay Apple the admin fees to have their information added to the software? No dice.

I would feel uncomfortable with any manufacturer having that much control over my device - and I suspect the MNOs would too.
I have the same concerns about an embedded SIM. I for one would be really unhappy if Apple go the route of an embedded SIM that relies on co-operation between Apple and the networks to make it possible to use a given network.

Even if all the networks you might choose are "available" to select, there is nothing to say that you would be able to "switch" virtual SIM's at any time of your choosing like you can now with a physical SIM, nor that it won't be exploited by networks to force you onto expensive "iPhone specific" plans.

With a physical SIM there is some degree of separation between the account/plan and the phone - which gives us an expectation of being able to put a SIM only plan SIM into any phone that we like any time we like without discrimination. Without a physical SIM this is no longer possible, the network has control over whether you can use a given mobile account on an iPhone, and they know for certain that you have an iPhone in doing so, so can discriminate on pricing in any way they like.

Want to buy a non-contract SIM with a SIM only package from a local network operator to put into your "unlocked" iPhone while you're overseas ? Forget it. Chances are they won't have an agreement with Apple to utilize the embedded SIM, or if they do they probably won't offer a SIM only plan to a foreigner, or only at ridiculous prices.

iPhone broken and you need to quickly transfer your SIM to spare non-iPhone device until you get it replaced ? Too bad, you don't have a physical SIM so you can't do it.

Very very bad idea in my opinion. Even if it had a SIM slot in addition to the embedded SIM, (with the SIM slot taking priority when a SIM is inserted) although that solves many of my concerns it still doesn't address the issue of how you would transfer your mobile number to a spare phone at a moments notice in the event of a broken phone, since you don't have a physical SIM card if you're relying on the embedded SIM with your default network provider.

Please Apple, don't do it. Removing the SIM slot on the iPhone would be going a step too far in "controlling" the user experience.

[Hands0n]

One has to wonder who is driving this though. This certainly has a feeling to it that the mobile operators have a hand in the thinking. They'd love grabbing an even bigger slice of the control as to what you are allowed to do with your handset! I'm not convinced that this will go global.

[DBMandrake]

A slight change of heart there Hands0n ? ;)

An interesting technological idea, but one that I think would ultimately lead to less flexibility and freedom for end users and easy abuse by greedy networks. No thanks.

[Ben]

I think we're headed SIMless, and I'm not sure I have any reservations about it at the moment. Inserting a physical artefact into a mobile device in order to use signal that's floating around in the air seems a bit archaic to me.

[DBMandrake]

CDMA networks (for example Verizon and Sprint in the US) have always been "SIM-less", and I've always felt one of the strengths of GSM over CDMA was the whole concept of an interchangeable identity SIM, from this perspective it seems a backward step.

Networks like Verizon which don't use SIM's rule what phones you can and can't use on their network with an iron fist. If you want to buy a phone on the open market and put it on their network and they don't want you to, tough luck. Without their co-operation to register the unique device identifier of the phone on their network, there is no way to get it working.

A compromise perhaps would be to have both a nominally empty SIM slot and an embedded "SIM" giving the best of both worlds, however the cynic in me worries that acceptance of such a feature is the slippery slope towards losing the SIM slot entirely in models one to two years later...