About a week ago, I discovered that Nokia had released a "US Version" of
the E90. I called letstalk.com, Nokia's US distributor, and asked them
if the UMTS feature of the new version, its 3G highspeed connection,
operated on a US frequency. The person I spoke to did not know, and so
passed me on to Nokia information. The lady I spoke to there said that
yes indeed, the US version recently released did UMTS on the 1900 MHz
frequency, which is supported by AT&T, my provider.
I ordered the phone. When it arrived I found that the box label, and the
internal information, said it used 2100 MHz. I called Nokia again, and
this time was told that the American version had UMTS on 2100, not 1900,
MHz.
In other words, the American version is precisely as compatible, and as
incompatible, with US providers as the European version. Both are quad
band phones that will do voice and EDGE data connections in either the
US or Europe. Both have a 3G connection that does not work in the US.
It's a very nice phone and I'll probably keep it, but I'm still annoyed
at Nokia.
"David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
news:ddfr-C74D42.22325201112007@news.isp.giganews.com...
> About a week ago, I discovered that Nokia had released a "US Version" of
> the E90. I called letstalk.com, Nokia's US distributor, and asked them
> if the UMTS feature of the new version, its 3G highspeed connection,
> operated on a US frequency. The person I spoke to did not know, and so
> passed me on to Nokia information. The lady I spoke to there said that
> yes indeed, the US version recently released did UMTS on the 1900 MHz
> frequency, which is supported by AT&T, my provider.
>
> I ordered the phone. When it arrived I found that the box label, and the
> internal information, said it used 2100 MHz. I called Nokia again, and
> this time was told that the American version had UMTS on 2100, not 1900,
> MHz.
>
> In other words, the American version is precisely as compatible, and as
> incompatible, with US providers as the European version. Both are quad
> band phones that will do voice and EDGE data connections in either the
> US or Europe. Both have a 3G connection that does not work in the US.
>
> It's a very nice phone and I'll probably keep it, but I'm still annoyed
> at Nokia.
>
> --
Nokia USA states E90 supporting HSPA at 2100 MHz. Shouldn't you be
disappointed at letstalk (for the incorrect info, perhaps otherwise Nokia). http://www.nokiausa.com/A4409183
In article <1193986693.304496@xnews001>, "Anonymous" <anonymous@no.net>
wrote:
> "David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
> news:ddfr-C74D42.22325201112007@news.isp.giganews.com...
> > About a week ago, I discovered that Nokia had released a "US Version" of
> > the E90. I called letstalk.com, Nokia's US distributor, and asked them
> > if the UMTS feature of the new version, its 3G highspeed connection,
> > operated on a US frequency. The person I spoke to did not know, and so
> > passed me on to Nokia information. The lady I spoke to there said that
> > yes indeed, the US version recently released did UMTS on the 1900 MHz
> > frequency, which is supported by AT&T, my provider.
> >
> > I ordered the phone. When it arrived I found that the box label, and the
> > internal information, said it used 2100 MHz. I called Nokia again, and
> > this time was told that the American version had UMTS on 2100, not 1900,
> > MHz.
> >
> > In other words, the American version is precisely as compatible, and as
> > incompatible, with US providers as the European version. Both are quad
> > band phones that will do voice and EDGE data connections in either the
> > US or Europe. Both have a 3G connection that does not work in the US.
> >
> > It's a very nice phone and I'll probably keep it, but I'm still annoyed
> > at Nokia.
> >
> > --
> Nokia USA states E90 supporting HSPA at 2100 MHz. Shouldn't you be
> disappointed at letstalk (for the incorrect info, perhaps otherwise Nokia).
Nokia, not letstalk.
When I called letstalk last Saturday, the person I spoke to didn't know
if the "US Version" used a US UMTS frequency, and so connected me with
Nokia information. The person at Nokia was the one who explicitly said
that the new version supported a 3G connection at 1900 instead of 2100.
I mentioned that the web site still showed it as 2100, and she said they
hadn't updated the web site yet.
So I think I'm entitled to be annoyed at Nokia--indeed, three times over.
1. For giving me false information.
2. For describing a phone as a "US Version" when the one significant
incompatibility of the previous version had not been changed.
3. For not offering a real US version. How hard can it be for them to
change from 2100 to 1900?
So far the only explanation I have come up with, other than
incompetence, is that they are negotiating with several US carriers, and
since different carriers use different UMTS systems they can't decide
which to build in until they have a carrier. But that means that they
are getting US customers to buy a non-US version labelled "US Version,"
and those customers will then discover a month or two later that the
real US version has just come out.
On Nov 2, 10:32 am, David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com>
wrote:
> About a week ago, I discovered that Nokia had released a "US Version" of
> the E90. I called letstalk.com, Nokia's US distributor, and asked them
> if the UMTS feature of the new version, its 3G highspeed connection,
> operated on a US frequency. The person I spoke to did not know, and so
> passed me on to Nokia information. The lady I spoke to there said that
> yes indeed, the US version recently released did UMTS on the 1900 MHz
> frequency, which is supported by AT&T, my provider.
>
> I ordered the phone. When it arrived I found that the box label, and the
> internal information, said it used 2100 MHz. I called Nokia again, and
> this time was told that the American version had UMTS on 2100, not 1900,
> MHz.
>
> In other words, the American version is precisely as compatible, and as
> incompatible, with US providers as the European version. Both are quad
> band phones that will do voice and EDGE data connections in either the
> US or Europe. Both have a 3G connection that does not work in the US.
>
> It's a very nice phone and I'll probably keep it, but I'm still annoyed
> at Nokia.
>
> --
> http://www.daviddfriedman.com/http:/....blogspot.com/
> Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
> Published by Baen, in bookstores now
David Friedman wrote:
> In article <1193986693.304496@xnews001>, "Anonymous" <anonymous@no.net>
> wrote:
>
>> "David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
>> news:ddfr-C74D42.22325201112007@news.isp.giganews.com...
>>> About a week ago, I discovered that Nokia had released a "US Version" of
>>> the E90. I called letstalk.com, Nokia's US distributor, and asked them
>>> if the UMTS feature of the new version, its 3G highspeed connection,
>>> operated on a US frequency. The person I spoke to did not know, and so
>>> passed me on to Nokia information. The lady I spoke to there said that
>>> yes indeed, the US version recently released did UMTS on the 1900 MHz
>>> frequency, which is supported by AT&T, my provider.
>>>
>>> I ordered the phone. When it arrived I found that the box label, and the
>>> internal information, said it used 2100 MHz. I called Nokia again, and
>>> this time was told that the American version had UMTS on 2100, not 1900,
>>> MHz.
>>>
>>> In other words, the American version is precisely as compatible, and as
>>> incompatible, with US providers as the European version. Both are quad
>>> band phones that will do voice and EDGE data connections in either the
>>> US or Europe. Both have a 3G connection that does not work in the US.
>>>
>>> It's a very nice phone and I'll probably keep it, but I'm still annoyed
>>> at Nokia.
>>>
>>> --
>> Nokia USA states E90 supporting HSPA at 2100 MHz. Shouldn't you be
>> disappointed at letstalk (for the incorrect info, perhaps otherwise Nokia).
>
> Nokia, not letstalk.
>
> When I called letstalk last Saturday, the person I spoke to didn't know
> if the "US Version" used a US UMTS frequency, and so connected me with
> Nokia information. The person at Nokia was the one who explicitly said
> that the new version supported a 3G connection at 1900 instead of 2100.
>
> I mentioned that the web site still showed it as 2100, and she said they
> hadn't updated the web site yet.
>
> So I think I'm entitled to be annoyed at Nokia--indeed, three times over.
>
> 1. For giving me false information.
>
> 2. For describing a phone as a "US Version" when the one significant
> incompatibility of the previous version had not been changed.
>
> 3. For not offering a real US version. How hard can it be for them to
> change from 2100 to 1900?
>
> So far the only explanation I have come up with, other than
> incompetence, is that they are negotiating with several US carriers, and
> since different carriers use different UMTS systems they can't decide
> which to build in until they have a carrier. But that means that they
> are getting US customers to buy a non-US version labelled "US Version,"
> and those customers will then discover a month or two later that the
> real US version has just come out.
>
As I understand it, T-Mobile is in the process of deploying 3G at
2100... I cannot cite a source at the moment, but I believe I did read
that.. Anybody?
In article <UPydnUpDkYGGrbbanZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Tony <tony@nospam.net> wrote:
> David Friedman wrote:
> > In article <1193986693.304496@xnews001>, "Anonymous" <anonymous@no.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:ddfr-C74D42.22325201112007@news.isp.giganews.com...
> >>> About a week ago, I discovered that Nokia had released a "US Version" of
> >>> the E90. I called letstalk.com, Nokia's US distributor, and asked them
> >>> if the UMTS feature of the new version, its 3G highspeed connection,
> >>> operated on a US frequency. The person I spoke to did not know, and so
> >>> passed me on to Nokia information. The lady I spoke to there said that
> >>> yes indeed, the US version recently released did UMTS on the 1900 MHz
> >>> frequency, which is supported by AT&T, my provider.
> >>>
> >>> I ordered the phone. When it arrived I found that the box label, and the
> >>> internal information, said it used 2100 MHz. I called Nokia again, and
> >>> this time was told that the American version had UMTS on 2100, not 1900,
> >>> MHz.
> >>>
> >>> In other words, the American version is precisely as compatible, and as
> >>> incompatible, with US providers as the European version. Both are quad
> >>> band phones that will do voice and EDGE data connections in either the
> >>> US or Europe. Both have a 3G connection that does not work in the US.
> >>>
> >>> It's a very nice phone and I'll probably keep it, but I'm still annoyed
> >>> at Nokia.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >> Nokia USA states E90 supporting HSPA at 2100 MHz. Shouldn't you be
> >> disappointed at letstalk (for the incorrect info, perhaps otherwise Nokia).
> >
> > Nokia, not letstalk.
> >
> > When I called letstalk last Saturday, the person I spoke to didn't know
> > if the "US Version" used a US UMTS frequency, and so connected me with
> > Nokia information. The person at Nokia was the one who explicitly said
> > that the new version supported a 3G connection at 1900 instead of 2100.
> >
> > I mentioned that the web site still showed it as 2100, and she said they
> > hadn't updated the web site yet.
> >
> > So I think I'm entitled to be annoyed at Nokia--indeed, three times over.
> >
> > 1. For giving me false information.
> >
> > 2. For describing a phone as a "US Version" when the one significant
> > incompatibility of the previous version had not been changed.
> >
> > 3. For not offering a real US version. How hard can it be for them to
> > change from 2100 to 1900?
> >
> > So far the only explanation I have come up with, other than
> > incompetence, is that they are negotiating with several US carriers, and
> > since different carriers use different UMTS systems they can't decide
> > which to build in until they have a carrier. But that means that they
> > are getting US customers to buy a non-US version labelled "US Version,"
> > and those customers will then discover a month or two later that the
> > real US version has just come out.
> >
>
>
> As I understand it, T-Mobile is in the process of deploying 3G at
> 2100... I cannot cite a source at the moment, but I believe I did read
> that.. Anybody?
My understanding is that they are using 2100 in one direction and
something else (1700?) in the other.
I'm about to send the phone back to Letstalk, which appears willing to
take it back. The problem with 3G is only part of the reason.
One of the things I use a smartphone with a wide screen for is reading
books--both reading other people's books and reading my manuscripts
while making notes on them for future revision. Quickword on the E90
takes up to ten minutes to load a book sized MSWord file. Furthermore,
it can only have one file loaded at a time. That makes it essentially
worthless for my purposes.
The Notes application is a little better, since it opens text files
fast. But it scrolls very slowly and has no "go to page" or equivalent,
so again not much use for my purposes.
And, although the hardware is in some ways very attractive, the software
felt generally clunky. From time to time it would freeze up--either that
or the interface was sufficiently unintuitive so that I couldn't figure
out what I was supposed to do next to get some response.
If, in a few months, Nokia announces a US adoption and a real US
version, I may rethink my decision--at least to the point of finding out
whether the software has improved significantly in the meanwhile.
I recently discussed my conclusions on the E90 at somewhat greater
length on my blog.
>
>
> As I understand it, T-Mobile is in the process of deploying 3G at
> 2100... I cannot cite a source at the moment, but I believe I did read
> that.. Anybody?
>
Likely 2100/1700, which would still be different from the European one.
The Nokia E90 "US Version" isnt. 
Linear Mode
