[syb0rg]

BGR Breaks It Down: Why a BlackBerry’s 3G bands are no longer relevant � Boy Genius Report

It seems that every BlackBerry-lover on the Internets is making a big deal over this AWS spectrum-equipped BlackBerry 9100, and while it�s great to have confirmation that the unit is hitting T-Mobile (and maybe even visiting our Canadian friends at WIND, too), all in all, it doesn�t really mean much. Here�s why:
Enter the BlackBerry 9700. RIM has done something incredibly smart. They�ve been using identical hardware for every single BlackBerry 9700, regardless of the carrier it is intended for. Let�s revisit that� RIM has used the same exact hardware for AT&T, T-Mobile, Vodafone, WIND, Rogers, TIM � whatever. How could this be, you�re asking? The chip RIM uses in these units supports practically every 3G band out there, and so do the antennas. What controls the hardware is the vendor/branding of the device. This enables RIM to produce one set of hardware, and brilliantly change the software to enable the 3G bands they desire. This keeps manufacturing costs lower as they only have to manufacture one single piece of the puzzle as opposed to two completely different ones, and this also will apply in theory to 3G devices going forward.
That means that BlackBerry 9100 you see with AWS bands will be able to be flashed with AT&T branding (by RIM, not by you), thus enabling 850/1900/2100MHz 3G bands without any effort. While this won�t necessarily speed up the release of these new smartphones on every carrier (they still have exclusivity agreements), you can at least rest assured that any model 3G BlackBerry from now on, will in theory support your local 3G bands, even if it doesn�t support your local 3G bands.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[trees247]

I was bout to post this too, how true is this? I dont thank its true someone would have did this already right?

[syb0rg]

I was bout to post this too, how true is this? I dont thank its true someone would have did this already right?

I think it going to take someone to break down the UTMS files and find what activates what frequency. I don't see someone doing it over night... but if a PS3 can be hacked i'm sure this can be to.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[cenloe]

I recommend reading the comments on any blog posted. One in particular on the BGR link you posted states this;

"This article is mistaken and misunderstands the technicalities of a cell phone.
The thing RIM is changing is the amplifier and the duplexer. The duplexer allows the phone to transmit and receive at the same time, and the power amp amplifies the signal. Both of these utilize tuned resonant circuits, and can basically handle one band only. They are the most expensive parts of the radio.

As an example, RIM uses Anadigics for the UMTS PA. If each phone could support all the bands, they would have to install 4 power amplifiers and 5 duplexers, 2 of would be wasted, and would add about $20-30 in useless parts to each phone. They would also have 1 FCC ID for the 9700.

RIM uses the same software and tells the phone what front end hardware it has. If you want to see how complicated the front end of a multiband cell phone is, pull up a Qualcomm datasheet, say the MSM7600. I guarantee that if somebody at BGR were to actually dismantle a phone, they would see that the part numbers differ."

While I don't have the technical knowledge and haven't done the research to know if this is true or not, I think it's likely that it is correct.

Another commenter writes this;

"Had a discussion about this topic awhile back. Some of us were wondering if it indeed IS the same hardware (9700) for all carriers despite the different AWS bands and this confirms it. However, the knowledge to unlock said device using just the carrier ID (ex.TMO–100, AT&T–102 and RIM–1) has been discussed and is interesting and probably illegal."

It is indeed an interesting article, isnt it?

[JRSCCivic98]

Wait a minute... I told everyone on the forums months ago that the 9500 and 9530 were IDENTICAL in hardware (and controlled by low level software in terms of what model they were), yet no one believed me. I guess it must be true now that BGR posted it. lol

[Denise in Los Angeles]

Ditto. I was telling some people that the AT&T and T-Mobile 9700 were the same exact phone with different programming, and was told that I was wrong. I think it was in the forum about the upcoming 16 new models of Blackberrys coming up for 2010.

[bluz]

RIM is going in the right direction.

[breakmedown]

I could definantely see how if RIM (and any other cell phone manufacturer) could pull this off, that they would. Obviously the threat of hacking would be a much larger risk with a device like this, I think the pros of doing it like this would much outweigh that specific con.

And on the comment about the guy with the amplifiers and duplexes and whatever, first of all, I'm guessing that whoever initially wrote the article is fairly well informed and wouldn't have written said article with a bit knowledge in the first place (which may or may not be the truth, but BGR is fairly reliable as far as I've ever known). Either way, I would not, in the slightest, be surprised if RIM would be willing to waste "about $20-30 in useless parts to each phone" because the cost saved by only having to manufacture one of each phone would be so much higher that that would be a negligible cost.

[SLVR6]

The only problem with the BGR theory is that there are different model #'s and FCC filings for the 2 versions of the phone (I posted that on BGR also). Manufacturing wise if the difference is just in the radio it would not save them much for production since it is likely robot built.