Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Canada The Internet

Telus To Shutter CDMA Service On January 31, 2017 (mobilesyrup.com) 42

An anonymous reader writes: With most Canadian mobile devices on some form of HSPA+ or LTE network, you don't hear mention of CDMA that often anymore. And for good reason; carriers like Telus, which still maintain their CDMA network for legacy customers, plan to mothball the tech over the next few years. We now have a definitive date when Telus customers will no longer be able to use their old CDMA device. Over the weekend, the company sent text messages stating, "CDMA service ends January 31, 2017. Move to our 4G network with great offers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Telus To Shutter CDMA Service On January 31, 2017

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Seriously, get rid of 2G and improve privacy. Without 2G, privacy-invading devices like stingrays won't work any longer. Plus it will free up the bandwidth for more efficient uses.

    • Stingrays can be designed to work on any protocol. They first worked against GSM, which is what everyone in Canada is moving to vice CDMA.
      • I mean, that might be part of the reason... but I believe GSM is the global standard, faster, and more reliable. It sucks that it's been poisoned - what we need are apps for phones that can detect if it's connecting to a stingray, and overload the thing.
        • by RubberDogBone ( 851604 ) on Monday May 30, 2016 @04:38PM (#52212669)

          Most everyone is moving to LTE, not GSM. In any case, you don't hear much about GSM Stingrays because the entire GSM security model was holed YEARS ago so there was far less need to go to extremes to do GSM intercepts. They cheesey GSM encryption method has a variety of weaknesses and anyone inclined to do GSM intercepts can do so quite easily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] The gear needed is basically a laptop and some innocent-looking antennas. It fits in a briefcase.

          Since the iPhone was GSM-only for a long time, I would be shocked if Apple's competitors had not setup GSM intercept stations around the Apple campus and done wholesale capture for perhaps years at a time. Hell it can be done from three blocks away and nobody would even suspect a thing.

          • I thought LTE was basically GSM 2.0 - same ideas, just jacked up (like 802.11B is to 802.11G). I don't really follow that side of things closely, though, so I'm probably way off on my wireless views haha. I appreciate your response to my comment - thanks!
            • by sr180 ( 700526 )

              No, LTE is really a jacked up version of CDMA. Its known as WCDMA with W for Wide Band.

              • by hvdh ( 1447205 )

                Technically, LTE goes a different rout than (W)CDMA.
                (W)CDMA means several transmitters sending on the same frequency at the same time, using different modulation codes. From the sum signal, a receiver can pick out each transmitter's signal by correlating with the transmitter's code.
                On LTE, transmitters never send on the same frequency at the same time. They always use separate frequencies and/or different time slots.

                • by sr180 ( 700526 )

                  And about 2 minutes after I posted this, I realised my error. You're right. UMTS/HSPA is WDCMA.

              • No, LTE is a development from GSM and UMTS. They're all developed by the 3GPP.

                What they're talking about is equipment based on the old CDMAone/CDMA2000 standards (1X, EV-DO, etc.), which were competitors to GSM and UMTS developed by 3GPP2 (which had nothing to do with 3GPP beyond both developing 3G network standards).

                The latter stuff got used a fair bit in Canada due to being better suited to rural environments, as at the time, GSM had that 35km cell limit.

                But now that problem is ancient history and everyt

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Shame on whoever modded the OP to -1. The present generation of stingrays jams 4g and 3g signals, then presents a fake 2g tower. The lack of security in 2g means that phones will connect to the fake tower. Their position can then be triangulated. Furthermore, the lack of security in 2g makes it particularly easy to intercept any communications. While the Hailstorm upgrades may enable location tracking once 2g is gone, it's expensive to upgrade and hopefully will be prohibitive at least in some places. Anyth

        • by Anonymous Coward

          A pity any criminal worth anything will just disable 2G in their phone (or, if they're trying even remotely, use an encrypted VoIP app). Not a law enforcement tool but for surveillance, ofc...

          • by Anonymous Coward

            It won't help with surveillance of criminals. Innocent people who don't take those steps are still vulnerable. And that's the problem; criminals have a number of tools at their disposal that innocent people are unlikely to use. From the standpoint of criminals, why not simply use burner phones anyway, so law enforcement won't know which phones to track?

  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Monday May 30, 2016 @04:39PM (#52212679)
    CDMA won the GSM vs. CDMA war. The HSPA/HSDPA 3G service in most GSM phones uses CDMA or wideband CDMA.

    See, the original GSM spec used TDMA - basically each phone is assigned a timeslice and all phones take turns talking with the tower. This meant that even if the phone didn't have much data to transmit or didn't need to send any data at all, it still used a full timeslice. Couple that with time buffers to account for phones being different distances from the tower, and GSM ends up wasting a lot of bandwidth. CDMA allows all phones to transmit at the same time. The tower tells them apart by assigning an orthogonal code to each phone. Bandwidth scales automatically between phones because each phone sees the other phones' transmissions as noise, thus reducing the signal to noise ratio and reducing bandwidth. If a phone doesn't need data for a few seconds, the noise decreases, the SNR for the other phones increases, and that extra bandwidth is immediately available for all the other phones to use.

    This is why CDMA carriers got 3G about a year before GSM carriers. Their towers could already provide 3G data speeds. GSM had to amend the GSM spec to specify CDMA and wideband CDMA data services, then wait for handset manufacturers and carriers to implement it. This is also why GSM phones could talk and use data at the same time. They had two separate radios - a TDMA radio for voice, a CDMA radio for data. CDMA phones only had a single radio which could be used for voice or data, but not both at the same time.

    Most implementations of LTE use OFDMA. It does the same thing as CDMA, except using orthogonal frequencies instead of orthogonal codes. CDMA served as the proof of concept for widescale simultaneous orthogonal transmissions, so without it LTE probably would not exist or would not be as mature ias it is today. (OFDMA requires more processing power than CDMA, which is why it came later. WiMax used OFDMA, and my Galaxy S phone which used it would die after 3-4 hours on WiMax vs 8-12 hours on 3G CDMA.)

    If the U.S. had followed the rest of the world in adopting GSM and had prohibited CDMA, our mobile data speeds today would probably be around 100-500 kbps. So be glad CDMA won, even if Qualcomm is evil.
    • Except this news isn't about CDMA. It's about CDMA2000, incompatible with both GSM/UMTS/W-CDMA/HSPA.
      Telus will still run its UMTS/HSPA as well as LTE networks. It will shutdown its CDMA2000 service.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      CDMA won the GSM vs. CDMA war.

      Wait what?

      There was no CDMA vs. GSM "war". The actual radio interface is only a small part of the whole technology (e.g. the SIM, the concept of "roaming" was built into the ETSI specs from the very beginning, ETSI was also years ahead with concepts of real time billing and prepaid). Whilst Qualcomm CDMA was ahead at the radio interface for a short period of time, the ITU/ETSI side quickly caught up and passed the tech for Qualcomm "CDMA"

      The real war was between "proprietary" specifications which came out o

  • by ark1 ( 873448 ) on Monday May 30, 2016 @05:11PM (#52212869)
    Stop spending on legacy infrastructure, generate more revenue from clients moving to more expensive plans.
  • Under low usage, CDMA could cover more area than TDMA/GSM. If the usage went to high, the coverage area would automatically shrink. Carriers trying to cover vast areas like Canada and the US choose it so it cut down the number of towers needed to cover an area. The reason Verizon still has the largest coverage in the US. But, it never became a global standard and it is now cheaper to field GSM based systems since the parts are cheaper due to a larger user base. Remember, these are voice standards, not data
    • by quetwo ( 1203948 )

      The other thing to note is that the CDMA providers in the US and Canada were also the incumbents. The reason why they could reach further and and wider was because the had the largest chunk of the good spectrum (sub 1Ghz). Verizon started out with the 800/950 spectrum and Sprint/Nextel had 700Mhz pretty much locked up. AT&T, T-Mobile and others started with 1700/1800/1900/2100 and had to deploy more antennas with more juice to get similar coverage. The cell standard didn't have much to do with this

  • What are the chances that someone who is using legacy technology is also in the group that doesn't/doesn't know how to read texts?

"No matter where you go, there you are..." -- Buckaroo Banzai

Working...