Travel Technology - International cell phone - $15

I just bought a Motorola C168i at Fry's electronics http://shop1.outpost.com/product/5349878;jsessionid=nPSuX8KOGOrJ8sQgR-3EvQ**.node1?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG and had it unlocked by calling AT&T's International Customer Service at (916)-843-4685, told them I'm going to Europe and need my phone unlocked. (If the first CS agent won't unlock it, call another one.)

Then I switched it to the European frequency pair by pressing | Menu | Settings | Network | Network Setup | Band | 900/1800 MHz | OK

Pop in a SIM from a European carrier, and you're good to go!

This is a dual-band 850/1900MHZ phone. I suspect that Motorola didn't change the firmware to remove the "change networks" options. I seriously doubt it will work on 900/1800MHZ networks.

I just bought a Motorola C168i at Fry's electronics http://shop1.outpost.com/product/5349878;jsessionid=nPSuX8KOGOrJ8sQgR-3EvQ**.node1?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG and had it unlocked by calling AT&T's International Customer Service at (916)-843-4685, told them I'm going to Europe and need my phone unlocked. (If the first CS agent won't unlock it, call another one.)

Then I switched it to the European frequency pair by pressing | Menu | Settings | Network | Network Setup | Band | 900/1800 MHz | OK

Pop in a SIM from a European carrier, and you're good to go!


While I have no doubt that you had the phone unlocked by AT&T Mobility's International Roaming Customer Care Dept. I am not so sure that the phone is going to function on GSM 900MHz/1800Mhz networks as easily.

According to PhoneScoop.com (http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=1257) the phone is a dual band 850MHz/1900MHz handset and does not poses the radio profiles to TX and RX on 900MHz/1800MHz frequencies. While the phone may offer the choice to switch the radio profile to search exclusively for 900MHz/1800MHz frequencies it does not necessarily mean that it can actually due so.

Dan

This is a dual-band 850/1900MHZ phone. I suspect that Motorola didn't change the firmware to remove the "change networks" options. I seriously doubt it will work on 900/1800MHZ networks.

The phone is sold in Europe for local use.
There is provision in the firmware to change bands.
There is no hardware difference between GSM phones, only the frequency that the tuning PLL is run.
In other words, I haven't seen any facts that suggest it won't work - only speculation.
Look at no. 4 on the Motorola spec page: http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=c282e4378b523110VgnVCM10000082 06b00aRCRD&show=productHome

The phone is sold in Europe for local use.
There is provision in the firmware to change bands.
There is no hardware difference between GSM phones, only the frequency that the tuning PLL is run.
In other words, I haven't seen any facts that suggest it won't work - only speculation.
Look at no. 4 on the Motorola spec page: http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=c282e4378b523110VgnVCM10000082 06b00aRCRD&show=productHome


On the same page you linked to:

Networks: GSM 850/1900 MHz

As for the hardware; there is more to it than just a different tuned PLL...

I wouldn't recommend a phone for international travel unless you are 100% sure it will work abroad. Why not report back to use once you've made a trip with it? The last thing you want is someone making a trip and finding out they have a useless cellphone.

At that price I really wouldn't expect a quadband (or even triband) radio. I also can't find any links to a European version for 900/1800, where did you find it for sale in Europe for EU networks?

I found only one reference to this phone having 900/1800 capability, here (http://www.wirefly.com/catalog/gophone/motorola/c168i/). Based on the fact that the linked page says this:Network Compatibility - GSM 900, 1800
Compatible Carrier - AT&T GoPhone and the fact that AT&T supports neither of those frequency bands I suspect this information is incorrect.

I found only one reference to this phone having 900/1800 capability, here (http://www.wirefly.com/catalog/gophone/motorola/c168i/). Based on the fact that the linked page says this: and the fact that AT&T supports neither of those frequency bands I suspect this information is incorrect.

I spoke with a friend of mine who has worked for the Legacy AT&T Wireless and now works for the current incarnation of AT&T Wireless, now AT&T Mobility and he stated that according to the white papers for the phone it only ever supported 850MHz/1900MHz.

Dan

I found only one reference to this phone having 900/1800 capability, here (http://www.wirefly.com/catalog/gophone/motorola/c168i/). Based on the fact that the linked page says this: and the fact that AT&T supports neither of those frequency bands I suspect this information is incorrect.

I'm guessing that the phone is dualband and is made in 2 versions, one for the US on 850/1900 and one for the rest of the world on 900/1800. Like I said earlier; at this price I wouldn't expect anything other than dualband.

I'm guessing that the phone is dualband and is made in 2 versions, one for the US on 850/1900 and one for the rest of the world on 900/1800. Like I said earlier; at this price I wouldn't expect anything other than dualband.
As I said, there's no difference between a US and Europe GSM phone except what bands it's tuned for. This does not require a hardware change. If it did, why would "Band" be selectable on a network setup menu?

By the way - and I know this doesn't prove anything - with 900/1800 selected on the menu, it can't find a network in Arizona.

Here's a page from Motorola India (see Performance Features) http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=a151133929985110VgnVCM10000082 06b00aRCRD&prodGroup=All+Phones&show=fullSpecification

As I said, there's no difference between a US and Europe GSM phone except what bands it's tuned for. This does not require a hardware change. If it did, why would "Band" be selectable on a network setup menu?

By the way - and I know this doesn't prove anything - with 900/1800 selected on the menu, it can't find a network in Arizona.


When will you be in Europe to test it out? I'll be down in the Seattle/Renton area and would love to pick one up if it's 3 or quad band or whatever.

Alas - not until spring (unless a very fortuitous event intervenes).

It looks like this $15 phone is the cellular lottery from eBay.

You can buy an unlocked phone directly from Motorola. http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=738537&highlight=motorola

It looks like this $15 phone is the cellular lottery from eBay.

You can buy an unlocked phone directly from Motorola. http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=738537&highlight=motorola

I have no idea what the eBay remark was about, but the only thing the Motorola store has for under $100 is the V197 for $99.99 - but I do believe $5* for the Fry's deal is less than that.

* $15 - $10 airtime

You can keep posting about "tuning" this $15 phone all you want, but it's not going to work in Europe or anywhere else with GSM900/1800 coverage, period. It's a refurb phone that more than likely had generic Motorola firmware flashed to it. I have an old V400 with a menu item that lets me turn Bluetooth off and on but that doesn't mean it has Bluetooth.

There are vast and varied differences in the radio between GSM850/1900 and GSM900/1800 - primarily in the number of channels, the spacing between channels, and the way data is encoded. A GSM radio that isn't designed for operation on all four bands is not going to magically switch to them just because there's a menu option that says so. I can appreciate that it's fun to engage speculation about what might happen when playing with the menus, but I would really hate to see other FTers go through the hassle of getting this phone and expecting it to work on a trip only to find out it was a waste of time.

If you're interested in GSM radios work, take a look at the actual spec (http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/45056.htm) at the 3GPP.

Or, you could just save yourself some trouble and see what AT'n'T has to say (http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/go-phones/pyg-plans-phones.jsp?WT.svl=calltoaction&_requestid=486811) about the handset.

FYI, dual-band GSM900/1800 handsets can be bought in Europe for around 29€ - the Boulanger near my house has Motorola, Nokia, and Sagem models on sale unlocked for that price.

Well, you may be right, of course - but by googling for a minute, I found the Si4209 transceiver chip, which appears to allow the selection of any of four band pairs by twiddling a couple of bits on the DXCO. All of the tuning components are on the chip. It was designed for dual-band phones, as the data sheet shows - and can be used as the core of a 10-component(!) implementation.

If Moto's intention was to build a phone that would work on a carrier's choice of North American OR European frequencies (but not both), this would be a good way to do it. It's not a quad-band phone, but an either-or dual-band.

Again - if the band weren't switchable, there'd be no reason to menu it. A software switch to turn Bluetooth on and off is different. It has to be there if BT is installed, but if the phone only does one band pair, a user selection is moot.

I have to say the jury is still out on this one.

Again - if the band weren't switchable, there'd be no reason to menu it. A software switch to turn Bluetooth on and off is different. It has to be there if BT is installed, but if the phone only does one band pair, a user selection is moot.The band is switchable on some phones. The c168i, however, was produced and sold as a very inexpensive dual band phone. Motorola probably used standard firmware and didn't remove this functionality.

Regarding the Si4209 chip, the fact that it is available does not mean it is in that phone.

Regarding the Si4209 chip, the fact that it is available does not mean it is in that phone.

I used the Si4209 as an example to show how fabs are in fact making programmable transceivers for entry-level (i.e. 2-band) phones. And there are two versions of the C168i, one for 850/1900, and one for 900/1800, and offering two functionally distinct phones under the same model number would probably create more problems than it solved.

See Performance Features here: 850/1900 (http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=c282e4378b523110VgnVCM10000082 06b00aRCRD&prodGroup=All+Phones&show=fullSpecification) and here: 900/1800 (http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=a151133929985110VgnVCM10000082 06b00aRCRD&prodGroup=All+Phones&show=fullSpecification)

All the links I have found for 900/1800MHZ c168i phones point to web sites that clearly (to me) have inaccurate information. Your links in the prior post did not work so I can't see what you were pointing us to. Don't get me wrong -- if I knew this would work as a 900/1800mhz phone I would have bought at least two. Since I'm fairly convinced it will not, I bought none. Please do let us know how yours works out when you get a chance to try it in 900/1800MHZ land.

You clicked on the 900/1800 link and got "inaccurate (to me) information?"

The links didn't work when you first posted them. I think the 900/1800 link has bogus information. It also claims the phone has an FM radio. I've found other links (posted above) for this as a 900/1800 phone with AT&T. The problem with those is that AT&T doesn't operate on those frequencies.

Look -- enjoy your phone. Let us know how it works. There's no sense in arguing.

Not to be argumentative, just asking a question...

Hypothetically - if you were a manufacturer who wanted to offer a cheap phone to carriers in Europe and the U.S., would you design and build two different phones, or would it be cheaper (for you) to create one phone that could be marketed in either service area by flipping a switch?

With due consideration for the burgeoning costs of R&D, prototyping, programming, manufacturing engineering...the whole nine yards, I think a 5 year-old could make that decision - correctly.

Not to be argumentative, just asking a question...

Hypothetically - if you were a manufacturer who wanted to offer a cheap phone to carriers in Europe and the U.S., would you design and build two different phones, or would it be cheaper (for you) to create one phone that could be marketed in either service area by flipping a switch?

With due consideration for the burgeoning costs of R&D, prototyping, programming, manufacturing engineering...the whole nine yards, I think a 5 year-old could make that decision - correctly.Chips aren't cheap. The chip you quoted above was listed by the manufacturer as being about $2 each in quantity when it was introduced. I see your point, though. In that case I would bet that Motorola would build the phone and stick in the appropriate version of the chip in it for the region the phone was supposed to operate in, leaving the software the same for both phones. That would optimise the costs. They would never they put both chips in and market the phone only as a dual band phone. They make *millions* of these things. Every penny of manufacturing cost per unit is counted.

I have to say the jury is still out on this one.

I think that even the O.J. jury would have called this one by now.

I think that even the O.J. jury would have called this one by now.
^

...Hypothetically - if you were a manufacturer who wanted to offer a cheap phone to carriers in Europe and the U.S., would you design and build two different phones, or would it be cheaper (for you) to create one phone that could be marketed in either service area by flipping a switch?

With due consideration for the burgeoning costs of R&D, prototyping, programming, manufacturing engineering...the whole nine yards, I think a 5 year-old could make that decision - correctly.
With due respect, realistically, wouldn't it be much easier to simply just ask the manufacturer (in your case Motorola), if this particular phone is designed/built the way you think it is? :D:D:p

Just report back to the board with the definite answer, OK? Either the manufacturer confirms it (or deny it) or it works (or not) for you in your trip to Europe next spring. See, isn't that easy? :)

DISCLAIMER #1: I apologize in advance if I have violated FT"s TOS by posting the direct links to the FCC OET test reports, I did not know if this was allowed or not.

I have spoken with my friend again and this time he gave me the FCC ID for the phone in question.

The FCC ID for Motorola C168i is IHDT56HY1 (https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=257787&fcc_id='IHDT56HY1') and the report can be found by searching the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology.

Now, let me explain a little about how these reports work, the FCC tests and notates all frequencies that the phone is capable of RX and TX with regardless if they are used in the USA or not. So, if the phone supported the four GSM bands even if only two were activated on the US version the FCC would still have tested the remaining two bands and posted their results along with the two supported US bands.

In Test Report Number, "20118-1" (https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=775430&native_or_pdf=pdf) page number 7, it clearly shows the two bands or radio profiles that could be tested on this particular handset.

Hope this helps to clear things up,
Dan

Interesting. As is the Motorola India page linked above, and this:

http://www.motorola.com/rtte/PCS/MEdocs/RDoC_C168isec.pdf

Gosh, what to believe - US Government or manufacturer? Maybe the FCC only tests devices as configured for US use?

Maybe the "900/1800" and "FM stereo" were preliminary stats that they didn't follow through with? I don't know.

I'm going to see if I can get my hands on some instruments that will settle the issue once and for all.

I think if you got a show of hands, you'd see that the issue really has been settled once and for all.

You realize that the document you linked to above is for the European/African/Asian version of the handset, right? The one not sold in the US? The one that would, naturally, support GSM900 and GSM1800? Right? I don't understand why you're having such a hard time grasping the concept that they're two different products in different parts of the world, or why you keep posting links to pages that don't prove the point you're trying to make, or why you insist or asserting false information that's only going to confuse and frustrate other FTers who now might mistake it for a quad-band phone.

What has more credibility?

The wireless carrier whose name is stamped on the front of the thing and who had the handset specifically built for them in the US for use on prepaid accounts that don't allow roaming overseas?
The US government, who tested and verified it as being dual-band, especially since a handset operating on 900 or 1800 would not pass certification if it happened as a happy accident?
CNet, who reviewed it (http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-c168i-at-t/4505-6454_7-32624771.html) a few weeks ago and says it's a dual-band?
The actual developer documentation (http://developer.att.com/developer/device_detail.jsp?id=11000150) for the handset, which clearly identifies it as a dual-band 850-1900?
The PhoneScoop (http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=1257)database, which is kind of the definitive resource for handset capability in the US, and also identifies it as a dual-band 850-1900 device?


Or a wishful interpretation of a vague phrase about roaming in "countries" from the promotional literature (n.b., Canada and Mexico are countries)?



Interesting. As is the Motorola India page linked above, and this:

http://www.motorola.com/rtte/PCS/MEdocs/RDoC_C168isec.pdf

Gosh, what to believe - US Government or manufacturer? Maybe the FCC only tests devices as configured for US use?

Maybe the "900/1800" and "FM stereo" were preliminary stats that they didn't follow through with? I don't know.

I'm going to see if I can get my hands on some instruments that will settle the issue once and for all.

You realize that the document you linked to above is for the European/African/Asian version of the handset, right?

Yes...

The one not sold in the US?

Yeah...

The one that would, naturally, support GSM900 and GSM1800?

Sure...

Right?

Check...

I don't understand why you're having such a hard time grasping the concept that they're two different products in different parts of the world, or why you keep posting links to pages that don't prove the point you're trying to make, or why you insist or asserting false information that's only going to confuse and frustrate other FTers who now might mistake it for a quad-band phone.

And I don't understand why you're having such a hard time grasping the concept that Motorola wouldn't waste money engineering two different products for different parts of the world if they could make one design that was switchable (using a 4-band transceiver). The point that I'm trying to prove is that the North America and Europe models are the same phone - and I haven't seen one that proves they're not.

By the way, since you posted phonescoop.com, I'll see you and raise you a several mHz: http://www.phonearena.com/htmls/Motorola-C168-phone-pa_2084.html

By the way, since you posted phonescoop.com, I'll see you and raise you a several mHz: http://www.phonearena.com/htmls/Motorola-C168-phone-pa_2084.html

While I really want to believe you, all that says is there's another frequency variant. It's not necessarily a phone that is tuned for 2 pair of dual band. Of course you can settle the issue by sending the phone to me and I'll test it in Thailand in January. :p

There you go again. The link you posted PROVES (if you choose to believe it) that there are two different versions, not a quad-band one.

Think about this: dual-band chips are cheaper than quad-band chips. @:-)

I'm beginning to think you don't believe this yourself, and you're just trolling to amuse yourself.

While I'm sure we all really appreciate this cheap phone deal I think enough has been said about it. So if you don't mind, I'm going to have the last word in this debate by locking it :)