Originally Posted by
typical
Simply put, either you quote frequencies as uplink/downlink, or you pick semi-representative "names" for each set of frequencies.
Numbers are probably easier to deal with than acronyms/initialisms, so you generally see "2100", "1900" and "1700" rather than "IMT", "PCS" or "AWS" (although of the three, that is the one I've seen most).
So glad that you understood what I was saying. I agree that either one could use uplink band, the downlink band or some other characteristic to name different bands. All I am saying is the criterion should be consistent and it's not.
For example look at some of the popular UMTS bands
Band--------Uplink--------Downlink
2100> 1920 - 1980> 2110 - 2170> Named after the downlink frequencies
1900 > 1850 - 1910 > 1930 - 1990> Named after the downlink frequencies.
1700 > 1710 - 1755 > 2110 - 2155> Named after the uplink frequencies.
850 > 824-849> 869-894 > ------ both uplink and downlink are around 850 MHz.
It's easier if one criterion is used for naming the bands. My brother thought he would need a dual band phone for an operator with services in the first (2100) band.