I've always wondered what the relative costs were of keeping two models instead of just using a tri-band chip. The tri-band chip would be more expensive per-unit but then that means you have to produce two separate models, complicating inventory management and production.
I figure since both HTC and Nokia are doing the 2+ models they did the calculations for themselves but then again tri-band 3G is a feature, though its hard to make a monetary case for more sales. Interestingly enough there were as many tri-band phones in 2007 (Kaiser/Tilt, K850i) but the trend now seems to be either way (X1a vs X1i, Fuze vs Touch Pro, Euro Nokia vs US Nokia) with a few tri-bands (iPhone 3G, Bold).
Of course then there is the T-Mobile 1700 headache...
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I've always wondered what the relative costs were of keeping two models instead of just using a tri-band chip. The tri-band chip would be more expensive per-unit but then that means you have to produce two separate models, complicating inventory management and production.
I figure since both HTC and Nokia are doing the 2+ models they did the calculations for themselves but then again tri-band 3G is a feature, though its hard to make a monetary case for more sales. Interestingly enough there were as many tri-band phones in 2007 (Kaiser/Tilt, K850i) but the trend now seems to be either way (X1a vs X1i, Fuze vs Touch Pro, Euro Nokia vs US Nokia) with a few tri-bands (iPhone 3G, Bold).
Of course then there is the T-Mobile 1700 headache...