“A week after it announced that it had chosen the final standard for the new 4FF nano-SIM standard, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) has finally updated the documentation on its website, confirming Apple’s nano-SIM proposal has not been altered in any way,” Matt Brian reports for TNW.
“When the original specification was announced, the dimensions of the new SIM exactly mirrored Apple’s design. However, Motorola and RIM submitted an amended variant of the 4FF standard, which borrowed heavily from Apple’s original submission and used the same form factor, bar a small notch in the side used for locking it in place,” Brian reports.
Brian reports, “However, in the 181 page report published today, ETSI sets out the specification in its entirety — and it’s Apple’s design that won out.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: What Apple wants, Apple gets. To the victor belong the spoils.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Dan K.” for the heads up.]
Related articles:
Nokia says nano-SIM winner is technically inferior, will still license essential patents – June 1, 2012
ETSI approves Apple’s new ‘nano SIM’ card format for slimmer, smaller phones – June 1, 2012
Samsung files formal complaint with ETSI over nano-SIM vote; vote continues anyway – May 23, 2012
RIM, Motorola told Apple they could find a nano-SIM compromise: Here it is – May 18, 2012
Apple modified nano-SIM design to fix concerns, standard to be decided this month – May 9, 2012
ETSI postponed vote on nano-SIM card standard after Apple rivals complain – March 30, 2012
Beleaguered RIM joins Nokia in whining about Apple’s nano-SIM tactics – March 29, 2012
Nokia won’t license ‘essential’ patents if Apple’s nano-SIM standard is selected – March 28, 2012
Apple wins patent relating to Nano SIM and iWallet chip – March 27, 2012
Beleaguered Nokia claims Apple royalty-free nano-SIM promise is hollow – March 26, 2012
Apple offers royalty-free license to nano-SIM patents, a proposed standard backed by most European carriers – March 26, 2012
Apple uses clout in attempt to push smartphones to use ‘nano-SIM’ cards – March 21, 2012
So…the whole thing these other companies were worried about was a small notch on the side that they could optionally be use to lock the SIM in place?!? That seems like a silly thing to care about.
That small locking notch would have put and end to all the misery caused by SIM cards accidentally falling out.
Err …. well it might do if SIM’s did routinely fall out accidentally.
Good. Because the market LEADER should dictate things.
NO.
Like Steve Jobs said- the best ideas should win. If another company had a better idea than apple then it should have won.
The constant danger is the lesser idea wining due to economic interests. phew for once.
Damn straight! How short some people’s memories are (or maybe they weren’t around), only 10 years ago Internet Exploder had 95%+ browser share, Windows had 90%+ market share, and RIM/WinCE/Nokia/Palm ruled the mobile market.
If they’d been allowed to dictate things like they “should” have, we’d be at least 5 years behind in every technology they ruled in.
I agree but I’ve yet to see any clear evidence that Apple’s design isn’t the best. I’ve heard a bunch of pissing a moaning and thats about ti. Seems this problem some had with Apple’s design was a notch to optionally lock the SIM in place.
Ah. You’re right. I totally didn’t think about that. 😛 I stand corrected. Well said, sir.
Yes they does!
Don’t agree with MDN’s take. It implies Apple rode roughshod over the process. I’m sure Apple’s design won because it was the best. Again. 🙂
Precisely.
1. — Don’t know what’s up with MDN apparently suggesting that Apple should set Standards just because it is Apple. I sure don’t believe that, and I doubt many at Apple do.
No, but often enough “Apple’s idea” is a good shorthand for “the best idea”.
Ever heard of the word “Sarcasm”.
If you have been frequenting MDN for any amount of time you would understand the irony and truth in the above quoted word.
Enjoy.
Uh, no. MDN was not being sarcastic. Just wrong.