The ‘open’ embedded SIM (eSIM) technology brought forward by Deutsche Telekom, nuSIM, has been chosen by Qualcomm for use in the 9205 LTE modem, one popular in Cat-NB, Cat-M, and 2G IoT applications. Huawei has also followed suit, using nuSIM in its Hi2115 Cat-NB SoC, and demonstrating the connection in a Quectel BC95-G module.
This is a big development in the world of IoT-focused eSIM, as the vendors try to reduce hardware costs to facilitate wider adoption. It is also surprising that Qualcomm hasn’t chosen something from up its own sleeve, but with Huawei on board too, it seems that nuSIM is well on the way to becoming the standard choice.
nuSIM was unveiled in the run up to MWC. Back in February, we covered the launch, where the signed-up supporters included Altair, Commsolid (Goodix), HiSilicon (Huawei), Nordic Semiconductor, Qualcomm, Samsung, and Siemens, for chipsets. For the modules (which incorporate other silicon components on top of the chipsets), the launch partners were Quectel, Sierra Wireless, Telit, and u-blox, as well as Nordic.
For the digital security aspect, Giesecke+Devrient (G+D) is the sole provider. Gemalto and Idemia were noticeably absent from that list, but since the launch, Gemalto has signed up – providing two choices for the security services. Other new additions include Fibocom, Gosuncn, MeiG, Neoway, and SIMcom. Deutsche Telekom says it has 16 design wins to date.
“The industrial sector is undergoing a digital transformation and we are collaborating with many industrial IoT companies today. We are proud to have been working with Deutsche Telekom and its nuSIM technology from day one of its conception,” said Dino Flore, vice president of technology, Qualcomm Europe. “It will allow IoT device manufacturers to offer ‘out-of-the-box’ cellular connectivity for the end user. It’s this kind of innovation that will enable the creation of a new generation of IoT devices.”
Qualcomm went to the effort of issuing a press release for its adoption, saying that it expects the 9205 modem to be used most in tracking and utility metering applications. It adds that since the launch of nuSIM, the collective supporters have been working on the shared specification ‘to create an open and fully interoperable ecosystem from concept stage through to implementation.’
Now, nuSIM isn’t entirely altruistic. The members hope that it becomes a de facto standard in this sector, something that other companies have to cave to, due to its dominance. Of course, we are far from reaching that moment yet, but while the other SIM and service providers might kick up a fuss, nuSIM does seem to have enough support at the hardware level.
The enthusiasm of the chipset and module makers is to be expected. They have suffered from slow adoption due to the relatively high prices of their LTE-based IoT offerings, and removing the physical SIM from the devices should enable simpler circuitry designs and form factors, ultimately leading to a lower price. However, a glut of old 2G and 3G designs still hampers purchasing decisions, and while operators want to refarm 2G and eventually 3G, the LTE components are still typically more expensive.
So, the hardware types are turning to the rest of the business stack to find compounding advantages to adopting eSIM. As Qualcomm points out, adding the SIM functions to the chipset itself removes ‘related logistics, stock keeping, and feeding efforts,’ – all of which are costs that the MNO has to burden, and which could be turned into savings that can be passed onto its customers.
There are others in the chain that would benefit from design simplicity. The MVNOs, the PaaS providers, and even systems integrators, could all have their workloads significantly reduced using eSIM – as you can switch carriers and push updates without having to swap out the SIM card. In order for the IoT to properly scale, the cost and complexity of onboarding a device has to be reduced, and in the cellular and L-LPWAN world, eSIM is a necessary step.
However, as we’ve touched on recently, the cost of the LPWAN hardware itself is negligible compared to the cost of the connectivity services charged by the MNOs. Given the transatlantic gulf between AT&T and DT’s offerings, direct comparisons seemed a bit redundant to make.
In terms of the smallest tiers, AT&T costs $14 a year for 6 MB of data, while DT’s pricing works out to €8 a year for the 6 MB – but of course, in DT’s world, you would have depleted the five-year allowance in one year, and replenishing the 6 MB the next year would cost you €8 again.
On that basis, it is easier to think of DT’s option as costing €8 per year, and in the current exchange rates, that works out to $8.86. However, if you follow DT’s line of thinking, that the 6MB is plenty for five years, then buying the equivalent package from AT&T is going to cost $70, compared to the $44.30 – or around 1.58x as expensive.
However, the more direct comparison is the L tariff from DT, with its €12 five-year price and 30 MB bucket, which lines up nicely with five years of AT&T’s 6 MB package. On that basis, the two services have massive variations in pricing – with DT costing $13.30 and AT&T costing $70, or rather, the same data bundle in the USA costing 5.2x as much as it would in Europe.
In closing, it’s worth revisiting our initial sentiments when nuSIM was launched. nuSIM is a good thing if it reduces the cost of a given device – it just seems to be being positioned strangely, given that the current largest concern for a developer opting for a licensed cellular connection is the fact that the network costs can easily dwarf the total cost of the hardware involved in the device, over the desired life of the product in the field. And that’s only for a small part of the total cost of ownership …