Thanks for correcting me with respect to DoCoMo and 3G - I knew better but had misplaced my head. I guess I could have at least hedged and said - in the 3G-like world. But this question of what constitutes 3G is highly relevant. Thread discussers seem to want to emphasize the technology side of this question. However, what really makes the difference is (1) what the user perceives as the benefits of 3G; and (2) what the operators perceive as the benefits of 3G. With regard to the users, DoCoMo's service has some similarities - it's packet-based; users get access to ~1000 new data services; users pay pennies for data messages; users receive info on their cell phones using simplified display software, compact HTML. The only thing missing seems to be broadband speed, yet DoCoMo appears to be tremendously successful, at least in the rarified Japanese environment.
From the operators standpoint, the benefits are really new sources of revenue. What DoCoMo has shown the potential 3G operators is that they can get a lot of money from (1) charging for individual data messages; and (2) getting a cut from the hits on various web sites they provide convenient cell phone access to. As you mention, operators also increase their voice capacity, but I don't have a handle on what the costs and benefits of that might be. And, based on lots of discussions, Qcom advocates feel this is very significant. |
