rob v, sorry but i believe smart phones are a wave of the future. Phones that are capable of running advanced applications will be in the hands of millions in just a few short years. Whether these phones connect to a 3G network or a 802.11 network I don't care.
I think smart phones will include both 802.11 and some form of 3G - CDMA2000 or WCDMA. Or all three.
Again, these phones will be fast and advanced. They will eventually start to eat into lower end laptop sales and the process will begin.
If you look at the 3G licensee around the world, you will find that Vodafone, Telefonica, Hutchinson, and NTT Docomo are going to have coverage that covers most of the world. If/when these operators start running into financial trouble I will start paying attention. Check out the amount of debt that these companies that have been able to raise over the last 24 months. I dont think you will find a problem with capital scarcity.
check out Korea. This is probably the most advanced country in terms of broadband and wireless. This country is at the forefront of technology. A higher % of Koreans have DSL than Americans. Over 3.5 million Koreans are getting wireless data at 60-80k per second. With-in 5 months, Koreans will be getting 600k per second on a wireless phone. These are real roll-outs across the entire country. Not NTT's joke they call 3G that only works in 3 cities and and doesn't even fully cover each of those 3 cities.
If we are going to see WLAN over take 3G, then Korea is the place we'd be seeing it happen.
I agree that these companies are going to have to prove that 3G can raise ARPU....but I believe that the capital will be available to build the network which at least provides them an opportunity to do so.
i disagree. Sprint and Verizon will be launching CDMA 1x networks very shortly. These networks have a peak rate of 144k per second. Real world speeds will be 60 to 80k per second. Even if consumers reject data services from these carriers, 1x offers a 1.6 to 1.8 increase in voice efficiency. That alone, almost justifies the cost of upgrading to 1x.
BTW I've read rumors that telecom operators are planning massive deployments of WLANs in 2002; the factors cited include ease of use, existing applications and services, low capital outlays and a proven revenue model - the parobolic growth in the WECA membership list seems to confirm the commercial interest by gear suppliers and operators
hmm...rob, lets think about this. Why would a telecom operator, that lost billions from the bubble burst, waste billions on building a WLAN network when very few people have devices that support WLAN? What people forget is that at the end of a WLAN connection is a connection to the internet and that costs money. A telecom company isn't going to offer WLAN services for free for everyone. If they plan on that, please correct me.
You can correct me if i'm wrong, but Starbucks isn't going to offer WLAN services for free. It'll cost like 20 bucks a month. Plus, i was told WLAN isn't very secure. They'll need to fix this before we rely on WLAN to carry wireless data and voice. |
