Here is a phrase, semi-fixed. Now lets take the early announcement from Lucent, 3Com and Nokia. They are going to use the 80 MHz unlicensed 2.4GHz band and create wireless LAN's that will be in dense area's, such as airports and the such. I found the mentioning of roads and railways a bit farfetched and probably the embellishment of the writer, but the fact is the fuel of communications is not voice but data. Now we have Sprint's ION strategy being defined by their acquisitions of the MMDS licenses at 2.5 GHz with 200 MHz of B/W and now clearly spelling out the strategy for it; Sectorizing the freq. The suggestion of 8-9 sites may work for area's with hilly terrain, but in flatlands like Houston, they are going to have to do a differing deployment either with taller towers or further sectorizing the spectrum. It would not be that complicated to make a multi-funcitonal handset. One that places voice calls on Sprint PCS and the other doing high bandwidth applications via MMDS. What the heck you got dual mode phones that transmit and rec 900 MHz cellular and 1.9 GHz PCS. It's not a big leap for a 1.9 GHz PCS to function as a transmitter/rec for 2.5 GHz MMDS in the same handset or device. Now that we have come full circle, where is QCOM's strategy in the hot talked about MMDS and LMDS bands? With the movement to open standards, I'm afraid it looks that they are on the outside looking in.
It's all a step to MCIWorlcom, Sprint and AT&T from approaching the FCC to further cellularizing MMDS. Who sit's on the advisory board to the FCC governors? Want to take a guess who those folks are and which companies they represent? There is nothing technically from making it a full blown mobile system. There is a regulatory barrier however, at least presently. The sugestion that mobility is limited to <2 GHz is wrong.
So does this semi-fixed approach present a threat to the global franchise of cellular/PCS/PCN? The threat to that franchise is it bandwidth and the demands that Moore's Law represents and pervasive within the computing culture. I've believed for sometime that we are in a doubling for the need for speed. Since 14.4, we have 28.8 then 56 Kbps.
Now you are hearing figures of 128, 144, 384 768, etc., with 3G pegging it at 2 Mbps. BTW that 2 Mbps is in a "fixed" application for the time being and probably has to with the complexity of handing off that wide a signal from cell to cell, and 384Kbps is touted in mobile, ie driving down the highway. So fixed isn't an appropriate term when you use it with wireless, it is more semi-fixed or semi-mobile depending on the speed and the application of the system.
Now does this represent a threat to your stock holdings. That I can't answer. I will say that technology is moving rapidly and the pursuit of satisfying consumer demand is very strong. Those that sit on there hands will lose and those that are aggressively exploiting the other realms of communications will succeed. My opinion...... |
