Jack:
...in wondering about VOFDM, should have been who do you think will succeed in making it easier for me to access my Schwab account while i'm walking in manhattan, if not clarity or wi-lan.
From everything I've read, Cisco's proposed implementation of VOFDM is a fixed, i.e., stationary, wireless technology. My readings of Wi-LAN's product literature and corporate communications leads me to believe that they have also, heretofore, only targeted the fixed market.
Based upon the criteria you stipulated, access to your Scwab account while walking in Manhatten, I guess the answer to your question is neither - at this moment in time (based upon what they've told us about their current state of development).
Continuing on, there is probably no worse environment in the world for street level reception of mobile satellite service than Manhatten - so I think we can eliminate the birds.
Unless someone comes out with a really inspired innovation (and there is a lot of people thinking real hard about this), you can expect the traditional cellular and PCS companies will be the dominant providers of this service. Their RF platforms will largely be determined by choices made long ago: Bell Atlantic and Sprint will use the 2.5 and 3G variants of CDMA; ATT & Cellular One (if memory serves) will go with the enhanced versions of TDMA; Omnipoint will go with EDGE and W-CDMA. The investment in the installed plant is just to great to rip it out lock, stock and barrel. Even IF one could cost justify a complete swap out of any of these networks, the killer issue is the handset. No carrier can afford to replace all the handsets of their customer base.
Of course, the issue for the established cellular and PCS carriers, an issue which has been generically discussed here in the past, is do they really have sufficient spectrum to offer high speed data service and if they do, how will they charge for it. That's a whole 'nother' kettle of fish.
ww
p.s. My "late to the party comment" was primarily motivated by the fact that Cisco's competitors had been pouring money into the millimeter wave / wireless broadband access hole for going on 5 years (TI=>Bosch=>Motorola; HP => Lucent; Ericsson ; ? (the name escapes me now) => Nortel; Stanford Telecom => Newbridge; PCOM; others. Even if Cisco has built a better mousetrap, they have a lot of handshaking and 'show me' demonstrations before they can overcome the considerable headstart of their equally well-funded, and more credible - in wireless matters - competitors.
p.p.s do you think csco can afford to ignore wi-lan? I think Cisco can afford a lot <g>. Seriously, I personally am not sufficiently aware of the technical underpinnings of Wi-lan's patent claims and hence cannot offer any informed opinion on the breadth - or lack thereof - of their intellectual property. I think common sense would suggest that if Cisco thinks Wi-Lan's IPR weak they'll ignore it; and if they think it strong, they'll quickly cut a deal. |
