Benefits of W-CDMA rather than cdma2000.
Higher chip rate [but now reduced to so close to cdma2000 that it makes no difference - not that it ever did]. So that's no benefit.
Synchronisation a bit different, meaning it isn't done the same way, but maybe it is now. No benefit to subscribers or service providers.
Coding is to be turbo in both now, since W-CDMA dropped the concatenated, convoluted Reed Solomon old-fashioned method. So that's the same.
More paws will be on the IPR in W-CDMA meaning higher royalties on W-CDMA meaning a higher price to subscribers. I don't understand how this helps anyone who can wear the label 'customer'.
Dual-mode ASICs will be bigger and less efficient, but not by much according to Irwin Jacobs and the cost should not be too high. The dual mode advantage is nil unless W-CDMA comes up with some subscriber or service provider advantage.
W-CDMA will be later to come into use [at high data rates - or low data rates for that matter] so that doesn't seem a good point.
W-CDMA will have backward compatibility problems with cdmaOne which means it won't be suitable for cdmaOne service providers to adopt.
The ability of the W-CDMA backers to come up with operating equipment seems questionable at best and dreamlandish. Nokia has barely come up with cdmaOne handsets which work. Did you see the item about a bunch of failed handsets? Message 13401610 Why back something which seem unlikely to work?
Both cdma2000 and W-CDMA are backward compatible with GSM switches and stuff. The idea that W-CDMA is for GSM and cdma2000 is not, is fake.
Tero, maybe I seem stupid, but please list for me the benefits of W-CDMA over cdma2000. Make it real simple for me. I bet I'm not the only bemused observer. Save me from losing or loosing my money by backing the wrong chip rate and cdma2000.
Maurice
PS: Jim [Lurgio], I was acknowledging Tero as being about the first I saw who described why QUALCOMM would not succeed in CDMA handsets. The luck part was not to reduce the compliment, but to recognize that there is always a good luck component in the muddied waters of The New Paradigm [or even the old paradigm]. I also claim some kudos for pointing out that QUALCOMM should ditch the handset division if they could not account for royalties by internal transfers AND still have good profits. Gregg Powers and others disagreed. I'm glad Irwin and co agreed with Tero and me. By the way, it's happy wedding anniversary time for Gregg. Happy 1 year of marriage Gregg, wherever you are...[note to self - don't forget own wedding anniversary...]
Also, W Molloy wasn't 'admitting' something, he was claiming credit for also seeing the need to ditch handsets.
"Success has many fathers and failure is an orphan". |
