First, I made no mention of beating any drum for QCOM, Mr. Pullin was the one who started the QCOM thread slander routine and the continual attacks to character. MY point was his statement that TDMA was all packets and anyone could use it. what he meant, I seem to find out is that it all has an ATM backhaul which is inherently packet, of which I agree. But there is NO packet mode in TDMA today. PERIOD. If Mr. Pullin wants to respond with real technical information as you have about the WIRELESS links and the actual over the air interface, then I would be happy to consider his technical prowess, but if all he can do is issue sideways attacks about a person and not respond in kind about the technical merit of his posts, then I pitty the AWE investor who takes this thread wiht more than a grain of salt. I think the basis of good scientific debate is as you have done, post real technical information, debate it technically, and leave personal attack out of it. I would apologize for my first remark to Mr Pullin, as I didn;t feel that he would react so strongly to a "what are you smoking" comment. I still ask what relevance the backhaul technology has when you consider the lack of real data in AWE abilities and the losses per quarter of AWE as an operational company. These were my real posts. I am concerned as I too own AWE and how it will respond to the market presented to it in the long term. I happen to know the IS-95 standard and know what it can and cannot do. If AWE chooses that, then great, I will be doubly happy, But if they choose something esle, then I want to see how they make money, how they suceed so that my investment will prosper, just like you.
As for the 4x improvement, Your numbers have been repeatedly disproven, and I believe the professor in question actually gave up teaching at this point. Continue to propagate whatever you wish, but you won't find any scientific evidence of it. You will find propaganda, which eminated from a few people, who have since signed up to the standard. the 10x improvement still stands, as opposed to the 2.7x improvement that TDMA still enjoys to date.
As for the costs, the world HAD to go digital. No choice. TDMA has an even higher capx cost, even more than GSM. CDMA at about 2x capx (now that you want to compare pricing) and a 10x improvement in capacity, seems to me to get better ecomnomics for an analog carrier. give the costs associated with Cost per POP, CDMA is still PROVEN to be the lowest cost solution in the market. This is not to say that TDMA is not a viable air interface, but the economics of it has yet to be proven in a profitable environment.
As for HDR, I left QCOM before they and I got into HDR. I have not studied the standard deep enough nor implemented it enough to comment. Sounds like your studying this alot. Have fun. Suggest you ask Clark or Walt Houston. I will say that the single channel coherence is a big factor in the performance as well as having the power control issue not be a factor since only one subscriber is transmitting at a time. I look forward to posts you may have on the channel performance, but as you say, perhaps this is better done on the QCOM thread.
Now, I call a truce and wait for real info on the profitability of AWE, the ability to do real data over the air, and how they solve getting to 3G systems.
any ideas here? |
