Transatlantic Tech War: A Myth Exposed
gsmworld.com
By Terry Phillips
A Brazilian news agency recently reported that a technology war is raging between Europe and America. Oh really' I hadn't noticed.
As a former war correspondent for CBS News (covering conflicts in Afghanistan, Bosnia and the Caucasus, to name but a few), I am very familiar with the signs of combat. However, I have seen no proof of such a conflict pitting the United States against the European Union.
In fact, the only serious wireless struggle going on these days is within the borders of North America. The clash is among the purveyors of the major mobile telephone standards - with no end in sight. But it is hardly a transatlantic fight. Authorship of that patently false story belongs to advocates of only one U.S.-based firm, promoting its own proprietary system in an effort to exclude competition.
That company's greed is so great and its influence so powerful that it apparently persuaded an American cabinet secretary to travel to South America promoting the product.
To the credit of Brazilian independence, this attempt at Yankee big-foot diplomacy has backfired. It now seems likely that Latin America's largest nation will choose a PCS system compatible with the rest of the world, rather than be hobbled by the prior mistakes of U.S. policy.
Here is some background. In North America, the alphabet soup of competing technologies - GSM, TDMA, CDMA and AMPS - leaves most consumers confused.
GSM (Global System for Mobile) communications technology is used by more than one-quarter billion people in 142 countries around the planet. It is the least expensive, most advanced and most popular wireless standard in the world.
TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) is a close cousin of GSM and has more than 45 million subscribers in the world. Unfortunately, roaming is not easy, handsets are more expensive and there are fewer features.
CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) is the creation of a California company called Qualcomm, the noisiest challenger to GSM. Unlike the widely available global technology, this Johnny-come-lately version requires payment to Qualcomm from anyone wishing to use its product. Their closed architecture leads to even higher consumer prices and fewer consumer choices. It is the same shortsighted approach that doomed the original Betamax video recorders and Apple computers.
Now Qualcomm wants to export that nonsense to Latin America. We say, 'Forget about it!' Here's why.
Brazil needs a national Personal Communications Services (PCS) system. ANATEL is preparing to choose which band of frequencies to license for PCS. If it selects 1.9 GHz, there will undoubtedly be more than one technology deployed. And since they are not compatible with each other, Brazilians won't be able to roam domestically with a single PCS mobile handset.
On the other hand, if ANATEL picks 1.8 GHz, there will be a national network using the only PCS technology available to operate in that band ? GSM. What's even better, Brazilians will be able to take their mobile service (including the same phone number and same advanced features) with them if they travel abroad. GSM is the only technology to offer that advantage.
Since GSM is also the fastest and least expensive technology to deploy, more Brazilians will benefit from this new service. It will bring in more investments and more jobs. And it will leave the door open for so-called third generation technology, with multi-media, full-motion video, mobile Internet access and other future services.
Many people are asking another key question: which choice provides the most competition in Brazil's free market' Again, the only sensible answer is 1.8 GHz. There is already TDMA and CDMA digital cellular service available in Brazil. Giving new PCS frequencies to the incumbent operators who use those technologies won't provide anything new. Choosing 1.8 GHz (and therefore, GSM) introduces real competition into the marketplace.
Look again at the benefits of choosing 1.8 GHz for PCS in Brazil.
It creates a national PCS network using a single technology, enabling Brazilians to roam domestically and internationally - including their most popular destinations (Miami and New York) - with GSM.
It brings real competition to the wireless services and equipment markets. This also increases the benefit to prospective operators whose investment would generate a faster return by building the least expensive, most advanced and most quickly deployable PCS service.
It secures a speedy transition to higher voice quality and higher speeds of data transmission, preserving 1.9 GHz for third-generation licenses, as accepted by most other nations.
Brazil should not repeat the mistakes of North America that led to the current state of regulatory chaos there. Instead, Brazil should choose what is best for Brazil. Clearly, that choice is GSM. |
