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. |
