--Mike
<< my point is valid in context of the number of GPRS subscribers you mentioned ... Though adoption of GPRS might be prevalent some day, I don't think it has crossed the chasm. >>
As it relates to the subscriber metric, I have to agree.
Likewise with 1xRTT.
Taking your approach and using your metric of choice, and following your logic, not only have they not crossed the chasm, but neither are fully commercialized, even though they are in commercial use and have attracted subscribers, and they will not be fully commercialized in this calendar year.
Subscriber counts as a consequence are minimal for both of these technologies that add "always on" packet-switched data capabilities to circuit-switched voice in a second generation environment.
You and I however are looking at different metrics and applying the TALC differently.
When looking at the evolution (or revolution) of technology I look at technology adoption and the TALC as characterized in both "Crossing the Chasm" and "Inside the Tornado".
In this instance we are talking about 2.5G - which is simply 2G on Steroids.
In simple terms we are talking about the extension of technology and the addition of features within existing technology that consumers are already demanding. features that the lack of has recently caused a dramatic slowing of growth in handset sales. Without new features why should you are I - maybe scratch the you <g>- buy a new mobile phone.
Were not talking about chasm crossings here, we're talking about Main Street.
In the case of GPRS we are dealing with the natural evolution of second generation technology that has already crossed the chasm.
[We can save debates about whether 1xRTT is 2,5G or 3G for another time, but Hambrecht put 1xRTT into the 2.5G category like most analysts do, and for purposes of technology adoption or technology pervasiveness the same comments I make about GPRS - or Christensen made - can be applied to 1xRTT, and Hambrecht did that].
In the case of GPRS we are NOT looking at 3G multimedia technology we are looking at second generation voice and data, and consequently there is no chasm to cross.
The GSM voice chasm was crossed long ago, and the period of hypergrowth was long.
The rampant GSM data tornado commenced 18 months ago in GSMland with point to point messaging.
The CDMA camp has picked up on the existence of the point to point messaging wireless data tornado and major carriers are scrambling to implement 2-way SMS, and IM because they missed the early revenue producing opportunities it affords, and they are attempting to shoehorn EMS (a standardized version championed by Ericsson of Nokia's 'Smart Messaging') into the current cdma2000 standards so it can be uniformly implemented across carriers, which was (and is) the key to the success of messaging in GSM.
While not yet across the chasm "crummy" (crappy) WAP enabled internet access (common to both CDMA & GSM) is starting to gain some measure of meaningful acceptance and, following the example of "i-mode", there is good reason to believe that "always on", with enhanced WAP (cHTML & xHTML), and useable content will lift wireless web access out of the chasm reasonably quickly, even before 3G multimedia data with its uncertain business case is widely deployed.
Bottom line is that 2.5G adds new capabilities that enhance existing ones.
<< I believe it's premature to make any assumptions about it enjoying the incremental, sustained adoption Christensen asserts in defense of his statement that GPRS will have a longer life than manufacturers of competing products would have us believe. >>
I believe it is NOT premature to begin to make assumptions about GPRS (or 1xRTT) enjoying incremental, sustained adoption, and eventually prolonged life, and in fact I started doing that 9 months ago.
All you have to do for starters is look at this Qualcomm slide and ask yourself what technology the other 1.25 Billion mobile wireless users will be using at the end of 2005:
qualcomm.com
You can then ask yourself how quickly those users will migrate to 3GSM or cdma2000, both of which will provide revenue for Qualcomm. The answer to this of course, holds real significance for those of us that hold Qualcomm.
Dr. Jacobs has already made it a point to inform us that WCDMA will not be commercially viable till 2004 or 2005. He is correct, but this is not just a matter of a carriers choice of air-interface technology. There currently are all to few Early Adopters or Visionaries (like DoCoMo, SKT, Sprint, Or BT) out there to drive 3G, and outvote the Pragmatists, and there are some technology hurdles to overcome.
Relative to the technology adoption life cycle it is important to realize that both GPRS & 1xRTT are a technology push and not a consumer pull, and that just happens to be a most important consideration.
In the case of both GPRS & 1xRTT, while the consumer (subscriber) has not yet voted, or even been franchised, the carriers have voted. They have adopted technology, plunked down hard cash, and are now rapidly upgrading their networks, and the services that support them.
We subscribers may never get to vote. The Pragmatists have made decisions for us, and two years from now you'll be hard pressed to find a mobile phone that is NOT 1xRTT or GPRS enabled.
The Pragmatists - the Early Majority Carriers - the "people [that] make the bulk of all technology infrastructure purchases" - the people that are "in charge of the company's [carriers] mission-critical systems" - the people that believe in evolution, not revolution, have made decisions for us [Geoffrey Moore from "Inside the Tornado" page 16 in his introduction to the TALC].
Technology adoption has occurred, and the Conservatives - the Late Majority - will soon follow the Pragmatists. GSM is relatively ubiquitous today, and GSM with GPRS is likely to be relatively ubiquitous tomorrow. GSM subscribers will be pushed. Their overwhelming acceptance of wireless data in the form of messaging as a supplemental method of communicating by voice on the same appliance, allows them to be pushed further. Their subscriber numbers will grow, rapidly. The research institutions that specialize in wireless can now make reasonably informed assumptions in the form of forecasts of subscriber growth By technology) and subscriber appliance sales.
<< Similarly, because it hasn't crossed the chasm, I also don't put any stock in the manufacturers' assessment. >>
I happened to choose a manufacturer for the assessment I offered for three reasons. The first because it was handy. The second because it paralleled the Hambrecht supplemental comments to Christnsen's presentations in that it somewhat agnosticlly included 1xRTT & GPRS 2.5G packet-switched data combined. The third because that particular manufacturer has an enviable track record of forecasting market demand.
This is the way that particular manufacturer looks at the market (for 1xRTT & GPRS packet-switched data enabled combined), from the perspective of handset shipments for the near term.
* 2001 - 5% of unit volume
* 2002 - 29% of unit volume
* 2003 - 41% of unit volume
Feel free to choose your own source for forecasting the wireless data tornado, but you probably won't find all that much variance from the above, and if this forecast is in any way accurate, the wireless data tornado (not the wireless multimedia data tornado), is at hand.
For all these reasons, I believe it is NOT premature to begin to make assumptions about GPRS (or 1xRTT) enjoying incremental, sustained adoption, and eventually prolonged life. The significance of this for the majority of thread participants that hold Qualcomm is that in the case of GPRS, its "adequacy" is a barrier to the timely adoption of any flavor of CDMA. Conversely, to the degree that it is inadequate, CDMA growth (most likely WCDMA growth) will accelerate.
I'd like to add one important comment about the all important subscriber metric, that I have given a lot of thought to (without reaching useable conclusions).
While it will always be an important metric in wireless, I do not believe that it is useable by itself, to track the growth of wireless data, or wireless multimedia data. I'll leave it at that for the moment as this post is already too long, but this needs to be discussed.
I would also like to add that on this thread, we tend to primarily look now at Qualcomm when examining the forthcoming wireless data tornado or tornados - that wireless internet nexus Cha2 refers to. My interest in keeping a vigilant eye peeled for these pending tornados goes beyond Qualcomm. I firmly believe and hope that the tornados will spawn other Gorilla and King candidates for consideration and discussion.
Respectfully,
- Eric - |
