A GPRS handset must use PCCCH/PBCCH in the R 97 standard if presented. Since the networks don't presently have it to present, why was no testing and verification strategy developed? Is Nokia trying to take advantage of the situation in order to get GPRS handsets without the functions out the door in time for Xmas? Or are the operators desperate? Or both?
Why wasn't the testing procedure timely implemented? Did Nokia and others know of the problem, yet decided to go slow on the solution until the last minute, after expectations of GPRS handsets by Xmas had been nicely established?
It seems very odd that the issue was not flagged until May this year, after Nokia's GPRS handsets were already late by many months. There has been too much time that has passed to make the justification and the solution credible. If there has been an honest mistake, then the competency of all involved must be questioned.
It was no doubt a complex problem to resolve which can't be timely done via testing verification procedures while Nokia's and lots of others' chestnuts are in the Yuletime fire.
I love the way 3ggp noses were tweaked by the GSM Terminal Group. The message was clear: Don't pull that crap again!
2) All the working groups in 3GPP should be urged to ensure that similar situations do not occur with 3G. It is not acceptable that major complex features are optional in the network while mandatory in the terminals, unless a test and verification strategy has been developed. In such a situation those features should also be mandatory in the network. Delays of months or years are not acceptable in 3G environment.
Message 16290037
Let us know how things progress. I'm sure some sort of convenient solution will be reached. It may be troublesome later, after the networks implement PBCCH/PCCCH, but, hey, at least no one has to deal with it now, while the reindeer are getting fitted for their harnesses.
No wine before it's time, huh, Illmarinen? |
