SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Nokia Corp. (NOK)
NOK 6.730+3.6%11:55 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Eric L who wrote (1397)9/30/2001 12:29:04 PM
From: Puck  Read Replies (3) of 9255
 
Didn't Schmidt go on to run Omnipoint? (Are they still independent?) I recall reading an interview of him a while after he left PrimeCo stating in which he discussed his reason for reasons for resigning after PrimeCo chose to use CDMA. I believe he claimed that CDMA technology in real world conditions was only 1 to 1.5 times as efficient as CDMA, which in his mind meant that very marginal spectral efficieny that CDMA might offer wasn't worth the price of deviating from GSM's worldwide economy. I've never quite been able to reconcile his statements with the claims by CDMA supporters that CDMA is three to as much as twenty or more times more efficient than GSM. Slacker has maintained for a long time that Sprint has intrinsic economic advantages because of its choice to use CDMA infrastructure that will allow it to overpower the competition in terms of price. Here in the midwest, I've seen no discernable bias among consumers toward Sprint's services in general over AWE and Cingular and the rest of the competition that would indicate Sprint is gaining any sort of increasing advantage in the subscriber wars.

Questions: In a practice, how efficient is CDMA compared with GSM, in your opinion? And do you think that those wireless carriers who chose to go with CDMA have been noticeably advantaged or disadvantaged in their competitive position by their choice?

Suppose that you were in charge of a new wireless carrier start-up in the U.S. whose plan was to build out a second generation network and then migrate to third generation technology along with the rest of the industry. Presume that financing was no issue. (You had all the cash you needed to fund your operations from the start and then for several years until your business was established and could tap conventional sources of corporate credit.) Which second generation technology and which third generation upgrade path would you choose: GSM/GPRS/WCDMA or CDMA/CDMA2000 or some non-conventional variant?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News