Puck,
<< This open mobile architecture initiative appears to be a way for the GSM community to leverage its hegemony within the wireless world. >>
It is exactly that. It builds on several other initiatives that have formed this year - each with the objective of promoting interoperability of 2.5G/3G GSM networks without having a single player control the open architecture, something that Microsoft and Qualcomm would certainly like to do, to a much greater degree than they have.
<< Notice who's names are missing from the press release: Lucent, Nortel, Sprint, and Verizon >>
Yes, but neither Lucent or Nortel manufacture handsets or other terminals and although network components are involved this is about terminal and device interoperability first and foremost. Regardless they may join.
Note that Samsung is included, and I suspect that LG may join.
No surprise that Sprint is not represented, but one could say that Verizon is represented by way of Vodafone.
I am candidly surprised that TIM and FT/Orange are not charter members, and one would think that CMHK would want to join although they are less of a global player (yet).
Another notable player not present is Openwave, and the chipmakers (TI & IBM) not yet in.
Interesting also that Sony Ericsson, not Sony and Ericsson, are members (back to the terminal manufacturer thing), but I wouldn't read anything to devious into that.
<< Because this initiative only supports the GSM/GPRS/WCDMA upgrade path, do you think that it will become very damaging to CDMA2000 carriers, such as Sprint, which appear to risk marginalization because they won't be able to participate in and benefit from this newly hatched global wireless community, >>
Not so sure it is damaging. Sprint, KDDI, SKT, KTF, LG, Unicom, Telstra, Verizon et al, have chosen their initial migration path for sound reasons, and are trying to globalize it to the best of their ability by creating a "CDMA belt" that competes with the larger global initiative, and are borrowing some techniques (roaming initiative, subscription portability, etc.) from the GSM world.
Clearly however the battle lines are drawn between 3GSM & UMTS and cdma2000, and between open standards and proprietary open standards.
The great strength of GSM and the reason it has been so successful is a disciplined approach to setting standards with a focus on network to network interoperability and cross border roaming.
The mobile open architecture initiative is a refocus on what has made GSM successful in the first place. Any fragmentation at this juncture that impedes interoperability as a result of key players trying to implement proprietary basic architecture as opposed to proprietary features or middleware could and probably would impede the overall adoption and implementation of third generation services, impact upon economies of scale, and the 2.5G transition services they build on.
- Eric - |
