re: PLATFORM
<< Regarding "success" or "failure" of 3g - I think many are missing the crucial point. It all depends on your legacy platform and migration path >>
It sure does ...
... and the operative word is PLATFORM ...
... and that is why the technology adoption of cdma2000 outside of the small existing IS-95 community has been so abysmal, and why CDMA after a solid fast start has lost market share to GSM for 2 consecutive years.
I do agree with you that many are indeed missing the point.
At the end of the day, having simply an exceptional air-interface, without the underlying services, and without a focus on network to network and vendor to vendor interoperability, and without uniform implementation of voice and data services, and focus on voice and data roaming, makes cdmaOne/cdma2000 the niche technology it is today and will always continue to be, unfortunately.
Carriers make decisions on PLATFORM ...
... and in a nutshell, the carriers have voted on which is the superior platform.
<< NO BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY! >>
Do you have ANY idea - even the remotest clue - of what you are talking about?
You obviously don't or you wouldn't be making that statement.
Maybe you better examine the GSM/3GSM migration path a LOT more closely, relative to forward and backward compatibility, because what you just stated is absurd, uninformed, and utter nonsense.
... and this gets us right back to services and PLATFORM doesn't it?
<< For existing (IS95) carriers the transition to 1xrtt is a clear cut success no matter how much data services those customers end up using. >>
You will get no argument from me about the advantages of the spectral efficiency of cdma over TDMA based technologies. That is why the decision was made in January 1998 to marry an evolved GSM core network with its then 30+ services, to wideband cdma.
<< Why? Because the 10-15% incremental network cost yields an 80-100 capacity improvement. >>
Would you like to examine that cost just a LITTLE closer?
If so, go here and take a look at SKT's 10-15% incremental network cost (Slide 11):
Message 17299253
<< For the Euro carriers - remember that they've already been hobbled by the financial burden of their spectrum acquisitions (egged on in no small part by vendors' hype of both ease and economics of 3g deployment/transition) there is no risk-free test of 3g >>
The risk free test of "3G" is the modestly priced upgrade to GPRS.
At the end of another day the Europeans AND the Chinese, Japanese, Australians and Koreans (and soon the major Latin American Countries) wind up with something the Americans do not have - big chunks of contiguous spectrum.
Please do not give me that "3G" in contiguous spectrum malarkey.
By 2010, when (not if) mobile wireless data is successful, the PCS's of the world will be sucking wind - and in fact they will have been gobbled up.
The carriers with large spectrum pipes will exist. Others will not.
The Europeans took a page out of our spectrum auction playbook, and when they did so, perhaps they should have examined C Block rather than A&B, but in the end the Vodafones, and Oranges, and TIM's, and Hutchinson's will be fine, after they have gobbled up the less fit, just as the less fit will be gobbled up here now that the spectrum cap has been lifted.
<< Their 2.5G path involving GPRS means sacrificing needed voice capacity for uncertain performance >>
Their 2.5G path allows them complete backward and forward compatibility with their existing network and either EDGE or WCDMA or a combination of both, while instituting the IP backbone and bearer service for IP packet data.
The downside is that until AMR & refined frequency hopping and frequency reuse is available they do risk becoming capacity constrained ... BUTt they have a relatively near term capability to enhance voice capacity of their existing network 100% to 200% ... before they move to wideband cdma.
<< their path beyond 2.5G involves yet more expense, uncertainty,
capacity tradeoffs >>
Their path beyond 2.5G is to WCDMA - all the way to 8 to 10 Mbps with the HSDPA extension on an all IP network ... but unfortunately for those that sing the Qualcomm theme song, they now have the option of an interim "3G" step to EDGE which alternatively triples data rate, or triples data capacity, or a combination of the 2.
<< Hence the tepid demand for additional Nokia-led gooods and services. Success in 3G is who gets there first on the basis of carrier economics that work. And that spells IS95/1xrtt/ 1xev/CDMA2000. >>
Thanks for dropping in.
It is always enjoyable to entertain yet another Qualcomm Moonie in an endless parade of Qualcomm Moonies.
Think long, very long, ... some one of these years those W-CDMA royalties will be gushing in, and perhaps Qualcomm can make some sort of impact on the WCDMA ASIC/DSP market.
It's a good thing, because cdma2000 just isn't selling, ole buddy.
Have a great Nokia Day,
- Eric - |
