After the article about Flarion's sales efforts in Europe, I posted a request on the Gilder thread that he address the Flarion threat to CDMA. His response, which robv linked below reads in full as follows.
Gilder weighs in on the Flarion issue:
Flarion is no threat to Qualcomm. It is multitone DSL in the air. So is 802.11A and G, the advanced WIFI variants. It's the same technology that the Bells use over twisted pair wires. It will be worse in the air. If you are starting a new network, it will offer more bandwidth cheaper than CDMA. But it lacks the robust voice capacity and coverage, and it will entail entirely new handset and NIC (network interface card) technology and new basestations. Despite possible advantages for fixed applications, Soma didn't choose OFDM even for portable wireless. Using adapted Qualcomm technology instead, Soma won a deal with NTT to be deployed all over Japan as the advanced portable (not mobile) wireless data solution. Think Drucker's Law. You cannot displace an entrenched technology unless you are tenfold better. Flarion may well not be better at all. Why on earth would anyone use it, except as a way for Europeans to save face at large expense? As Essex's Opera shows, CDMA itself has large upside possibilities for broadband.
--GG
That robv would respond to this with a mere taunt and no substance is predictable. for those with engineering expertise, though, I think Mr. Gilder's opinion provides a helpful starting point for a more detailed examination of this issue on the thread. The layfolk among us therefore encourage you, whatever your view, to express your well-reasoned opinions on the subject. And robv, if you actually can address the specific points made by Mr. Gilder instead of mouthing off like a nursery school playground troublemaker, please contribute. |
