Maurice and Jim,
Let start here! I tried and follow what's been going
on from about msg. 500. I tried forward and then
backwards. Neither seemed to help. Must be
that jet lag.
Jim and Maurice, I'm trying to figure if you guys
are aging hippies or lottery winners. Nice little
war you two had going. I see we still are trying
to determine if CDMA is a viable technology.
Dr. Frezza stated in one of his published articles
best, Wall Streeters are puffing this debate out
of proportion (actually it was one sided, in that he
attack the CDMA crowds without being fair or
subjective in leveling the same attack on theTDMA
crowd). I hate reading some MBA's or
economist diatribes about which standard is
better. Put twenty economist in the same room
and you get twenty different outlooks.
TDMA has been around a longtime and for
most, you have been talking over it in calls
to mom's, dad's, sister's and brother's for
sometime. Now as to this argument about
the time it has taken to deliver in the wireless
environment, the Europeans have been at it
for sometime, like 6-7 years, in rolling out GSM.
CDMA has been around a long time. It became
a viable option with advances in microelectronics.
It goes against the standard, narrow minded thinking
about carrier communications. Its abit revolutionary
and most don't like the leading edge. They like the
conformist approach. Twenty years from now
30 something YO engineers will pooh-pooh the next
wave of advances just as they are today.
Alot of us live through a revolution in the way
we compute. Back in the late sixties it was
mainframes and supercomputers. Then came
the PC's. Look at the next rage that is upon us;
Net boxes. Look at the debates about this
pending upheaval in the way people do things.
The Compaq and Dells are calling it pie in the
sky and not viable; bailing wire and bubble gum
technology.
Funny, but I was up early this morning and
caught the History Channel program about
old Tom Edison, you know the guy who
invented the light bulb. Well he invent the
high resistance DC bulb. He lit up a small
part of New York with DC. It was someone
else who invent AC and sold the rights to
Westinghouse. What struck me about that
was Edison rejecting AC over DC. He was
rather biligerent.
The parallel is the same with the CDMA vs
TDMA. Jim you keep the pressure with
the negative about CDMA, although you
tout IDC and B-CDMA. TDMA is DC and
CDMA is AC. TDMA is the old conformist
method, CDMA is the more flexible and
efficent method. Both have some hurdles
to overcome in the mobile environ. Unfortunate
I had to scamper back to U.S., but I did notice
the chap with the GSM phone turn it off on the
Motor way. I over heard him talking to his
office once we arrived that he was on the
motor way. I found that strange and it
means to me that what I've suspected for
sometime, digital has a problem at speed.
The everchanging E/B and C/N that rapid
transit has on the bit stream.
The Europeans aren't talking about that issue
in their lamblast on CDMA. Jim you are also
confusing cellular and PCS when you were
talking about towers. Don't confuse the two.
PCS will have their own towers, just as the A
and B operators of cellular have their own towers.
Well enough for now. I've got a few other
thought about the free phones to pass
on. That's later. |
