Maurice, I wasn't letting the slogan think for me, I was using it as a concise description of the situation as I saw it...
As far as the benefits to Ericsson of promoting a "vaporware" wideband system...
Negotiating a better CDMAone license - this would only be true if they actually had a system. If Q is so convinced that it's vaporware (which would seem to be common knowledge in the Q camp), this "benefit" is non-existent and should be laughed at when used as a bargaining chip.
Delaying CDMAone progress - only if the alternative systems are CDMAone derived. From my understanding, WCDMA isn't intended to directly compete with IS-95 CDMAone or GSM, and therefore shouldn't impede their progress... from what Jim has posted, if the Samsung/IDC efforts aren't CDMAone related, then it would only impede the "vaporware" CDMAone 3G systems that QCOM must be involved in.
Talking themselves into doing it - if this is the case, then we're really saying Ericsson management doesn't yet have an implementation plan with regard to wideband systems... which I find hard to believe, given last year's emphasis in their annual report on the future planning they've done.
Keeping others from developing systems - As Jim has pointed out, IDC/Siemens seems to be going full steam ahead. Also remember, Nokia is a full partner in the WCDMA idea, so they must be in cahoots on the "vaporware" nature of the equipment as well. QCOM isn't being deterred from 3G systems by Ericsson's efforts, are they? So how can the threat of a "known" vaporware 3G Ericsson/Nokia system hold back the mighty Q?
By feeling they are doing something - I think Ericsson's management has proven that tilting at windmills isn't high on their priority list, as shown by the continued financial success over the last few years.
If they have no wideband system in place in 5 years, they will have fallen drastically from their position as the world's leader. Current configurations of GSM won't be an option for 3G type applications, as they've already admitted, and that is the rationale for a 3G system in the first place. If we you stated came to pass, I'm guessing they would have fallen a bit too far in their customers eyes for "We're sorry" to work very well ...
As far as proving the systems really exist... I would imagine we'll get a pretty good indication when the hardware starts getting tested by DOCOMO. Everything else before then is guesswork, on both sides of the argument, unless your an Ericsson employee/spy. I have to prove nothing at the moment. Tom made the claim that Ericsson's system is vaporware. Where I come from, the accuser has the burden of proof, not the accused (Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent, the IRS and tax cases notwithstanding). I also find it hard to put much faith in the "guilt by perceived historical similarity" argument which seems to be the prime piece of evidence presented.
At least one advantage of an Ericsson wideband system is that being backward compatible with GSM, it has a larger installed suscriber base. Depending on the outcome of the Vodaphone trials, this might become only a complexity advantage, i.e. not requiring an extra layer of technology to interface to those same GSM systems. As far as a technical advantage, it's impossible to say until all the systems are up and running.
DWB |
