SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Clarksterh who wrote (40431)9/11/1999 2:30:00 AM
From: Ruffian  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
Good Article On GSM>

From the September 13, 1999, issue of Wireless Week

Nagging Question Remains For GSM Carriers

By Monica Alleven

Even after the June merger announcement between VoiceStream Wireless Corp. and Omnipoint Communications, one question
persistently plagues the domestic global system for mobile communications community: When will all the regional GSM players
become one?

The question has been slung at GSM carriers for years, twisting around their necks like a phone cord ready to choke off their very
existence until they retort, "Don't you know? We've got a national network already!" However, industry insiders joke that GSM
carriers, considered collectively, can boast great coverage--just don't try to use your GSM phone in Dallas or Chicago, where no
GSM network exists. There, you'll have to pick up one of those old wired models.

The technology simply has no single prominent carrier to represent it--thus the perception persists that GSM is comprised of a
crazy-quilt patchwork of regional carriers. Despite attempts at alliances and related public relations work, this digital technology is
still struggling to achieve brand identity like that enjoyed in the United States by the other major cellular technologies, time division
multiple access and code division multiple access. Thus speculation continues over how GSM carriers will evolve to thrive in a
national market led by giant brands such as AT&T Wireless Services Inc. and Sprint PCS.

Past attempts to brand
Why such continued interest in GSM's nationwide status, and is that question even fair?

GSM proponents point out that no carrier has a truly nationwide service; TDMA carrier AT&T Wireless relies on roaming
partners, as does CDMA carrier Sprint PCS. Even Nextel Communications Inc. could use more spectrum and better coverage.
Plus, VoiceStream Wireless expects to introduce Chicago and Dallas service next year, plugging two prominent holes in GSM
coverage.

Yet the call for a more cohesive strategy remains, and a seemingly botched nationwide marketing attempt on the part of some
GSM carriers a couple years ago hasn't helped shape perceptions in their favor.

Remember August 1997, when then-North American GSM Alliance Chairman Don Warkentin and other GSM proponents
boarded a yacht in New York to unveil a bold new plan that would make GSM the next FTD Florist of wireless, a service as easy
to find as automatic teller machines and readily identifiable to end users? The idea was that GSM Alliance members would bond
over a single branding effort and work to get better volume deals on handsets. It wasn't going to be another Cellular One brand,
mind you, but the image of one powerful, nationwide brand certainly was the focus.

Some said that plan was doomed from the get-go. How in the world would participants get egos from the seven largest North
American GSM operators to agree on a common strategy, much less implement it? Two alliance members--BellSouth Mobility
DCS and Pacific Bell Wireless--already possessed relatively strong brand recognition thanks to their wireline siblings, and they
weren't about to give that up.

Recalibrating goals, retooling perceptions
Today, GSM carriers indeed use common logos to identify their allegiance, but to say the GSM Alliance created an FTD-like
brand awareness would be a bit of a stretch. GSM Alliance Chairman Bob Stapleton, while conceding that the industry perceived
the alliance's efforts as focused on common branding, argues that that never was the goal. Stapleton, the president of
VoiceStream, assumed leadership of the alliance this summer, after Warkentin's two-year stint.

Stapleton now asserts that GSM doesn't really need a national brand. Individual members have forged attractive roaming
agreements among themselves, essentially allowing them to offer national rate plans competitive with AT&T Wireless' Digital One
Rate and a host of other one-rate plans. In their regions, GSM carriers have undertaken exhaustive branding efforts under their
own names, including VoiceStream, with its wildly successful marketing program that features celebrity spokeswoman Jamie Lee
Curtis.

The real goals of the alliance, according to Stapleton, were related to technology and standards.

In technology, GSM carriers made great strides with better quality vocoders, for example, forcing proponents of CDMA to react
with their own product improvements. Another achievement was getting the GSM and TDMA camps to pursue a common
next-generation technology, a historic bonding expected to show results in 2001.

Doing fine, but looking ahead ...
Numbers from the GSM Alliance indicate that, collectively, the carriers are doing just fine. In the second quarter, GSM companies
added 660,000 new customers, more than Sprint PCS, the fastest growing 1900 MHz CDMA carrier. During the first six months
of this year, GSM carriers added customers at a rate of five per minute. In the past year, more than 2 million customers signed up
for GSM service.

Under the pervasive "bigger is better" philosophy raging throughout telecommunications, however, a unified, national footprint
brings more clout, more economies of scale and better brand awareness. Even European carriers such as Vodafone AirTouch plc,
which bought AirTouch primarily for its international properties, recognize the value of creating a nationwide U.S. footprint.

Under the widespread expectation that further consolidation must come, all eyes are on VoiceStream, where management has the
gusto and expertise to get the job done. Upon VoiceStream's announcement that it would buy Omnipoint, speculation mounted
over how, or when, VoiceStream would make additional acquisitions. Before the ink was dry, analysts pegged struggling Aerial
Communications Inc. and fast-growing Powertel Inc. as the next most likely acquisition candidates, although officials at those
companies predictably wouldn't comment.

For his part, Stapleton said his company is not ready to pay the kind of steep prices some GSM companies might garner today.
Ever since the VoiceStream/Omnipoint merger was announced, stock in most GSM carriers went up dramatically. "We're always
looking, but we aren't going to overpay to make any transaction happen," he added.

Some analysts agree that VoiceStream doesn't need to acquire more companies to remain competitive. Once the merger with
Omnipoint is finalized, most likely this winter, VoiceStream will cover 175 million POPs, or about two-thirds of the population. It
essentially will be the fourth-largest carrier nationwide, and roaming agreements will fill in any areas that are lacking.

But if VoiceStream were to pursue more acquisitions, Aerial's patchwork network would fill in some key Midwestern markets and
Powertel's contiguous footprint would fill in the Southeastern states. That would still leave the California market, where
VoiceStream has a license in San Francisco it hasn't yet built out because it already has a roaming deal with SBC
Communications.

Which begs the question, would SBC and VoiceStream join forces? SBC, which owns the California and Nevada GSM markets
via its Pacific Bell Wireless subsidiary, has strong brand awareness in the Golden State, and no one suggests wrestling the
California market from SBC's acquisitive clutches would be easy, or even likely. Yet "you can't have a nationwide footprint
without those (California and Nevada) markets," noted Cindy Motz, analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston in New York.

SBC is still wrapping up its hefty Ameritech acquisition, so its plate, for now, is relatively full. But Stapleton said it's important for
the two companies to keep a good working relationship; VoiceStream, with coverage in many Western states, relies on PacBell
for roaming into California markets, and VoiceStream is PacBell's largest roaming partner.

Some say SBC could simply wait for VoiceStream to do all the hard work, then snatch up the then-consolidated GSM carriers in
one fell swoop. For that matter, MCI WorldCom could take the same tactic toward rolled-up GSM carriers, although Motz and
many other analysts insist the best wireless play for MCI is still Nextel, even though the two broke off talks earlier this year.

Perceptions aside, GSM carriers clearly have their own vision of their future needs. VoiceStream's acquisition of Omnipoint will
create a massive network covering most of the country, establishing it as the nation's fourth-largest carrier. But until GSM carriers
roll themselves into one cohesive unit, speculation about GSM's U.S. consolidation will remain.



To: Clarksterh who wrote (40431)9/11/1999 2:39:00 AM
From: Ruffian  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 152472
 
Nortel & 3G Interview>

From the September 13, 1999, issue of Wireless Week

Assessing The Next Generation At Nortel

Nortel Networks, then Northern Telecom, started the wire-less rush to the Internet a year ago when it acquired Bay Networks.
To find out how that integration has proceeded and how Nortel's Internet protocol vision is developing, Wireless Week Data/IP
Networking Editor Brad Smith interviewed Pascal Debon, president of Mobility for Nortel's Wireless/Carrier Solutions.

Debon, a native of France, moved to Texas in January when he was appointed to his current position after serving as president of
the GSM Solutions sector. In his new job, Debon is charged with developing Nortel's next-generation wireless business as well as
having overall global responsibility for the company's GSM, CDMA and TDMA product business units.

Wireless Week: A lot has changed at Nortel Networks in the past year. Along with the merger with Bay Networks, there has
come a name change, an ad campaign to give the company a higher public profile, several big contracts and a stock split. Plus, you
have been given the new job as head of the Wireless Solutions Mobility business. How is Nortel coping with all this change and
will it continue?

Pascal Debon: I moved from Paris to Dallas in January and have found Dallas to be absolutely fascinating. In Europe, we don't
have the same perception of this new wave of information technology. To summarize, in terms of the business, here the Internet
and all the paradigms of Internet are a reality. In Europe it is not there ... Europe right now is missing something in terms of new
economic opportunities. Here in the U.S. there is a lot of entrepreneurial spirit around the Internet and what I call the information
technology, and it's not there in Europe. For me it is absolutely fascinating to touch a reality that I was not able to see in Europe.

I was making a presentation about the Internet a while ago and was making a comparison between Gutenberg, who invented
printing, and the Internet. Our civilization had been built on the book, on writing, the past few centuries. That's the way we have
been educated; that's the way we are thinking; that's the way we transmit information and knowledge. Now, with the Internet, all
those paradigms are going to change. In the next 10-20-30 years all the fundamentals of our way of education will completely
disappear.

The Internet creates a new world and a new way of working, of living, of thinking. What was the battle of the last century? It was
access to information. Now, information is there. The problem is no longer access to information; it is what can you do with it.

The combination of wireless and the Internet is certainly one of the important growth areas in the next few years.

WW: Where do you see Nortel in this competitive mix? Nortel was probably alone a year ago but has competition now.

Debon: What companies are leading the IP market? First you have Nortel, but we are not alone. We recognize that we have
competition in North America. But you don't see any European companies because the market is not there. In the U.S. the market
is driving us to go full speed to this new paradigm.

If you integrate all the changes that the market is leading, which is through IP, through the Internet, it will bring huge changes in
the next few years. The networks will go from switching technology to packet-based technology. There is no more debate about
that; it will be a massive change. Then you have all this integration of voice, data and wireless, which is Nortel Networks' vision of
Unified Networks. Then you have millions of applications on the Internet. That is how the world is evolving. The business case for
our customer--the value model--is drastically changing. We have to adapt our organization, our process, to this new world. Take,
for example, the last change we have done, to combine all our structure working on wireline and wireless to be able to propose to
our customer a single solution to whatever he needs.

Basically we are working with a moving target. It is difficult for an organization to be flexible. But that is the way Nortel is
evolving, to have the possibility of adapting to the new conditions. The definition of a good organization in the '70s and '80s was a
rigid and fixed structure. Now a good definition is an organization that is flexible and adaptable, and also by the speed at which we
can react.

WW: "Wireless time" hasn't been as fast as "Internet time." Do you see those two different kinds of time converging?

Debon: With the Internet, all notions of time can disappear because you can have information worldwide. The next challenge for
Nortel is to combine the wireless and Internet worlds. That is what we are doing by taking some leadership in what we call 3G/IP,
but [which] includes GPRS, 1XRTT, EDGE, [high-speed standards for GSM, CDMA and TDMA technologies]--everything which
can go at speeds of 100 kilobits per second to 2 megabits per second over any network.

WW: Is the integration with Bay Networks complete? If not, what remains to be done? Was the integration more or less difficult
than envisioned?

Debon: We can now see that integration of Bay Networks has been a real success. It has been an accomplishment in two ways.
First it is an achievement in terms of people. Each one [Nortel and Bay] has brought something, new ways to work, new ways to
think and new ways to manage opportunity. In terms of people, we can really see the integration. In terms of products, taking as
an example GPRS and 1XRTT, we are working a lot with the help of what Bay has done and they did bring us a lot in terms of
IP. I would say they have given us the ability to build better IP architecture; the work that they have done gives us the possibility
of starting not from zero but from an established knowledge base.

WW: Were there any bumps on the road to success?

Debon: There are always issues but that is just day-to-day work, nothing important. I think the merger has been so positive.

WW: In your new position you are responsible for developing a third-generation strategy. Realistically, how much interest is there
now among your carrier customers in 3G? I assume the interest is more intense in Europe?

Debon: In terms of evolution, you get from the wireless point of view two components. You get the backbone, the network, and
you get access.

In terms of backbone we have two strong fundamentals. One is to evolve the backbone to packet switching. That is what we are
doing with our Succession Network architecture line today. That can be for wireless and wireline. The second fundamental is a
Unified Network. Now when we sit in front of a customer, if it is a wireless customer, a wireline customer or a combination, we
approach the customer with a global integration solution. The things that we have in front of us when we address a customer are
going from circuit-switched to IP through our Succession line. We are going to see the project, the customer's network, in terms of
integration of wireless and wireline. That is our vision.

The second thing is access. Everybody speaks about 3G and you know we have a leading position in 3G. But in the next four or
five years you will have more people on GPRS and 1XRTT than on 3G. So we have a very strong focus on what we call
two-and-a-half, which is basically the first step of the data evolution for wireless. When you see that the network will be able to go
at speeds of 144, 170, 384 kilobits per second, you really are reaching new paradigms in the wireless industry. This evolution to the
data world, this evolution to the wireless Internet will go first to GPRS, 1XRTT and EDGE, and that is where we are taking a
leading position. If you establish yourself in the U.S. market that will be the drive. 3G in Europe will be there sooner, because it is
being pushed also by the politics of Europe, which wants that particular technology. It will take some time.

The next question is, what are you going to do for applications?

The trend will be what I call business applications. I think wireless data will explode in all business applications. I speak of
business applications vs. the Internet, which is the consumer market. Data will be led by the needs of the business community.

That basically is Nortel's position. First, the network. It is fundamental that if you don't evolve your network to IP you cannot have
the bandwidth to do the Internet. The second is to be able to access the speeds and the third one is to provide the applications.

WW: Do you see a role for Nortel in developing applications?

Debon: I see a lot of possibilities for Nortel to work through partnerships and alliances. That goes back to what I said earlier about
the evolution of the business model for our customers and for ourselves, which is to the service and application work.

WW: Can you provide any examples?

Debon: One is the work we are doing around the concept of the mobile office. Basically it is the vision of what the businessman
needs in terms of wireless for the mobile office. A lot of things will be there very quickly. Take GPRS as an example--and we will
deploy GPRS next year--it is a data network that is an overlay on the voice network. So you have an IP network that is built as an
overlay of the switch. That is one of the things that we want absolutely to develop for our customer, GPRS being an overlay of
data. So let's go build the IP network and one day you will be able to put voice on it. It will take some time because we need to
work on mobile voice-over-IP.

WW: When you talk about GPRS deploying next year, are we talking about the U.S.?

Debon: We have several orders, including one from Omnipoint. Nortel has GSM leadership in the U.S. so we are working with
our customers to deliver GPRS next year. It will be the same with CDMA with 1XRTT. It will be a little later for 1XRTT, but we
are working very closely with our customer base. (Nortel has announced a 1XRTT contract with Telstra in Australia and also has
demonstrated the faster CDMA data standard, 3XRTT.)

WW: Some analysts have described Nortel as "skeptical" about the initial market for 3G services and therefore is concentrating its
efforts on delivering data ability in the backbone, which would have cost benefits for both voice and data services. Can you
elaborate on this?

Debon: I would not put those words in my mouth. Yes, 3G will be the evolution of wideband wireless. Having said that, we today
have a strong focus on our customer needs in coming years. Nortel is one of the leading suppliers in 3G. We have announced
market tests with France Telecom, with Microcell Telecommunications, British Telecom, etc. We are working, as you know, with
Panasonic, which is one of the main suppliers of NTT DoCoMo in Japan. The reason we are working with Panasonic is, first, that
Japan will be first to market and we wanted to have contact with this reality, and second, we will also with Panasonic have an
end-to-end solution.

I believe the next wave of wireless growth will come with data and data applications. For me, its more important to provide
tomorrow my customer with IP evolution and with GPRS, 1XRTT, EDGE because that is how they will make their money by
enhancing their actual networks. 3G will go and we want to be first, but it will take some time to be implemented.

WW: There was a Nortel study that said wireless carriers spent 37 cents in operating and depreciation costs to deliver 1 megabit
of data and that Nortel's goal is to bring that cost down to 4 cents by 2004. That sounds aggressive. Is it attainable?

Debon: You have to come back to the market evolution. Today in most of the advanced countries, the penetration rates of mobile
is between 20 to 30 percent. Three or four years from now, where will we be? The penetration rate that we envision is above 50,
around 60 or 70 percent. It's millions and millions of people. They are going to have access to the Internet. The carriers will have a
massive number of bits to carry. When you have that paradigm in mind you understand that that can happen only if you drastically
cut your costs. I'm not talking about improving the costs of network 10 or 20 percent by changing the way that you manufacture,
etc. We are speaking about a drastic change and that basically is packet-switching technology.

WW: Packet switching will bring that kind of change?

Debon: Yes. And in terms of investment and also in terms of operation. Once more, this is a fundamental evolution. It will be in a
consumer market. As the market explodes the costs will go drastically down. It is what we call elasticity of demand vs. price.

WW: You're speaking of some very dramatic changes ahead.

Debon: To conclude, there are two fundamentals that need to be understood. First, the business model, the value model of our
customer will change, and our business model will change.

The second is this evolution to IP. If you look at the data evolution on wireless, you get some projections that it will be 15 to 20
percent four or five years from now. But if you look at some industrialized countries you will have a rate of 40 to 50 percent. You
will be able to get that data on your network only if your network has this new IP-based technology. I will say all the elements are
there, but now you have to jump to assure your success.




To: Clarksterh who wrote (40431)9/13/1999 8:16:00 AM
From: gdichaz  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
Clark: How about these apples? Any competition for the Q down the road on data or just for Loral? In any case, proposed competition for the huge wireless fiber pipes from the sky.

Do you (or qdog) have any comments?

And will CDMA move into the big pipes on earth or the sky?

Talk : Communications : Loral Space & Communications

To: SafetyAgentMan (6779 )
From: djane Monday, Sep 13 1999 3:07AM ET
Reply # of 6781

SkyBridge to compete with LMDS carriers

September 9, 1999

By Elizabeth V. Mooney

NEW YORK?When David Finkelstein looks up at the heavens and
ahead to the future, he sees low-earth-orbit satellites as galactic warriors
fighting to control suburban sprawl on Earth and provide the power of
Internet access to the rich and poor alike.

??The big social message is that telecommunications (networks) are like
the new railroads of the next millennium. They are altering the relative role
of infrastructure,?? said Finkelstein, senior vice president of marketing and
business development for SkyBridge, a Bethesda, Md., LEO start-up.

??LEO constellations will become a very powerful agent in that change ...
They can slow down uncontrolled urbanization, and there are a lot of
costs to society associated with this, including development and time lost
in transit.??

Bankrolled by corporate heavyweights, including Alcatel, Telstra Corp.,
Toshiba Corp. and Loral Space & Communications Ltd., SkyBridge will
focus on last-mile access instead of end-to-end connectivity.

For $4.8 billion, the equivalent ??of one operator?s fiber-optic deployment
in the New York City metro area,?? SkyBridge plans to deploy a
constellation of 80 LEO satellites covering the globe, except for the Arctic
and Antarctic regions, Finkelstein said at the recent Telecom Business ?99
Conference & Expo.

??SkyBridge is a fairly unique implementation. We are taking the notion of
statistical multiplexing used in network backbones, where aggregating
traffic is used for efficient transmission,?? he said.

??It is similar to the hand-off from base station to base station in terrestrial
wireless.??

Orbiting at an altitude of 15,000 kilometers, the LEO satellites will
provide two-way communications with a latency of about 30 milliseconds.
This is far less than the half-second delays experienced in communications
via the geostationary satellites in widespread use today. They orbit at
much higher altitudes.

Sky Bridge plans to begin launching satellites in mid-2002. Meanwhile
Hughes Electronics? $1.4 billion Spaceway system expects to begin
offering similar services that same year in North America. Likewise,
Astrolink L.L.C., a strategic venture initiated by Lockheed Martin Corp.,
plans to launch its first geostationary satellite in 2002, followed by the
launch of three additional satellites at six-month intervals.

Lockheed Martin also is providing launch equipment to Teledesic L.L.C.,
whose backers include Motorola Inc., Boeing Corp., Bill Gates and Craig
McCaw. Teledesic plans a $10 billion system of 200 LEO satellites, the
first of which is slated to be launched in 2003.

??Twenty-five percent of America will remain uncovered by terrestrial
landline or wireless, and a larger percentage worldwide will be
overlooked by Internet deployment,?? SkyBridge?s Finkelstein said.

??Satellites can reduce the gap between the information haves and
have-nots by providing universal service ... Satellites are distance
insensitive, so delivery costs are the same in Manhattan or Montana. It is
the only technology about which you can say this.??

SkyBridge sees an addressable market of about 21 million people in
North America and Europe. They live or work far enough away from
urban areas that satellite-based Internet access may be their cheapest
option.

??Remote applications are highly interactive: telecommuting, tele-medicine,
distance learning,?? Finkelstein said.

??New generations of applications are increasingly information-rich and
interactive. Workers who need to interact are increasingly mobile, spread
out and global, and they are redefining and changing work processes.??

Residential terminals will cost less than $1,000, ??and we are working to
get the price down,?? Finkelstein said. Residential customers also will pay
a $30 flat-rate monthly service fee. Business customers will pay about
$2,000 for the installation and about $50 per month for service.

Sky Bridge also will offer services to companies in industrial parks that
cable television and local exchange carriers are not interested in serving.

For these customers, local multipoint distribution systems and microwave
multipoint distribution systems ??have a wonderful future, but they have
propagation characteristics that require a line-of-site and towers every
several kilometers,?? Finkelstein said.

??How can satellite compete against fixed wireless and [digital subscriber
line]? I use the example of Direct TV. Echostar started in rural areas, and
now the largest number of its new (customer) additions are in areas that
already have cable TV.??