Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cooters who wrote (4778)	11/19/2000 11:01:32 PM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196978

Cooters, << I have always understood 3G to involve data speeds and approved standards >> First, 3G requirements, extend well beyond speed. For sure, speed wise you have Full Mobility, Pedestrian, and Fixed or stationary data speeds. You also have interoperability requirements. This gets you into hardware (USIM/R-UIM) but also spectrum. 3G was originally envisioned to be a single global fully interoperable standard. No specific technology was defined at that time. Today we have a harmonized standard instead of a single converged standard and we have 2 basic network standards with a network interface to an IP network) and 5 radio interfaces. making interoperability somewhat an easier said than done thing. << The press surely does not differentiate the ability for existing CDMA implementations to achieve both in existing spectrum, while non-CDMA carriers require new spectrum. >> It is not as simple as non-CDMA carriers require new spectrum.and cdmaOne carriers do not. A great advantage of 1xMC is that (like WCDMA) it doubles voice capacity. WCDMA of course by definition is wideband and simply can't be applied effectively in existing spectrum. It is optimized (at least right now for IMT-2000 2 GHz spectrum. Despite this although we have more than adequate spectrum today, we will not tomorrow, and carriers and the FCC are starting to realize this. Multimedia applications will eventually eat it up, regardless of technology deployed. The world of digital mobile wireless telephony today is Voice-centric. Mobile wireless penetration is relatively low in the US (despite the fact that we are the largest mobile wireless market in the world) an minutes of use is low because of our superb copper based landline infrastructure. Take up of data services is low, and will remain so relative to other countries for a period of time. even though it will grow reasonable When spectrum issues were first addressed by the ITU and WRCC in 1992, 2G was just starting to be (GSM, D-AMPS), and attention was being turned to 3G planning (just as now attention is being turned to 4G planning). For the 3G services that were envisioned it was recognized that large spectrum would be necessary, and ideally that spectrum would be contiguous to simplify interoperability of evolved and converged 2nd generation services. Back then there were no multi=band handsets, much less multi-mode, but they were already in the works and obviously added complexity. Many nations left the conference and worked quickly through the set aside or rearrangement of spectrum to free up the specific spectrum that was agreed upon. Others did not. << Is this possibly the problem in semantics? >> Perhaps. Most of the nations that set aside a wide band of spectrum specifically for 3G services, are licensing that spectrum, and are focused on interoperability, and global roaming, certainly look at 3G as technology that will be implemented in that spectrum, in some cases to the exclusion of other spectrum for a period of time, and particularly if that spectrum is particularly strained. Regards, - Eric -