Keith,
<< new critics of 3G. Now that the speeds and capacity are there, they are criticizing the new investments in the technology due to a lack of revenue opportunities >>
... not to mention the fact that many are moaning and groaning because spectrum licenses have to be paid for. <g>
It does seem as though many carriers are shelling out big bucks for investments and technology without a business plan, and in GSMland there are, how shall we say, "technical difficulties" to overcome.
At least from a technical point of view, you and I, living in CDMAland, were able to enjoy (well, attempt to enjoy <g>) WAP early on, and at speeds 50% faster, than GSM.
We now have rate plans that rival Europe, and have phenomenal coverage anywhere in the US with no roaming or long distance charges and have a choice between wired or wireless Internet access at very moderate cost.
We are perhaps a year away from being able to enjoy an always on connection, and this will be at speeds significantly greater than the GSM flavor of packet data, if we are willing to pay for it. Beyond that we will have HDR devices that will accept data at greater than T1 rates (again if we are willing to pay for it).
Hard to believe that 5 years ago wireless mobile telephony in the United States was virtually 100% analog AMPS, with a little CDPD if you wanted data.
Our government chose not to mandate a digital technology standard. If they had, it probably would have been IS-136 TDMA.
Open choice in technology has allowed cream to rise to the top and by the end of this year CDMA will be the dominant wireless technology in the US and by 2004 it will be used by over 50% of the wireless subscribers in the US.
In the interim, both Verizon and Sprint PCS will continue to enhance their networks and wireless data service offerings.
Free from the type of "technical difficulties" described in the article below, I am sure they will be able to find revenue opportunities, that will satisfy their need for revenue growth and earnings, while providing us with value.
>> Japan: Technology Journal - Asian Technology - Phone Bloat
H. Asher Bolande
Asian Wall Street Journal
27/11/2000
Manufactures Pile on the Features but Power is Always a Problem
For all the buzz surrounding third-generation mobile technology, you might think all its wonders are on our doorstep.
Poor assumption. Though 3G, as it's called, is set for a roll out in some Asian countries by the middle of next year, engineers are still wrestling with fundamental technical snags that may initially leave you with a clunkier and less exciting phone that you were banking on. More on that later.
For most users, the first taste of the mobile Internet will come via a different standard, 2.5G, an ad-hoc collection of enhancements to existing cell-phone networks.
Despite the slick commercials from Motorola and Nokia, changes brought on by 2.5G are actually the more profound leap forward. "Two-point-five-G is really the revolutionary phase, 3G is only evolutionary," says Craig Ehrlich, the group managing director of Hong Kong service provider Sunday Communications. "It is truly the first technology that allows us to make the wireless Internet consumer-friendly."
Which is a good thing, because even though the 3G unveiling is just around the corner, 2.5G will be the dominant cell-phone technology for the next two to five years, according to analysts. Even as late as 2005, the number of 2.5G customers in Asia will be more than triple the figure for a slower-evolving 3G, according to Nick Ingelbrecht, a regional analyst with the Gartner Group, a market-research firm.
And though less flashy than 3G, 2.5G has surprising firepower, enough to enable millions of people to get started e-mailing, gaming, buying and stock-trading on their handset.
Why is 2.5G such a quantum leap? Two reasons: It enables an always-on connection to the Internet, and makes your phone behave more like a PC.
In countries where GSM (Global System for Mobile communications) is the presiding cellular standard, 2.5G will arrive in the form of something called GPRS (General Packet Radio Services). With GPRS, your handheld device for the first time communicates in the language of the Internet: packet switching, as opposed to circuit switching, which is the system used by traditional phones. Essentially, that means data can be sent as data, rather than translated into voice and retranslated into data at the other end, which is the case currently.
From a practical standpoint, that means data is handled far more efficiently and reliably. So many users will for the first time be able to download and install software programs, like games, on the fly.
Packet switching is the reason DoCoMo has been able to build up a rich menu of services for its iMode phone even though its advertised data-transmission speeds are no better than the almost useless WAP (Wireless Access Protocol) phones that have been on sale since the beginning of this year.
Despite the utility of 2.5G, Japan has no choice but to leap-frog to 3G. Its older networks are groaning under current traffic volumes, and so its carriers have to hurry to invest in new equipment.
Not so for the rest of Asia, where operators have robust GSM networks. Most of them will opt to upgrade or enhance these networks for 2.5G wireless Internet rather than switch to 3G too fast, says Greg Tarr, who manages the M-Werks wireless investment fund from Seoul.
Meanwhile, 3G faces a period of teething pains, industry insiders say. Handset manufacturers are still confounded by basic problems associated with 3G's speed requirements.
To process some two megabits of data per second, a 3G handset has to be more like a powerful computer than a phone. That creates engineering headaches, like how to put powerful enough computer chips inside that won't suck any known phone battery dry in minutes.
The power-consumption dilemma is made worse by 3G's much-hyped ability to provide streaming video: color liquid-crystal screens refreshing at a television-quality 25 frames per second devour electricity on a different scale from today's digital handsets.
The high-revving computer chips required for all this also generate large amounts of heat, and unlike a PC, a compact mobile device can't incorporate a fan to help keep them cool.
For these reasons, one of Ericsson's recent prototypes - used as a demonstrator for carriers like British Telecom - is a bank of equipment in a specially built vehicle and not a handset at all, according to a Swedish industry source who requested anonymity. "It's the size of a truck," he says. Ericsson officials declined to comment.
Sources across the industry predict the phones released for DoCoMo's May launch will lack the most advanced capabilities associated with 3G, like video on-demand or real-time videoconferencing.
"The terminals will certainly be more voice-centric," predicts Nokia spokesman Pekka Isosomppi. "To incorporate other kinds of features, it will take a longer time."
He and counterparts at Motorola say they expect to overcome such technical obstacles by the time they introduce their own dual-mode 3G models in early-to mid-2002.
DoCoMo will not comment on exact size or battery-life specifications, but says its first round of 3G handsets should be comparable in size and shape to the iMode.
Eventually, there's no doubt that 3G phones will pack greater power along with the full range of sophisticated features. But for now, consumers will have incentives to stick with 2.5G, says UBS Warburg analyst Dylan Tinker. For one, the big manufacturers will have their attention on 2.5G because that's where the larger numbers of users will be, he says. "As a result, the prices will be lower."
"With these handsets, it's economies of scale," he says. <<
- Eric - |
