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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (9752)	12/16/2000 1:48:03 PM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

"...GPRS aggregates GSM voice channels to provide that speed. Every GPRS user will be kicking a number of voice users off of the network. The extra capacity that CDMA provides allows it to avoid this dilemma." slacker- As you know, I'm not fully up to speed on mobile wireless. Is what you state above a fact or opinion? I am currently in the 'GPRS is enough' camp and didn't expect any serious UMTS SP revenues for about five to ten years. Thanks. -MikeM(From Florida)

To: slacker711 who wrote (9752)	12/18/2000 12:34:51 AM
From: axial	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Hi, slacker - Thanks for the fine links on GSM. Your point about the extra capacity provided by CDMA in a GPRS environment is well taken. If that is so, then it would strengthen the author's case, would it not: that GPRS may well delay the implementation of UMTS for cost/buildout reasons? I haven't been paying a lot of attention to the CDMA side of things, because it seems obvious that what you pointed out is true: as an intermediate solution, it seems optimal. However, there seems to be a lot of fudging on the cost of the highest-speed variants, when CDMA is compared to TDMA. I found it interesting that T has still not dropped EDGE with WOFDM as a data transport mechanism. Friends in the States tell me of peak usage constraints, now. Do you think that GPRS will keep the capacity dogs at bay long, say, in New York, or LA? I guess the questions are growth, and whether the demand for data will require the additional capacity of UMTS. Most seem to think "no": and since most of the current apps are 'bursty', I think they're right. Given the billions spent on spectrum in Europe, do you think providers can extract the revenues to pay down their debt by giving users GPRS? Or will they have to notch up to 3G in order to attract the revenues they need? They're in a tough spot; I think they have no choice but to build. Interesting times. Jim