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.

Pastimes : Home on the range where the buffalo roam -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Boplicity who wrote (10572)	2/21/2001 10:39:25 AM
From: A.L. Reagan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13572

Re: 3G or not 3G. I tend to agree with Milunovich that true 3G is overkill for almost all mobile data applications that are out there right now, or on drawing boards. Watching "Hannibal" on a cell phone wouldn't be much fun. However, existing 2G systems with 9.6kbs and similar data speeds leave a lot to be desired on even basic apps like email, simple web surfing, etc. QCOM's spectrally efficient 1XRTT implementation (2.5G) strikes me as a good solution, as does GPRS (if it can be made to work). While wireless LAN, including Bluetooth, has some valuable uses in places like hotels, airports, SBUX's, etc., I think he too quickly dismisses the advantages of mobility. The ability to use a device "almost everywhere" versus "in selected locations" creates a more compelling user value proposition, IMO. This is just a fundamental part of human nature, and why we tend to prefer owning automobiles versus taking the bus, even though the bus route can more cheaply transport us "in selected locations." Or, to strike another analogy, why did the world rush out in the 1950's-1960's to buy televisions, when perfectly good movies at a fraction of the cost were available at the local bijou? Now we're moving to built-in TV's in our higher end cars and vans. Why not watch at home? W/r/t 3G spectrum in Europe, with or without a 3G killer app, there will still be a need for more spectrum. Arguably 3G itself, and some of the prices paid for spectrum, are questionable, but there is a need for more spectrum. W/r/t killer apps (last analogy), who in the mid-1980's in "386" PC land would have envisioned the applications being run a mere 10 years later? I can remember back then intelligent people arguing that we have spreadsheets, we have word processors, we have dBase III, what more could people ever want on a PC? And the 10 best years of PC-land were ahead of it. It turned out that there was no single killer app, but rather a series (including, broadly defined, "the internet.") So, I'd argue that typically the "killer apps" tend to follow, not lead, the technological capability to implement same, and I'll argue that Milunovich is being a little myopic in literally putting the cart before the horse that pulls it. Where he is not being myopic is in deflating expectations that the golden era of 3G is right around the corner.