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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dexter Lives On who wrote (4482)	12/2/2001 2:28:43 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

I wanted to. Presented to the CFO and afterwards have never heard of him. So now I make it widely public. Because I know that's the way this thing is going to be built. Split between: wide deployed 2.5 G (with 3G been shifted for much later in the future because I believe 2.5 G is good enough) entertainment-centric and high-traffic spots covered by WLAN business-centric.

To: Dexter Lives On who wrote (4482)	12/2/2001 8:22:16 PM
From: iod_sherwood	Respond to of 46821

Forget radioframe, that's 802.11 and iDen... for GSM, my company has partnered with ip.access (announced at the UMTS show in barcelona) to do GSM in-building for extremely cost effective scalability. should be a winner. WLAN's and 3G will co-exist. They're built for different applications. 3G is more for presence based/location based/connectivity based communications, access stuff. WLAN is more for productivity/work connectivity when you need to get particular things done, or just casually want to get access to something... they serve different markets, the fact that ppl do the comparisons so directly just further displays their ignornace... should there be only 1 network that serves all? hard to say... i doubt it. whil bluetooth has failed in its early start, it's always that catch22 between equipment vendors and network operators... build it and they will come? no. operators demand that the new services be available, otherwise why provde the network... the service providers/vendors, demand the network to exist... otherwise, why build services for it??? it's really dumb, very ill-co-ordinated, but that's the way things are... these days anyhow... the struggle to figure out what's right... kind of makes being in the industry even more exciting... cheers.