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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (17137)	12/6/2001 10:07:25 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 34857

<<news from NEC that they wont deliver dual-mode handsets until the end of '02 does not bode well for the results.>> Judging by what I heard that the site acquisition for the 3G networks are progressing at a very slow pace, I think NEC delivering by end 2002 will hurt much. My view is that the replacement phones must be on the stores by the next purchsing season: Thanksgiving-Xmas 2002. Very very little (besides the usual hot air stuff) will happen before that. Do you know when we will reckon 3G has arrived? It will arrive the day someone come to me and say: "Look we are running out of capacity in our backhaul network, need to upgrade those microwave links and Leased Lines!" Then, 3G will be here. Not before that.

To: slacker711 who wrote (17137)	12/6/2001 10:43:34 AM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Slacker. << I think you are playing devil's advocate in this post.... >> I've been known to do that. << Hypothetically >> You have some BIG hypotheticals. <g> << if Qualcomm had decided to exchange IPR with Ericsson and Nokia, they STILL would have created a W-CDMA standard sufficiently different to require dual-mode handsets. >> Even IF Qualcomm had decided to exchange IPR with Ericsson and Nokia (and others) the open 3GPP air-interface standards would have been different than Qualcomm's proprietary (open) standard. Multi-mode, multi-band handsets would have STILL been requisite regardless of what new air interface (or packet data overlay) was chosen. This is not much different than 800 MHz cellular carriers in the US needing multi-mode, multi-band when they licensed 1900 MHz spectrum in 1995 and selected digital technology for (old and) new spectrum. << If 1x had become the official 3G air interface over a GSM-MAP infrastructure in the middle of '98 >> That's the big hypothetical. The strategic events that really started 18 months earlier really precluded that. In rough chronological format : * 3GIG founded and initial UMTS drafts specs (really requirements) published (1/97) * Ericsson decides to approach DoCoMo to combine GSM MAP with DoCoMo WCDMA * Nokia decides to approach DoCoMo to combine GSM MAP with DoCoMo WCDMA * Qualcomm announces intention to develop IMT-2000 3G implementation of CDMA * Ericsson, Nokia, DoCoMo alliance finalized and announced. * Siemens and Alcatel scramble to align with Motorola and Nortel for CDMA/TDMA hybrid alternative * Vodafone Newbury trial takes place and "this research trial achieved the agreed objectives that were set at the start of the project, namely: It has demonstrated and provided experience using a CDMA wireless access on a GSM network. A CDMA BSS has been integrated at a standard A-interface, and experience was gained on the flexibility of the interface for third generation." * Qualcomm Europe SARL formed for ETSI (3GIG) participation * ETSI entertains proposals for terrestrial air interfaces for UMTS * 3GIG evolves to 3GPP (1/98) * 3GPP2 formed (1/98) * 3GPP chooses UTRA FDD (WCDMA) as primary UMTS air interface and UTRA TDD for the secondary (1/98) << Some of this is due to attempted improvements to CDMA.....but much of it was done to simply deny the rest of Qualcomm's value chain a head start on 3G technology. >> No question about that. Strategic positioning. Maybe some of the players had read Sun Tzu's "Art of War" or Dr. Gary Hamel's "Strategic Intent"? Better yet, some applied what they read. << who would have gotten the contracts??? Lucent, Motorola, and Nortel. >> ... and Qualcomm? Right. Unless of course Qualcomm sold their infra division anyway. ... and all would have been competing with the Japanese against DoCoMo's WCDMA out of ARIB which most certainly would have also become an IMT-2000 << It has worked. Nokia and Ericsson dominate the list of W-CDMA contract wins. >. Right, with Siemens in position 3. In addition the value of contracts already awarded, or yet to be awarded, for WCDMA infra far exceeds the value of 1xRTT infra. << They now need to put their money where their mouth is and deliver infrastructure and handsets. >> Those are the next steps. Hardware infra with trial software ramping and shipping (although not being recognized as revenue), and trial networks are coming live every week. Handsets will follow. << The news from NEC that they won't deliver dual-mode handsets until the end of '02 does not bode well for the results. >> That didn't surprise me. Did it surprise you? Now we have to watch and see if Sony Ericsson and Nokia deliver them on their announced schedule. There are a considerable amount of things that have to fall into place, and as things get more complex, and data is more complex than voice, interoperability issues become the major hurdle. This would be the case regardless of the air interface chosen. We are seeing some impact from this already by virtue of the fact that while 1xRTT is chugging along right nicely in Korea, it is not implemented here yet, or in Japan, and here and in Japan data roaming (which relates to interoperability) is less requisite than it is in the GSM/3GSM world. ... and of course interoperability issues and data roaming are still being worked through with GPRS ... and GPRS is the bearer for WCDMA. Best, - Eric -