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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (19599)	2/26/2002 10:28:53 AM
From: Keith Feral	Respond to of 196545

GSM 1X & GSM 1xEV DO can be used as on overlay for existing 1.25 MHZ carriers or they can be used in new spectrum. When you look at the results of 3G auctions in Britain, you get a quick idea how much extra spectrum is available. Hutchison received 2X15 MHZ of paired spectrum and 5 MHZ of unpaired spectrum. That is a total of 35 MHZ of spectrum. Vodaphone received 2X15 MHZ of paired spectrum. That is a total of 30 MHZ of spectrum. It only takes 10 MHZ of spectrum to put together a UMTS 2X5 MHZ network of paired spectrum. That leaves both Hutchison and Vodaphone an additional 20 MHZ of spectrum to play with, excluding the unpaired spectrum & the spectrum for 1.25 MHZ GSM carriers. The standardization of 3GPP2 is going to lay the framework for 1xEV DO in 5 MHZ (WCDMA/UMTS) carriers, so Qualcomm has to be ready to support that standard with chipset designs. What would you think of Qualcomm if they were not prepared with the equipment to handle GSM1X for a 1.25 MHZ carrier? It would seriously reduce their credibility to handle GSM1X for a 5 MHZ channel. The standardization of 1x and 1XEV follows the progress from CDMAONE narrowband to GSM narrowband to WCDMA wideband. You cannot standardize WCDMA 1X without making GSM 1X a reality. The simple hierarchy of narrowband vs. wideband is tracking the commercial progress of WCDMA/UMTS. WCDMA/UMTS will be on par with CDMA1xEV Rev A with data speeds around 307 kbps. From there, 1xEV upgrades to Rev B with data rates in excess of 600 kbps. There is simply no visibility for the upgrade pathway for WCDMA/UMTS beyond the entry level of 307 kbps at this point. However, the evolutionary pathway will be defined as 1XEV is standardized within the context of 3GPP2 for WCDMA/UMTS networks. I see 3 main ways that 1x/1XEV could be implemented into 3G spectrum. It could be used as a replacement for GPRS as a data bridge to WCDMA/UMTS. It could be used to provide additional carriers for 3G networks dedicated to 1xEV DO. It could also be used to upgrade WCDMA/UMTS 307 kbps data speeds for 5 MHZ carriers when the standardization of 1XEV in 3GPP2 is complete.

To: carranza2 who wrote (19599)	2/26/2002 12:31:26 PM
From: Eric L	Respond to of 196545

c2, << As I take it, then, you are of the opinion that GSM1x will go nowhere >> You take it wrong. That is not what I said. << Implicit in your opinion >> No. Implicit in your opinion of what my opinion is/was. <g> << ... because the standards are immature and the various groups who would have to issue the standards have to much to do. >> That I did say. Updating the IS-833/834 standards is something 3GPP2 intends to address. They have not set a priority on it from what I can discern, and they do have a set of priorities which includes at the top of the list "completion" of Release B and Release C. << Do you have any actual idea as to how "immature" in fact they really are? >> I do not have an "actual" idea. I do have a pretty good general sense from following 3GPP2 meeting reports and contributions. << I don't, of course, but wonder why Q would go through the time and expense of developing something such as GSM1x if the efforts would be a waste of time. >> I don't consider it a waste of time anymore than I considered them developing (in conjunction with their value chain) CDMA 450, even though the 450 MHz market is comparatively small. One thing QCOM has done exceptionally well over the years - starting with the Pactel funded demonstration to CTIA ARTS in late 1989 - is scrambling together a live demonstration of a technology capability, and that one led to IS-95 standards development and commercialization efforts on the part of Motorola, At&T (Lucent) OKI, ETRI and Korean vendors. Hopefully, the demo package Qualcomm put together for Cannes will arouse interest in carriers, and infra providers to prioritize updating the GSM1x standards and begin commercialization, if they have not already done so. << Implicit in your opinion is the notion that UMTS will be ready to go from a standards standpoint substantially before IS 833 and IS 834 can be readied for GSM1x. >> UMTS is, as a matter of fact, not opinion, "ready to go" from a standards standpoint before IS 833 and IS 834, but phased UMTS standards development will be ongoing for the rest of this decade, just as GSM standards development was ongoing through the last decade and into this one. Forward compatible commercial gear is shipping based on 'R99-June01' and being brought live in Europe and Japan. Prototype handsets are beginning IOT on that gear. This includes the MSM5200 based test handset from Qualcomm, and possibly (hopefully) other handsets based on engineering samples of that same chip. << From what Ben posts, the UMTS march deadline is being hurried, corrections are not being considered, and the usual mess prevails. >> Ben's commentary on 3GPP 3GSM standards process is always interesting to read. I prefer to watch the (larger) process myself, and its also fun to watch the mini-mess over in 3GPP2. I'll let Ben explain this "march deadline" which relates to ITU submissions and applies to both 3GPP & 3GPP2 which is doing their own set of scrambling, which in turn relates back to allocation of priorities which would enable bringing IS-833/834 to speed. As for "corrections not being considered" (to 'R99' as opposed to 'R4' which mirrors 'R99' in 3GPP there is a specific criteria that CR's must meet, and there is certainly a desire to close 'R99' to submissions and move on to 'R4'. R5, and 'R6', even though there is no 'R99' "march deadline". << Presumably the freshening up of IS 833 and IS 834 required for GSM1x will not be as labor intensive as getting UMTS (finally) ready. Most of the work, as I think you will agree, has already been done. >> Most of the work has indeed been done, but it has not been done to IS-833/834, and it won't be done in a week or a month once work commences. It will not be as labor intensive as getting cdma2000 Release A (finally) ready, but it will take more than a cut and paste. << Second problem: UMTS is not going to be subject to an immediate worldwide rollout. This gives GSM1x a fighting chance in many markets for a long time. >> 3GSM was never going to be subject to an immediate worldwide rollout. Capital markets have exacerbated that. << Now the "what ifs." What if UMTS is a dud on the par with GPRS? Don't you think that GSM1x's prospects would be quite good should that occur? >> While I take them into consideration, I do not invest on "what ifs." Several of the "what ifs" I took into consideration prior to my original investment in Qualcomm have not borne fruit. I fully expect that UMTS will, be just as much of (what you call) a "dud" as GPRS in the early stages of commercial launches. This will prolong the life of GSM (including GPRS & EDGE) which won't be "duds" forever, anymore than GSM was, as the kinks got worked out. I consider GSM1x to have limited market potential. I respect the fact that Qualcomm is not exaggerating that potential. I do however consider it to have enough potential to be worthwhile bringing to market, and I do think that Unicom could be the catalyst of that. Best, - Eric -