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

To: Eric L who wrote (2592)	10/21/2002 6:46:27 PM
From: Eric L	Respond to of 9255

re: BWCS on E-OTD Problems >> E-OTD Location Technology in Trouble BWCS Ledbury, UK 22nd October 2002 bwcs.com Problems in meeting E-911 performance requirements in the US, coupled with a lack of commitment from European operators, mean that E-OTD wireless location technology faces troubled times ahead. BWCS’ industry white paper "The Last Known Location of E-OTD" (available from www.bwcs.com ) shows that many question marks still hang over E-OTD (Enhanced Observed Time Difference) technology in terms of its positioning accuracy, reliability and cost. In the US the leading GSM operators AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless and VoiceStream (T-Mobile) have chosen E-OTD to meet positioning accuracy requirements laid down in the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC’s) E-911 mandate. However, field tests of E-OTD carried out by these three operators indicate that it falls short of accuracy levels set out by the FCC for handset-based positioning solutions. BWCS Managing Director Graham Wilde said: “Problems with E-OTD’s accuracy are now causing serious concern among the emergency services community in the US. Tests carried out by VoiceStream found E-OTD accuracy to be 75 metres for 67% of calls and 259 metres for 95% of calls, compared to the FCC stipulation of 50 metres for 67% of calls and 150 metres for 95% of calls.” Wilde said, “It’s impossible to say what the root causes of E-OTD’s poor performance are, but we suspect that its reliance on handsets to collect signals from base stations and transfer that data to network LMUs [Location Measurement Units] may be a large component. Limitations on the performance capability of handsets compared with network-based equipment, could be a major part of the problem.” If E-OTD technology cannot be improved to meet the E-911 mandate by the October 2003 deadline set by the FCC, the US GSM operators will face hefty fines and may be forced to look at alternative positioning technologies. A recent FCC submission by AT&T Wireless stated that it may not be able to meet the future deadline. Supporting submissions from Nokia warned that AT&T may be forced to make changes to its network planning and antenna configuration in order to bring E-OTD’s performance up to the required standard. In an effort to insure themselves against the possible failure of E-OTD, both AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless have announced plans to trial an alternative location technology, called U-TDOA (Uplink Time Difference of Arrival). Wilde said, “This is the most concrete evidence that AT&T Wireless and Cingular believe they may not be able to make it with E-OTD. It’s a highly significant move.” In Europe, a BWCS survey of mobile operators found many to be concerned about the cost of rolling out the technology. Wilde said: “There is no E-911 mandate in Europe, so mobile operators are looking at location services from a purely commercial perspective. At the moment most of them are using basic Cell-ID positioning because it’s cheap. While the operators acknowledge that there is a correlation between positioning accuracy and location service revenues, they have expressed misgivings about the cost and performance of E-OTD.” << - Eric -

To: Eric L who wrote (2592)	10/22/2002 3:43:54 PM
From: michael_pdx	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9255

"users don't even know that they are getting 3G phones-" [in Korea] Based on anecdotal evidence, the same may be true at Sprint. Last week at a Sprint PCS store I bought a new phone to replace a Motorola that had been lost. After trying and returning a Samsung, I ended up choosing one of the least expensive models available, (Sanyo SCP-4700). The sticker on the back says "Qualcomm 3G CDMA." I would have thought that the sales staff would have at least mentioned that the phone is CDMA 1x and made a pass at promoting Vision to go with the basic voice services. But they did not say a word on any of three visits to the store.