SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Jim Mullens who wrote (31329)1/17/2003 12:43:04 PM
From: foundation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 197207
 
Gartner addresses a political potentiality:

The message is:

Sway from the guild - get screwed by the guild.

There is no technical aspect barring seamless GSM1x/GSM roaming. Both use GSM Map and GSM1x reuses infra and backhaul.

Would retribution follow threats?

Some carriers may be asking that question.



To: Jim Mullens who wrote (31329)1/17/2003 1:25:01 PM
From: rkral  Respond to of 197207
 
Jim,

re "any carrier that adopts GSM1x would be cutting its own throat since it is probably more lucrative to charge roaming fees than to adopt GSM1x."

Gartner is obviously referring to a CDMA2000 1x RAN with a GSM MAP core network .. *without* a GSM RAN overlay. IOW, there would be no GSM radio interface. In this case, roaming GSM mobiles could not get service .. ergo, no roaming fees.

But Gartner implies providing GSM to local and roaming subscribers is "more lucrative" than providing CDMA2000 1x to local subscribers only. Is that typically true?

I don't know .. but let's say 1x can serve twice as many subscribers as GSM. Then profits due to roamers would have to be greater than 50% of total profits .. for Gartner's implication to be true. Are profits from roamer traffic typically greater than 50%?

Again, I don't know .. but I doubt it. And remember, the 1x to GSM capacity ratio is greater than 2.

RAN <=> Radio Access Network
MAP <=> Mobile Application Part

Ron

P.S. Confuscious says "When reader not understand writer .. not always writer's fault." <g>



To: Jim Mullens who wrote (31329)1/17/2003 1:30:27 PM
From: Robert  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 197207
 
The point is that any one of the 1/2 billion GSM users roaming into the area with a GSM/GPRS phone would not be able to connect to a GSM1x network that no longer supports the GSM air interface, thus the carrier misses out on the "lucrative" roaming fees.

R.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News