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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (53989)	5/6/2003 3:39:10 PM
From: pyslent	Respond to of 54805

I don't know why you are so up in arms about the use of the word "generation" in ATTws marketing lexicon. While the ITU may regulate the definitions of 3G, they have no purvue over the use of common english words. For ATTws, the gsm/gprs network represents a new network that allows them to offer improved data services that rival anything that 1X has offered. The gap between TDMA and GSM/GPRS is far greater than that between GPRS and 1X. If i makes you feel better, then go ahead and maybe we should consider GPRS 2.99G and just attribute ATTws's market as round-off error. There is no official body that defines GPRS as 2.5G. The fact is, to the average consumer, 1X and GPRS are functionally equivalent. Why would it matter to the marketplace whether the one is officially 3g or not? The 3G label is not going to sell any more cell phone contracts. let them compete on performance, not hype.

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (53989)	5/6/2003 3:58:04 PM
From: Eric L	Respond to of 54805

Wireless Obsolescence Jim, You quoted a Hutchinson Whampoa unnamed "source" here: 'Our competitors have a huge investment in "2.5G technology" [<snip> what I assume is your edit] They don't want to tell their customers their new GPRS phones will be obsolete almost as soon as they buy them.' Now there is a great example of hyperbole. The fact of the matter is that Vodafone's, mmO2's, Oranges, and TIM's GSM GPRS handsets will not be functionally "obsolete" because they will able to be put to the identical use that the purchaser bought it for, and assuming that the handset is tri-mode or quad-mode the user can continue to use it for its original intended purpose on 450+ networks around the world some 175 to 225 of which have been upgraded or are currently being upgraded to GPRS, and will many of which will be upgraded at some future time to EDGE and/or upgraded to support a WCDMA RAN with fall back to GSM GPRS/EDGE as well. The phone will only be obsolete if the user determines it is obsolete, and no longer fits his requirements. Please do not tell my wife that her Verizon Kyocera 2135 with the "3G by Qualcomm" sticker on it is obsolete, even though it is, and always will be. incapable of 1xRTT data unless she uses it as a modem, which is unlikely since she doesn't own a laptop. OTOH, I may attempt to use the "obsolete" excuse to justify spending $630 to upgrade my KYO QCP-6035 to a KYO 7135 with a portable keyboard on a 1 year contract. I could save $30 by committing to a 2 year contract, but that's a sucker bet. I will of course have to spend an additional $100+ on dinner and drinks to put her in the proper frame of mind to get away with that one, particularly since 1xRTT has not yet reached my suburban neighborhood. <g> << AWE ... purposefully distributing disinformation >> In all do respect, having read many of your SI posts I think that you often have the tendency to distribute disinformation if not actually create it, or at the very least unwittingly disseminate non-deliberate misinformation. Perhaps you feel the same about my posts, but I guarantee you that I put considerable effort into striving for accuracy in what I post about wireless. Opinions are another matter, but I also try to clearly label opinion or conjecture of my own, as such. Best, - Eric -