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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SemiBull who wrote (6451)	5/8/2003 8:14:30 AM
From: Peter Ecclesine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi SB, >>At data transmissions speeds of up 20 M/s and a range of 3-5 miles,<< and no truckroll, any such technology would be disruptive. And one of the ceramics companies (Kyocera) did demonstrate 20 Mbps to mobiles (not from mobiles) around New York City using lots of base stations. But no such technology is in 802.20 >>(1) 4G will rollout faster and will not present a cheaper faster wireless pipe? << there are two viewpoints on 4G these days; one says it incorporates many radios - UMTS/WiFi/cdma2000/whatever and seamlessly handovers among them; and the second viewpoint is 4G offers higher WAN speeds, and 5G offers Fast Ethernet speeds. The first view comes from no new mobile spectrum, while the second view requires new spectrum worldwide. So any opinion on 4G rollout should involve discussing whether worldwide spectrum refarming is required. >>(2) Might you agree on the potential paradyme shift if the cost structure of a 802.20 rollout was significantly cheaper?<< Price is perfection. If 802.20 requires no new spectrum, and could offer "data transmissions speeds of up 20 M/s and a range of 3-5 miles" from the same cellular towers as UMTS/1xEV-DO uses, then pigs can fly. Faster: '3' bits/Hz/sec is beyond 3G, and has a cost in Carrier to Interferer Ratio, requiring a stronger signal. EV-DO has slower uplink in recognition that the services are mostly downlink, and making it easier to Farther: 3-5 mile range at 2100 MHz symmetrically uses a lot of power in the mobile terminal. If 802.20 requires micro-cellular and pico-cellular structure, than the cost of that structure dominates the discussion, rather than the cost of the mobile terminals. The link margin has to come from somewhere, and Arraycom/Flarion/IP Wireless trials will take at least $3B before a country (other than Luxembourg) will commit (like Australia did with CDMA) to nationwide cutover from their current cellular technology. Next time around, the European Union isn't united on 4G. IEEE 802.20 can create standards absent the operators, but field trials take their toll. Lets see how 802.20 goes next week, and then opine whether .20 is more like .14 (cable modems), or .16 (BBWA), or 3GPP ;-) petere