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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: bananawind who wrote (13556)8/11/1998 2:11:00 PM
From: bananawind  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
All...

Software radios could bring flexibility to base stations

By Kristen Beckman

Flexibility may be coming to a base station near you.

August 10, 1998

Most base stations today are built to accommodate only one or two wireless technologies, but a
relatively new concept may allow carriers to reconfigure base stations to support a variety of
standards and applications.

Software radios are ``radios in which a large portion of the functionality is implemented through a
programmable signal processing device,'' according to Jeffrey H. Reed and Brian D. Woerner,
authors of a textbook on software radios due out next year.

Using a software radio within a base station would allow manufacturers to build one hardware
product that can house software radios which can be reconfigured to support different technologies
and applications. That translates into better cost efficiencies for the manufacturer and ultimately
service providers, say experts.

``The topic of software radio has been around for awhile, mainly in the military,'' said Stephen
Blust, senior manager of strategic technology at BellSouth Cellular Corp. Although the military
remains a primary market for software radios, the commercial wireless industry recently has begun
to take an interest in the concept, he said.

Blust is chairman of the Modular Multifunction Information Transfer System Forum, which is
changing its name to the Software Defined Radio Forum. The group, comprising the defense and
commercial wireless sectors as well as civil government, is working to implement software radios in
wireless handsets and base stations.

The group has been focusing on handset issues, but members expressed enough interest in base
stations that a new working group was formed to look at the idea. Blust said.

``There has definitely been an increase in the noise level surrounding software radios in the last 18
months or more,'' said Blust. ``People don't say `what?' anymore when you ask them about
software radios. They ask `when?' ''

Possibilities

While software radios could have applications in today's second-generation systems, many
software radio experts expect third-generation technology to drive the use of software radios.

One of the most compelling advantages of software radios is their ability to support multimode
operations.

``Traditionally, dual-mode operation has required two complete sets of hardware, increasing the
size and cost of the radio,'' said Reed, who also is associate director of the Mobile & Portable
Radio Group and an associate professor of electrical engineering at Virginia Tech. ``A software
radio could change modes by simply loading a different piece of software into the memory.''

Software radios also would allow use of advanced signal processing techniques such as adaptive
antennas, interference rejection and strong encryption, said Reed.

Advances in technology used to mean equipment became obsolete rather quickly, but with software
radio base stations, the hardware need not be replaced. Only the software needs to be changed.

Blust said service providers and manufacturers don't have to wait until 3G is a reality before
investing in base stations equipped with software radios once they become available.

``I would hate to have put in base stations and cell sites that are only one year old and then have to
tear them out when 3G comes along,'' said Blust. ``Instead, if I buy a software radio now, it forms
an evolution platform that will meet next-generation needs in a couple of years.

``It's like planting the seeds now so I don't have to do a `forklift' migration later,'' he said, referring
to the alternative of completely replacing base station equipment later.

Virginia Tech's Reed sees even more potential for software radios.

``I don't think we will see the full potential of software radios until fourth-generation wireless
systems,'' said Reed. ``We'll see both handsets and base stations with software-defined radios
actually determine which air interface to use according to the current conditions.''

For instance, ``If there is heavy traffic on the network, the handset and base station can reconfigure
themselves to work around it,'' envisioned Reed.

``A few years ago, everyone was concerned about the splintering of standards, and everyone said it
was a tremendous disadvantage,'' he said. ``Maybe it's not so bad after all. It might actually be
good because all of the technologies have their relative strengths and weaknesses, and software
radios can be used to exploit the strengths of each technology.''

Challenges

Dr. David Goodman, director of the Wireless Information Network Laboratory (WINLAB) at
Rutgers, said although software radios are extremely promising, proponents should be careful to
consider some of the hurdles that need to be overcome before software radios can be used to solve
3G problems.

``There is still a lot of work that needs to be done to take advantage of software radios,'' he said.
``People that are counting on software radios to be a panacea for 3G may be assuming too much.''

For the idea to work, the influential infrastructure providers will have to embrace and support the
idea, said BellSouth's Blust.

``Early on, a couple of companies had some ideas, but they weren't the traditional infrastructure
manufacturers of the industry,'' said Blust. ``In the United States, systems are tightly integrated from
the base station to the switch. It is difficult for a third party to bring a product in because there is too
much proprietary equipment.''

Manufacturer Watkins-Johnson has developed and deployed a base station product that
incorporates software radio technology, said Andrew Park, a member of the technical staff at the
company. Watkins-Johnson is exploring partnership opportunities with larger manufacturers, he
said.

``Many of the American carriers are quite conservative in what they want to deploy,'' said Park.
``They want to make sure it doesn't hurt any previous equipment they've deployed.

``Partnering opens up bigger doors,'' continued Park. ``Companies like Lucent (Technologies Inc.),
(L.M.) Ericsson and [Northern Telecom Ltd.] all have very well-established switching systems,
which carriers view as the center of their infrastructure. `[Carriers] want things to work with that.''

In addition, said Park, the amount of proprietary equipment deployed forces carriers to buy
equipment from the same companies that provided the switches, making it difficult for third-party
vendors to come into the market with a product on their own.

Implementing software radios also would be a fairly dramatic departure from the way infrastructure
manufacturers are used to doing business.

``It changes the market value of the product manufacturer. The value shifts to the software,'' said
Blust. ``It's a different way of doing business, and it's not necessarily an easy transition. There are
positive things happening, and efforts are moving forward, but business issues often override.''

In the end, said Blust, software radios can help carriers accomplish one of their top
priorities-making technology transparent to the customer, especially moving toward 3G.

``Service providers are beginning to recognize the long-term benefits,'' he said. ``This industry is
traditionally consumed with next quarter.

``Now they are starting to look more to future opportunities,'' he said.



To: bananawind who wrote (13556)8/12/1998 2:04:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
If there is, as Limtex says, no judicial or political risk that Qualcomm will have their IPR confiscated even to the extent of some compulsory arbitration, I wonder why Qualcomm is mucking around seeking USA government support.

All that's needed is to specify the terms of a licence and go back to making cdma2000 handsets. If Ericsson or others accept the offer and cdma2000 standard, fine, otherwise, just ignore them and get on with making and selling cdma2000 like hot cakes.

This seems to me very big time and politicians can pass laws specifically for wireless technology to require patent holders to comply with certain rules legislated for the greater good. After all, from each according to their ability and to each according to their needs.

I think Qualcomm has done an excellent job of creating a patent portfolio, licensing it widely to establish market demand and patent rights in practise, soliciting USA political support to forestall any silly European legislation and negotiating with L M Ericsson, SETI and Koreans. Not to mention others. The good judgement is evidenced by Motorola buying a licence, but failing to produce their own handsets, while Nokia produced chips and handsets, others are now producing chips, others are sticking just with handsets while buying the chips from Qualcomm. The mix of approaches shows the price of the IPR was well balanced with the technical difficulty of developing products.

The big test is whether L M Ericsson perseveres with their VapourWear SETI project or caves in and buys the rights from Mighty Q. I don't believe they can invent their own multimedia CDMA without using Qualcomm's patents. L M Ericsson sure is taking a risk and their stockholders are perhaps taking fright. Then again, so are everyone's.

Life's a giggle. Whose afraid of the big bad wolf.

Chris Reeder, this is just a correction. No worries bro'. We'll soon be heading for 16000 for Feb 2002.

New Paradigm rulz ok! This is a margin cleanout - bound to happen every now and then to catch the greedy and careless.

Mqurice