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

To: John Carragher who wrote (31815)	6/5/1999 9:58:00 PM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 152472

Very Good Yahoo Post> by: its_really_friday (34/M) 8168 of 8169 I don't mean to speak for Gregg P., but here's my take: <<It amazes me to see that Gregg P. and others still think GSM/TDMA will evolve to 3G through some kind of cdma air-interface.>> Meeting full IMT-2000 specifications for 3G require a CDMA air-interface. Remember all the talk about GSM being replaced by W-CDMA over the past several months? The question is not if, but when will GSM evolve from a TD-based air-interface to a CD-based air-interface. <<Note his words: 'GSM=CDMA'(???)>> GSM = Global System for Mobile communications. Think of GSM is a label for marketing and other purposes. But currently, GSM has a TDMA air-interface. But can GSM have a CDMA air-interface? Yes, of course. A CDMA air-interface can sit on top of a GSM core network. Call it GSM, C-GSM, GSM-2000, whatever. And yes, this CD air-interface can be deployed on top of the GSM core network before the full IMT-2000 specifications are realized. So the term "GSM is toast" could refer to GSM's air-interface, but not the GSM core network. Since GSM with a CD air-interface would be considered GSM, then the "GSM is toast" mantra does not apply here... <<Is it their tunnel-vision (un-awareness of EDGE) or is it cdma-propaganda do You think? They simply don't get it. >> No, I think the folks understand EDGE and its role. Some call it a migration path and/or marketing tool. You seem take it for granted that GPRS/EDGE/W-CDMA will be the carrier-preferred migration path to 3G. That is certainly not the case, even if these technologies are approved as such 3G migration milestones. You can create a standard, but that does not guarantee it would be widely adopted. Take, for example, the fate of UWC-136. Many analysts see the proposal dying because it cannot evolve into a solution meeting all the IMT-2000 requirements. I suppose GPRS addresses low data rates (LDR); while EDGE addresses medium data rates (MDR). Only W-CDMA (if modified for commercial viability) is designed to work also with high data rates (HDR) (Obviously, W-CDMA can operate a LDR/MDR rates too). One major drawback of GSM, is that the current TD air-interface cannot support HDR speeds of up to 2 MB/s. Ericsson and Nokia are positioning GPRS and EDGE as 3G migration milestones from a marketing perspective. We all know, from a marketing perspective, anything goes. You can call AMPS a 3G migration milestone if you desire. However, one only has to look at the technical and logistical perspectives to assess the validity of GPRS and EDGE as 3G migration milestones. Let me see if I got the marketing positioning correct: High-speed circuit switched data (HSCSD) is both a relatively minor hardware and software upgrade to existing GSM networks, utilizing multiple slots of data to achieve speeds. General Packet Radio Switching (GPRS), entails packet switching; and because it means another way of driving the physical layer, extensive hardware changes will take place. Meanwhile, a new protocol stack will entail all new software. Enhanced Data for Global Evolution (EDGE) is a new modulation technique that will also require more new hardware and all new software. Keep in mind that capacity gains are critical, even at low and medium data rates, because this variable is what determines how many users can utilize packet switching and at what speeds. This is why spectrum efficiency is so important. And it is the reason why CD air-interfaces can do HDR, while TD air-interfaces are stretched well beyond their limits. Posted: 06/05/1999 06:22 pm EDT as a reply to: Msg 8164 by Zoogin97 View Replies to this Message Related Links Quote & News Profile Research