(keitai-l) Re: What's wrong in Europe

From: Benedict Evans <inherent_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 07/26/01
Message-ID: <LAW2-F46Fsxf4yp8ARf000082b3@hotmail.com>
So, you're saying:

*Wideband CDMA is not substantially more spectrally efficient than GSM
*EDGE is available off-the-shelf today to GSM operators
*GSM operators are not experiencing capacity constraints

Those are pretty challenging assertions, to put it mildly. Actually, I'm not 
sure about the second one. You misunderstood some of what I said, but then 
you're not that clear yourself;)

You keep talking about 'CDMA' as though this is 3G. It isn't. What on earth 
is the relevance of comparing the cost of a 'CDMA' base station 'a few years 
ago' with the cost of GSM, as though that tells us anything about the 
relative cost of providing high density service in three to five years time 
using 3G v. GSM?

EDGE is not 'available'. 'Available' means I can go out and buy a working 
solution. EDGE will become available for European GSM operators in late 
2002/early 2003- about the same time as their 3G networks are being turned 
on. Handsets may well take longer - especially given that they'll hardly be 
a priority for the vendors.

Why would I deploy EDGE if I've got a 3G licence? I have to build 3G anyway 
- or write off the licence costs. EDGE actively reduces my voice capacity. 
It confuses my customers. It won't let me offer the services that my 
competitor is offering over 3G. And my cash position has nothing to do with 
that. The only people who *might* deploy EDGE are Blu and Bouygues - but Blu 
will get bought by a 3G new entrant and Bouygues will get a licence next 
year - so no deployment at all.

>GSM, allocated only a fraction of the extra spectrum allocated now for 3G, 
>would be able to handle all the voice >traffic you can possibly think of.

That's a staggering assertion. Would you really claim that a technology 
concieved for maybe 4m customers per country is best suited to replace the 
entire fixed access voice infrastructure? Do you think doubling capacity is 
enough?

>As far as fast data goes, it is more likely that this market will be >taken 
>by WLAN and 3G will be too late for it. WLAN is yet another 3G >alternative 
>that is again far more cost effective and it is much >faster today than 3G 
>will ever be.

What makes you think mobile operators will lose a moment's sleep if no-one 
ever connects a single laptop to 3G?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


[ Did you check the archives?   http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Thu Jul 26 10:31:46 2001