🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 9 May 2002 00:51:13 +1200, "Peter Murray"
<peter.murray@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>
>New technology is often restricted by having to be compatible with existing
>technology, but with cellphones, the network provider just installs the new
>technology on the cell towers alongside their old system and starts
>promoting new handsets which can access it. 
>
>
So if one phone provider has more towers, we could get stuck with an
inferior technology system sinmply because the provider with the
greatest number of towers has more relaying outlets?

Does CDMA have the same 'range' (if that is the right term) as GSM?
Could it be really as simple as putting up CDMA relayers on the
existing GSM towers if Vodaphone wanted to migrate to CDMA?  Would
existing resource consents cover such a thing?
>
>
>From the user's point of view, they don't really care what acronym 
>the technology uses as long as it does
>what they want (or think they want).
>
>
This remark gets to the heart of what I am trying to get at.
Broadband technology with cellphones will allow all sorts of things.
But will people try it because they think they want it, then discard
it once the novelty has worn off?

Perhaps an analogy might be with the introduction of the first
generation of cellphones.   The number of users has gone up
dramatically but the spend per average user has gone down.   And
contrary to the doom and gloom merchants, the usage of fixed lines has
not dropped off.

If people buy a 3G cellphone because they think they might need it,
will it just languish in the bottom drawer when people find out how
much it costs to operate it?   This might even be the case with the 2G
phones around at the moment!  

Anyone out there own an 027 phone?   If so, are you using it as much
now as in the first month that you bought it?  How much more in
today's dollar terms would you be prepared to pay per month to be able
to have access to a sophisticated 3G phone system?
>
>
>I predict that the next generation of cell phone handsets will use either a
>completely different encoding and transmission system offering a much higher
>bandwidth 
>
>
That will require lots of investment on behalf of the
telecommunications companies.
>
>
>or will use two different existing systems in the one handset to
>provide greater coverage and higher bandwidth. This could even solve the
>number portability problem.
>
>
Somehow piggyback CDMA on GSM?   Is that technically feasible? SNOOPY



-- 
Attention Spammers.   All UCE to me *will* be reported
                    http://spamcop.net
No second chances, and soon, no e-mail address for you!
--