🚀 go-pugleaf

"John Fulton" <jfulton@actrix.gen.nz> wrote in message
news:QO7C8.1404$A07.210837@news02.tsnz.net...
> In message <3cd8436d.1424378@news.caverock.net.nz> -
> tennyson@caverock.net.nz.NO_SPAM (Snoopy) writes:
<snip>
> GSM offers global roaming in many more countries than the three that CDMA
> does.  While CDMA may be a more modern system, GSM has a much greater
market
> penetration.  The example of Microsoft tends to indicate what market
> penetration can achieve!
>
I haven't been following the argument too much, but just because a
technology dominates the market, does not make it a better technology.
People will not necessarily adopt the best technology, but will often follow
the crowd. For example, BETA was a technically better video system, yet
almost everyone has VHS.

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. 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).

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 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.

--
Peter Murray
open i
http://www.blenheim.co.nz/open_i