BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
| Bad move I can't understand why anyone would pay for something that's already obsolete. Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)?
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." | |
|
 
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: Bad move said by BillRoland  :Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Flash OFDM may very well be better than EV-DO, but who can I get it from? Oh that's right, it's not available. EV-DO wins by default, because Flash OFDM isn't available, and EV-DO is. | |
|
 | 
RTPnc
@69.134.x.x | Re: Bad move using the nextel broadband service was an amazing experience... very fast, stable, available everywhere i went, 'up all the time.' a shame its being shut down. | |
|
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| said by Jeremy341 : said by BillRoland :Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Flash OFDM may very well be better than EV-DO, but who can I get it from? Oh that's right, it's not available. EV-DO wins by default, because Flash OFDM isn't available, and EV-DO is. I was speaking about cell companies, not a consumer like you. And besides, that is completely irrelevant to my post. The fact that a brand new technology, which is better than EV-DO, is not as ubiquitous as EV-DO, is completely irrelevant.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." | |
|
| |
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: Bad move said by BillRoland :The fact that a brand new technology, which is better than EV-DO, is not as ubiquitous as EV-DO, is completely irrelevant. Brand new? Hardly.
As to wanting to know the cellular companies' side of the equation, DrTCP summed it up quite nicely. | |
|
| | |
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs: | Re: Bad move Oh you're right, Flash OFDM has been out since the 1980s. My mistake.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." | |
|
| | | |
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: Bad move said by BillRoland :Oh you're right, Flash OFDM has been out since the 1980s. My mistake. No need to be sarcastic. It's been around since 2000. You were calling it "brand new" compared to EV-DO, which has also been around since 2000. Neither one is brand new, and both are actually about the same age. | |
|
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
| said by BillRoland :I can't understand why anyone would pay for something that's already obsolete. Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Because Flash OFDM requires new equipment and costly upgrades and has backend integration issues with the existing infrastructure of the service provider.
Also when service provider sticks with standards (industry or international standards) the equipment they need to provide to customers becomes cheaper.
EVDO and WCDMA has more potential than what is currently offered by service providers. | |
|
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| Re: Bad move said by DrTCP : said by BillRoland :I can't understand why anyone would pay for something that's already obsolete. Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Because Flash OFDM requires new equipment and costly upgrades and has backend integration issues with the existing infrastructure of the service provider. Also when service provider sticks with standards (industry or international standards) the equipment they need to provide to customers becomes cheaper. EVDO and WCDMA has more potential than what is currently offered by service providers. EVDO and WCDMA, from what I have seen and heard, still don't have the potential of Flash OFDM. I guess I'm just a believer in giving the customer the most advanced technology available and figuring out how to make it all work, rather than just give up on it.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." | |
|
| phinniusj
join:2005-02-04
Old Bridge, NJ
| But a company like Nextel needs to do the upgrades of which you speak anyway.
Also, CDMA and its addons are not standards. They are the proprietary and patented properties of QCOM who has the OEMs by the short hairs for the licenses. The animosity in the OEM community in regard to the licensing fees is legendary.
It seems to me that Flarion's technology would not only give better performance and latency to end users and application developers, but would also provide the OEMs better leverage with technology providers given the competition that would come about. | |
|
| |
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
| Re: Bad move said by phinniusj :But a company like Nextel needs to do the upgrades of which you speak anyway. Since Sprint is buying Nextel and Sprint has already notes operating on CDMA based technology (while Nextel has no real commercial data operation) the natural choice for company to choose EVDO. Having two types of technology for a single company does not make sense. It does not make sense for coverage, it does not make sense to support and maintain two sets of equipment. It makes it harder to integrate two systems of backend servers. It makes it more expensive to stock customer equipment etc. The natural choice for Sprint/Nextel is too unify their operations and equipment.
Nextel had to upgrade its IDEN equipment to operate on the new 1900Mhz bands for which they game up their use of 800Mhz bands. Now, since Nextel is supposed to upgrade anyway, they will upgrade to CDMA equipment creating an opportunity for a bigger Network for Sprint. Both Nextel and Sprint is benefiting from such move.
Also CDMA and its addons are not standards. They are the proprietary and patented properties of QCOM who has the OEMs by the short hairs for the licenses. The animosity in the OEM community in regard to the licensing fees is legendary. CDMA2000 is a standard:
»www.umtsworld.com/technology/cdma2000.htm
There are many patents behind most standards. For example, there are patents behind PCI as well but PCI contributors agree to license their patents in non-distrimitory and reasonable fee basis. This is what QCOM is doing with CDMA and CDMA based data standards.
It seems to me that Flarion's technology would not only give better performance and latency to end users and application developers, but would also provide the OEMs better leverage with technology providers given the competition that would come about. Maybe so. But, the best do not always will. It has to make business sense as well. CDMA2000 makes business sense for existing CDMA based operators. | |
|
|
|
|
