Should I go with GSM or CDMA?

[meballard]

Originally posted by MethodMan


The FCC just decreed that analog will be phased out in the next five years. That means either cdma or gsm or even both will have to pick up the slack.

No they didn't, the requirement to have two analog carriers using a set amount of frequency in all areas with analog coverage is the only thing that's changing, the carriers will have the option to decrease the amount of spectrum used for analog, or one carrier (or both if they wanted two) have the option of dropping out analog service in an area, which isn't an option now. No where does it say analog has to be phased out.

[MethodMan]

Originally posted by meballard
No they didn't, the requirement to have two analog carriers using a set amount of frequency in all areas with analog coverage is the only thing that's changing, the carriers will have the option to decrease the amount of spectrum used for analog, or one carrier (or both if they wanted two) have the option of dropping out analog service in an area, which isn't an option now. No where does it say analog has to be phased out.

In other words, analog is as good as dead. You really think the carriers will pour money into mainting analog equipment for the next five years? Once you relieve the carriers from this requirement, they'll soon replace failing analog cell sites with digital. No need to beat around the bush.

[meballard]

Originally posted by MethodMan


In other words, analog is as good as dead. You really think the carriers will pour money into mainting analog equipment for the next five years? Once you relieve the carriers from this requirement, they'll soon replace failing analog cell sites with digital. No need to beat around the bush.

First of all, not all carriers who operate analog networks have the money or desire to upgrade their network (in really rural areas, as some of them are very small). Also, as long as the network is being actively used, I don't see the carriers discontinuing the network, only reducing the capacity (or letting just one carrier manage it in each area), since there are still a number of subscribers who use it for various reasons, like ones that are built into their car, or just haven't upgraded, or alarm systems and the like...

[ImmerStark]

operators that have analog networks will be more inclined to use cdma than gsm becasue a cdma overlay requires much less money, and provides much better rural coverage.

another decifding factor in which decision an operator makes is which company it is an affiliate of or does a lot of roaming business with.

[MethodMan]

Originally posted by meballard
First of all, not all carriers who operate analog networks have the money or desire to upgrade their network (in really rural areas, as some of them are very small). Also, as long as the network is being actively used, I don't see the carriers discontinuing the network, only reducing the capacity (or letting just one carrier manage it in each area), since there are still a number of subscribers who use it for various reasons, like ones that are built into their car, or just haven't upgraded, or alarm systems and the like...

I disagree. I don't see any carrier that is willing to provide analog service. The carriers will find the funds to upgrade or lose more money in maintaing an analog network.
It costs more to operate an analog network then it does for a digital. That's why CDMA 800MHz and GSM 850MHz (900Mhz in europe) exists for the sole purpose of providing a signal over large expanses of land while minimizing the number of cell towers needed.
For those subscribers who still need analog coverage, they will be encouraged to upgrade their hardware or face the risk of having no service. The carriers are not obliged to provide legacy support at their own expense.

[MethodMan]

Originally posted by ImmerStark
operators that have analog networks will be more inclined to use cdma than gsm becasue a cdma overlay requires much less money, and provides much better rural coverage.

It can also be said that carriers that have TDMA coverage for the rural areas (quite a few) can easily upgrade to GSM service.

[ImmerStark]

a tdma to gsm upgrade is not easy at all, it requires and entire new core network and the adition of more base stations. and at the same frequency cdma gets close to twice the range of gsm and in flat open areas tdma based technologies like gsm have a very difficult time coping with co-channel interferance. something people need to remember is that gsm was never designed for rural ocverage, it was designed for the densely populated european countries, and it has no true upgrade path to 3g(it instead has a series of forklift upgrades and the construction of two intirely new networks)

[emag*rad]

Originally posted by ImmerStark
a tdma to gsm upgrade is not easy at all, it requires and entire new core network and the adition of more base stations. and at the same frequency cdma gets close to twice the range of gsm and in flat open areas tdma based technologies like gsm have a very difficult time coping with co-channel interferance. something people need to remember is that gsm was never designed for rural ocverage, it was designed for the densely populated european countries, and it has no true upgrade path to 3g(it instead has a series of forklift upgrades and the construction of two intirely new networks)

Co-channel interference is less of an issue in rural areas.

Zealot.

[ImmerStark]

i was wondering whre you had gotten off to.

you should be proud of me i am on the verge of trying attws gsm, i just need to find the t68i for cheap (gotta save my money for my sanyo 5300 ya know)

[emag*rad]

Originally posted by ImmerStark
i was wondering whre you had gotten off to.

you should be proud of me i am on the verge of trying attws gsm, i just need to find the t68i for cheap (gotta save my money for my sanyo 5300 ya know)

I'm not a GSM zealot. I'm looking forward to Cingular 800 GSM only because the phone selection is (will be) better than TDMA. Since I have access to any phone Cingular offers or plans to offer, I can play/have more than one phone but only one number (SIM). Plus there is and will be many 800/1900 GSM data modules shortly.

More importantly, there are better hardware/software appliction development opportunities for me (both personaly and professionally).

Personally, I am very impressed with countless innovations that Qualcomm has infused into CDMA. BREW is an excellent idea, its call capacity, high data rates, etc., I believe the TDMA carriers may have made a misstep in their technology selection, a technology, that unlike CDMA, is not particularily suited to the US wireless environment.

[ImmerStark]

i take it as a term of endearment when you call me a zealot, i think it is funny, you are an all right guy, i just like to give you a hard time, and you like to do the same to me it's all good

but yeah, the tdma operators going to gsm instead of cdma was a very stupid choice, it is going to cost them so much more money, and they are not going to break even for 10-15 years on the investments

[emag*rad]

Yes, "zealot" is a term of endearment. You're an alright guy too. I suffer from CDMA envy.

[MethodMan]

Originally posted by ImmerStark

tdma to gsm upgrade is not easy at all, it requires and entire new core network and the adition of more base stations.

.....

but yeah, the tdma operators going to gsm instead of cdma was a very stupid choice, it is going to cost them so much more money, and they are not going to break even for 10-15 years on the investments

??? So you're saying that upgrading tdma to gsm is harder and will cost more. All carriers are PROFIT driven. For them to choose a standard that is more difficult and expensive OVER a standard that you claim (cdma) is cheaper and easier to implement isn't a good business decision.
Why would they even do this?

[ImmerStark]

politics and ego, they don't want to admit that they made an incorrect technology choice in the first place, and they feel pressured by other companies to go the gsm rout. what gets me is att's deal with docomo only means they have to use i-mode and eventually upgrade to wcdma, att could have easily upgraded to cdma2000 and had it running in existing spectrum in all of their markets by now and used the added data revenue to pay for later on when it was practical add wcdma, then they could maintain both technologies(one to keep docomo happy, and one that would really be the money maker)

there is a good white paper published by the shosteck group concerning the upgrade path of tdma operators.

http://www.cdg.org/tech/shosteck/CDG...per_060801.pdf

[VTECMAN]

Originally posted by jh811
that's why you go prepaid SIM when travelling abroad. At least you have the option to roam with GSM. Your CDMA phone is a useless paperweight anywhere outside N. AMerica isn't it??

Now now, there are a few countries that have cdma now. around 12 or something..