 | Issue: | Latin America IV 2000 |
| Article no.: | 9 | |
| Topic: | 2001 – New Century, Old Lessons | |
| Author: | Marco Aurélio de Almeida Rodrigues | |
| Title: | President | |
| Organisation: | Qualcomm do Brasil | |
| PDF size: | 20KB |
About author
Not available
Article abstract
As we move into a new century, it becomes increasingly obvious to many observers that some of the current technical limitations of wireless communications will, very shortly, be eliminated by newer technologies. It is frustrating for the mass of increasingly sophisticated consumers, that such limitations as access speed and, particularly, the limitations of the infuriating dial-up processes are still a dominant feature of Internet connections. This pervasive consumer discomfort exerts pressure upon manufacturers and technology developers to find and market solutions immediately.
Full Article
Thus, the year 2001 should see the fulfillment of a good many of the promises that various wireless technology providers have been boasting. We will be witnessing the embodiment, on a commercial scale, of the services provided by the GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) in the GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) standard, as well as those provided by the new 1xRTT standard for CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) networks. The fact that a mobile internaut can now be continuously connected, ‘always on’, will certainly act as an incentive for use of a wide variety of new services. In Brazil, in the light of the recent technical advances, one might well ask what the future will be for the existing IS-136 TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) based networks which are, undoubtedly, the prevailing digital wireless technology in the country. For most of the specialised analysts, the future of the IS-136 is highly uncertain. Its future is virtually in the hands of AT&T Wireless in the USA. Should AT&T insist in keeping to its IS 136 networks, the standard will survive a bit longer. Should AT&T, on the other hand, decide to modify its networks, IS 136 will be subjected to a ‘sudden death’. As a result, enormous pressure is being exerted on most cellular carriers in Brazil to decide which path to take – migration to CDMA or to GSM, this second instance representing in my opinion, a serious mistake. First lesson: the majority is not always right. The bidding for licences in Brazil’s so-called C, D and E bands included several interesting requirements, some of which induced use of the GSM technology. At the moment, GSM is the only technology with commercialised products that fully meet the requirements of the frequency bands specified in the bidding process. I will refrain from making detailed comments on the strategic mistake of Brazil’s frequency band decision. This decision ignored the standards of our Mercosur partners and of most of the Americas, markets that now buy hundreds of million US dollars in cellular sets from Brazil. Brazil has now aligned itself with partners to whom it will not sell a pennyworth of goods. I will restrict my comments on what to expect from the GSM technology per se. Unquestionably, the GSM standard is a smashing success. Introduced in the mid 90s, in Europe, it has managed to unify the babble that characterised the analogue cellular telephony in the Old Continent. As the only standard allowed in Europe, and well defined in terms of facilities that permit the integration of the mobile systems of all the countries of the European Community, GSM flourished and expanded at worldwide level. Technically speaking, the GSM is a TDMA technology that is quite different from the American TDMA. It was developed with an emphasis on network integration rather than on the efficient use of the radio-electric spectrum. Accordingly, the GSM represents the worst solution, among the various standards mentioned herein, for spectral utilisation. GSM is highly inefficient in this respect. As such new services as mobile Internet arise, these GSM networks will not be capable of providing them with the necessary quality and throughput. In this context, it is important to disavow some ideas. The existing GSM networks will not enable data transmission above 9.6 kbits, and the boasted services are the same as those allowed by other networks, based on other technologies such as CDMA. The new services that the recently announced GSM/GPRS networks will offer, unquestionably, represent a step forward. These services though, at best, will be limited to a maximum speed of 56 kbits. Since the GSM is predicted to be highly limited, being highly inefficient in terms of spectrum usage, any real success of GSM services will lead to rapid network congestion. GSM/GPRS networks, in order to evolve and grow, will have to plan for a change, in the not too distant future, to another standard called EDGE. EDGE technology is projected to provide for a transmission velocity of up to 384 kbits. This of course, being another technology, would mean the end of GSM-based network evolution. In parallel with the EDGE ‘evolution’, a new technology is being rapidly developed. The new technology is planned to offer the European continent an alternative for third-generation (3G) services; it will permit speeds of 2,000 kbits – significantly higher than EDGE systems. The new standard, although this is not being emphasised, is an outgrowth of the CDMA standard. It is widely recognised that the CDMA standard, in any of its versions, is the only technology capable of responding to future challenges. It will be the base technology for the most important third generation standards. The greatest part of the resources, billions of US dollars that the European community is investing in the introduction of third generation cellular services, is being spent on licences for the use of W-CDMA technology. This raises serious doubts about the parallel efforts exerted to develop the GSM follow-on, EDGE, technology. In this respect, it is important to note that GSM networks can never become third generation networks. The clear fate of such networks is to play the same role for W-CDMA that AMPS performed in the Americas with regard to the introduction of digital technology. It is predictable that GSM will be progressively deactivated as soon as third generation services start to occupy the space now occupied by GSM. It is this GSM standard, ‘boosted’ by the GPRS, which Brazil, after much debate, decided to privilege. We are welcoming its introduction at the precise moment when Europe is investing billions of US dollars to arrive at a new standard to replace the old GSM networks. On the other hand, CDMA networks will have their evolution assured by the introduction of facilities which are called for by the 3G standards. Such evolution will lead to usage compatibility between future and existing networks. The system is developing in stages, just as people grow from ‘childhood’ to adulthood. Brazil will introduce the 1xRTT standard in the coming year; this is a first step towards third generation technology, the ‘childhood’ of CDMA2000. This standard will allow speeds of 144 kbits to be achieved and increase the usage efficiency of the radio spectrum almost twofold. Now, CDMA is already, effectively, the most efficient technology among cellular standards. CDMA will soon have its capacity almost doubled; this practical assurance will enable carriers to introduce new Internet mobile and multimedia services and trust that their networks will be capable of supporting them. Despite this, GSM, since it delivers more than the current analogue and digital systems, is popularly perceived in Brazil to be the technology of the future. Second lesson: The facts, the truth, can be quite different from what people popularly believe to be the truth. Conclusion How can one explain why the defenders of CDMA technology have experienced successive failures in Brazil? First, a majority of the operators adopted a technology that we long claimed to have no future; unfortunately, we were unable to convince the majority of this when the systems were built. Second, we were unable to convince the Brazilian Government (Anatel) that it should not encourage the introduction in the country of a technology that was ending its career. The adoption the 1.8 MHz frequency band, instead of the 1.9 MHz band, will, undoubtedly, prove harmful to Brazil’s interests in the Mercosur and in the Americas. The adoption of the 1.9 MHz band would have allowed the use of either standard, even though most might get the impression that GSM, in this band, would not have much of a chance to economically overcome its competition. Logically, from a technical standpoint, there is no reason for CDMA’s defenders to have failed in their bid for the market at two crucial turning points in the history of mobile communications in Brazil. Third lesson: Knowledge of a subject, alone, will not suffice. It is essential to know how to sell the concept, how to transmit the knowledge to others. Currently, however, on the eve of the auctions for PCS (Personal Communications System) frequencies, I see many recent indications that people are willing to be more flexible. Those who perceive that mistakes have been made are looking for a solution. During 2001, we will still hear much talk about the technological superiority of GSM. In the year 2002, though, I expect to see the position of GSM decay, technology and the position of CDMA, as the only future-proof alternative, consolidate. Fourth lesson: Constant dripping wears the stone.
