Welcome to Our WirelessAdvisor Community!

You are viewing our forums as a GUEST. Please join us so you can post and view all the pictures.
Registration is easy, fast and FREE!

CDMA & GSM buildout maps???

Discussion in 'GENERAL Wireless Discussion' started by DaveyJ, Mar 31, 2003.

  1. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    CDMA & GSM buildout maps???

    OK, so I am skeptical of which protocol will be the next "TDMA" of the US in terms of coverage (TDMA is practically everywhere in terms of digital).

    Does anyone know of any good, up to date, build out maps of current GSM & CDMA networks? I've found a bunch, but most are outdated and looking at individual states via FCC maps is too time consuming. I've had both GSM and CDMA phones. From what I can tell the CDMA networks are leading the pack (in terms of coverage), but with Cingular and AT&T offering GSM buildout at the present time I'm not so sure. I would definitely go back to T-Mobile if they just offered service in one of the areas I frequent (and released the color SideKick). I like the fact that with GSM I'm not tied to a phone and the GSM phones I've owned seem like they have far better build quality, although my VX4400 isn't bad. Then we get into things like 1XEV-DO and with Verizon pushing the beast and seemingly phone providers ramping up to produce I'm leery that because CDMA has an edge today CDMA will be the obvious choice in 2-3 years.

    Hmmm, where did I put my magic 8 ball???

    Thoughts, links to maps???
     
  2. northform

    northform Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    0
    The reason that CDMA has had better coverage is because it was built out on the cellular (800MHz band) which transmits further while GSM, until now, was limited to the PCS (1900) band. Cingular is currently rolling out GSM800 in regions where they do not have PCS licences and will roll out GSM800 everywhere they have 800 licences by the end of the year. ATT is rolling out GSM1900 everywhere, but will be adding GSM800 in all of the areas that they have 800 licences by the end of the year.

    It doesn't matter if CDMA has an edge in coverage today. For the future, coverage will depend on which networks pick GSM vs. CDMA and what their coverage is. ATT GSM and Cingular GSM will have better coverage than their TDMA networks by the year's end. A "head start" doesn't matter here since carriers like ATT or Cingular have already built the towers and that is the difficult part because of the building limitations imposed. Adding a technology to a tower is a relatively easy thing to do and won't slow the progress of these wireless networks. In MA, ATT's GSM coverage is already a good bit greater than their TDMA coverage.

    As for technology, remember that GSM (EDGE/wCDMA) is what 85% of the world has chosen and committed to for 3G. The rest of the world is either going with 1xEV-DO/DV, remains undecided, or has chosen a completely different alternative like TD-SCDMA. GSM's future is not in question.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "Providers ramping up to produce I'm leery that because..."

    There really aren't any good coverage maps. For GSM, the GSM Alliance maps used to be a good, neutral ground, but they don't take into account GSM800 coverage which makes it look like Cingular only has coverage in the Pacific States and the Carolinas. Check out http://www.adam-phones.co.uk/usaphone.htm for the GSM Alliance/Coversoft maps, but remember that they don't take into account GSM800 (not to mention that they only show "high quality coverage") which would be like removing all of Verizon and Alltel's cellular coverage from a CDMA map. That link will also show you Nextel's iDEN coverage. As for CDMA maps, there is no impartial governing body for the CDMA standard and so truth is harder to come by in the CDMA world. Qualcomm would love you to believe that Verizon's America's Choice network was an indication of CDMA coverage in the US, but most of the America's Choice network is analog. The closest thing to a Verizon coverage map can be found at http://www.verizonwireless.com/ics/plsql/prepay.intro (the link that says View PREPAY Network rate area). The problem is that map OVERSTATES Verizon's own coverage since it is merely an indication of their licenced area and what technology they use there. If you look at the areas where Verizon is PCS (light green) you will notice that their coverage is stringy. Also notice that they have still not converted a good portion of their own network to CDMA (the dark green areas are analog).

    In WI, you can see that Verizon doesn't have much coverage at all. T-Mobile actually has better coverage.
     
  3. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Although you bring up a few good points I think you are a tad bit biased towards GSM. If a head start is no advantage then why did VHS take over Betamax (for the general public?)? They had more product on the shelves faster and it was more readily available. I'm just saying that if CDMA networks are built out first and customers see new features they can use then they may opt to put their money in that technology leaving new buildouts / conversions of other networks to GSM without funding.

    Also 85% of the world hasn't chosen GSM, they were forced to use it based upon a decision by their government. The reason CDMA took off in the US is because there is no regulation on that matter. And even though GSM was first to market it seems as though total CDMA coverage is further along than GSM here in the US.

    Verizon may not have a "home area" that is greater than T-Mobile. BUT, with extended network combined Verizon is the clear choice of coverage. Also, T-Mobile does not own all of what they show on their map of WI. A BIG chunk of that is Einstein PCS that is a partner with them. So, in all reality they don't have better coverage, I know, I happen to live here.

    As for "high quality" how can you judge? I'm curious, really, I have had no problems with dropped calls or echos since I've had Verizon, the only problem you'll find I've had was customer service and a junky phone. And that in itself is a reason why I was considering going back to GSM -- quality of phones. BUT, again in that case it seems CDMA networks are progressing towards future technologies faster (ie 1XEV-DO). If Verizon is in fact rolling out these to the public I would like to know where the EDGE platforms stand.

    The prepay map you refer to is not correct. Considering I roam on Alltel and Sprint 1x all the time and those parts of WI are not even documented on the PrePay network. That is no good way to judge Verizon's digital coverage. In fact the last PRL update I got gave me digital extended area in the rest of the areas I travel, so it seems to me, even though it is not Verizon's network, I still am getting "better" service as time goes on.

    I wasn't asking for a lecture on why GSM reigns supreme in your eyes, I was simply asking for up to date coverage maps (which seem to be non-existent) as well as unbiased opinions on the subject. Thanks for the reply though...
     
  4. Buickman

    Buickman Gearhead/Gadget freak
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    901
    Cell Tower Picture Gallery:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Bye Bye MN, Hello Cali
    My Phone:
    BB 9550, Moto Droid
    Wireless Provider(s):
    Verizon on both phones
    Daveyj, being your nieghbor to the west I must say that I am happy to see CDMA catching on better in this part of the country. We now have Verizon, Alltel, US Cell, Cellone west, and Midwest wireless. From what I can tell, northern MN and northeastern WI are about the only areas around here that dont have carriers building CDMA systems. With all those carriers covering large areas and Sprint covering the main hiways things are looking up.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  5. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    I need to mention one little point. [​IMG]

    Western Europe has selected EDGE/WCDMA as their route to 3G. This is by regulation. It may come as a surprise, but Western Europe is not 85% of the world. Just because a service provider uses GSM today, does not mean that they will necessarily choose EDGE/WCDMA as their 3G solution.

    Perhaps they will. Perhaps the will choose EV-DO and EV-DV. Or...perhaps they will choose another solution such as TD-SCDMA. Only some of the service providers outside of Western Europe have selected their 3G solution. I do not know of any place outside of Western Europe where all the service providers are locked into a specific 3G solution.

    I will agree that there is a lot of talk today about selecting this or that system. Until the infrastructure is installed, only Western Europe has their 3G solution cast in stone.

    Therefore, I would say that much more of the world is undecided today than 15%.

    The rest of the world can wait until one of the technologies is really proven to perform consistent with its hype.
     
  6. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly, and that is a big reason why I went from T-Mobile back to Verizon. Is Cellone split up into smaller divisions? The Cellone dealer here is still pushing TDMA and when I checked with a rep they were like "CDMA what?". Could just be a clueless rep, which is probably the logical answer, but if you know more fill me in.

    I just wish that when in extended areas on CDMA that I would get a V/M indicator. Anyone have any more info on that? My caller ID works fine. But, with old school TDMA it didn't matter what network you were on, as long as it was digital those simple indicators work. So what's the big hold up? Yeah, if you notice Buickman all of I-94 from the Cities to Madison is now 1x Sprint (Extended Area on Verizon). Before it was mostly analog from Eau Claire until around Portage. Score for me because that's a long stretch of road I frequent to go home from college!

    Bugwart, thanks for the backup on the "future of wireless". I am a common person to contribute to wireless "churn". But, I like to try and look ahead to see what's best for me. I'm glad our govt. doesn't put Big Brother in action and force a technology on us. But, it leaves our wireless networks sparse at best when something new comes out. At least it promotes competition, altough if I had to take a stab at it, there's gonna be roughly 2-3 main players in wireless in 5 years. Most of the smaller guys will be swallowed up in the process but at least there will be some more conformity. But, that's just my guess and am open to constructive criticism!!! [​IMG]
     
  7. northform

    northform Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    0
    You asked for more than coverage maps.

    I posted the prepay map because it is impossible to tell what areas of the America's Choice map are digital and what areas are analog. Yes, Verizon does allow you to roam on to other carriers and I thought that I had made it clear that I was only talking about their OWN coverage. Some of Verizon's roamin partners might be TDMA/AMPS and could go with GSM when upgrading and not CDMA.

    It doesn't matter what technology gets in first. Unlike the VHS/Betamax situation, people don't invest in a huge ammount of content for one network. The only thing that ties you to either network technology is your phone. But that more ties you to the carrier than to the technology since I could not use an old Verizon phone with Sprint service no matter how compatible it is, nor could I use a Sprint phone with Verizon's service. So people have to re-purchase a phone when switching carriers anyway and that is the only thing tieing them to a specific carrier. Not to mention the fact that people like to update their phones as new ones come out. In the VHS/Betamax situation, people spent a lot of money buying VHS tapes and they wanted a player that could play them which Betamax couldn't. Since you have to re-buy your phone (the equivalent of the VHS tapes) anyway, it doesn't matter what technology gets entrenched first.

    ATT and Cingular have both said that EDGE and, in selected markets, wCDMA will be available by the end of the year. Of course, I wouldn't put much stake in this, but then I wouldn't put much stake in Verizon's rollout plans either.

    "Already over 85% of the world's network operators have chosen 3GSM's* underlying technology platform to deliver their third generation services." "*3GSM represents third generation services delivered on an evolved core GSM network. 3GSM services are delivered at a technical level on third generation standards developed by 3GPP, which utilise air interfaces for W-CDMA and, in some specified markets, EDGE." This comes straight from the GSM Alliance (gsmworld.com).

    CDMA is more built out today because Verizon has CDMA800 in so many markets. As Cingular rolls out GSM800 and smaller, regional carriers add GSM to their services, GSM's coverage will improve. There is no advantage to being first. If there were, we would still be using analog. Nothing stops me from switching technologies every time that my contract expires.

    I think that the greatest support for the fact that being first won't matter came in a recent report from EMC (http://www.emc-database.com/) which said that, in 2007, CDMA will have grown from 43% of the US wireless market today to 44% of the US wireless market. On the other hand, GSM will have grown from 11% of the US wireless market today to 33% of the US wireless market in 2007. That is the number of customers of each technology, not companies using it or coverage. So in 4 years, GSM will have trippled its customer base while CDMA's will have remained relatively unchanged. CDMA is king today because of Verizon's network, but Cingular has a fine network as well and they have chosen GSM. At the same time, ATT is rolling out GSM1900 and will have GSM800 out by the end of the year.

    **************(If there is one thing you read in this post, let it be this) GSM's coverage is going to grow by a huge margin in the next year because ATT and Cingular's TDMA footprint will also carry GSM. CDMA's coverage will not grow anywhere near as much because CDMA carriers have to add towers, not just upgrade towers. This gets to the heart of your question. Both T-Mobile and Sprint offer services here in MA with a relatively similar footprint. That foorprint hasn't changed for the better part of a decade - for either carrier. It is difficult to build out more towers. Generally, for CDMA to expand new towers must be build. GSM's expansion comes by converting existing network's footprints to GSM. That is general since USCC is converting to CDMA, unlike ATT and Cingular, but it does provide a concrete, logical reason why GSM's footprint in the US will grow a lot while CDMA's won't.
     
  8. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    First off, anything you believe in forecasts will not be a dead on truism in any means. In 2007 GSM could have been found insuperior by some technological breakthrough with CDMA and all carriers may be switching to something totally different by then. Same goes for CDMA, forecasting 4 years out in ANY technology is a given false. Secondly, Cingular and AT&T's current TDMA networks both rely heavily on roaming partners. So, unless they can convince the small guys to go GSM vs. CDMA they will not have the buildout footprint you currently think they will.

    On your last "must read" paragraph you make a huge assumption that all existing TDMA towers will naturally go to GSM. How do you figure? A lot of regional carriers are going way of CDMA. As well as I'm sure a lot are going GSM. But for the little guy and reports I've read I think most that are choosing CDMA are doing so for capacity reasons as well as a wider and simpler future / upgrade path.

    As for rollout of new technology the fact that Verizon has been testing 1XEV-DO since late 2001 leads me to believe that initial rollout will be relatively soon. And I still say that one of AT&T & Cingulars biggest challenges are existing customer base. It's hard to convince someone they "need" a new phone because we want to offer you more technologies. Most people don't like it when they're told to do something and if they have to shell out even a measly $25 for a new phone they won't be happy. What you may not see is that this forum and others like it only constitute for maybe a percent or two of these large companies customer base. People like my parents and grandparents will not see why they need a new phone when their existing one works fine. And unless AT&T and Cingular are willing to shell out millions of dollars in free, cheap phones they'll still end up with disgruntled customers. Yes, regional TDMA carriers going to CDMA have the same issue, but on a much smaller scale. To me, it seems the CDMA path towards newer technology had one great silver lining in the fact that all new infrastructure is backwards compatible.
     
  9. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    This is a true statement. However, it is a statement made with the intent of marketing GSM/GPRS/EDGE/WCDMA.

    Your conclusion, in the following quote, is exactly what the marketing folks at the GSM Alliance wanted you to infer from their statement. There is nothing wrong with making statements to push their technology. This is, after all, the job of the GSM Alliance. But your statement that, "As for technology, remember that GSM (EDGE/wCDMA) is what 85% of the world has chosen and committed to for 3G." is not what the GSM Alliance said in their statement.

    The GSM Alliance only said that <u>GSM</u> had been chosen by "...85% of the world's network operators..." They lead their readers to draw the conclusion that all of these network operators would choose EDGE and/or WCDMA, but they did not state that because it is not true.

    The choice for a GSM operator to go GPRS is really a no brainer. GPRS is simpy multi-slot packet switched GSM. The upgrade is rather modest in cost and complexity. However, the next steps along the GSM-&gt;WCDMA pathway are neither cheap nor simple. No one knows the actual costs of upgrading to EDGE, because no operator has done it. DoCoMo's costs of deploying their FOMA WCDMA system are in the public record. These costs were very high. SK Telecom rolled out a larger EV-DO system for much lower costs.

    DoCoMo's costs may not be representative of WCDMA network deployment elsewhere, however we will have a better idea of the costs as more WCDMA networks are depoyed in Europe and Australia.

    Once the world's network operators know the actual costs of deploying WCDMA and EV-DO/EV-DV, they will be able to make intelligent decisions. Until that time, it is simply not possible to predict the 3G solution of most of the world. (Except, of course, the 3G solution of the Western European telcos. They must deploy WCDMA as a requirement of their operating licenses.)
     
  10. Matt

    Matt Twin girls!
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2001
    Messages:
    4,882
    Cell Tower Picture Gallery:
    2
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Lititz, Pa.
    My Phone:
    MyTouch 4G
    Wireless Provider(s):
    T-Mobile
    Slide 14 of the link below (from AT&T) says EDGE will cost $1-2 per POP to upgrade.

    link
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  11. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, honestly, if that were the case, why wouldn't they all be EDGE from the get go? I think your slide is a bit off. Maybe 10-20K for updates at a POP sound more reasonable, and even those numbers may be low. This is commercial grade equipment capable of supporting hundreds and hundreds of users. $1-2 is not a realistic number.
     
  12. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    The real issue is actual costs per POP, not estimates. Since no one has ever installed an EDGE system before, the accuracy of the estimate could be poor.

    The "Big Dig" in Boston is now many times its original estimated cost. No one had ever done a project like the big dig before.

    I am not trying to imply that EDGE is like the fiasco in Boston. I am only trying to point out that estimates for a new and unproven technology can be expected to be much lower than the actual costs.

    How close to reality were DoCoMo's estimates for the FOMA deployment?
     
  13. Matt

    Matt Twin girls!
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2001
    Messages:
    4,882
    Cell Tower Picture Gallery:
    2
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Lititz, Pa.
    My Phone:
    MyTouch 4G
    Wireless Provider(s):
    T-Mobile
    DaveyJ - the reason they aren't all EDGE from the get-go is that there are no handsets yet. A few have been announced but AFAIK are not yet commerically available.

    Davey and Bugwart - well those numbers are direct from AT&T, so......I am just the messenger here. $1-2 per POP is $500 million dollars approximately, so it's not an insignificant cost. Of course, the estimate could be wrong. We won't know how much they've spent until they are done. I thought I read somewhere that T-Mobile said it woudl cost them $3 per POP to go to EDGE (about $750M) but I don't remember where I read that....
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  14. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    Sorry, I did not mean for you to infer that that I thought it was your estimate.

    I was simply trying to explain that any estimate is just that - an estimate.

    Since no one has done an EDGE system, there is nothing to base the estimate on except guess work and assumptions. Errors in assumptions have a bad habit of geometrically increasing the total error.

    In jargon, AT&T's and T Mobile's numbers are commonly reffered to as SWAGs - Scientific Wild ___ Guesses.

    I hope that neither T Mobile nor AT&T have bet the store on their guesstimates.
     
  15. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't believe that is the limiting factor. Since Hutchison launched it's UMTS/WCDMA network as of the first of this month they have not released the handsets yet. Although they are coming, the network was launched before the access method.

    Hutchison Launches 3G

    If in fact you were referring to no EDGE handsets at all Nokia I believe is producing the 6200 which is EDGE. However, to me, it seems that the 1xEV-DO handsets are more readily available right now and even in use. Which is surprising I guess because I figure that GSM would have an edge (no pun intended) because it is deployed in more places than CDMA worldwide (I think). The only "real" 3G networks up seem to be based on CDMA technology, maybe in part because of the lack of EDGE handsets?!?! Anyway... Just a few of my thoughts.
     
  16. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    There should be quite a few EV-DO handsets available today. SK Telecom launched EV-DO in October 2001.

    NTT DoCoMo has FOMA handsets, perhaps FOMA is a different frequency than Hutchison's WCDMA in Australia.
     
  17. Matt

    Matt Twin girls!
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2001
    Messages:
    4,882
    Cell Tower Picture Gallery:
    2
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Lititz, Pa.
    My Phone:
    MyTouch 4G
    Wireless Provider(s):
    T-Mobile
    davey - can one buy a 6200? I know it has been announced, but can you buy it?

    bugwart - I feel the estimates should be reasonable. Exact? Of course not. TM has been installing EDGE base stations for a while....all of their 2002 and forward market launches were built with GSM/GPRS/EDGE from the start) So they should have a handle on how much it is costing them.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  18. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    We shall see once it is operational.

    Installed cost is one issue. Start-up cost is another.

    I have done many, many new fab start-ups in the semiconductor industry.

    You always find problems during start-up. Most are unexpected. Many are expensive.

    The first start-up of a new system will always have nasty surprises.

    This is not a reflection on the technology, or the company installing it. It is simply a fact of life.
     
  19. hillbilly44

    hillbilly44 Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0
    Matt/Bugwart;

    The model you are mentioning is in the testing phase. The Edge basestations is really just a radio upgrade not the basestation themselves. There is some software however that is required to make Edge work. Some of the equipment vendors have in available in a beta version but, it's only in the testing phase right now. Look for Edge to be "on-air" by the end of the year.
     
  20. Buickman

    Buickman Gearhead/Gadget freak
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    901
    Cell Tower Picture Gallery:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Bye Bye MN, Hello Cali
    My Phone:
    BB 9550, Moto Droid
    Wireless Provider(s):
    Verizon on both phones
    DaveyJ, didn't mean to confuse you there. the Cellone I was refering to is Western wireless in the Dakotas, Nebraska, and western MN. By the way, do you know how Alltels CDMA conversion is going in WI, I spend some time southwest of Eau Claire in the summers and at the end of last year I would occasionally get a digital signal, but usually only analog.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  21. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    I am speaking of the overall startup cost.

    The upgrade includes some modifications to the transmitters, since the air interface is different than GPRS. But the bigger question is the handsets.

    In the cases of both GPRS and wCDMA, handset problems delayed commercial deployment by <u>many</u> months. The major problems involved hand-off and battery life. I am quite certain that the handset manufacturers believed that they had solved these problems before the systems were switched on.

    EDGE handsets will need to hand-off not only to other EDGE towers, but also to GPRS, and GSM towers. I can not believe that this will be trivial. For example, will a Nokia EDGE handset hand off to a Nortel GSM tower or an Ericsson GPRS tower? This is a reasonable question, since T Mobile UK recently found that one of the Nokia GPRS handset models that they were selling would not work on T Mobile's GPRS network.

    There will be problems. I hope that they are not too difficult to solve. The last thing that the wireless industry needs if for consumers to feel that the products do not match the hype.
     
  22. hillbilly44

    hillbilly44 Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bugwart:

    I think you may have a bit of a misperception about EDGE, GPRS, & GSM. First of all EDGE stands for Enhanced Data for GSM Evolution, so an EDGE phone will hand off to a GSM site, it's just a sofware (& radio)upgrade to the GPRS network, which dosen't have anything to do with voice traffic. The way the protocol works if the EDGE radio goes out, then the other radion in the site(sector) will reconfigure to handle data traffic at GPRS speed. The Nokia GPRS problem was with data transfer which was corrected with a software upgrade. The Bigger problem will be with UMTS (WCDMA). That's going to require additional spectrum and a dual mode phone that dosen't yet handover from GSM to WCDMA.
     
  23. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    I agree with you. That is the way that EDGE is supposed to work.

    What I was saying is that the first commercial EDGE system will be a first time start up of a system that has never been in commercial operation before. If you really think that it this will be a flawless start up just because EDGE is supposed to work that way, it is only proof of what P. T. Barnum said.
     
  24. bobolito

    bobolito Diamond Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    Messages:
    12,735
    Cell Tower Picture Gallery:
    50
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    in front of my computer
    My Phone:
    iPhone SE
    Wireless Provider(s):
    T-Mobile
    But nothing is flawless from the startup. Just look at GAIT.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  25. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    According to a Nokia press release, "EDGE (Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution) is a GSM evolution. The first commercial products (like the Nokia 6200) will enable voice and data traffic at a speed of up to 118 Kbps."

    Reference: DTAC makes first EDGE call

    "The EDGE call in a laboratory environment is part of the first phase DTAC EDGE trial using commercial equipment from Nokia." Note that this was a call in a laboratory environment.
     
  26. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
    Well stated Bobolito!!
     
  27. northform

    northform Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, but you obviously didn't read. 3GSM has been chosen by 85% of the world's network operators, not GSM. 3GSM includes EDGE and wCDMA. That means that 85% of the world's wireless network operators have chosen either EDGE or wCDMA. Only 15% of the world's wireless providers are going to be using a technology other than EDGE or wCDMA according to them. Yes, the GSM Alliance does promote GSM, but they have no stake in GSM. Many of their constituants do, but many of their constituants also have a large stake in QComm CDMA (Lucent Technologies comes to mind). You can question whether they are exagerating or not, but it is absolute that they are talking about EDGE/wCDMA NOT GSM.

    Also, the upgrade to EDGE is a software upgrade. It requiries no new equipment or hardware. There is no way that one can make any argument that EDGE is less compatible with GSM/GPRS than 1xRTT is with CDMAOne.

    The problem is that people have been naming technologies improperly. 1xRTT voice has nothing to do with 1xRTT data. They share nothing and have no similarities, but it allowed Qualcomm to market it under a single name rather than two. 1xRTT data is a packet data solution similar to GPRS. 1xRTT voice includes some enhancements that enable greater capacity, but it is a group of techniques rather than one new technology and none of them have anything to do with 1xRTT data. At the same time, EDGE has voice and data parts. The data part is an enhancement of the system put in place by GPRS that allows speeds of up to 473kbps and 130kbps in real life (as opposed to 1xRTT's 153kbps and 75kbps real; 1xEV-DO's 2.4Mbps and 250kbps real; UMTS's 2Mbps and 300kbps real; 1xEV-DV's 5Mbps and 400kbps real; and HSDPA's 10Mbps and 1.2Mbps real). The voice part adds 8-PSK modulation and a 4kbps codec, neither of which have anything to do with what is making the data side better - but it is easier to market.

    There were differences in phones before the marketing departments got their hands on things. CDMAOne phones didn't originally have the EVRC codec. Later CDMAOne phones were made with it. It was something that made phones much better, but it was never marketed as something desireable that should be listed on the retail synopsys. At the same time, GSM never advertised their EFR or AMR codecs even though they added value to the phones. Now they feel that they have to label phones as "X-Capible" to convince the public that there have been changes in network technologies. Personally, I like that they are now telling the public that phones are capible of things like that, but they should use different names for the data and voice part since they have nothing to do with each other.

    My point is that thinking that EDGE phones won't be compatible with GSM is like thinking that EVRC phones aren't compatible with CDMAOne or that EFR/AMR phones aren't compatible with GSM. There is precident for seamless upgrades that handoff perfectly and work perfectly in the past and there are many reasons to believe it will work perfectly and NO reasons to think that it won't. Just because it is called EDGE doesn't make it a different technology. EDGE is a step just like EVRC or EFR or AMR. There is nothing fundamentally new about it.

    It is fine if you want to think that wCDMA might have some difficulties. It is wrong to think that wCDMA will have more problems than CDMA has handing off to analog since wCDMA and GSM are closer technologies than CDMA and analog and you won't even take Qualcomm's assurances of it even thought they would have a lot to gain by saying that their technology could hand off to their legacy tech better than wCDMA could handoff to GSM. But thinking that EDGE is going to have problems shows that you don't know what EDGE voice is. EDGE voice is not some revolutionary change to anything. It adds tweaks to be more efficient. It is not more of a big deal than the move to EVRC or EFR or AMR.

    Marketing wants you to think that EDGE is something that it is not. Marketing also wants you to think that 1xRTT is something that it is not. Both of these are data technologies that marketing has decided that some normal voice enhancements that no one would otherwise take notice of shuld fall under.
     
  28. DaveyJ

    DaveyJ Junior Member
    Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    But, it (in testing) does:


    GSM handoff to WCDMA

    As you can see, I'm pro-nothing. Although, northform makes great efforts to use as much technological points as possible I believe it all comes down to what the consumer chooses. Not which technology is better in X number of ways. And IF there are flaws during roll outs and upgrades that result in service disruption don't think for a minute that a provider won't lose credibility or customers. Unless these conversions are taken with utmost priority and are tested thoroughly providers are going to have major issues...
     
  29. hillbilly44

    hillbilly44 Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0
    And like it was said before GSM to WCDMA handoff was in a Lab environment. I do know that I works in a lab because I saw it work in a lab in Dallas at one of the equipment vendors (Not Ericsson). In real work applications however, there are still equipment and spectrum issues to overcome.
     
  30. Bugwart

    Bugwart Bronze Senior Member
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Pennsylvania
    My Phone:
    Samsung SCH i760,
    Wireless Provider(s):
    SKT, Verizon, China Mobile, EPlus
     

Share This Page

Copyright 1997-2022 Wireless Advisor™, LLC. All rights reserved. All registered and unregistered trademarks are the property of their respective holders.
WirelessAdvisor.com is not associated by ownership or membership with any cellular, PCS or wireless service provider companies and is not meant to be an endorsement of any company or service. Some links on these pages may be paid advertising or paid affiliate programs.

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice