America's First WCDMA Call
k-hell writes "Ericsson and AT&T Wireless recently completed the first WCDMA/UMTS call in a live network environment in the Americas, capable of data transfer speeds of up to 384 Kbps. AT&T Wireless and Ericsson currently pursuing the path to 3G capabilities in the U.S. market by deploying EDGE-ready GSM/GPRS systems. This path ensures an evolution to EDGE, then UMTS, a wideband radio technology that provides mobile users with data rates up to 2 Mbps." This is not yet a strong enough reason to move to Dallas, though.
Okay, so what... I already live in Dallas and have Sprint's Vision plan... that gets me on average 128kbits/sec including when I plug my phone into my laptop. I don't really think I'm going to rush out and get one of the other carriers for an extra few k/sec.
The meteoric demise of Metricom's Richochet service (which was unlike most dot-bombs run sincerely, and provided pretty good value) should make it pretty clear as to the demand for such fun.
As I see it, the biggest selling points for 3G data service are the availability and security associated with it. While one can never be completely secure over anything wireless, certainly, when coupled with stronger encryption, 3G can promise high speed security. Most people who need an internet connection for business purposes will likely pay a premium for always-available, secure data services.
For the casual user, I do see 802.11b as being "just fine." So what if someone is packet-sniffing my Yahoo.com mail account? I'm really not doing anything important. However, when data services become both ubiquitous and inexpensive, we may find users who cut the line on their cable modems and DSL connections and go wireless. (Kind of like we are seeing a transition from land-line phones to cellular.)
Of course, there are also issues such as network saturation, which I feel are being grossly overlooked. I mean, I regularly can't complete calls during the evening hours (when the other 26,000 people at my University are also using their free night and weekend minutes.) I can't imagine what it would be like with data services on top of that!
In short, I see the cellular phone as an application of a broader wireless platform. The platform is now beginning to be used to transmit data, which is a perfectly appropriate use of the technology. Over the next few years as 3G becomes more wire-spread, we'll see how things shape up. It will be interesting to watch.
Though a very interesting concept, the question remains...how much is this going to cost?? Phones and plans cost more than enough already! (At least in Canada)
~~{~~@ LDP @~~}~~
i dont think that wifi can replace this technology. 3g has better range then wifi does and it does roaming between towers, whereas wifi is not capable of this yet. So if you are stationary, wifi might be the way to go, otherwise 3g will be the solution for people on the go. Somebody needs to come out with a killer app in order to get people to swtich to 3g, such as unmetered connections for reasonable flat rate fee, then it will be more likely to catch on.
With initial packet data speeds up to 384 kbps a wideband radio technology that provides mobile users with data rates up to 2 Mbps
More interesting would be a test of this under high saturation. Current systems are already getting bogged down, reception is getting craps, calls lost, etc. Once the user-base for the service gets high, I would predict a decrease in speed (at least for a time).
Never trust the "up to." My internet is supposed to get "up to " > 2.5Mbps transfer rate down. Average or mean would be a better indicator.
Well not a huge history, but just some interesting trivia..
Ricochet's wireless modems were not run out of the Bay area office as some like to think. Bay area was mainly a "peoples interface"
The real behind the curtain work occured down in texas. The NOC in texas was responisible for authenticating the modems and ultimately had complete control over the system.
[training speil]
When the ricochet is turned on, it's unique number goes over the poletops until it hits a WAP, then down to texas where the number is checked against the customer database. If it checks out an authorization command is sent back to the modem allowing it to connect to the ricochet network.
[end training speil]
Texas is a huge flat land mass located in the southern portion of the united states. It borders the carribean and has fairly nice weather (except for the occasional tornado) These geographical features are what makes it so appealing to wireless development.
Also to note are the remote oil fields that depend on pump yeild data that is usually sent wirelessly because it's cheaper in terms of right of way. So basically there's a demand in texas for anything new in wireless data transfer.
Texas is cool place to watch on "King of the Hill", but I wouldn't want to live there just because I love where I live (Friends, family, ect) I'm surprised slashdot editors would allow such a seething comment to make it through. Just because you love where you live is no reason to clown on someplace else.
Its probably more accurate to say this is the first WCDMA/UMTS call on a commercial network, as Motorola and probably others have been doing this on their private networks for some time now.
Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
Interestingly FOMA is a 3G network. More specifically it is also a WCDMA network (NTT just had to do their own derivate), which
someone claimed to be inpracictable or expensive at best.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
...When Connectivity Providers fought tooth and nail for cities. Recently it has been regions. Now it looks like they are banding together and drawing the lines at nations. I mean, it seems that ubiquitious networks would be wonderful, but I worry when one becomes the national monopoly. Will technology like this allow competition with other protocols? Or do we get one protocol and a bunch of implementations from different companies?
Zech Harvey, MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA
WCDMA - Wideband Code Division Multiple Access
UMTS - Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
according to www.acronymfinder.com and others
"We live in our minds, and existance is the attempt to bring that life into physical reality" Ayn Rand
What good does this new-fangled crap get me when I can't even get decent reception, much less any reception, when I'm back home? (right betwen Eau Claire and LaCrosse, Wisconsin). Get service(digital-2G) in > 95% of the US and then worry about other shit. I know a lot of people who would get cell phones if they could just get decent(if any) reception. They're missing out, from what I see, as a lot of potential customers. But, there must not be enough possible customers to turn a profit by introducing digital service in certain areas....so we'll just have more hicks without cell phones for a little while longer.