CDMA 2000 1x Comes to India
nilesh writes "Yesterday, Reliance Infocomm launched one of the largest CDMA networks in the world [Google news]. This wireless network will cover 90% of India's population on a backbone of 60,000 kms of optic fibre. They have dreams of providing an Internet-enabled Java-powered CDMA2000 1x phone to almost every Indian citizen for around tariffs as low as 40 paise per minute or 0.8 cents per minute. The Samsung/LG/Kyocera phones will be replete with applications ranging from internet banking to video on demand and online gaming. Now all we need is Quake for Java and we'll have college kids playing deathmatches with each other in classroom at 144kbps. The next game revolution is in sight."
I keep hearing and reading stories of Indian taking leap after technological leap (even if its just attempted leaps). First the leaped in the future of programming, then linux (the open source initiative that pretty much may have kicked Microsoft in the balls) and now this network leap.
:)
Has India reached some sort of critical mass that the US hasnt reached? I know they are supposed to be a poor country but hell, it feels like they are just about to leap frog over everyone in the next couplt of months.
would like to hear replies and thanks for reading
Sigs are dangerous coy things
but bad for US and Canada, in the long run. Indian government realised that the only way they can reduce poverty and improve the condition of India's citizes is through technology. Permeating every class in the society with the technology will enable even the poorest people to access the learning materials and colaborate with other people in developing new products and services. Those products and services will in turn be sold and smart people who understand technology, no matter how poor they were, will get a chance to rise above the class to which they belonged and achieve their full potential.
It is really too bad that US and Canada, with their sub-substandard primary and secondary education, and lack of technological vision in governmental leaders, will fall behind in technology and be reduced to the land of financial speculators and marketing people.
This has absolutely nothing to do with helping the poor, or trying to get a phone to a beggar in India. It has everything to do with the fact that Reliance is providing the right service at the right time.
Reliance is not just a J Random company in India. Reasons why this will be a killer service in India.
They have done their groundwork beautifully well. They have been laying fiber optic all over the country, for quite a while, and have enormous clout. As an example, where other providers have so far been unsuccessful in getting govt. clearance for certain services in India, it looks like Reliance will not be having that problem.
Reliance is using existing technology customised for India, at the Indian Inst. of Technology Madras. Details here.
You have NO idea the way the demand for bandwidth for both voice and data is growing in India. Want figures? Find them here.
Do you know the proposed cost of deployment of RIL's telecom plan? You pay Rs.3000 initially ($60) and Rs.600 monthly ($12) you get the instrument and the service, but will have to service for a period of 3 years, as part of the Rs.600 will go towards your instrument. Just look at their pricing schemes.
In fact, pricing is one of the reasons why Reliance will succeed. Reason? They chose NOT to use GSM as the initial cost is high, but wanted to help atleast the middle class.
;-)
If you still are not convinced, goto Chaoszone, run by cygnusx. He has been keeping track of this for a long time, and has very interesting links on the current scenario and WHY this WILL work.
You are forgetting one very basic point. Yes, India has poverty to handle, but you do not solve it by denying all other technology, atleast that's what your attitude sounds like. There is a significant chunk of the middle class for whom the rates that reliance offers is EASILY affordable, and that comes to a significant portion of the population of a billion.
Read this interview with Mukesh Ambani. Forget quality, they'll see gold through quantity. And that is exactly what Reliance is banking on.
And as a geek, I sure as hell hope they do, am looking forward to getting one of their J2ME enabled thingys
Science always advances. Technology makes inroads. The aim is to make lives easier for *most* people, not *all* people. Even the US has not been able to ensure that each of its citizens have their basic needs met, or that the fruits of technology have reached all.
So the next time you hear a story about India or Jordan or Brazil or any other developing country trying to improve the life of its citizens, try to be understanding, if not a cheerleader. And quit your high-horse!
Somehow, I doubt such a plan would succeed. Is such a low tariff even possible, much less for this kind of expensive service?
Reliance is a fairly old but very successful company. I have been following news about them for several years and have never seen them do anything that is both big and naïve. While I cannot say that people come first for them, surely business and money do.
These are at least some of the reasons why we should expect costs of telecom services to be low in India:
Technology - The infrastructure was built practically from scratch in the last 6-7 years. Even regular phone service coverage was around 4-5%. As opposed to the US, which has been building its infrastructure over much a longer period - laying copper and then fiber. India is starting with fiber for which the cost-per-bit is very low. IIRC, Reliance built its fiber optic network in the last 3-4 years.
Labor costs - One of the biggest costs in building infrastructure is labor. But labor is very cheap in India. I expect labor wages to be around USD30 per month.
Competition - There is a lot of competition, the other major players are Bharati, TATA, and the government (yes, the government is in this too). So, including Reliance that makes it at least four major competitors. There are some small companies (BPL, Birla, Satyam, etc. - don't know what happened to Worldtel) too but so far they have not had any major impact.
And all this is the exact opposite of what you see in the US. So...
I copied this sig.
Easy, they've got their foot on the accelerator of new technology, new ideas, new rules, and new freedoms.
In contrast, we've got our foot on the brake of new constraints like "Intellectual Property", new "growth" areas like patents on everything, and new laws to ensure that old business doesn't succumb to the new.
To which continent do you think the label of "progressive" applies best?
The only reason we're still doing as well as we are here in the "first" world is because we have a large head of steam and massive resources from past years, and a world bank that knows on which side its toast is buttered. If everyone were to start afresh right now, our only growth industry would be in lawyers and related non-producers of wealth. It's kind of depressing.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
This system is WiLL which means no handoffs. This type of system is great for replacing existing (or non-existant) land line infrastructures to single points (like homes). This reduces the complexity of the system and therfore the cost of installation and upkeep. However, this system doesn't work if the user is moving around, so it's no substitue for a true cellular system.
- In some southern Indian states, fishermen have found a great use of cellphones. When they go out to sea for fishing, on the way back they call at all of the local harbors within their range, and find the best price for their catch! Some fishermen have found that their cellphone paid for itself in just a couple of weeks.
- Farmers can keep in touch with their nearby mandis (wholesale markets), and strike deals which will maximise their gain from their harvest (i.e., pick the right time, sell their produce in advance, checkout prices at all nearby places and take their produce to the one with the highest prices, etc.).
These are but 2 examples; I'm sure if someone did a study, you'd find 100s more.I liken this new technology to what happens when a man-made wreck lands at the bottom of the sea. Nature quickly finds ways to use the wreck to its advantage: new coral colonies bloom, fishes use it as their hideout, etc. Similarly, the people of India will quickly adapt and find ways to leverage this new technology in ways that we, here in the west, can't even imagine. I say more power to them!
For GPRS to work, spectrum has to be dedicated to data and voice separately. Existing GSM providers need to license more spectrum (this costs big money), have to upgrade their equipment and convince users to change handsets to support 2.5G ("GPRS"). Considering that they are all in the red, it ain't going to be easy. CDMA providers can provide voice+data over the same spectrum.
Because 3G deployments in Europe and Japan so far have been less than successful.
Because CDMA 2000 1X is coming with a massive second mover advantage, at a time when people need higher data rates from their mobile, and the GSM folk can't given them that quickly, the operative word being 'quickly'.
I agree a GSM-based high-speed standard would have been better. But the only way high-speed GSM would have taken off in India was if someone built a W-CDMA (which is the air interface for high speed GSM) network from scratch, and given European and Japanese experience with W-CDMA 'til now, I'd excuse any business for being slightly scared about this :).
In Brasil people are complaining every day that government has chosen TDMA and CDMA over the cheaper, standard GSM.
Huh? TDMA is the air interface for vanilla GSM. High speed GSM uses W-CDMA as the air interface because TDMA is so damn inefficient. Anyway, what business does the government have mandating technology? (Europe did this, mind you :-p) All they should sell is spectrum!
Every country has a black mark. How do you justify American action in Iraq? Perhaps they have a point, perhaps they do not.
How about Pakistan, which sponsors terrorist activities, is ruled by a military dictator and whose intelligence agency ISI is *confirmed* to have ties with the underworld in India?
India has a rocket scientist for a president, a *democratically elected* president, while being surrounded by a Military Dictatorship (ruling a fundamentalist country) on one side and a Communist Dictatorship on the other.
India is a developing nation, and has it's own set of problems in healthcare and basic utilities, I do agree. But technology IS the ONLY way out of this mess. Only when you educate people about the ill effects of bad environments, AIDS and the like will there be progress. People NEED to know.
Yes, we have sectarian violence. Try having a billion people of disparate cultural differences, with hundreds of languages, who have been exploited by colonialism for 400 years. You will then know.
Keeping them in the dark only worsens the situation. People *need* to be taught that this would not help in the long run. People need to be taught tolerance.
Technology has done a wealth of good for us, with revolutions in the agro sector, IT industry and now communication industry.
More the money the industries make, more the revenue the govt. earns, and the society as a whole benefits. And you have a booming economy, with a growing middle class which is tech savvy.
Please tell me what is wrong with this. I fail to see how something as beneficial as technology is going to do ill to a society.
Unforunately, people like "metlin" forget that their country needs to be brought up from 3rd world status and that will not happen by giving people cell-phones.
Incorrect reference, third world refers to Non-Aligned Nations, and has nothing to do with economic development. Developing nations would be an appropriate usage. Technology is not the end, it is the means to solving world's problems. If you think otherwise, you're a fool.
Most of the achievements in the Western world have come from hardwork and a sincere desire to change. Technological advances were created with the evolution of society not by handing them technology.
Huh? What the hell did you just blabber? Oh so wait, we want to have technology so that we can sit and play Quake all day? Or wait, technology happens on its own without us having to work or just loitering around or what?
What an absurd statement. Technology arms people. Technology gives people the power to do things that they thought impossible, and improves their standard of living. It does not happen overnite, and it does not happen to everybody. But it does happen, it is a process and it will take time.
But that does not mean that its all useless. This is one of the MOST STUPID comments I've EVER read on
Duh.