Last week I wrote a post about RIM partially being to blame for the lack of BlackBerrys with digital cameras on CDMA networks. The comments kind of morphed into something completely different, however, a very good question needs to be asked.
What is going to happen with CDMA in the United States?
GSM is undoubtedly the dominant global standard. Roughly half or more of Americans, however, depending on what report you look at, are on CDMA networks. I concede that GSM will eventually (no time soon) take over here in the U.S. as well. The big question is how will this transition occur?
I’m not so certain that CDMA will “eventually” give way to GSM.
CDMA technology is generally considered better. Verizon, the main proponent of CDMA in the USA, and Rogers Wireless, the main proponent of CDMA in Canada (I believe) carry substantial market share both in the business and consumer markets. With Verizon purchasing GSM carriers and converting their subscribers to CDMA, what evidence is there that leads us to the conclusion that they will switch to GSM. If they were even considering that route, wouldn’t it make sense for them to leave the GSM people where they are, without comment as to the future of CDMA? In other words, why switch them to GSM if you are just going to switch them back?
And, pardon me for being provincial or being too pro-America with this, but …. why do we care what the rest of the world does with there telecommunications systems? Since when have we adopted a “foreign” technology over our own? And before you trash me for calling GSM “foreign,” I say “foreign” not to belittle the current GSM system in the US, but to distinguish it from the CDMA, which appears to be primarily a North American technology.
The only thing from stopping CDMA from completely dominating in the US is the fact that Verizon (and I suppose Sprint should be mentioned as well) does not have as great a selection of handsets as T-Mobile or ATT and that Verizon cripples the handsets it has by deactivating features. But, as you will find if you ask the CDMA subscribers, the handset is not the primary concern — the quality of the service is what matters and many of those features can be paid for at a minimal increased price or gotten through other technologies (i.e., GPS via TomTom or Garmin).
Plus, Verizon has bridged that gap between the technologies (though at a glacial pace, but nonetheless) with the dual GSM/CDMA world phone/bb. Anyone know if there are more to come? I bet there are.
Lastly, if the real move is to incorporate WiFi into phones, does it really matter if the phone is GSM or CDMA in the end? Isn’t the long term goal for the US to become completed wired? Many cities are moving towards a free or low-cost wireless network. It’s not a great leap to think that there will be a plan put into place to accommodate mobile phone users of the new WiFi networks.
And, pardon me for being provincial or being too pro-America with this, but …. why do we care what the rest of the world does with there telecommunications systems? Since when have we adopted a “foreign†technology over our own?
Another example of this would be the metric system. The rest of the world uses it and we don’t. And if you asked most people they don’t want to change. Why should we change just because the rest of the world does. The US is big enough were can do what we want. I personally hate Europe, their policies and their snobbery. The fact that they hate CDMA is one more reason I like it.
And as long as Verizon is a big player, GSM will never be the US standard. Maybe that’s a good thing. A monoculture is bad. Just look at computers. Windows was the dominate OS (still is, but to a lesser extent) in the world and what did that get us, Viruses and Spyware running rampant, high and restrictive licensing costs and stagnant products. And if a problem arises, it effects everyone. Enter Linux, Mac OS and Mozilla. Choice was restored, products improved and everyone wins.
If CDMA were to disappear, what would be GSMs incentive to improve and advance or vice versa. Competition is good, mono cultures are bad.
I don’t think that CDMA is going anywhere anytime soon and I don’t know that when it does dwindle away that it will be because GSM has taken over.
As you said in your other post, GSM being better than CDMA or CDMA being better than GSM really doesn’t matter. The United States is an enormous market that truly can be catered to without regard to what the rest of the world is doing. So long as CDMA networks, namely Verizon, is considered to be the best and it’s subscribers are willing to pay for it, it will be around. AT&T and T-Mobile just don’t have a large enough 3G footprint make a dent in today’s market.
My guess is that it will be a new technology like Wi-Max that will be the end of CDMA.
I think it’s very ignorant to think the US should do anything without regard for the rest of the world, whether it be in telecommunications or any other industry.
As of 2006 CDMA had 13.7% world market share, while GSM had 77.7%. To make an even finer point only 10% of the total global cellular subscribers are in the US and Canada, which save for a few other small countries are the only two regions in the world that use CDMA. A post from a few days ago come to mind, which asked why RIM hasn’t made any camera BlackBerrys for CDMA networks. I think the above answers that question. What sensible company would first concentrate on 13% of the market (CDMA), rather then 77% of the GSM market? Same goes for other manufactures like Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, etc. This is why AT&T and T-Mobile have all the cool handsets. It’s not because they are the biggest in the US, but they are technology that is by far more widely used in the world.
The recent currently exchange rates of the US dollar against the Euro or even that Canadian dollar should also be clues to revise your views of the US being able to go on without regard to what the rest of the world is doing.
What sensible company would first concentrate on 13% of the market (CDMA), rather then 77% of the GSM market?
Because that 13% can still make you a lot of money, thats why. If every company thought the same as you then Apple would have folded years ago.
Seems for some it’s better to break it down to it’s smallest parts for it to be understood.
nonproprietary
Adj.
1.not protected by trademark or patent or copyright; “nonproprietary products are in the public domain and anyone can produce or distribute them”
glob·al (glbl)
adj.
1. Having the shape of a globe; spherical.
2. Of, relating to, or involving the entire earth; worldwide
3. Comprehensive; total: “a . . . global.
4. Computer Science Of or relating to an entire program, document, or file.
stan·dard (stndrd)
n.
1. An object that under specified conditions defines, represents, or records the magnitude of a unit.
2. The set proportion by weight of gold or silver to alloy metal prescribed for use in coinage.
3. Something, such as a practice or a product, that is widely recognized or employed, especially because of its excellence.
4. A degree or level of requirement, excellence, or attainment.
5. Widely recognized or employed as a model of authority or excellence: a standard reference work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM
PS, and remember the suggestion about reading, understanding and learning before posting FUD.
“Rogers Wireless has the largest, integrated wireless voice and data network in Canada. Our GSM/GPRS network reaches 94% of the Canadian population offering extensive coverage in both urban centres and local areas. GSM is the world standard for wireless communications that is relied upon by more than 84% of the world’s digital markets. Our customers benefit from using GSM/GPRS technology – the world standard for wireless communications.
The potential to access the latest wireless devices and applications, quickly and affordably. Because more than 82% of the world relies on GSM technology, more manufacturers are building more wireless devices for this technology than for any other technology.
Travel the world easily, with one wireless device, in almost every country around the world. Because more countries use GSM than any other technology, Rogers Wireless is able to create wireless voice and data roaming agreements and provide seamless access to service for our customers.
Access to the latest services that the Next Generation of wireless communications has to offer. The next generation of wireless communications is evolving from the GSM world standard.”
Competition is a good thing but not when it comes to incompatible consumer communications technologies, on the other hand maybe it is a good thing. cdma had a huge head start over GSM technology in North America, yet GSM was still chosen and to this continues to eat away at cdma’s customer base.
Lack of devices is a small part of cdma’s many problems, lack of global coverage, lack of non-proprietary standards is another. The other problem which is linked to the proprietary technology cdma which cdma is. cdma Providers take back consumer freedoms, making consumers buy and use only the providers branded and crippled handsets. The provider picking and choosing which technologies within cdma to use such as R-UIM, brew, Et cetera, Et cetera. When there is a global standard with open technologies there are standards set. GSM providers, device manufactures, and consumers benefit greatly from these standards which insure freedoms and keep costs in check.
cdma might be a better technology, like beta video WAS. But companies like verizon and qualcomm are doing their best to shoot cdma technology down from every direction. Greed, Arrogance, High Royalties, Litigation, Restrictions, Et cetera, Et cetera.
Ask yourself WHY providers with cdma networks are upgrading those networks to GSM and GSM family technologies IF cdma is so good.
Global technologies especially in consumer communications are important. Dont even think of starting the argument that cdma is any more American than GSM. Have a SONY Playstation? a NINTENDO Wii? na those are “foreign†technologies. What brand of vehicle is parked out in your driveway? GM? Ford? if so my hats off to you, if not and you have one them there “foreign†vehicles why did you adopt a “foreign” vehicle? especially when we have generally considered better vehicles made right here in North America. Global technologies dude…. consumers generally chose what works for them best. What works for some might not work for someone else as the best, it’s either that or the cdma kool-aid. Sad to say we also have alot of consumers who turn a blind eye and believe everything which comes out of corporations mouths without doing any research to truly make the best choice for themselves.
The GSM family of technologies will be THE wireless communication standard, who knows on how long cdma providers will drag their feet, who knows how many cdma blackberry’s will be crippled by then.
GSM is as “pro-american” as cdma.
@hellno- blah blah blah blah, more of same GSM cheerleading and dribble you spouted out in the last post. How about trying to say something new.
Facts are facts.
1. CDMA isn’t going anywhere until Verizon says so.
2. As long as there is money to be made, companies like RIM and others will continue to make and improve CDMA handsets.
3. Quaalcom will continue to make money off of their patents
4. You can hold your breath and beat your arms and legs on the ground like a little kid and these facts will not change no matter how wonderful you think GSM is.
These are the facts and they are indisputable.
@hellno: GSM is just as proprietary as CDMA. Nokia makes money off of every GSM handset sold. Also, South Korea’s CDMA network is the most advanced wireless network soon to be displaced by their investments in WiBRO / WiMax
oh gquaglia thank goodness summer vacation is almost over and you’ll be back to school soon.
Remember almost 2.5 billion GSM customers in more than 218 countries and territories, on over 700 GSM networks with more than 200 manufacturers and suppliers prove your incorrect to say the least.
GSM also has the advantage of operating with the The GSM Association “to ensure mobile phones and wireless services work globally and are easily accessible, enhancing their value to individual customers and national economies, while creating new business opportunities for operators and their suppliers. The Association’s members serve more than 2 billion customers – over 82% of the world’s mobile phone users. The GSMA plays a pivotal role in the development of the GSM platform and the global wireless industry. Much of the GSMA’s work is focused on two areas: Emerging services and emerging markets. The GSMA helps its members develop and launch new services, ranging from mobile instant messaging to video sharing to mobile Internet access, which will work across networks and across national boundaries. At the same time, the GSMA is heavily engaged in the industry’s push to extend basic voice and text services to more people in emerging markets. GSM is an evolving wireless communications standard that already offers an extensive and feature-rich ‘family’ of voice and data services. The GSM family of technologies consists of today’s GSM, General Packet Radio Service (GPRS), Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE) and third generation GSM services (3GSM) based on W-CDMA and HSDPA access technologies. Together these technologies underpin the GSM platform.
The GSM Association’s Board comprises top-level representatives of some of the world’s leading mobile operators, such as Cingular Wireless, China Mobile, Orange, Telefonica Moviles, T-Mobile and Vodafone.” This association plotting the course forward makes sure there is no one company calling the shots (like qualcomm)
Very good posts gquaglia and the other few cdma cheerleaders, nothing like sitting back and watching a FUD cheer turn into tears of desperation. Read, understand and learn.
Anon,
“What is GSM?
GSM is an open, non-proprietary system that is constantly evolving. One of its great strengths is the international roaming capability. This gives consumers seamless and same standardised same number contactability in more than 170 countries. GSM satellite roaming has extended service access to areas where terrestrial coverage is not available.”
http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/faq.shtml
“GSM (Global System for Mobile communications) is an open, digital cellular technology used for transmitting mobile voice and data services.”
http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/what.shtml
” Two open technologies that offer great promise for India are GSM and DVB-H. “Open standards such as GSM and DVB-H technologies for mobile phones will provide the market with greater choice, better value and more opportunities for innovation.”
http://www.mobiletechnews.com/info/2006/07/13/125253.html
Global, Open, Non-proprietary, Standard.
Hellno has nailed this one and this has been known for quite some time…
just watch as companies start to halt all cdma r&d and production..
better or not cdma networks dont make sence… i saw numbers recently and i cant remember the exact numbers but rogers brought in something like 300 million in international roaming fees to foreign gsm customers.. bell/telus and verizon in the states can only get roaming money from each other.
so again
quote
What sensible company would first concentrate on 13% of the market (CDMA), rather then 77% of the GSM market?
/quote
if you dont agree with that statement and you want to be a global player in this industry… good luck!
just a thought, isn’t at&t moving towards a wcdma 3g standard which, in many ways resembles cdma tech used (most notably) by our favorite “in” network? keep in mind that conglomerates care about maintaining a consumer base and verizon especially will continue to update its network as really, that’s their strongest avenue of customer retention. I know some that think at&t and t-mob are god’s gift to cellular-dom, but check ratings sites like cnet: the avg user is not happy w at&t and t-mob just doesn’t have a large enough coverage area to run with the “big two”. I think that verizon sees its machine as working well and as long as its network remains among the best, cdma is not in danger of going anywhere.
wcdma (3GSM) aka “UMTS” is NOT cdma.
“Despite the similarity in name, W-CDMA has very little to do with CDMA.”
“The W-CDMA protocol was developed independently of the CDMA protocol developed by Qualcomm”
“The CDMA family of standards (including cdmaOne and cdma2000) are not compatible with the W-CDMA family of standards”
http://www.funsms.net/wcdma_tech.htm
“W-CDMA was developed by NTT DoCoMo as the air interface for their 3G network FOMA. Later NTT DoCoMo submitted the specification to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) as a candidate for the international 3G standard known as IMT-2000. The ITU eventually accepted W-CDMA as part of the IMT-2000 family of 3G standards, as an alternative to CDMA2000, EDGE, and the short range DECT system. Later, W-CDMA was selected as the air interface for UMTS, the 3G successor to GSM.”
“Though W-CDMA does use a direct sequence CDMA transmission technique like CDMA2000, W-CDMA is not simply a wideband version of CDMA2000. The W-CDMA system is a new design by NTT DoCoMo, and it differs in many respects from CDMA2000. From an engineering point of view, W-CDMA provides a different balance of costs vs. capacity vs. performance vs. density, and promises to achieve a benefit of reduced cost for video phone handsets. W-CDMA may also be better suited for deployment in the very dense cities of Europe and Asia”
“WCDMA should not be confused with narrowband CDMA.
Based on extensive research conducted between 1989 and 1997, WCDMA is a completely new technology targeting true 3G requirements.”
3G BlackBerry in development
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2007/07/13/3g-blackberry-in-development/
“Chris Ting, a RIM technical account manager, revealed that the company is readying a 3G capable device for use on the country’s Telstra network. The device may also include GPS and Wi-Fi, but given the early stage of the development process, the specs have yet to be nailed down. It’s also unclear exactly which form factor this new “super-Berry” will take on. 83xx, 88xx, or could this be the early stages of the 9xxx series? Please don’t tempt us any further. What is clear, however is that the new Berry will likely operate on Telstra’s HSDPA network, giving users 3.6 mbps download speeds, and a sound reason to feel a sense of entitlement and superiority over the rest of the world.”
“The Next G network has a theoretical maximum download speed of 14.4Mbps, the Telstra-flavoured BlackBerry is expected to offer speeds of around 3.6Mbps.”
The numbers tell the story, and there is no doubt that GSM holds a huge edge over CDMA. That dictates the economics, and that is what will win out. In this case, as others have pointed out, many leading manufacturers simply choose to develop for GSM only, and skip CDMA. Others, like RIM, continually give CDMA handsets second priority. Over time this has an effect, as the GSM carriers become more and more known for having more advanced handsets. Perhaps the final blow was struck with the iPhone being GSM as well.
Regardless of the technical merits of each system, the economics will work to force a total conversion to GSM. You can’t fight the money.
Now it may take some time to do this, as carriers like Verizon continue to do well enough. But don’t be surprised if by the year 2020, for instance, if the whole world isn’t on a GSM derivative.
Hellno has nailed this one and this has been known for quite some time…
just watch as companies start to halt all cdma r&d and production..
As I said, as long as there is money to be made, there will be plenty of CDMA handsets available. They are not ideologically retarded like some posters here and have no holy mission to bring world peace through GSM.
Ned had some very good points in his post, but here are the reasons thatI agree withe author that CDMA will eventually be eclipsed. GSM is not just the world standard for cell phones, but as a result of this I am certain that GSM depolyment is cheaper just based on the fact that the equipment costs is cheaper by the pound, the old argument of networked coverage is slowly starting to be no argument, in many metro areas ATT is claiming as much or more covereage as Verizon in many markets, as an owner of both phones and being an extensive traveler i can attest to this. Verizons service costs are higher in most cases, if for no other reason because their overhead is higher, read “It’s the Network” being the only tag line they have, what happens when suddenly everybody had the network. CDMA in the pas has had standardization of some cool but underutilized features like GPS functionality across a broad range of handsets. It is advantages like these which should have given both Verizon and Sprint, their legs up in the game in contrast to their albiet less sexy phone line. Your big name phone makers produce oodles more phones for GSM then CDMA, why? Simple there are more people and carriers to sell them through and too. An frankly it’s surprising to me that CDMA, has held on this long, if not for Verizon CDMA, in the US would already be dead, they are Motorola’s only reason for being in the CDMA buisness. The cellphone less customers are shrinking, and those without them primarily buy what their friends have and whats cheapest. , which if your a kid that means a Sidekick, and if your an adult its tougher to say, but with more smartphone users than ever, and Blackberrys selling like hotcakes (showing no signs of slowing down) I would say that is going to come down to who has the sexiest phones, and I don’t think I need to say which two carriers have those. The facts, T-Mobile will most likeley eventually be aquired by ATT in this country; Sprint, once devoid of enough customers (which seems to happening by leaps and bounds every quarter) will be a realatively easy target for Verizon who will add their customers to their existing protfolio and the Sprint name goes away period. ATT has a lot more customers then anyone else 63 million last time I checked making Verizon a distant second. Those location based services that Verizon and Sprint had first are now starting to appear on GSM handsets (uncrippled, telenav is great!) read..not good for the CDMA boys and they are being promoted wholesale by these guys take note Verizon. I would say just as sure as the sun rises and sets, eventualy market consolidation will yield no more CDMA, it simply won’t be cost effective as Verizon and Sprint are squeezed on price as GSM continues to be cheaper to deploy and maintane giving the handset makers all the reasons they need to keep developing the sexiets handsets first. Lastly, as far as 3G goes Sprint is playing with something called WI-MAX for their net generation, and Verizon just rolled out a new revision to EV-DO, which at best brings it closer to HDSPA employed by ATT which I can tell you is quite a bit faster in my testing then anyting the CDMA guys have now or in the forseable future. Again here the only adavantage [of EV-DO] being deployment, which will soon not be an advantage; an let me leave you with this. An upgrade to faster speeds on HDSPA will be a software thing as this point, firmware for your device; to move to the next revision on CDMA’s 3G requires you purchase a new a device, which means no cushy 2 year discount for existing customers, (I know I was on of thse people handed this unfortunate news) so you are responsable for the sull price for the hadware required. I keep being told how much better the customer experiance is when dealing with Verizon customer service, but having been a customer for 3 years now, and an ATT customer for 1 year I can tell you ATT on the phone, and in the store exceeds the incredibly snobish attitudes I have encountered in the Verizon stores; (yes company owned cprporate stores) CSR on the phone have been very halpful.
Personally, I will never be happy with GSM because calls do not sound clear on the GSM phones that I have owned (RAZR and iPhone). Two very different phones, but the exact same tin-can sound.
I’ve used both Sprint and Verizon and I am a current Verizon customers. Calls on Sprints service (when the call was not being dropped) or Verizon always sound crystal clear. It must be CDMA over GSM, right? Also, I get static on GSM calls… something I never get with Verizon. The call is clear… even up to the point that it drops.
Whoever said that Rogers uses CDMA is incorrect. I have a friend in Canada who has a Blackberry Pearl with Rogers. Last I looked there is no CDMA Pearl.
Eric,
“The key advantage of GSM systems to consumers has been higher digital voice quality.”
Also digital technology doesn’t get static, signal is either there or its not.
There are other things which can effect sound quality.
If you use a CDMA phone (like a Verizon, Sprint etc.) you cannot use that same phone in any other country. For a business customer who travels, this is not good.
This same business customer can purchase a GSM phone and have that flexibility.
Yes, I do agree that for the most part, most people do not need this. But, there is a growing segment of the world population (which includes the US by the way) that travels from country to country, continent to continent, and needs this capability.
Verizon and Sprint see this opportunity and have accomodated in various ways to conform to both CDMA and GSM technologies.
In the end, these protocols are not based on politics, economic systems, or culture as most mainly US conservatives think they do. They are based on pure unadulterated liberal tactics called “free market capitalism”.
Anything else should just be posted on a FOX blog.
Thank you
I’m currently a AT&T user and have moved into the DC area. The network at my house is so so to horrible with AT&T and so the wife and I have thought about switching over to the Verizon network. I really really hated this decision, due to the lack of high tech phones and knowing I cannot just buy an unlocked phone and use that. Also I hated how Verizon shut off certain features. I might not use them but if I am going to pay for it, I want to know I can use it.
After a while, I finally settled on the fact that in the DC area that the Verizon network was better here and I can live with a not so high tech phone.
Now the wife has a new job and for her job she needs a Blackberry. We’ve looked at the 8830 and she was content with that and we were going to go sign up for an account later on today. However, she found out today, through a co-worker, about the Curve at AT&T. With her office deal she would get this phone for free with AT&T. So now she wants to stay w/ AT&T and get the Curve. She loved how it looks and the camera.
She didn’t care that Verizon has a better network in these areas, such as the subways and possibly at our house. All she cared about was that the Curve looked better and has a camera. She really didn’t like the fact that the 8830 did not have a camera.
So for her the phones trumped the network. This is just one family but if stuff like this keep happening CDMA will lose out in the end.
@lookingtobuy
I hope your wife likes her new paperweight, because that all a fancy phone is without good coverage.
Luckly GSM coverage is as good if not better than cdma coverage in most cases.
gquaglia I don’t know how to take your comment. It sort of sounds like you personally take offense that she would go w/ a better GSM phone rather then a CDMA network. You sound like you need to relax. Her decision does not affect you and you do not need to make snide remarks.
Also, I figure that you do not know that the GSM coverage in the DC area is not bad. It’s not on the same coverage level as Verizon but it’s getting better. I would say it’s the 2nd best network in the DC area. Their 3g coverage is getting bigger also.
So the decision for us was either
a) Best network + crappy phones
b) Best phones + 2nd best network.
We choose b.
The coverage at our house is so so to horrible but I think that’s mostly due to our phones not the coverage. Our friends phones on at&t work well at our house.
No matter what you say to defend the CDMA network, for some it will always be about the phone. Just like for some it will be about the network. Each to his own.
I personally believe that if Verizon and Sprint keep turning up these lackluster phones it will drive people to the other networks. Especially in areas where the GSM coverage is getting stronger.
Anyone have any idea if or when Verizon will carry the Blackberry Pearl?
There are rumors floating around that it could be coming within the next couple of months.
https://www.rimarkable.com/archives/1392
I guess I heard tht before–wasn’t the Pearl supposed to be here in May originally? I am getting tired of waiting and my current PDA has crapped out and rather than get a new one, I plan on getting a smartphone. I may opt of the BB Worldphone instead.
Michael if you want a state of the art blackberry upgrade yourself to one of the many built for the Global Standard in Mobile Communication GSM. Steer clear of verizon’s crippled 8830.
Here is PROOF of verizon’s continued lies and anti-consumer behavior
BlackBerry 8830 GPS disabling
http://jkontherun.blogs.com/jkontherun/2007/07/blackberry-88-1.html
It’s shameful and verizon’s culture of screwing the customer the last go round was bluetooth. With verizon its all about control, greed, and arrogance. It’s insulting how verizon turns RIM’s hard work on it’s blackberry’s into crap. Patrick Kimball words are typical verizon lies and FUD, sure hope the response will be entered as official evidence in a courtroom of LAW. By the way those ” unapproved 3rd party applications” verizon cripples are RIM approved and put on the BB by RIM. More lies and anti-consumer behavior from a POS communications company.
Meet Sir Charge
Thanks for the info Hellno. You say to steer clear of the BB 8830, is that only because of the crippled GPS? Altho, a cool feature I would love to have , that alone would not be an impediment to getting that phone. Is there any other reason to avoid the 8830? Thanks for the taking the time to provide all of this info, it is really appreciated.–Michael
I dunno but nobody in down under thought this would happen:
Australia’s Telstra is considering a plan to scrap a mobile-phone network used by more than 1 million residents of the remote outback.
http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/networks/index.htm
Their website states “Telstra will continue to operate its current GSM, 3G and CDMA networks, but given the breadth and depth of coverage offered on the Next Gâ„¢ network, the CDMA network will eventually be phased out.”
CDMA is superior for it covers better in countries that has large land and fewer towers. Besides, all know that GSM covarage sux here in the US. Small countries can efford GSM, we cannot.
Poli Man – Last time I was there Australia was pretty big. Its about 3500 miles from Sydney to Perth. Australia has alot of open land (the outback if you will) and that’s where Telstra is going to discontinue the CDMA service and switch it to GSM. Go figure. The only delay that Telstra has is that the Australian government wants them to phase it out over a longer period time.
I would have to say that (sticking to the original topic here) that CDMA can and will for that matter only be eclipsed by a few mergers and aquisitions, which will be interesting to say the least. To start, Verizon will probably never switch on their own because they have such a huge investment in it on the back end and such. They dont even operate a GSM network period, so they would have a scary transition to say the least. Whats poloticaly interesting is that one of Europe’s biggest GSM carriers has a 40% investment in Verizon wireless and may have some sinsiter for verzion that is intentions, as they refuse to sell their stake and are only a hair’s worth of shares from a controlling interest. Some investers are pushing for a compete takeover, and as sucj I bet you can guess what that would eventually mean; thats right Verizon becoming a GSM carrier or the “Verizon Wireless” name actuallu going by by and getting replaces, or even more sinsiter, any American interest being sold to a competing carrier and the European parent divesting itself of its American counterpart completeley. Can anyone say “T-Mobile” part of Deutch Telekom, whom like our ATT has plenty of cash and plenty of name Recogniton. I have at times speculated that T-Mobile’s American arm may be divested and sold t ATT, but if such a deal were to made available to Deutche Telekom they may indeed find it lucrativ to buy and incorporate Verizon Wireless into a brand new (albiet GSM) rival of ATT, and combining the two of them would certainly make for a bigger company then ATT wireless for sure, thus squarely placing T-Mobile/Deuch Telekom at the top of the Ameican wireless hill. A nice position to be in indeed, but could happen, I think yes but only if the wheels are set in motion by O2’s shareholders to aquire a controlling interest, then find a suitable buyer to divest themselves of there American interest. However, far before any of this happens, I predict that Sprint will go bye bye, they to me seem to be in the worst market position and don’t show any signs of recovery; quarter after quarter they are loosing customers while arguably maintaining the bottom of the berrel (think credit situations) and complacent customers who are either too cheap to pay to get out of their contracts, or see a sell phone as something less then alluring. It is this same type of customer who refuses to pay for the often very profitable for the carrier service additions that Sprint heavely advertises, as these people say a cell phone “is just for talking.” The worst part, however and certainly something which I am sure will be reaching litigation (if it has not already) is how they have treated their iDen customers, silently neglecting their network, and depriving them of high end product in the hope of forcably making them switch to highbrid, iDen/CDMA handsets (at the customers expense mind you) while continuing to advertise and sign up new customers to arguably the worst network in the buisness (admitably by their own employes) while corporate throws up its hands at the shareholders like
“I don’t know why they hate us, and we can’t sign up new customers”…please. Apparently its not illegal for a company to do this (yet), but it sure should be. Don’t get my wrong I am all with the whole switch to a better network thing, but to A. not be giving wholesale discounts to existing an loyal (Nextel people are the most) customers. B. Holding the cunsumer to his/her contract with full well knowlege that they are not whistling dixie when they say “my service is horrible” is just downright scary, and my feeling is Sprint deserves whatevery happens to them. The only thing that shocks me is that Nextel users are not marching on Sprint’s headquarters with burning torches! Needless to say I predict they will eventually be gone, and their buisness practices with them making for 1 large CDMA carrier once Verizon and (whatever is left of) Sprints customers combine forces against the ATT juggernaut. My final work is, all this is good for buisness but bad for consumers, format wars never end pretty i.e. VHS and Betamax and now Blu-Ray and HD-DVD.
Just my take.