DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey | beta/vhs/ofdm
This reminds me of the VHS>BETA thing. Beta had better quality but it wasnt marketed well. I think flash ofdm will have the same fate. . Plus licensing etc. |
|
Dude
What Happens When I Do This
Premium
join:2000-11-20
Chicago, IL
clubs:   | yeah
this reminds me of the dvd divx thing
why are there so many dang technologys
evdo
ofdm
cdma
tdma
gsm |
|
chupakobra
join:2002-12-31
Orlando, FL
|  interesting
This reminds of of a cheeseburger I once ate. I didn't care what was in the special sauce as long as it tasted good and didn't make me sick. 
Wait, no it doesn't mind me of that. I think any "standard" will need to be expandable. There is no way that 300-500 kbps is going to last for long. I would be happy with 100mbps and 1 - 5ms latency  |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
| Bad move
I can't understand why anyone would pay for something that's already obsolete. Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)?
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." |
|
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| said by BillRoland  :Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Flash OFDM may very well be better than EV-DO, but who can I get it from? Oh that's right, it's not available. EV-DO wins by default, because Flash OFDM isn't available, and EV-DO is. |
|
RTPnc
@69.134.x.x | using the nextel broadband service was an amazing experience... very fast, stable, available everywhere i went, 'up all the time.' a shame its being shut down. |
|
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
1 edit | reply to Dude
Re: yeah
said by Dude :this reminds me of the dvd divx thing why are there so many dang technologys evdo ofdm cdma tdma gsm That list is a little misleading. EV-DO and CDMA go hand-in-hand, since EV-DO rides on the CDMA network, and can't exist without it. TDMA is on the way out, and none of the big 5 cellular companies are using it primarily any more. OFDM doesn't really fit in that list at all, because it's not dependent a cellular phone network, and is completely separate. So really, your list should have two items:
CDMA + 1xRTT/EV-DO
GSM + GPRS/EDGE/UMTS
Those are the major competing cellular technologies right now. OFDM is purely a data technology, not related to cellular phones in any way, aside from it being offered initially by a cellular provider. |
|
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
| reply to BillRoland
Re: Bad move
said by BillRoland :I can't understand why anyone would pay for something that's already obsolete. Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Because Flash OFDM requires new equipment and costly upgrades and has backend integration issues with the existing infrastructure of the service provider.
Also when service provider sticks with standards (industry or international standards) the equipment they need to provide to customers becomes cheaper.
EVDO and WCDMA has more potential than what is currently offered by service providers. |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| reply to Jeremy341
said by Jeremy341 : said by BillRoland :Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Flash OFDM may very well be better than EV-DO, but who can I get it from? Oh that's right, it's not available. EV-DO wins by default, because Flash OFDM isn't available, and EV-DO is. I was speaking about cell companies, not a consumer like you. And besides, that is completely irrelevant to my post. The fact that a brand new technology, which is better than EV-DO, is not as ubiquitous as EV-DO, is completely irrelevant.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." |
|
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| said by BillRoland :The fact that a brand new technology, which is better than EV-DO, is not as ubiquitous as EV-DO, is completely irrelevant. Brand new? Hardly.
As to wanting to know the cellular companies' side of the equation, DrTCP summed it up quite nicely. |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| reply to DrTCP
said by DrTCP : said by BillRoland :I can't understand why anyone would pay for something that's already obsolete. Flash OFDM clearly kicks the crap out of EVDO. Why would anyone want to pick 2nd place (the first loser)? Because Flash OFDM requires new equipment and costly upgrades and has backend integration issues with the existing infrastructure of the service provider. Also when service provider sticks with standards (industry or international standards) the equipment they need to provide to customers becomes cheaper. EVDO and WCDMA has more potential than what is currently offered by service providers. EVDO and WCDMA, from what I have seen and heard, still don't have the potential of Flash OFDM. I guess I'm just a believer in giving the customer the most advanced technology available and figuring out how to make it all work, rather than just give up on it.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs: | reply to Jeremy341
Oh you're right, Flash OFDM has been out since the 1980s. My mistake.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition." |
|
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| said by BillRoland :Oh you're right, Flash OFDM has been out since the 1980s. My mistake. No need to be sarcastic. It's been around since 2000. You were calling it "brand new" compared to EV-DO, which has also been around since 2000. Neither one is brand new, and both are actually about the same age. |
|
phinniusj
join:2005-02-04
Old Bridge, NJ
| reply to DrTCP
But a company like Nextel needs to do the upgrades of which you speak anyway.
Also, CDMA and its addons are not standards. They are the proprietary and patented properties of QCOM who has the OEMs by the short hairs for the licenses. The animosity in the OEM community in regard to the licensing fees is legendary.
It seems to me that Flarion's technology would not only give better performance and latency to end users and application developers, but would also provide the OEMs better leverage with technology providers given the competition that would come about. |
|
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
| said by phinniusj :But a company like Nextel needs to do the upgrades of which you speak anyway. Since Sprint is buying Nextel and Sprint has already notes operating on CDMA based technology (while Nextel has no real commercial data operation) the natural choice for company to choose EVDO. Having two types of technology for a single company does not make sense. It does not make sense for coverage, it does not make sense to support and maintain two sets of equipment. It makes it harder to integrate two systems of backend servers. It makes it more expensive to stock customer equipment etc. The natural choice for Sprint/Nextel is too unify their operations and equipment.
Nextel had to upgrade its IDEN equipment to operate on the new 1900Mhz bands for which they game up their use of 800Mhz bands. Now, since Nextel is supposed to upgrade anyway, they will upgrade to CDMA equipment creating an opportunity for a bigger Network for Sprint. Both Nextel and Sprint is benefiting from such move.
Also CDMA and its addons are not standards. They are the proprietary and patented properties of QCOM who has the OEMs by the short hairs for the licenses. The animosity in the OEM community in regard to the licensing fees is legendary. CDMA2000 is a standard:
»www.umtsworld.com/technology/cdma2000.htm
There are many patents behind most standards. For example, there are patents behind PCI as well but PCI contributors agree to license their patents in non-distrimitory and reasonable fee basis. This is what QCOM is doing with CDMA and CDMA based data standards.
It seems to me that Flarion's technology would not only give better performance and latency to end users and application developers, but would also provide the OEMs better leverage with technology providers given the competition that would come about. Maybe so. But, the best do not always will. It has to make business sense as well. CDMA2000 makes business sense for existing CDMA based operators. |
|
llmax
@65.76.x.x
| Disappointed Trial Participant
The Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill service was great. Unbelievable convenient to be at high-speed where ever
I was in the RTP area. Disappointed to see it going away. Somebody just offering this at the 20 largest airports for $10
a day or $39 per month would make a mint.
Max |
|
LarryScott
@nexteldata.net
| Nextel Wireless Broadband
I have a few bones to pick with Nextel...First, when I signed up, I was NEVER told it was any sort of a trial. I was also never lead to believe by Nextel's massive radio and billboard campaigns that this was a "trial." The word "trial" was never used in any of it's promotional material, advertising, or contracts...nor did any sales or support person every use that word UNTIL I got the email telling me the trial was over.
Secondly, the service was not all that great, and the tech support was awful. My modem would go into scan mode constantly...I would get dropped every 45 minutes from a stationary location. It never got resolved despite my 12+ calls and endless hours on hold with tech support.
The only redeeming thing out of this whole "trial" was the 3 free months they gave us to make up for them pulling the plug. If they hadn't done that, I think there could easily have been a line of people at the Attorneys General office filing a class-action lawsuit.
But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. |
|
