[Hands0n]

The Authority of Reuters has announced that 3G is here, and that next week's 3GSM show will be devoted to it. Reuters is a wonderful news service, but even a casual look at the article reveals that the headlines are not saying what the story under them reveals. No, 3G is still a mess.
Full article on The Register here --> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/14/3g_has_arrived/

So, what do you think? Has the author a point? And what about those "losses"? If accurate, how long can the mobile companies run like that? ARPU is often bandied about, but in isolation the figure can look good. How does it balance with their outgoings then? The overall profitability? Big ARPU and even bigger costs will equal negative equity. Not a terribly good recipe for the business in general.

P.S. do we need a general 3G discussion area? I couldn't find elsewhere to pop this ditty.

[Ben]

Interesting that it mentions upstreams. Wired broadband providers still seem to be having a job providing symetric bandwidth services, so we can't expect mobile services to be any better. The prospect of them being considerably worse, however, isn't a good one. 3G has been clearly defined as a delivery service, for delivering premium content to handsets, rather than a full on data service like Wi-Fi/WiMAX would provide.

It's early days of course. All the networks will have profitable 3G operations in a few years time, and any that don't may well be taking the fall that the O2 boss predicts. I think I'll just end this post by saying there is considerable work still to be done. It's work that wont be done, however, without increased demand for the services.

[Hands0n]

Wired (Business) services have had the offer of SDSL (symmetric DSL) for some time, albeit at a premium cost. The notion behind ADSL is that we all want fast download speeds but not necessarily upload. But then that does not allow for us wanting to send a large file to someone/somewhere else. Even at 128Kbps or 256Kbps (upstream) it can be agonisingly slow.

I believe that they've carried that same (ADSL) notion into 3G provision - rapid delivery of service content to the handset. Videocall gets away with it because it does not need even 64Kbps given the state of the art. But when we get to general data handling the need/desire for symmetric transmission returns. Not sure what the technical hurdles are for 3G in the radio spectrum but from what I know of radio (albeit analogue) there will be a bandwidth allocation issue to resolve, even for digital.

The waters continue to muddy with O2's Manx trials of HSCSD (still asymetric) and talk of 4G (not a distinct transport technology in itself), and of course the Wi-Fi/WiMAX you mention - plus what else can come along while 3G matures!

Interesting you mention the "demand" driver for continued development. The type of content (ring tones, music video, pornography, football) are being used in the promoting of 3G as no previous telephony technology before. Its no longer about telephony though, is it? A whole new set of rules and gameplay are being established. Responding to fads will be de rigeur. The so-called "Chav" market is being actively pursued. Kids and Teens will be targetted actively. It'll be a wild ride for the next few years, I predict :)

[Ben]

By HSCSD are you referring to HSDPA? Essentially this is just an upgrade to 3G and can be deployed at the software level for the 3G equipment network operators have already got installed. Unfortunately I have not read anywhere that HSDPA will increase uplink, which could leave us with massive download capability with just 64kbps up!

Even SDSL is only available in a limited number of telephone exchanges. Upstream data seems to be an expense that telcos just aren't prepared to afford.

You're very right in saying it's no longer about telephony. I don't make many calls - I've always been far more interested in the wireless data/portable connectivity angle - hence my fascination with 3G. A lot more specially crafted marketing is needed to help 3G take off, but I guess the handsets haven't really been available to make it worthwhile just yet.

I hope you like the addition of this new section by the way - hopefully it's ideal for discussions such as this one.

[Hands0n]

Thanks for correcting me - yes I did mean HSDPA I'm suffering from TMAITB (Too Many Acronyms In The Brain). Now I'm left wondering what the hell HSCSD is, and why its in my head!! LOL.

No, I've not read of HSDPA offering anything more than the Downlink (hence the "D" in the acronym). 64Kbps uplink is, I reckon, a continuation of the telephony/videoconference design mindset. It does not allow for the data speeds that we would want (and get on other transmission methods) when using laptops and PDAs.

SDSL is more/different kit in the Exchange and Customers Premises. Behind the ADSL/SDSL kit the network is symmetric and the same (trying desperately to remember the name of BTs infrastructure [iirc its called Datastream], its all ATM and very high speed up to 622Mbps). But yes, as you say, it is more expensive and charged accordingly.

Three's marketing is very clever, and apparently effective. I must admit to being somewhat confused at Orange's marketing of 3G. Okay, so its "Easy", but easy to do what? Not sure they got it right just yet.

Thanks for the new section - perfect for conversation not speficically about a particular mobile op.

[Hands0n]

Gawd bless Google ......... LOL

High Speed Circuit Switched Data (HSCSD) is an enhancement of data services ("Circuit Switched Data - CSD) of all current GSM networks. It allows you to access nonvoice services at 3 times faster, which means subscribers are able to send and receive data from their portable computers at a speed of up to 28.8 kbps; this is currently being upgraded in many networks to rates of and up to 43.2 kbps.

[Ben]

Ah of course! Orange made a big fuss about HSCSD (or alike) did they not? Ah, those were the days ;)

[3g-g]

Hey don't knock HSCSD!! I had a go on one of the first Video phones back in 2001 on Orange, and it ran on 2 timeslot HSCSD!! Badly.. but it ran!

[3GScottishUser]

Having just read about the development of the intel Wimax chip i am beginning to fear for the relevance of W-CDMA in terms of data. Wimax can cover up to 10 miles and offers the possibility of up to 80Mb/s downstream. It looks like the answer, real wireless broadband. As prices fall keep an eye on this development.

Wimax Information from the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4455727.stm)

[Jon3G]

Over the next few years things are going to get really interesting and mobile technolgy will be able to rival Household suppliers, if they become cheap enough

[Hands0n]

Radiation scares notwithstanding Wireless does seem the way for everything to be going. The arguments for keeping wireless expensive are evaporating as the technology improves (beyond all recognition from those heady days of 1982 and the advent of radio telephony for the masses). Anybody recall the Post Office Radiophone Services (sic) of those times? We've come on just a tad since then