Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55
  1. RafRol's Avatar
    Posts
    544 Posts
    Global Posts
    570 Global Posts
    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    ...the world, where the standard (for better or worse) is GSM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rnp View Post
    What??? Serious... I believe that you are not well informed about this...

    People, please... Ok, I know that the big part of forum lives in USA, but the rest of the world is GSM/UMTS/WCDMA
    Let's see... CDMA is used throughout the entire continent of North America, including most of the Caribbean region. Uhmmm...the 2 most populated countries in the world: India & China. I guess Israel isn't much of a market either... heck, let's throw in Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam in there. While I'm at it, South Korea and the Ukraine. Japan too, what do they know?

    Let's just hope that HP doesn't bother with them... what a waste of time and effort. And what was Apple thinking of when making a CDMA iPhone???

    Edit: I forgot to mention Venezuela, Peru, New Zealand, Yemen, Ecuador, Bangladesh, the Philippines, and Indonesia, which has the largest population of Muslims in the world, fourth most populated country overall (if you're wondering which is the 3rd most populated country in the world, then I can understand how you would think GSM is THE standard).

    So the 4 most populated countries on our planet have CDMA networks. They must not be of this world.
    Last edited by RafRol; 06/10/2011 at 12:38 AM.
    Visor/Sprint Springboard Expansion Module > Visor Platinum > Tungsten E > Centro (work) > Palm Pre
  2.    #22  
    C'mon people, let's be real here.

    CDMA is dying.

    The CDMA network in Australia was shut down and migrated to GSM already.

    The CDMA network in Brazil was shut down and migrated to GSM as well.

    In Canada, the CDMA network will be shut down by 2015 in a migration to GSM/HSPA. In China and Russia, the same migration is underway.

    The phony distinction between LTE and GSM is a bit like arguing that HSPA isn't GSM, but a "separate technology called WCDMA." Technically true, but truly irrelevant.

    If you buy a WiMax + CDMA phone, you can use it on exactly one carrier -- Sprint. If you buy a CDMA + LTE phone, you can use it on exactly one carrier -- Verizon. If you buy a GSM + LTE phone, you can use it on virtually every carrier on earth with a few exceptions.

    Suppose I offered you an investment opportunity. One was to create a CDMA smartphone to sell to the 150 million or so CDMA users out there, with the caveat that the carrier would completely dominate design decisions, increase your cost with useless variations to the basic handset for "differentiation," etc.

    The other is to create a GSM + LTE smartphone to sell to *billions* of GSM customers around the world, who can buy your device straight from the carrier, or purchase directly from you and activate on their carrier of choice. You don't have to make meaningless variations on the theme, be subject to absurd CDMA tech limitations and carrier nonsense.

    Which would you invest in? The latter.

    Guess what -- HP right now is making the same investment decisions, if I had to guess.
  3.    #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by RafRol View Post
    Let's see... CDMA is used throughout the entire continent of North America, including most of the Caribbean region.
    CDMA in Canada is scheduled to be phased out by 2015. If I had to guess, I'd expect that Verizon will be shutting down its CDMA network ASAP to free up the bandwidth for GSM/LTE. In Mexico, the CDMA network is a poor sister to the GSM network.

    That means that by 2015, the only major CDMA player in North America will be Sprint (if it's even around in 2015).
  4. #24  
    Why is this only less opportunity for HP?
  5.    #25  
    I wouldn't say it's *no* opportunity, but Palm went the "invest in CDMA first and most aggressively" route with the Pre, and we all saw how that went.

    Looks like HP is going exactly the opposite way, and I'm not convinced it's a bad idea.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    I wouldn't say it's *no* opportunity, but Palm went the "invest in CDMA first and most aggressively" route with the Pre, and we all saw how that went.

    Looks like HP is going exactly the opposite way, and I'm not convinced it's a bad idea.
    Oh yeah, it failed because it was CDMA!! I'm sure the bad hardware quality and horrible advertising had nothing to do with it. It is still one of Sprint's best selling devices - I believe second only to the EVO. Verizon flat dropped the ball with webOS.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    CDMA in Canada is scheduled to be phased out by 2015. If I had to guess, I'd expect that Verizon will be shutting down its CDMA network ASAP to free up the bandwidth for GSM/LTE. In Mexico, the CDMA network is a poor sister to the GSM network.

    That means that by 2015, the only major CDMA player in North America will be Sprint (if it's even around in 2015).
    Honestly where do you guys come up with this?!? Do any of you read?

    I knew nothing about this but it only took me a few minutes to find out what's really going on. Bell (Canada's largest CDMA provider) started a new Video Calling service on their new HSPA+ network. They have no plans to dump CDMA. The 2015 plan is to switch to LTE and phase out both CDMA and their HSPA+ network.

    References:
    Bell Mobility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Roaming and LTE behind Canadian operators’ switch | telecoms.com - telecoms industry news, analysis and opinion

    I don't think you people who are hyped up about GSM (a network that's about to be phased out) understand how costly it is for Verizon or any network to switch from one network to another network, especially when both networks are supposed to be phased out.


    • You have to buy the spectrums
    • You have to buy the equipment
    • You have to pay to install all that equipment
    • You have to offer free phones to all your customers who's contracts say nothing about having to pay for new phone to change networks.


    And all for what?? So in 4 years you can do it all over again?!? A company would go broke doing that.

    Canada just offered a new service with HSPA+ and saw a business opportunity to get roaming fees with it. I'm not sure but this also might have been a move to help transition to LTE, but this has nothing to do with wanting to leave CDMA.

    Some of you are making this personal about GSM and are blind to the reality that nobody, not even the Mobile Operators care about what brand of technology they are using so long as it makes business sense. For some operators it was GSM and others CDMA. They are both fine.

    In the USA, CDMA just happens to have better coverage in small unpopulated farming towns like San Francisco and New York (yes there was some sarcasm in that). And that has more to do with the Mobile Operators deployment, not whether they used GSM or CDMA.
  8. #28  
    To the GSM people:

    Your arguments are analogous to the VHS vs Betamax war. However you are making these arguments a year after DVD has already been out.

    Please look that up if you don't know what VHS or Betamax are. Because soon nobody will remember what GSM or CDMA were either, which is why this is silly.
  9. #29  
    I wouldn't say soon. The end, as they say, is not near.
    Touchscreens are a fad.
  10. RafRol's Avatar
    Posts
    544 Posts
    Global Posts
    570 Global Posts
    #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    CDMA in Canada is scheduled to be phased out by 2015. If I had to guess, I'd expect that Verizon will be shutting down its CDMA network ASAP to free up the bandwidth for GSM/LTE. In Mexico, the CDMA network is a poor sister to the GSM network.

    That means that by 2015, the only major CDMA player in North America will be Sprint (if it's even around in 2015).
    Do us a favor and improve your research skills. CDMA isn't going anywhere anytime soon:

    Verizon's CDMA May Last Another Decade | News & Opinion | PCMag.com

    BTW, in North America a big client of CDMA technology is OnStar. I guess VZW should just dump that cash-cow...

    Edit: Many of the CDMA carriers in Asia, are now upgrading their networks to CDMA Rev. B., not GSM, not LTE.
    Last edited by RafRol; 06/10/2011 at 11:28 AM.
    Visor/Sprint Springboard Expansion Module > Visor Platinum > Tungsten E > Centro (work) > Palm Pre
  11. #31  
    Interesting thread.

    Apple seemed to think there was opportunity when it recently released its CDMA iphone on Verizon. Then again,what does Apple know about selling phones?
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    C'mon people, let's be real here.

    CDMA is dying...
    I think this is the point you are missing.

    Dying != Dead

    The market still exists. Phones have a .5 to 2 year lifecycle. CDMA will be around that long. HP will market to those users.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    CDMA in Canada is scheduled to be phased out by 2015. If I had to guess, I'd expect that Verizon will be shutting down its CDMA network ASAP to free up the bandwidth for GSM/LTE. In Mexico, the CDMA network is a poor sister to the GSM network.

    That means that by 2015, the only major CDMA player in North America will be Sprint (if it's even around in 2015).
    You've made quite a jump in assumptions with "if I had to guess... Verizon" part.
    I don't think Verizon will have shut down their CDMA network as quickly as you're assuming, and even if they did, 3.5 more years is still a pretty hefty market segment.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by deesugar View Post
    Canada just offered a new service with HSPA+ and saw a business opportunity to get roaming fees with it. I'm not sure but this also might have been a move to help transition to LTE, but this has nothing to do with wanting to leave CDMA.
    It is. LTE to HSPA is just like HSPA to GSM. I'm pretty sure the plan is migrate to LTE but the fallback is UMTS. They won't build a network just for it to last a few years, especially how our contracts here are 3-years. They'll get A LOT MORE angry customers than they already do.

    CDMA is definitely getting phased out at some point, though.
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLIÉ T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  15. #35  
    Isn't there more cdma androids than gsm?
    Shouldn't android also get out of the cdma market before it's too late?
    And what the heck is Apple thinking making a cdma iphone?
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    ...Phones have a .5 to 2 year lifecycle. CDMA will be around that long. HP will market to those users.
    And for Sprint users we know it's at LEAST 2 years and 4 days (as of this posting)!



    I agree with you, there are lots of opportunities for CDMA in the short term, and the Pre3 can run on GSM networks. Right now HP has to launch with anyone that will have them!
  17. #37  
    Look, what I'm saying is this: almost countries that do you have CDMA, you have GSM, too. But in most coutries where do you have GSM, the CDMA network is decreasing or was disabled.

    It's nothing about be better or worst; but yes, about growth. I don't know if because the GSM/UMTS/WCDMA/LTE network is cheaper or other reason, but is spreading more than CDMA/EVDO...


    Best Regards...
    "If A Man Isn't Willing To Take Some Risk For His Opinions, Either His Opinions Are No Good Or He's No Good!" - Ezra Pound (Poet & Critic)
    (Happy A Lot, As A Good Carioca!)
  18.    #38  
    If you don't see the wisdom of investing in the growing global standard rather than a closed, smaller dead-end in decline, I don't know what else I can say. Some of the examples you give are proof positive of my point...

    EVO -- top selling handset of a carrier that has posted billions in losses and continues to post staggering losses every quarter;

    OnStar -- outdated legacy service of an automaker that would have liquidated without significant government bailouts.

    If you build your business on a dying, dead-end technology, chances are that your business is going to follow that trajectory. If you cannot see that, I don't know how else to make you understand.

    Apple seemed to think there was opportunity when it recently released its CDMA iphone on Verizon. Then again,what does Apple know about selling phones?
    Yet the expected long queues and massive conversion from AT&T didn't happen, did it?

    Because most iPhone users understood CDMA's limitations, and for all of AT&T's problems in NYC and SF, didn't see the point in moving to a slower, dead-end network technology from one that's being continually upgraded.

    CDMA just happens to have better coverage in small unpopulated farming towns like San Francisco and New York
    Not in my experience. Both T-Mobile and AT&T have superior in-building coverage to Sprint CDMA, in my experience. AT&T can even deliver data service inside buildings where there's no Sprint or VZW signal coming through at all.

    I don't know if because the GSM/UMTS/WCDMA/LTE network is cheaper or other reason
    It's the flexibility of the technology. CDMA is the Apple Macintosh of the cell phone world -- it was technically superior "way back when," but the open standard of GSM caught up fast and eventually passed it by in the rate of innovation. It also has a lot more of a future as an open technology deployed around the world.

    For the GSM carriers, an upgrade to high speed UMTS and LTE is the evolution of their existing technology base. For the CDMA carriers, LTE is a migration to the GSM standard.

    For poor Sprint, they're stuck with both a dated CDMA network and a high-frequency, building-blocked WiMax network that hasn't grown since its initial rollout and requires truly oddball phone combinations combining two esoteric technologies (WiMax and CDMA). Unsurprisingly, this has inhibited their ability to offer compelling devices -- hence stinkers like Echo, HTC EVO and its well-documented problems, Nexus S 4G with its antenna issues, etc.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rnp View Post
    Look, what I'm saying is this: almost countries that do you have CDMA, you have GSM, too. But in most coutries where do you have GSM, the CDMA network is decreasing or was disabled.
    You are saying things that have been proven wrong. CDMA is not being disabled or decreasing to a significant amount anywhere. If you have proof, that's different but after looking into your claim about Canada switching from CDMA to GSM and finding it utterly false, I flat out don't believe anything you say unless you have proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rnp View Post
    It's nothing about be better or worst; but yes, about growth. I don't know if because the GSM/UMTS/WCDMA/LTE network is cheaper or other reason, but is spreading more than CDMA/EVDO...
    Yeah, you see it's when you say stuff like that I wonder how much you actually know versus just making stuff up because it bolsters your uninformed opinion. But I suggest you try something new and bold:

    Try reading about the things you are talking about so you can answer your own questions and arm yourself with information instead of incorrect guesses and opinions.

    But the most important thing you should try to learn is GSM is just as dead as CDMA. They are both old technologies that are being replaced by either LTE or WiMAX. Please understand GSM has nothing to offer over the technology it will be replaced by.

    You should probably read more about LTE and WiMAX since that seems to be what you are confused about the most. Like how close they are to each other and how they are technologies that will stand on their own for both voice and data replacing GSM and CDMA because of cost efficiency and a bunch of new value added services that those technologies will allow Mobile Operators to sell.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    If you don't see the wisdom of investing in the growing global standard rather than a closed, smaller dead-end in decline, I don't know what else I can say. Some of the examples you give are proof positive of my point...

    EVO -- top selling handset of a carrier that has posted billions in losses and continues to post staggering losses every quarter;

    OnStar -- outdated legacy service of an automaker that would have liquidated without significant government bailouts.

    If you build your business on a dying, dead-end technology, chances are that your business is going to follow that trajectory. If you cannot see that, I don't know how else to make you understand.



    Yet the expected long queues and massive conversion from AT&T didn't happen, did it?

    Because most iPhone users understood CDMA's limitations, and for all of AT&T's problems in NYC and SF, didn't see the point in moving to a slower, dead-end network technology from one that's being continually upgraded.



    Not in my experience. Both T-Mobile and AT&T have superior in-building coverage to Sprint CDMA, in my experience. AT&T can even deliver data service inside buildings where there's no Sprint or VZW signal coming through at all.



    It's the flexibility of the technology. CDMA is the Apple Macintosh of the cell phone world -- it was technically superior "way back when," but the open standard of GSM caught up fast and eventually passed it by in the rate of innovation. It also has a lot more of a future as an open technology deployed around the world.

    For the GSM carriers, an upgrade to high speed UMTS and LTE is the evolution of their existing technology base. For the CDMA carriers, LTE is a migration to the GSM standard.

    For poor Sprint, they're stuck with both a dated CDMA network and a high-frequency, building-blocked WiMax network that hasn't grown since its initial rollout and requires truly oddball phone combinations combining two esoteric technologies (WiMax and CDMA). Unsurprisingly, this has inhibited their ability to offer compelling devices -- hence stinkers like Echo, HTC EVO and its well-documented problems, Nexus S 4G with its antenna issues, etc.
    brmiller1976,
    The staggering falsehoods and misinformation in what you just said is mind blowing. I literally don't have the time to explain how almost everything you said is either completely wrong or borderline insane.

    The biggest W.T.F moment is your comment about OnStar. *edit* I forgot to add, what was your reason for bringing OnStar into this? Was it because they use CDMA??? Because you have officially jumped the shark with this one.


    • Onstar is not an automaker, they are a subsidiary of GM.
    • Outdated?!? hardly.
    • Would have liquidated without significant government bailouts?!? I doubt that would have happened since they could have been sold for a profit


    Anyway educate yourself:
    OnStar China Gets 1 Million Calls in a Month - autoevolution
    GM Pushes Hard with OnStar - BusinessWeek
    OnStar - United States - News



    I implore those who are knowledgeable to explain all the other inaccuracies as I don't have anytime anymore.
    Last edited by deesugar; 06/10/2011 at 12:50 PM.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions