Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 61
  1. #1
    Socal Cell
    Guest
    Who stole the definition of 3G?

    No, Cingular was not the first carrier to do so, and in
    fact at least they are at least offering a data rate,
    while not 3G, that is faster than the companies that
    are claiming that GPRS is 3G!

    "There used be, before they were stolen, a couple of fairly
    concrete criteria for 3G networks. One said that it must use
    the 3GPP (3G Partnership Program) defined air interface
    and the other that it must be capable of transmitting 2
    megabits per second between the network and the 3G
    handset."

    Sonera is not the only one missing 3G definitions. As a
    matter of fact, 99 percent of "3G service providers" are
    missing part of the criteria."

    "http://newsletter.nordicwirelesswatch.com/story.php?story_id=2133"

    "http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=20513"

    Steve
    socalcell.com
    sfbacell.com

    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



    See More: Who stole the definition of 3G?




  2. #2
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:28:58 -0000,
    [email protected] (Socal Cell) wrote:

    >Who stole the definition of 3G?
    >
    >No, Cingular was not the first carrier to do so, and in
    >fact at least they are at least offering a data rate,
    >while not 3G, that is faster than the companies that
    >are claiming that GPRS is 3G!
    >
    >"There used be, before they were stolen, a couple of fairly
    > concrete criteria for 3G networks. One said that it must use
    > the 3GPP (3G Partnership Program) defined air interface
    > and the other that it must be capable of transmitting 2
    > megabits per second between the network and the 3G
    > handset."
    >
    > Sonera is not the only one missing 3G definitions. As a
    > matter of fact, 99 percent of "3G service providers" are
    > missing part of the criteria."
    >
    >"http://newsletter.nordicwirelesswatch.com/story.php?story_id=2133"
    >
    >"http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=20513"



    The proper definition of 3G is at <http://www.fcc.gov/3G/>. 2 Megabits/second
    or higher applies only to indoor traffic. The other standards are:

    * 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
    * 384 kilobits/second for pedestrian traffic

    There are also several other criteria.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  3. #3
    Socal Cell
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [email protected] (Socal Cell) wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    >Who stole the definition of 3G?
    >
    >No, Cingular was not the first carrier to do so, and in
    >fact at least they are at least offering a data rate,
    >while not 3G, that is faster than the companies that
    >are claiming that GPRS is 3G!


    Oops, following up on one's own post is bad form
    but I should point out that in fact Cingular did _not_
    actually claim that EDGE is 3G--my mistake.

    What they said was "EDGE is recognized as the most
    economical way to overlay GSM/GPRS to achieve 3G
    capabilities"

    This statement is intentionally vague. 3G "capabilities"
    which could mean a lot of things, i.e. services that
    were expected to be available on 3G are now available
    on EDGE, etc. This is in fact the same sort of claim the
    Finnish carrier Sonera alluded to when they claimed that
    they had deployed "3G."

    Since Cingular has no plans at this time to go to 3G
    (UMTS), they don't have to worry about how to sell
    3G to people that are using the 3G "capabilities" of
    EDGE.

    The article at
    "http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=20513"
    which refers to Finnish carrier Sonera, talks about
    the dangers of labeling 3G services on a 2G network,
    as 3G.

    If you read virtually any article about EDGE, there
    are always qualifiers when there is any mention of it
    being 3G.

    Even at the 3G America's web site, an article states:

    "EDGE, or Enhanced Data Rate for Global Evolution, was
    introduced in 1997 as an enhancement to GPRS networks.
    Doradla explained that EDGE will be able to offer data
    speeds of up to 380 Kbps per second, compared with the
    115 Kbps of GPRS networks. Third-generation networks
    are advertised as offering speeds of up to 2 Mbps per
    second."
    "http://www.3gamericas.org/English/News_room/publishedarticles/cingular_exec.cfm"

    It should be pointed out that there are sometimes similar
    weasel words in efforts to attempt to paint 1xRTT as 3G, i.e.
    '1xRTT CDMA standard 'forms the basis' for 3G'
    And you can find definitions of 3G that would put both
    EDGE and 1xRTT into the 3G category, though the
    industry view is that 3G means UMTS and 1xEV, not EDGE
    or 1XRTT.

    With real world data rates for 1xRTT at 2x the GPRS
    data rates, should 1xRTT be lumped into 2.75G even
    though it is half the speed of EDGE? At least a couple
    of analysts believe so,

    http://www.3gnewsroom.com/3g_news/ap...ews_2100.shtml
    "In his new in-depth report, The Global 3G Report, U.S.
    Bancorp Piper Jaffray Senior Wireless Equipment Analyst
    Samuel May remains cautious on the rollout of high-speed
    packet-based 3G wireless networks across the globe due
    to three main reasons:

    - The extended functionality of packet-switched 2.5G
    and 2.75G mobile networks. May coined the acronym
    2.75G to describe a hardware upgrade to either a 2G
    code division multiple access (CDMA) 1xRTT network
    or global system for communications (GSM) enhanced
    data rates for global evolution (EDGE) network. Both
    networks allow for potentially higher data throughput
    (up to 144Kbps) than 2.5G, which can provide 30 to
    40Kbps."

    A report from SRI stated:
    "In a misnomer and over-hype of capability, these 2.5G
    phased improvements to 2G networks are being tagged by
    some carriers and infrastructure vendors as 3G. In
    reality, using strict interpretation of the ITU level
    of performance, they are not since average throughput
    speeds are much lower than the ITU a specified data
    rate levels for 3G"

    The report also stated:

    "WCDMA 3G in the USA (AT&T Wireless/Cingular) will not
    occur in any significant level of deployment until after
    the spectrum auctions in 2005

    CDMA 2000 2.5 and 2.75G wireless data technology
    (SprintPCS/Verizon) will out perform GPRS/EDGE networks
    and will see widespread deployment and successful market
    acceptance if costs to subscribers are kept at reasonable
    rates"

    How about 1xRTT being dubbed 2.63G and EDGE being
    dubbed 2.82G (just kidding)?

    Steve

    --------------------------------------------------
    http://www.socalcell.com
    Southern California Area Cellular Carrier Comparison
    [email protected]
    --------------------------------------------------


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  4. #4

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:41:47 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote:


    >The proper definition of 3G is at <http://www.fcc.gov/3G/>. 2 Megabits/second
    >or higher applies only to indoor traffic. The other standards are:
    >
    > * 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
    > * 384 kilobits/second for pedestrian traffic
    >
    >There are also several other criteria.


    So, if the stationary user (indoors) can achieve 2M it's 3G. So,
    there's only 1 commercially rolled out technology, cmda2000 1x EV-DO,
    that achieves that. "Who Stole 3G" is correct.



  5. #5
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:03:13
    -0500, [email protected] wrote:

    >On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:41:47 GMT, John Navas
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>The proper definition of 3G is at <http://www.fcc.gov/3G/>. 2 Megabits/second
    >>or higher applies only to indoor traffic. The other standards are:
    >>
    >> * 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
    >> * 384 kilobits/second for pedestrian traffic
    >>
    >>There are also several other criteria.

    >
    >So, if the stationary user (indoors) can achieve 2M it's 3G. ...


    No -- read more carefully.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  6. #6
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:00:19 -0000,
    [email protected] (Socal Cell) wrote:

    >[email protected] (Socal Cell) wrote in article
    ><[email protected]>:


    >>Who stole the definition of 3G?
    >>
    >>No, Cingular was not the first carrier to do so, and in
    >>fact at least they are at least offering a data rate,
    >>while not 3G, that is faster than the companies that
    >>are claiming that GPRS is 3G!

    >
    >Oops, following up on one's own post is bad form
    >but I should point out that in fact Cingular did _not_
    >actually claim that EDGE is 3G--my mistake.
    >...


    "What is IMT-2000" (ITU)
    <http://www.itu.int/osg/imt-project/d..._IMT2000-2.pdf>
    Page 6 defines
    * 2G: cdmaOne (IS-95A), TDMA, GSM
    * 2.5G: cdmaOne (IS-95B), GPRS
    * 3G: cdma2000 1X, EDGE, cdma2000 1x EV-DO & EV-DV, W-CDMA

    <http://www.3gamericas.org/English/Ne...m?id=519&s=ENG>

    EDGE Quickly Accelerating in the Americas
    Cingular's Market Launch is First on Track in Indy

    Bellevue, WA, July 17, 2003 -

    Mobile customers in Indianapolis will be the pacesetters for a
    potential captive market approaching 100 million customers throughout
    North, Central and South America, and the Caribbean, who will have
    the benefit of EDGE, including data speeds three times faster than a
    wired dial-up modem. Cingular Wireless, along with Nokia and
    Ericsson, set the pace for the next-generation of mobile services in
    Indianapolis by becoming the first of 33 operators in the Americas
    who will offer EDGE high-speed mobile data and Internet access
    services.

    Chris Pearson, Executive Vice President of 3G Americas emphasized,
    "EDGE is here today offering the start of a new generation of fast,
    cost-efficient and global mobile data services. Like the
    introduction of the personal computer, cellular phones and other
    phenomena of technology that have changed our lives, high-speed
    mobile wireless data services will positively impact us wherever we
    work or play."

    3G Americas reports that there are 33 operators, representing close
    to 100 million current customers within their networks, who have
    announced their deployment of EDGE technology over the next few years
    in the Americas. Additionally, other operators are preparing for
    deployments by installing thousands of EDGE-enabled base stations as
    they expand their GSM networks or migrate their TDMA networks to
    GSM/GPRS. As an example, AT&T Wireless announced in June that 93% of
    their cell sites are EDGE-equipped.

    Pearson stated, "EDGE continues its momentum as a preeminent 3G
    service, not just in the Americas but throughout the world.
    Operators who have announced their 3G technology choice of UMTS/WCDMA
    are now choosing EDGE as a complementary 3G technology deployment."
    Pearson continued, "The recent announcement by leading European
    operator Telecom Italia Mobile to deploy EDGE supports the business
    case for EDGE in Europe even where new 3G spectrum licenses have been
    awarded."

    Global EDGE commitments by 48 operators on every major continent represent
    a potential market of close to 200 million customers today.

    [MORE]

    Cingular on the cutting EDGE
    <http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/3757.html>

    Claiming a world first, U.S. mobile network operator Cingular
    Wireless has deployed EDGE technology to boost data speeds for
    subscribers in Indianapolis.

    Cingular Wireless today announced what the U.S. based mobile network
    operator claims is the world's first commercial deployment of
    wireless services using Enhanced Datarate for Global Evolution (EDGE)
    technology. Cingular's initial EDGE service offering is in its
    Indianapolis market, with subsequent deployments expected later in
    the year.

    Building on more than a decade of wireless data experience,
    Cingular's EDGE technology enables true "third generation" (3G)
    wireless data services with data speeds typically three times faster
    than those available on GSM/GPRS networks. Based on GSM, EDGE is a
    software enhancement for Cingular's General Packet Radio Service
    (GPRS) data network that can support peak data rates up to 170 Kbps
    with average data rates of 75-135 Kbps.

    [MORE]

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  7. #7
    Socal Cell
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [email protected] wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:

    > So, if the stationary user (indoors) can achieve 2M it's 3G. So,
    > there's only 1 commercially rolled out technology, cmda2000 1x EV-DO,
    > that achieves that. "Who Stole 3G" is correct.


    Yes it's correct. What's the question?

    Read: "http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/64/31927.html"
    which states:

    "AT&T Wireless today repeated its commitment to launch
    a scaled-back 3G network Stateside by the end of next
    year, alongside its upgraded "2.75G" EDGE network."

    At least AT&T is being accurate and isn't trying to allude
    to EDGE as 3G. Of course it isn't in AT&T's best interest
    to do this since they want to sell 3G when it actually is
    available.

    Of course when I saw the author of this article at The
    Register the alarm bells went off, but he seems to have
    gotten it all correct in this instance.

    Steve

    --------------------------------------------------
    http://www.socalcell.com
    Southern California Area Cellular Carrier Comparison
    [email protected]
    --------------------------------------------------


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  8. #8
    [email protected]en.cc.kux.edu
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:18:46 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    >In <[email protected]> on Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:03:13
    >-0500, [email protected] wrote:
    >
    >>On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:41:47 GMT, John Navas
    >><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>The proper definition of 3G is at <http://www.fcc.gov/3G/>. 2 Megabits/second
    >>>or higher applies only to indoor traffic. The other standards are:
    >>>
    >>> * 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
    >>> * 384 kilobits/second for pedestrian traffic
    >>>
    >>>There are also several other criteria.

    >>
    >>So, if the stationary user (indoors) can achieve 2M it's 3G. ...

    >
    >No -- read more carefully.


    I did before I posted. State your objections to the basis for my
    posting.




  9. #9

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:00:19 -0000, [email protected]
    (Socal Cell) wrote:

    >[email protected] (Socal Cell) wrote in article
    ><[email protected]>:
    >>Who stole the definition of 3G?
    >>
    >>No, Cingular was not the first carrier to do so, and in
    >>fact at least they are at least offering a data rate,
    >>while not 3G, that is faster than the companies that
    >>are claiming that GPRS is 3G!

    >
    >Oops, following up on one's own post is bad form
    >but I should point out that in fact Cingular did _not_
    >actually claim that EDGE is 3G--my mistake.
    >
    >What they said was "EDGE is recognized as the most
    >economical way to overlay GSM/GPRS to achieve 3G
    >capabilities"


    AT&T Wireless' pamphlet proclaims

    "AT&T next generation services and devices".
    They're claiming 3G without saying so....



  10. #10
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?


    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:00:19 -0000, [email protected]
    > (Socal Cell) wrote:
    >
    > >[email protected] (Socal Cell) wrote in article
    > ><[email protected]>:
    > >>Who stole the definition of 3G?
    > >>
    > >>No, Cingular was not the first carrier to do so, and in
    > >>fact at least they are at least offering a data rate,
    > >>while not 3G, that is faster than the companies that
    > >>are claiming that GPRS is 3G!

    > >
    > >Oops, following up on one's own post is bad form
    > >but I should point out that in fact Cingular did _not_
    > >actually claim that EDGE is 3G--my mistake.
    > >
    > >What they said was "EDGE is recognized as the most
    > >economical way to overlay GSM/GPRS to achieve 3G
    > >capabilities"

    >
    > AT&T Wireless' pamphlet proclaims
    >
    > "AT&T next generation services and devices".
    > They're claiming 3G without saying so....


    Again, very vague--intentionally.





  11. #11
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Thu, 31 Jul 2003 08:16:31
    -0500, [email protected] wrote:

    >On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:18:46 GMT, John Navas
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>In <[email protected]> on Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:03:13
    >>-0500, [email protected] wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:41:47 GMT, John Navas
    >>><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>The proper definition of 3G is at <http://www.fcc.gov/3G/>. 2 Megabits/second
    >>>>or higher applies only to indoor traffic. The other standards are:
    >>>>
    >>>> * 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
    >>>> * 384 kilobits/second for pedestrian traffic
    >>>>
    >>>>There are also several other criteria.
    >>>
    >>>So, if the stationary user (indoors) can achieve 2M it's 3G. ...

    >>
    >>No -- read more carefully.

    >
    >I did before I posted. State your objections to the basis for my
    >posting.


    We've been over this before, and what I stated was clear, so it seems you're
    just trolling, and I see no point in continuing.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  12. #12
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Thu, 31 Jul 2003 08:18:30
    -0500, [email protected] wrote:

    >AT&T Wireless' pamphlet proclaims
    >
    >"AT&T next generation services and devices".


    >They're claiming 3G without saying so....


    No, it (not they) is proclaiming 2.5G (GPRS) now, and 3G (EDGE) by the end of
    the year.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  13. #13
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Thu, 31 Jul
    2003 13:58:54 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >> AT&T Wireless' pamphlet proclaims
    >>
    >> "AT&T next generation services and devices".


    >> They're claiming 3G without saying so....

    >
    >Again, very vague--intentionally.


    Since you don't actually know the intent, you're just slinging more anti-GSM
    innuendo.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  14. #14

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 14:26:35 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote:


    >We've been over this before, and what I stated was clear, so it seems you're
    >just trolling, and I see no point in continuing.


    That right, blame it on someone else, again. This is the third time
    I've seen a non-answer from you being blamed on someone else!

    Explain this, then: Can W-CDMA deliver 2 mbps indoors?
    The answer is no. It can only deliver 384 kpbs indoors. It doesn't
    meet the FCC definition of 3G.

    Let's take the argument to the extreme: I'm outside, but stationary,
    and the mobile terminal antenna is outside. Peak speed 384 kbps.
    Move 6 inches (15 cm) so that the mobile and antenna are inside and
    stationary (door open with direct line of sight to the transmitter
    tower). Peak speed is still 384 kbps. The mobile terminal is inside.
    The peak speed is still 384 kbps.




  15. #15

    Re: Who stole the definition of 3G?

    On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 14:28:39 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    >In <[email protected]> on Thu, 31 Jul 2003 08:18:30
    >-0500, [email protected] wrote:
    >
    >>AT&T Wireless' pamphlet proclaims
    >>
    >>"AT&T next generation services and devices".

    >
    >>They're claiming 3G without saying so....

    >
    >No, it (not they) is proclaiming 2.5G (GPRS) now, and 3G (EDGE) by the end of
    >the year.


    Sorry, the pamphlet says nothing about next year, nor even the
    technology.



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast