Qualcomm Inc (QCOM)

[carranza2]

You're right, it was the promise of "millions and millions" of GPRS handsets by the fall of '01 that Nokia screwed up, not millions of EDGE terminals in '02.

So many Nokia screwups, I get confused.

Cell density is going to be very high for EDGE to reach 3G speeds, even if the GSM boys finally supply the market with a true 3G-capable handset and true EDGE technology that is truly 3G. If that doesn't translate to lots of new infra, tell me what does.

By the way, this was a really good job of spinning--it's the cabinetry that might need replacing as well as, what the heck, a transceiver or two. Now why in the name of reason would existing cabinets have to be replaced to accommodate existing transceivers? Too funny.

Some older base station cabinetry may need to be replaced or modified in order to house existing as well as new transceivers.

Older GSM infra without EDGE built in to it has to be replaced. Forklifts, bud. New transceivers and God only knows what else for those who have not updated their stuff recently.

Perhaps you've also forgotten the speculation--which I have not yet seen refuted or confirmed anywhere--dealing with EDGE forklift infra changes made by Deutsche Bank a few months ago for EDGE's newer iterations. An interesting bit of speculation no one has followed up on.

Whatever and however you spin it, the Nokia EDGE phone is not represented by Nokia as a 3G phone. Period. Full stop. End of story. The interesting part of the story is why not.

Is it the EDGE software itself that doesn't achieve the higher speeds or are the handsets the problem?

Either way, no 3G EDGE.

Nokia chooses not to label the 6200U as a 3G terminal, Nokia instead focuses on data transmission rates that users can realistically expect using it (with max 3+1 and alternatively 2+2) at this point in time) in an EDGE phase 1 environment, rather than on peak data rates:

But EDGE itself is represented to be 3G. The problem is that there are no EDGE handsets in view capable of 3G speeds. None are announced, they are simply not on the horizon.

If you claim that Nokia chooses not to label the 62000 as a 3G terminal, Nokia instead focuses on data transmission rates..., then Nokia speaks out of two sides of its mouth. This is what it says here:

EDGE: up to 118.4 kilobits per second (downlink) in EDGE packet transmission networks

http://www.wbs.nokia.com/nokia/0,8764,5880,00.html

What does "up to" mean to you? To me it means it can't reach any higher speeds. But you can spin it as you wish, you know how much I value your comments when you are on "spin cycle."

Face it, unless and until the manufacturers provide 3G EDGE networks with handsets capable of 3G performance--not "3G-like" performance--carriers spending on EDGE hoping to get a 3G system could be in the process of getting the shaft. They are putting their trust on the group that gave them slow-poke GPRS and the dog's breakfast that is WCDMA. I'm sure you remember the hyped-up speeds GPRS was touted as being able to achieve. What a joke that was.

Bottom line: The GSM cabalistas are simply not to be trusted.

Oh, and by the way, the 177 kbps speed for the Motorola T725 applies only when it is attached to a PC. We'll see how it does on a stand-alone basis.

http://www.imobile.com.au/Future/default.asp?ID=futurejan0303