Now here's a new concept...
Discussion
BBC website said:
Third generation (3G) mobiles have proved a financial disaster as companies have struggled to interest consumers in using the new technology.
Because...
And wait for it...
BBC website said:
they found customers were only using them for simple phone calls
A phone for phone calls... now fancy that
Full Story Here
3G is one of the biggest disasters ever - it's like the bosses made such a cock up, but are unable to admit it - I'm convinced that when they bought the licences they thought it was going to replace GSM, not that it was a way of delivering IP to handsets....
When you think about it, why is anyone going to use it ? video calls ? why ? the services are sooo expensive, but now they've taken the gamble they have to keep on with it - the telcos have spent billions building networks, problem is the guys who come up with marketing strategies etc are completely clueless, trying to find "killer" apps, when the killer app is making phone calls. Problem with that is there would be nothing for these guys to do ....... Actually the only possible killer app is porn, but they won't acknowledge that...lol
When you think about it, why is anyone going to use it ? video calls ? why ? the services are sooo expensive, but now they've taken the gamble they have to keep on with it - the telcos have spent billions building networks, problem is the guys who come up with marketing strategies etc are completely clueless, trying to find "killer" apps, when the killer app is making phone calls. Problem with that is there would be nothing for these guys to do ....... Actually the only possible killer app is porn, but they won't acknowledge that...lol
guydw said:
3G is one of the biggest disasters ever
Not if sitting at No 11 Downing Street its not. Having persuaded some of the UK's smartest companies and executives to part with 22 billion to be a part of something that no customers are really that interested in to top up the treasury is quite a coup.Tripps said:
guydw said:
3G is one of the biggest disasters ever
Not if sitting at No 11 Downing Street its not. Having persuaded some of the UK's smartest companies and executives to part with 22 billion to be a part of something that no customers are really that interested in to top up the treasury is quite a coup.The problem with 3G is no one has found the "killer app" for it. It was bit predictable really as they has the same problem with wap. Where 3G has taken off is in mobile data solutions. I think this will go further as the providers roll out 1.8 MBit/s HSDPA. Compared to a standard 3G connection the speed is absolutley stunning.
plasticpig said:
The problem with 3G is no one has found the "killer app" for it. It was bit predictable really as they has the same problem with wap. Where 3G has taken off is in mobile data solutions. I think this will go further as the providers roll out 1.8 MBit/s HSDPA. Compared to a standard 3G connection the speed is absolutley stunning.
This is the key, and the devices don't really make you yearn for that kind of speed right now, as the experience they offer isn't up to it. There is no real need for me with a PocketPC phone (Orange M600) to have anything more than GPRS, Edge is a nicety when it can be used, but the device is too small to do any real browsing on and the data costs too prohibitive. It's great for e-mail and other bits, but they don't really require more bandwidth.
But a 3G connection for a laptop is a great thing to have, not bothered with one yet myself, but I can see the use in that, possibly in-car systems in the future too, but information over-load is bad enough in the office these days, the thought of it cars scares me to death.
zumbruk said:
Content, content, content. The general public don't buy technology for the sake of technology (unlike people here; "Mmmmm, shiney things!"
.
And all I want a mobile phone to do is make phone calls. I couldn't care less about all the other nonsense.
I have two different requirements for a phone... The personal one has to be easy to text on and have a good camera. The business one on the other hand needs to synch my diary and my contacts, be good to speak on and have loads of inclusive daytime minutes. . And all I want a mobile phone to do is make phone calls. I couldn't care less about all the other nonsense.
None of those need 3G to achieve it.
guydw said:
3G is one of the biggest disasters ever - it's like the bosses made such a cock up, but are unable to admit it - I'm convinced that when they bought the licences they thought it was going to replace GSM, not that it was a way of delivering IP to handsets....
Erm, if they thought that way I'd be very very worried.
Pretty much every electronic exchange you make runs over IP currently. 98% of your voice calls do as well (yes, even on GSM and old school bakerlite telephones, the trunking is IP). BT is spending billions upgrading the infrastructure. Converged networks are the future, at home, in the office and out and about. UMTS is a key way to deliver this convergence.
The 3G licences from the government were almost certainly overpriced, but the carriers had to pony up or get left behind.
FYI, UMTS will replace GSM, it's significantly more spectrally efficient and spectrum is a rare and expensive resource. Its just like every other product. The marketing crew promises everything and then it turns out to be harder/more expensive to deliver that they planned. HSDPA/HSUPA is not a new technology, it's not super 3G, or 3.5G or whatever else it's beeing called. It's release 5/release 6 of the 3GPP specs and is a planned evolution to better use the radio resource. It's been on the cards for years. Software upgrade on the network side and a compatible handset is all you need.
zumbruk said:
Content, content, content. The general public don't buy technology for the sake of technology (unlike people here; "Mmmmm, shiney things!".
And all I want a mobile phone to do is make phone calls. I couldn't care less about all the other nonsense.
. And all I want a mobile phone to do is make phone calls. I couldn't care less about all the other nonsense.
Actually even when being paid lots, I don't tend to do the "shiny thing" deal any more. I'll buy something if it's going to be useful
In some respects 3G did exactly what it said it would do on the tin. Provide broadband speeds to anyone with a compatible unit and had signal. It does that, I've seen downloads at 35KB/s which is definetly in 'broadband' territory. The problem is that marketing had everyone thinking of universal gadgets, it'd be a phone, a camera, video recorder, web enabled device, GPS navigation and the data will be 'all you can eat' or 'as cheap as chips' and it'll have great battery life.
Well. Yes ok. Most modern phones CAN do all of that (either on their own or with additional software/hardware), however the equipment really isn't up to 'web'. Your left with either using the screen on your phone/PDA which hasn't the resolution to do puka page rendering (800px is really the minimum width, height is different, I have no objects to scrolling down) or having to get your laptop out and use either a 3G card OR bluetooth + phone, not the most elegant solution for quickly jumping on google maps and asking it "Where the hell am I and how the hell do I get to where I need to be?"
3G's acceptance wasn't helped by adverts hammering the video calling features and nothing else... erm... having tried that once or twice you look like an idiot and the phones aren't designed to be pose able thus you need to wedge the damn thing on your desk with something else.
So IMHO until a cheap as chips device comes out and 3G enters broadbands pricing structure it will always be under utilised by the public, businesses and everyone else.
[quote = Mr E]
Pretty much every electronic exchange you make runs over IP currently. 98% of your voice calls do as well (yes, even on GSM and old school bakerlite telephones, the trunking is IP).
[/quote]
I'm not sure this is correct at all, certainly Orange and Vodafone still use traditional TDM to carry voice (although all the signalling is done over IP, and many other services...), BT are hoping to have 50% of their voice traffic onto 21CN (the new IP network) by 2008, 100% by 2010 - though I'm not up on where they actually are with this...
You are right about UMTS etc though, not sure what a realistic timetable for this is... my point was basically that I (and many of my colleagues, having discussed this at length) are convinced that the powers that were didn't really understand what they were bidding on, and helped put the price up for 3G licences, had they exercised more restraint and co-operated they could have paid far less, as happened elsewhere in Europe (once the same organisations where being asked to cough up again...).
The whole thing has been made worse by senior management announcing services when the technology was immature, and didn't really deliver properly at launch. Useable IP to a laptop is obviously worth having, but it is amazingly expensive, which will restrict its use somewhat - this is however a good thing as Telco IP networks would have a real problem if every single customer decided to start using 3G services on their laptops, not least from an IP addressing point of view.
Since you're in SW, sounds like we've mixed in similar circles
;-)
Pretty much every electronic exchange you make runs over IP currently. 98% of your voice calls do as well (yes, even on GSM and old school bakerlite telephones, the trunking is IP).
[/quote]
I'm not sure this is correct at all, certainly Orange and Vodafone still use traditional TDM to carry voice (although all the signalling is done over IP, and many other services...), BT are hoping to have 50% of their voice traffic onto 21CN (the new IP network) by 2008, 100% by 2010 - though I'm not up on where they actually are with this...
You are right about UMTS etc though, not sure what a realistic timetable for this is... my point was basically that I (and many of my colleagues, having discussed this at length) are convinced that the powers that were didn't really understand what they were bidding on, and helped put the price up for 3G licences, had they exercised more restraint and co-operated they could have paid far less, as happened elsewhere in Europe (once the same organisations where being asked to cough up again...).
The whole thing has been made worse by senior management announcing services when the technology was immature, and didn't really deliver properly at launch. Useable IP to a laptop is obviously worth having, but it is amazingly expensive, which will restrict its use somewhat - this is however a good thing as Telco IP networks would have a real problem if every single customer decided to start using 3G services on their laptops, not least from an IP addressing point of view.
Since you're in SW, sounds like we've mixed in similar circles
;-)
guydw said:
The whole thing has been made worse by senior management announcing services when the technology was immature, and didn't really deliver properly at launch. Useable IP to a laptop is obviously worth having, but it is amazingly expensive, which will restrict its use somewhat - this is however a good thing as Telco IP networks would have a real problem if every single customer decided to start using 3G services on their laptops, not least from an IP addressing point of view.
Since you're in SW, sounds like we've mixed in similar circles
;-)
And there you hit the nail on the head. Marketing sell something, and the the poor bastard engineers have to try to make it work, on time.....
Not convinced it's hugely expensive. For the average casual user, data service isn't cheap. For your hardcore road warrior, an unlimited package is 60-70 quid a month. That's 2 quid a day for as much data as you want wherever you are (pretty much), and at decent speeds in urban areas is pretty good value I'd reckon. Starbucks will charge you 5 quid an hour for WiFi.....
I'm heavily based in wireless, and the next bit of fun will be OFDM (no reason we can't do it with CDMA at all) and services. It would be nice to have your GSM/CDMA/WiFi/WiMax/whatever enabled device that will automatically select the best connection depending on what your doing.
For example, start a data session at home, runs over WiFi. Leave the house, and it hands off to GSM/CDMA while you drive to work. Get to work, hands off again to the office WiMax environment, etc etc.
There's plenty of scope for IOT....
zumbruk said:
Content, content, content. The general public don't buy technology for the sake of technology (unlike people here; "Mmmmm, shiney things!".
And all I want a mobile phone to do is make phone calls. I couldn't care less about all the other nonsense.
. And all I want a mobile phone to do is make phone calls. I couldn't care less about all the other nonsense.
The thing is, 3G's got the content. All you ever hear about on 3G adverts is free download this, football clips that, pop music the other. It's not about the handsets any more (although the "ooh shiny" crowd, like me, still have a lot of sway in the 2G market)
Trouble is, no-one cares.
The "content" isn't the killer app. Once you get past the "look ma, no wires!" part of 2G phones, the killer app was content-free: SMS messaging.
What's 3G's killer app? I don't know, and I don't think the networks know either.
Interestingly, SMS was never ever supposed to be used for what it's being used for now.
3G handsets can do all manner of fun things, Instant messaging for example. Trouble is, the operators are *terrified* that these things will hurt their SMS revenue (and that can be 30-40% of their income).
3G handsets can do all manner of fun things, Instant messaging for example. Trouble is, the operators are *terrified* that these things will hurt their SMS revenue (and that can be 30-40% of their income).
I've had a 3G phone now for 6 months.
For web browsing its shit. The screen is too small for any serious work, plus it lacks Javascript, so anything remotely complex (PH included) looks cack.
For use as a modem for your laptop, it rocks. I can connect usually at 384Kbps, so its approaching broadband speeds. So if you're at a customer site and wish to check your mail, its good.
For everything else, its average. Why? Because 3G vendors think you're going to spend hours gazing lovingly at their lovely colour screen, ergo your battery life is apalling. I get 3-4 days out of my 6280.
Eventually I will probably get a 3G smart phone. But for the moment, they're few and far between. Not to mention costing an arm and a leg.
For web browsing its shit. The screen is too small for any serious work, plus it lacks Javascript, so anything remotely complex (PH included) looks cack.
For use as a modem for your laptop, it rocks. I can connect usually at 384Kbps, so its approaching broadband speeds. So if you're at a customer site and wish to check your mail, its good.
For everything else, its average. Why? Because 3G vendors think you're going to spend hours gazing lovingly at their lovely colour screen, ergo your battery life is apalling. I get 3-4 days out of my 6280.
Eventually I will probably get a 3G smart phone. But for the moment, they're few and far between. Not to mention costing an arm and a leg.
GregE240 said:
I've had a 3G phone now for 6 months.
For web browsing its shit. The screen is too small for any serious work, plus it lacks Javascript, so anything remotely complex (PH included) looks cack.
For web browsing its shit. The screen is too small for any serious work, plus it lacks Javascript, so anything remotely complex (PH included) looks cack.
My N80 running Opera is actually pretty ok, but Opera does format for small screens pretty well.
What handset is it?
And yes, battery life is still a problem.
spot on Mr E - so you are right in there peddling disruptive technologies...
What do you think of WiMax ?
I'm not too up on this stuff, as my area is Core IP (MPLS etc) but it seems that when the whole wireless piece as you describe is working the whole picture changes.... I reckon the telcos have their head in the sand to a great degree on this stuff (wireless IP & VoIP anyone?) interesting stuff... are you with a telco ? (based in Bristol perchance?) Or are you consulting etc and helping build the very networks that the telcos are afraid of ?
Doesn't worry me at all, as whatever it is, it'll cross IP so there'll be work for me whatever happens.... lol
What do you think of WiMax ?
I'm not too up on this stuff, as my area is Core IP (MPLS etc) but it seems that when the whole wireless piece as you describe is working the whole picture changes.... I reckon the telcos have their head in the sand to a great degree on this stuff (wireless IP & VoIP anyone?) interesting stuff... are you with a telco ? (based in Bristol perchance?) Or are you consulting etc and helping build the very networks that the telcos are afraid of ?
Doesn't worry me at all, as whatever it is, it'll cross IP so there'll be work for me whatever happens.... lol
UTRAN R&D here, and yes, somewhere near Bristol. Not consulting, but if you offer me enough cash.... 
WiMax has a few flaws, but the basic use of scalable OFDM is now on (we can make the tx and rx bits of hardware small and accurate enough). There is no reason that CDMA cannot use the same modulation for a significant boost in speed given the same radio bandwith. Combine that with MiMo steerable antennas and you could see some serious performance (I've seen 7-8Mb over the air with standard HSDPA and current generation antennas).
The only issue I've not seen resolved with WiMax is that 802.11b/g were designed to deal with the inteference from other 802.11 wireless networks, and by and large they do. WiMax, as far as I know, does not deal with it as well....
Anyone know anything about that?
(and yes, it'll all be IP. Not from the voice UE to the RAN, AMR is hugely more efficient than IP, but from there on)
WiMax has a few flaws, but the basic use of scalable OFDM is now on (we can make the tx and rx bits of hardware small and accurate enough). There is no reason that CDMA cannot use the same modulation for a significant boost in speed given the same radio bandwith. Combine that with MiMo steerable antennas and you could see some serious performance (I've seen 7-8Mb over the air with standard HSDPA and current generation antennas).
The only issue I've not seen resolved with WiMax is that 802.11b/g were designed to deal with the inteference from other 802.11 wireless networks, and by and large they do. WiMax, as far as I know, does not deal with it as well....
Anyone know anything about that?
(and yes, it'll all be IP. Not from the voice UE to the RAN, AMR is hugely more efficient than IP, but from there on)
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff