Seems UTSI is going the same way like NT and benefits are large. Good decision to halt UMTS (already done) and free resources for better things. Also Curitel deal will help to free resources.
Telephony article is too long to cop,
"Mobile WiMAX kit that MacKinnon claims can achieve a cost-per-bit ratio three times better than any other vendor�s commercial WiMAX gear and a 10-times improvement over whatever 3G technologies can provide today."
Phone companies have NOT yet figured out that NONE of the high speed cellular technologies (3G, 4G, WiMax, TD-SCDMA) will work COST effectively.
There is already a practical answer which is FREE to the consumer, i.e., WiFi hot spots.
I recently pulled off the Interstate 5 freeway near Disneyland and pulled into the Marriot Residents Hotel. I asked the counter people if they had "wireless Internet" in the lobby and they said yes. I then connected using my laptop at about 20 times the speed of the best 3G!! Who needs Sprint's 3G when I have this available for free!! (Needless to say I am now a regular "paying" hotel customer of Marriot when I travel.)
The new cell phone answer is dual mode phones, CDMA & WiFi, GSM & WiFi, or in China, PAS & WiFi.
WiFi would suddenly become a huge attraction of customers to businesses. Businesses would naturally solve the entire issue (by installing free WiFi) just to attract customers.
Important point: The "20 Billion+" that Vodaphone spent building out their 3G network WILL become wasted money once the competition figures out that dual mode phones are the answer. Sprint and Verizon are similarly wasting their money on their EVDO (3G) buildouts. The competition will figure out the truth very soon and undercut on price (by offering dual mode phones) thus making the 3G networks uncompetitive.
The good new is the UTSI is already making WiFi phones AND dual mode phones of various flavors.
Wake up Cingular, Verizon and Sprint!! Wake up China Netcom!! The answer is staring you in the face.
UTSI was working with Vanu to develop a software defined radio base station. I read somewhere that Alcatel is working on a similar solution. Haven't heard much more about this for many months now so not sure when it will be ready, if ever. Have a nice evening.
I agree with everything you have said here except for the success of WiMax. TD-CDMA was ahead of its time but now that mobile WiMax is being deployed, real world trials can be carried out. I believe that TD-CDMA will prove to be far superior to mobile WiMax for reasons already outlined. Since it can be superimposed on already existing networks such as W-CDMA and GSM without need for a change in core infrastructure, it provides telecom carriers with an excellent solution. The war between the netheads and the bellheads will continue and the bellheads (telecom carriers) are likely to stick mostly with their own technology. TD-CDMA may not be mainstream 3G but it still is 3G and provides an easy upgrade path to 4G. In any event, I think UTSI has little to lose now in this battle and can easily gain significant unexpected sales if my thoughts about TD-CDMA are borne out in future trials. Have a nice evening.
As the article indicates, multiple antenna can be used either for beam forming or MIMO. Nortel has chosen the latter path.
Beam forming through adaptive array antenna system can be used either to increase capacity or coverage distance (and building penetration for better signal indoors.) Disadvantage is low mobility as beam is constantly adjusted according to feedback from a user's moving terminal. China's TD-SCDMA uses adaptive array system for beam forming. It's interesting that even lowly PAS from UTSI uses adaptive array in the PAS base stations to increase system capacity. The technology is from ArrayComm which also markets its own wireless broadband system called iBurst which has been deployed in Australia.
MIMO works best if user terminals also use multiple antenna MIMO technology. But that could increase handset cost. By committing to MIMO alone instead of also paying attention to beam forming, Nortel has differentiated and taken a lead on certain technology aspects of its WiMax products, although the focus might turn off some operators because of a lack of equipment support for MIMO from other vendors at this moment.
As far as UTSI is concerned, I haven't heard anything about whether it has conducted much research on WiMax/4G or not. Who will be the potential customers? In China, ZTE and Huawei are both doing WiMax, with ZTE being a major member of WiMax forum and has signed deal previously with Intel to push WiMax in China. Would Softbank chose UTSI for WiMax? I kind of doubt it as I think Softbank is likely to use Motorola and to a lesser extent, maybe Nortel system in this regard. Also UTSI is now a provider of TD-CDMA 3G equipment to Softbank competitor IPMobile.
I do agree that UTSI's 3-year CDMA handset procurement deal with Curitel is good for conserving resources. Will resource be allocated to WiMax? I don't know. And what will Qualcomm do with the flash OFDM technology it qcquired from Flarion in response to WiMax? Will UTSI do something with Qualcomm in this regard? Will there be much industry support for Qualcomm's venture? Probably not very likely but nothing can be ruled out.
If UTSI does WiMax, it will have to line up support from Softbank. Then it will have momentum to push the products to other markets. But then it also has to balance support between WiMax and TD-CDMA. And the less industrialized nations where UTSI can hope to get some business would conceivably have less mobile data needs (WiMax's strong suit) than Europe/US do and so would be more inclined to focus on basic voice. WiMax as a DSL replacement in some markets. Could be. But would that harm relationship with IPWireless? Many questions. No answers.
I think it is becoming clearer each month that UTSI and Softbank have parted ways. Masayoshi Son has decided to spend billions of dollars on a 3G network that UTSI feels is based on a dead-end technology, namely W-CDMA.
I thought it interesting that IP Mobile in Japan carried out its TD-CDMA trial with NTT Com. and not with Softbank. IP Wireless has continued to develop its technology and is now testing multiple aspects of its technology that will culminate in 4G LTE with Sprint.
Notice that the advanced TD-CDMA lends itself very nicely to all forms of multiple array antenna technology with MIMO already undergoing testing by Orange in France. Most important of all are actual trials comparing TD-CDMA to WiMax. The first major trial of this type occurred recently in NYC with TD-CDMA provided by Northrop Grumman and WiMax by Motorola. Motorola lost the contest for 2 major reasons: their WiMax system could not accomplish cell handoff at speeds of 74 mph and their penetration to the cell edge (e.g. into subways, other buildings, etc.) was poor compared to TD-CDMA.
Still, WiMax is clearly not a dead technology. Motorola has indicated that it could overcome its shortcoming by using a higher density of cellular base stations. Sprint seems to have bought into this technology for some reason, although they also keep saying they continue to evaluate other technologies and clearly, TD-CDMA is
one of them. WiMax has tremendous ecosystem support but TD-CDMA is the superior technology. Perhaps there is room in the world for both technologies. UTSI is one of the few vendors that has placed a significant bet on TD-CDMA. Although that technology has been much slower to deploy than UTSI had initially thought, I still think it is promising and could eventually succeed. We'll see. Have a pleasant evening.