1946 Time-Life article on post-WW2 European reconstruction

[pax]

Ya privatizing everything BUT oil was a major mistake. It should at least have waited for an election as it had no bearing on contracting reconstruction efforts. It was clearly a test privatization in order to see how the population will take an attempt to privatize oil eventually.

That would be catastrophic. Anyone even with passing understanding of the history and the business sense of Iraqis and arabs in general would know this.

The analysis on the level of resistance in Iraq right now doesnt seem to lend to the average Iraqi being pissed at that happening. But we really simply dont know yet. If resistance grows and evidence shows the bombings and attacks are mostly non suicide in nature then we'll pretty much know.

I really hope the us admin isnt that stupid tho. But god knows the money that would be involved in such a scam...

 

[RussSchultz]

If I recall, the cellular infrastructure in Iraq will create a 'black hole' in the region since the rest of the region has adopted CDMA (or is it TDMA or GSM or whatever) the Europe and the Middle East use...

Exactly the opposite. They chose GSM because even though CDMA is "better" technology, precisely to avoid this problem. CDMA is used in the US (along with TDMA and GSM plus analog), whereas GSM is used throughout the world.

 

[nelg]

Exactly the opposite. They chose GSM because even though CDMA is "better" technology, precisely to avoid this problem. CDMA is used in the US (along with TDMA and GSM plus analog), whereas GSM is used throughout the world.

Plus GSM has the added benefit of having a wonderful encryption key or did they fix that ?

 

[pax]

I had read it was in fact a french firm that got that contract... At least some privatising will go to bidding...

 

[DemoCoder]

No, Europe just doesn't offer you a choice. In the US you can get GSM, CDMA, TDMA, and AMPS. In, China, Korea, and Japan, you can also choose CDMA (among other choices) My SprintPCS phone worked in China and Korea. Korea has 27 million CDMA users for example.
NTT DoCoMO is standardizing on WCDMA.

Besides which, the terminology people use in this thread is incorrect. GSM encompasses more than just the "air interface" (way spectrum is used), but also the sim cards, integration with carriers, billing, SMS, MMS, IMEI, BTS, etc. GSM's air interface is TDMA.

CDMA is much superior to TDMA in terms of efficiency, and there is nothing to stop GSM from utilizing CDMA as it's air interface. Unfortunately, people are also using the label CDMA to talk about the higher level protocols used by carriers.


Think of it this way. Imagine that GSM is a TCP/IP stack. At the lowest level is TDMA (level 0). What people refer to as CDMA is also a TCP/IP stack, and at the lowest level, is CDMA. The label CDMA is frankly, incorrect.

Where GSM is mature is in all the higher level areas of interoperability: standards for billing, PIM, phone portability between carriers, MMS/SMS protocols, etc.

Where GSM is lagging is in bandwidth efficiency and in 3G networks. GPRS and EDGE will be soundly beaten by CDMA 1xEV/WCDMA/CDMA2000 on both speed and by costs to implement at the carrier. Sooner or later, Europe will be forced to move in the same direction that the US and Asia is, by tossing out TDMA signalling.

That doesn't mean GSM disappears, anymore than replacing 802.11b with 802.11g means you throw out your entire network. What it does mean, is that sooner or later, they will have to pay the costs to jetison their inefficient legacy network.

With respect to Iraq, it's a double edged sword. Iraqi's need a network quickly, and one with which they can roam to their neighbors (GSM). On the other hand, CDMA networks are cheaper to operate per customer, and you can have more of them per tower. And in the future, TDMA is going to die anyway.

So the argument is
1) build out CDMA now, Iraq is ready for the future, and can support more subscribers at a lower cost BUT
2) Iraqi's won't be able to roam to Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc

Fact is, the best option for them is GSM at the moment, since a working, albeit old technology, is better than a new fangled technology that they don't need at the moment (3G phones)

 

[Willmeister]

The difference between North America and Europe and Asia is that you can use the same phone, and get the same digital service no matter where you go. From Turkey to Portugal, your phone will work in digital mode, which is more than you can say for US service. I know this because I know a lot of people who travel on business. You go into parts of the USA and your CDMA or TDMA phone reverts to crappy analog service, if it gets to work at all.

Looks like 3G isn't picking up at all. Even the Japanese public hasn't really adopted it. And pretty much if Japan doesn't, no one else does.

 

[DemoCoder]

The difference between North America and Europe and Asia is that you can use the same phone, and get the same digital service no matter where you go. From Turkey to Portugal, your phone will work in digital mode, which is more than you can say for US service. I know this because I know a lot of people who travel on business. You go into parts of the USA and your CDMA or TDMA phone reverts to crappy analog service, if it gets to work at all.

Balderdash. I am a frequent business traveler and I happen to work for company that sells mobile technology. I've been a SprintPCS customer for years and have rarely if ever had coverage problems in the US. Phone worked fine in Canada too, in BC and Vancouver. I digitally roamed even while in the mountains. My phone also digitally roamed in Beijing, Shanghai, and Seoul.

If you want to see spotty coverage, try T-Mobile GSM in the US.


It is true that it won't do that in Europe, since in Europe, you don't have a choice between network technology. You're stuck with TDMA GSM, period. It is also true that you can roam more with TDMA than with CDMA, but so what? As I explained, the real issue with roaming, it agreements on tariffs, billing, and authentication, NOT the air interface.

GSM is a stack of protocols, and it will run just fine on top of CDMA (most likely W-CDMA) if the ITU would stop screwing around with TDMA EDGE, something that will be thoroughly obsolete by the time it is deployed, and move on to CDMA or OFDM CDMA as the air interface for GSM.

The only reason TDMA still exists is because it's cheap to deploy and because it's a legacy system with so many users. But it is not the better wireless technology, in terms of spectral efficiency, and it is not as flexible. CDMA is more packet-like, so varying datarates are supported easier. TDMA has a much harder time accomodating high speed data plus voice calls.

Looks like 3G isn't picking up at all. Even the Japanese public hasn't really adopted it. And pretty much if Japan doesn't, no one else does.

Well, that's not surprising, since the first 3G service was only launched in October of 2001, initial handsets were buggy, bulky, and service cost an arm in a leg. DoCoMo has now broken the 1 million subscriber mark for 3g, and growth is climbing due to the release of new handsets.

SprintPCS faces the same hurdles. The launch of SprintPCS "vision" sucked. The first batch of phones were complete crap, 1xRTT sucks, and the promised speeds (128kps) didn't materialize close to reality until recently (I can regular hit 70kbps on my PC-Card)

SprintPCS needs better handsets and finish their 1xEV-DO support. Once they do that, ATT's inroads with GSM will start to slide. Some of the new CDMA handsets coming out this year are much better. Samsung's new smartphones rock, will have SDIO slots (can add a Wi-Fi card for 802.11b network access if near an access point), or use CDMA 1xEV.

I own two phones right now. A personal SprintPCS phone, plus, every 2 weeks or so, I get a new handset from work. I've been beta testing the Nokia 6600 for the past 2 months. When I travel to Europe for meetings, I take a GSM phone. If I travel in the US or Asia, I take both.

 

[Willmeister]

Balderdash. I am a frequent business traveler and I happen to work for company that sells mobile technology. I've been a SprintPCS customer for years and have rarely if ever had coverage problems in the US. Phone worked fine in Canada too, in BC and Vancouver. I digitally roamed even while in the mountains. My phone also digitally roamed in Beijing, Shanghai, and Seoul.

Leave larger US centres like my friends have to. Othello Washington isn't exactly a metropolitan area and cellular service really sucks apparently. You're lucky to get analog service. Coverage in Lower Mainland BC is spotless, but go north to places north of Courtenay and Comox... China doesn't have a cellular coverage problem since the Chinese government is pushing cellular instead of land lines because the infrastructure costs are much much lower than stringing up telephone lines and microwave towers.

 

[DemoCoder]

Look, I travel all the time, and I happen to deal with the network carriers as part of my current job. You don't know what you're talking about. The largest network with the biggest coverage in the US is Verizon CDMA, period.

For example, the two largest national GSM providers are ATT and Cingular (I won't count TMobile VoiceStream since they are much further behind), here's what their coverage looks like

Cingular

ATT

Now look at Verizon's CDMA coverage

Verizon even just rolled out 1xEV-DO in Washington DC and San Diego, which means data rates of up to 2.4mbps and is building a nation wide WiFi (802.11) network.

You can't use anecdotes to prove cell phone coverage. Everyone has bitchy stories about the networks, the very nature of the technology means that there will always be people you can find who have had problems with coverage. The handsets matter too, some are really bad at keeping signal.

 

[nelg]

The handsets matter too, some are really bad at keeping signal.

So true. I live in a small valley and there is a huge difference between handsets.

 

[pax]

2.4 mbps is sweet for wireless... So gsm will never attain the high bw levels of cdma? Hey Will is NBtel wireless cdma I wonder?

 

[Willmeister]

Rambling on about TDMA and CDMA, basically using jargon that 90% of subscribers couldn't give a rat's ass about, wasn't what I was trying to get across. Like Pax says, the Iraqis aren't even given the ability to make the choice for themselves. They were getting CDMA/TDMA/whatever and that is that, as the Register reported a month or so ago.

Anyway, this crap about TDMA/CDMA/whatever, is like comparing A-242 to 'superior' A-514 steel. Sure, A-514 can take more than double the axial load (yield, not ultimate strength) for the same shear stress, and giving nearly double the elastic range before plastic deformation, but for the most part, end users just don't care (they shouldn't need to). But they do care about the cost, and A-514 would probably be a heck of a lot more. It's overkill, like 90% of what is offered in the telecommunications industry. My money says that's why 3G largely has even been a relative flop in Japan, a nation that loves handheld gadgetry. I bet that 90% of users care about one thing, a dialtone. Now we're getting into a whole new topic...

How many people actually use 802, and of those, what tiny percentage really find it little more than a 'cool' diversion? Should other users be subsidizing technology that never have any intention of using? Is it a productive use of resources? If users were given the choice of using 'free' services like 802 and other such bells and whistles or having $10 cut from their monthly bill, I'd bet a vast majority would go for the $10 cut. Now we're getting into another whole topic.

I was discussing this with friends and someone mentioned that this point may be moot anyway since some manu is making a cellphone that will run BOTH on the same phone and just have to replace a CID card. Not the best solution though either but better than having two phones.

Speaking of handsets, I'm going to look into getting a new one for myself since a new phone seems to actually be cheaper than buying a new battery...

Anyway, I'm tired and going to bed...

 

[DemoCoder]

GSM will attain it, just not using TDMA. The plan of GSM carriers was to do a minor upgrade to EDGE which pushes TDMA speeds to something like 384kpbs (ideal). But they found out that EDGE ugprades would be expensive, so it's unknown whether it will be deployed, or whether UMTS /WCDMA will take hold. Ericcson is pushing ahead with W-CDMA.

The the best network is one with GSM's high level protocols for roaming and portability married with CDMA's bandwidth efficiency.

 

[RussSchultz]

Like Pax says, the Iraqis aren't even given the ability to make the choice for themselves. They were getting CDMA/TDMA/whatever and that is that, as the Register reported a month or so ago.

Except you're wrong about that.

http://www.nyjournalnews.com/newsroom/100703/d0307iraqphones.html

They chose regional companies and are installing GSM.

 

[Willmeister]

Awarded by a council that has no power (Bremer has veto power), and was unelected by Iraqis. They were appointed by an occupational military force.

I guess they decided not to go with the black hole after all, but then again, they're getting companies from the region to implement it. So I guess it didn't turn out all bad...

 

[DemoCoder]

First you didn't know the difference between GSM and CDMA. Then you didn't know about CDMA's network size in the US. And finally, you didn't know that GSM was chosen in Iraq. You're zero for 3 in the mobile phone discussion so far.