That's great. Because the world needs more devices that make nearby speakers go dit-dit-dit.
I use GSM, I love the availability of handsets. But the signaling standard (based upon TDMA) sucks. We'd be far better off if all this switched to a CDMA signaling.
Andrew makes a good point. There's been no reason why a CDMMA/CDMA preovider would ever considewr a backwards movement to GSM less than 3G hardware. But if they were to jump from CDMA 2000 (like SPrint. Verizon etc) and go to W-CDMA would be this such a difficult move? i.e. are the 2 real 3G CDMAs close enough that a switch becomes viable cost and infrastrucrure wise?
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
That's great. Because the world needs more devices that make nearby speakers go dit-dit-dit.
I use GSM, I love the availability of handsets. But the signaling standard (based upon TDMA) sucks. We'd be far better off if all this switched to a CDMA signaling.
UTMS (3G GSM) uses a wideband-CDMA air interface, so that problem is going away. Slowly.
Do you mean UMTS?
(sorry for the nitpicking)
Andrew makes a good point.
There's been no reason why a CDMMA/CDMA preovider would ever considewr a backwards movement to GSM less than 3G hardware. But if they were to jump from CDMA 2000 (like SPrint. Verizon etc) and go to W-CDMA would be this such a difficult move? i.e. are the 2 real 3G CDMAs close enough that a switch becomes viable cost and infrastrucrure wise?
W-CDMA is not CDMA at the "air interface."
Under the covers, it's still TDMA-style signalling just like humble old GSM.
You really need to look this up, people.