Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in news:evk883$6lb$1
@aioe.org:


>> Other things are going to force their hands as well. The more data
> they
>> try to push through their voice networks is going to cause a capacity
>> problem that Sprint won't have to deal with by running seperate voice
>> and data networks. They won't last long if customers are leaving in
>> droves because the network is overloaded.
>
> True, but the wireless networks give priority to voice, so those who
> notice congestion will be the data users whose connections will slow
and
> stutter. They'll need to decide whether it's "good enough" for the
> price! ;-)
>

Exactly.

>
>> > some folks will want to ditch
>> > wired broadband to avoid two bills as well, even if the speed isn't
as
>> > fast as wired. This might put Sprint in the awkward position of
>> > metering/capping usage, or enforcing a restrictive TOS.
>>
>> They have ample spectrum and backbone to prevent this from happening.
>> If it fails, it won't be due to the lack of technical resources
>> available.
>
> Then why not target fixed broadband as a market as well?

Because they have ample spectrum, not unlimited.

>
>> I don't see that happening. The advantage Sprint has is that the
>> technology will be embedded in consumer technology, which will be
hard
>> for VZW and ATT to overcome.
>
> Perhaps. Frankly, I've never found plugging in a PCMCIA card much of
a
> technological barrier personally... ;-) Having a "cable-ready" TV
> didn't stop me from subscribing to cheaper satellite TV. I go where
the
> deals are.

As usenet geeks, we tend to take things for granted that would keep our
neighbors busy for hours :-)


>
>
>> I was talking about dedicating two different spectrum bands to WiMax
>> and developing dual mode technology to allow a greater availability
of
>> unused network.
>
> Now you want your cake and ea it too! Sprint can't play the
> "interoperability" and "embedded technology" cards, then say "and if
we
> oversell it, we'll just add a non-standard band." (Well they can do
> that, but then they can't move the "embedded" users to the new bands
to
> free spectrum- just the ones they've sold proprietary cards to.)

And there's no problem with that- the move would be backwards compatible
from the user's standpoint.


>
>> Limited by network, spectrum and technology, there's not much further
>> they can go without sacrificing something. It could be riskier to
>> sacrifice their current networks than it is for Sprint to build a new
>> and untested one.
>
> You're assuming that the networks ar running near capacity. The
> ridiculous rates and draconian TOS's prevent that. Heck, Verizon has
so
> much leftover bandwidth they're showing TV on the excess! ;-)


And Verizon is the champion of capacity problems in some of the big
cities. They have alleviated the problem by building out their network
in those bottleneck spots, but the margin for error is still razor thin.

>
>> Agreed, but it is the technology that gives benefit to the customer.
>
>
> Only if the consumer sees and values the benefit. If someone invented
> Star Trek's matter transporter tomorrow, business people wouldn't care
> how it worked- they'd just want to know if it can get them to New York
> faster than United, and how many carry-ons are they allowed to beam.
>
>> They may not care about it, but they rely on it to grow and give the
>> latest/greatest.
>
> Once the early adopters give it critical mass, anyway. You're a tech
> guy, that's your background. I'm from the sales/marketing side of the
> fence. There's an old saying in business- it's easy to identify the
> pioneers- they're the ones with the arrows in their backs. Other,
> larger, entities may be content to see if Sprint's $10B gamble pays
off
> before swooping in and taking the business out from under them.
>
> After WiMax launches, Verizon will throw up a bunch of TV ads with
maps
> showing that their 3G has more coverage than "any other wireless data
> company," remind you that you save x dollars off the regular price by
> adding it to your voice plan, and show that little dork in the jacket
in
> the middle of an Arizona desert tapping out on his laptop "Can you e-
> mail me now?" and Sprint will have a hard, hard, sell, even with the
> better product- because, frankly, we're all stupid, and we seem to
> believe that Verizon actually sends people to swamps with phones to
test
> reception for us! ;-)

And Sprint will turn around with their own ads reminding cutomers of the
larger CDMA network available for their data needs if coverage is a
concern. Remember- Sprint is not abandoning the CDMA technology and
have publicly stated that they have no intention of getting rid of it.
While I believe this statement to be technically correct, I can see a
scenario where they eventually get out of wireless voice entirely and
concentrate the business on data transport. They took a huge step
towards this in the wireline world with the spinoff of their local
wireline business, while keeping the internet backbone. Doing the same
thing with wireless- eventually spin off the CDMA business and focus on
wireless data backbone, if they can pull off WiMax.

>
>
>
>
>