3G: Are we there yet?

3G: Are we there yet?

Summary: Ericsson and Texas Instruments said Monday that they are teaming up to develop custom technology and chips for 3G devices. My reaction--other than I'm overwhelmed with the acronyms in the statement--is this: How long do we have to hear about 3G?

SHARE:
TOPICS: Mobility, Networking
1

Ericsson and Texas Instruments said Monday that they are teaming up to develop custom technology and chips for 3G devices.

My reaction--other than I'm overwhelmed with the acronyms in the statement--is this: How long do we have to hear about 3G?

So far the answer seems to be at least through 2008--that's when handsets with TI and Ericsson's integrated technology are supposed to hit the market.

Maybe it's just me, but it sure seems like we've been hearing about 3G forever. And 3G still isn't rolled out entirely. These 3G (short for third generation) wireless networks have largely been a dud and some companies such as Sprint and Clearwire are talking 4G. Now we can debate whether you should call WiMax a 4G network or not, but it does raise the question about 3G's longevity.

I don't necessarily have the answer, but I'd like to have a real-world wireless network that can hop between the cell network, Wi-Fi, 3G (or any other G) and WiMax to give me service. Frankly, you can keep all the Gs and acronyms to yourself. I want this network and technology hopping going on in the background.

If TI--or anyone else for that matter--can deliver devices that can roam technologies it's a guaranteed winner.

Separately, TI reported revenue of $3.42 billion and earnings of 42 cents a share. These results and the outlook were in line with lowered expectations.

 

Topics: Mobility, Networking

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

1 comment
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Lets not be confused; Can You Hear ME NOW

    3Ghz technology is favored because the US is allowing it to be unregulated. But it fails the "can you hear me now" test unless a substantial number of new towers are installed. This is unlike the spectrum set aside for interactive TV (the 700 Mhz spectrum).

    The 700 Mhz spectrum is perfectly viable for WiMax and recent efforts to confuse things by stating that the M use to stand for Microwave should be objected to loudly.

    Furthermore - unless traitorous public officials work with corporate vested interest groups to prevent its use for WiMax - there will be no substantial number of new towers needed.

    This is because the less than 1 Ghz spectrum lets the towers be spaced further apart and it is because communities already installed towers for the promise of interactive TV 30 years ago.

    The 700 Mhz "peoples" airwaves currently provide the promise of universal access of an AT&T legal monopoly. The US gave AT&T a legal monopoly owing to the substantial investment needed to get last mile telephone service. Such a give away isn't needed for WiMax

    But this is a USA-only solution. No other nation on earth can implement WiMax as we can because corporations already have control of it. The USA has such a huge opportunity to enhance the well being of its citizens. We will go forward with WiMax on 700 Mhz and we will do it in less than a year. We have already done it on Puget Sound. See what it is doing to our economy. It is the end of Microsoft. It is the beginning of a great economic engine - an Amazon.

    And the best part. No moving outside for a phone call or web access. 700 Mhz goes right through walls. No stopping to chat. 700 Mhz is fully mobile not at just pedestrian speeds like 3Ghz. There is no reason to support 3Ghz in the USA when 700mhz WiMax is available. That bandwidth is for the lesser democracies.
    mighetto