> I have to disagree. 3G to me means a third generation network:
> currently being
> implemented as either cdma2000 or wCDMA.
> I don't consider it a particularly fuzzy issue.
Actually, after I wrote my last thing, I read the latest Scientific
American articles on mobile internet, and CDMA and whatnot, and I agree that
you could say 3G is signified by the bandwidth.
However it's not very meaningful if you can't do anything with that
bandwidth. So if you're phone can't stream video or play MP3s, then what's
the point?
In any case, what I gathered from the articles is that 3G may be a little
disappointing. The megabytes per second will actually translate into only
about 64kbps after all the overhead and sharing of cells between users is
taken into account.
(Scientific American, "The Third Generation Gap", page 54 of the October
2000 issue)
Dave
[ Did you check the archives? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Wed Nov 8 06:09:04 2000