Jump to content

If lte is gsm, then what's the CDMA 4g?


Recommended Posts

Technically the hypothetical UMB was CDMA's (3GPP2's) answer to LTE. WiMax and WiMax Advanced was a whole different industry grouping.

 

LTE is an evolution (hence the "E") of the ideas behind GSM and UMTS (W-CDMA, including HSPA etc.), but airside it's yet another incompatible thing, so it's not really GSM except that pretty much everyone in the GSM camp went GSM->UMTS->LTE and in the US SIM cards have mostly been associated with GSM carriers but not with CDMA carriers (CDMA SIMs do exist but no carrier in the US uses them - even on Verizon, the user-removable SIM only does LTE and sometimes GSM roaming).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically the hypothetical UMB was CDMA's (3GPP2's) answer to LTE. WiMax and WiMax Advanced was a whole different industry grouping.

 

LTE is an evolution (hence the "E") of the ideas behind GSM and UMTS (W-CDMA, including HSPA etc.), but airside it's yet another incompatible thing, so it's not really GSM except that pretty much everyone in the GSM camp went GSM->UMTS->LTE and in the US SIM cards have mostly been associated with GSM carriers but not with CDMA carriers (CDMA SIMs do exist but no carrier in the US uses them - even on Verizon, the user-removable SIM only does LTE and sometimes GSM roaming).

 

There's absolutely nothing GSM abt LTE. Not the air protocol nor the backend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LTE is to GSM as German is to English or Latin is to Spanish. Am I right?

 

LTE has more in common with WiMAX and 802.11n WiFi than it does with W-CDMA or GSM. Heck, it has more in common with iDEN than it does with GSM.

 

The big reason LTE is associated with GSM, bigger even than the fact that both techs always use SIMs, is that both LTE and GSM/UMTS/HSPA came from the same standards body: 3GPP. WiMAX came from IEEE, like WiFi. CDMA is a Qualcomm tech, but its standards branch has wound up as 3GPP2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LTE has more in common with WiMAX and 802.11n WiFi than it does with W-CDMA or GSM. Heck, it has more in common with iDEN than it does with GSM.

 

The big reason LTE is associated with GSM, bigger even than the fact that both techs always use SIMs, is that both LTE and GSM/UMTS/HSPA came from the same standards body: 3GPP. WiMAX came from IEEE, like WiFi. CDMA is a Qualcomm tech, but its standards branch has wound up as 3GPP2.

 

I know Qualcomm's licensing revenues are doing very nicely seeing as 3G EVDO/CDMA tech is still heavily used and will be around for quite a while (especially in other parts of the world) but... in the future it must hurt them that they have no 4G tech to collect licensing revenue from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Qualcomm's licensing revenues are doing very nicely seeing as 3G EVDO/CDMA tech is still heavily used and will be around for quite a while (especially in other parts of the world) but... in the future it must hurt them that they have no 4G tech to collect licensing revenue from.

 

I think they'll be okay. There's this little think called Snapdragon that they've been making for awhile. I don't see that going out of style any time soon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they'll be okay. There's this little think called Snapdragon that they've been making for awhile. I don't see that going out of style any time soon.

 

I agree they've done a good job diversifying... also picking up ATI's mobile graphics division was excellent. I don't think the margin on the processors is near as nice as on licensing tech though! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I don't.

 

This article might explain things better than I can.

 

http://m.networkworl...mobify-bookmark

 

Haha, I just found the same article. Looks like Samsung/Qualcomm and Intel have solid portfolios. Intel did a good job acquiring patents from other players it looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why exactly was UMB development axed? Was it because they "projected" LTE to be more popular. Wasn't it cancelled along time ago?

 

Mainly it died on the vine because Verizon chose LTE and Sprint was already committed to WiMax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how difficult would be to upgrade to Rev B? It is not just a software update I take.

 

EV-DO Rev B single carrier is likely just a software upgrade, as it adds in 64-QAM DRCs. But EV-DO Rev B multi carrier is a hardware upgrade, since the number of carrier channels is scalable, and those multiple carrier channels have to coordinate data throughput.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

EV-DO Rev B single carrier is likely just a software upgrade, as it adds in 64-QAM DRCs. But EV-DO Rev B multi carrier is a hardware upgrade, since the number of carrier channels is scalable, and those multiple carrier channels have to coordinate data throughput.

 

AJ

It would shut all of the HSDPA+ fanboys up if there was a CDMA carrier that had revB. Isn't revB friendly to battery too? I'm just assuming its not very cost efficient for Sprint, otherwise we'd probably have it.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the problem is not cost efficiency but the fact that everything is to be replaced by NV hardware so why bother with getting new hardware just for rev B. Not to mention... I doubt it'd help that most sprint towers are over capacity and bogged down thanks to the T1 lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the problem is not cost efficiency but the fact that everything is to be replaced by NV hardware so why bother with getting new hardware just for rev B. Not to mention... I doubt it'd help that most sprint towers are over capacity and bogged down thanks to the T1 lines.

Sprints adding back haul to every tower and depending on the type of RevB (as AJ mentioned), it could be software upgrade. Sprint will definitely have the right amount of back haul if the site is sporting lte speeds.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprints adding back haul to every tower and depending on the type of RevB (as AJ mentioned), it could be software upgrade. Sprint will definitely have the right amount of back haul if the site is sporting lte speeds.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

I'm taking about people yelling for ReV. B last year before NV upgrades began. I remember people were complaining everywhere to upgrade to Rev B and idiots cancelling contracts because they didn't. Good times. It was all based on rumors and conjectures iirc.

 

Nowadays, sprint towers with NV and upgraded backhaul has the potential to do a lot more things than just a year before so rev B is definitely possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Strange business model that they keep around all these pricing plans. 1000s of plans per carrier is reportedly not uncommon.  Training customer support must be a nightmare. Even MVNOs have legacy plans. A downside of their contract mentality I guess. Best to change contracts during a recession. But then all carriers try to squeeze out legacy plan benefits as they grow old.  
    • Everything "Uncarrier" is becoming "Carrier" again. Because of the Credit Limit that T-Mobile put on our account for no reason at all (and wouldn't change/update the last time I checked all the way up to the CEO), I don't plan on buying/upgrading our iPhones through T-Mobile. I'm going through Apple directly. Looks like I'll be going through Google and Samsung directly for our other lines for upgrades. Also, we're staying on Sprint Max given the ridiculous pricing for Go5G Plus. On Sprint Max, we currently pay for our Plan: $260 for 7 Voice Lines $25 for two Wearable Lines. (One is $10/Month. The other is $15/Month because the AutoPay discount only applies up to 8 lines.) Total: $285/Month vs. Go5G Plus (Per the Broadband Facts "nutrition label" on the T-Mobile Website): https://www.t-mobile.com/commerce/cell-phone-plans $360 - ($5 AutoPay Discount x 7 Voice Lines) = $325 The Watch Plans show as either $12/Month or $15/Month: https://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans/affordable-data-plans/smartwatches So this is about the same for the wearables as what we're paying now. Overall, it's quite more than we're paying now to switch plans. Ridiculous....
    • Welcome back! That's similar to my best (1250ish). A few people have broken 2000 on good sites. 
    • Lots of new multi-carrier nodes popping up in Bushwick. Crown Castle Fiber node at Ridgewood & Palmetto:   Crown Castle Solutions node at Irving & Jefferson:   Crown Castle Solutions node at Wilson & Noll:  
    • I’m surprised they’re running a 5x5 Band 66 carrier still. In NYC T-Mobile has 25x25 AWS and they’re running 20x20 Band 66 and 5x5 n66 (in testing). Presumably when n66 commercially launches they’ll drop Band 66 down to 15x15 and go straight for a 10x10 n66 carrier like they did with n25. 
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...