Cellphone operators are under threat

Whatever is cheaper and user friendly for Granny Rat & Aunt Agness - Bring it on, otherwise, give me cheap unlimited superdamnfastdeliciousinternet!
 
the best thing that can happen, is for one of the operators to come close to bankruptcy (eg. cellc)

then they'll be forced to drop their prices close to cost and gain customers just to save the business, cos in a situation like that, they really having nothing (+ everything) to lose. you can throw arpu* out the window, cos it doesnt matter if ur business is gonna close 2morrow

*arpu = average price per a (cellphone)user
 
If it does what it meant to do, and it's affordable, I'm in.
 
well some new phone o/s no longer as restrictive as other were due to operator + provider pressures, combined with hspa low latency etc they either gonna have to lower prices or come under threat like voip and fixed line telecoms companies.
 
if it's cheap fast and works good, i want it
 
I just want to quote this:

Nevertheless the 3G service poses a threat to cellular operators because it allows users to bypass their networks and make calls over an Internet telephony service like Skype
Click to expand...

And then say the following to the Author: "You Dumb, uninformed nitwit". He obviously has NO CLUE how mobile operators work and he has even LESS information about the technical and operational aspects of 3G. I think he drew the word "3G" from his "word-of-the-day" hat and decided to use it in a sentence for the first time. Unfortunately, he still managed to stuff it up, but a big "A" for effort to him.

MTN, Vodacom and even CellC (when they get round to it) are the "hosting" companies for 3G technology. You cannot "Bypass" the cellular operator and then still use 3G. It's like saying you're going to "bypass" telkom but still use their landlines to make a call....er....I don't think so Jimmy!

But let's take a look at this from another aspect, let's see if we can make sense of this ill-written article. Maybe the author is trying to say that by USING 3G to make an international call using VoIP, it will mean that Mobile Operators will be losing out on money. WRONG AGAIN SIR. Make a quick 2 minute phone-call to a friend using the normal means....write down the cost. Now, make the same 2 minute VoiP call to the same friend...write down the cost....Not that cheap, is it?

This reply is a bit of a rant but it seems to me that the author honestly does not know what he's talking about and he's trying to make a mountain out of a molesheap.

In Summary: You CANNOT "bypass" the mobile operator and then still use the service that it provides. And making a call using VoIP through 3G/GPRS is not as cheap as you might think.
 
Closing Statement: 3G does not "pose a threat" to any mobile operator. Even if you decide to make calls using 3G and VoIP you'll be billed for it in Data. So instead of making money by billing you for a voicecall in seconds, the mobile operator will now bill you for a Data session in Megabytes. And that's not cheap at all. Remember, there's no such thing as "off-peak" data rates.
 
Just add to Mr Andersons writing:- As for Alan Knott-Craig stating that he is more afraid of Microsoft than MTN, it also seems to be unfounded since no matter which handset software the consumer is using they still have to use a carrier of some kind.

Wether the handset is operating on Windows or whatever they still need a medium to communicate on, step in cellular operators. Another example is Telkom does not care wether you are using an Apple MAC or not, you still have to dial up on their lines, hell even MTN, Cell C and Vodacom use Telkom lines as well!!!! So Microsoft is not that scary...
 
*sigh*

3G is not a technology solely used by the "Network Operators". Sentech uses 3G in their MyWireless solution, for example.

And... there are handsets (and we have a few here) that connect to a VOIP service via a standard 802.11 wireless connection. There are also plans in the pipeline from many different tech companies in the world to make WIFI capable handsets, thereby eliminating the need to connect to a cellphone tower altogether. Microsoft is rumoured to want to target that space, as is Google and indeed even Apple. Siemens is also looking at making a WIFI phone.

So, while you choose to insult the obviously rather knowledgable journalist who put this article together, your argument is flawed.

A simple google search for WIFI phone http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=wifi+phone&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 turns up enough results to keep you busy.

So while the current requirement may be a cellular communications link, this is soon not going to be the requirement.

EDIT: More reading: http://www.itbusinessedge.com/item/?ci=6136 AND http://thomashawk.com/2005/04/wimax-phone-service-coming.html AND http://www.techworld.com/mobility/news/index.cfm?newsID=6280&pagtype=all AND http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=86355&WT.svl=news3_1 AND http://ipcommunications.tmcnet.com/news/2006/may/162980.htm
 
Last edited:
' I think the point that was being aimed for regarding the comment about Microsoft was the fear that, should MS operating systems become the new standard or dominant player in the handset market(s), then MS would have powers in that sphere similar to what it does now in the PC market - strongarming and what-not, forcing networks and service-providers to do X, Y or Z because of their dominant position.

' Obviously the argument is far more complex than what I've written above, but I'm trying for a summary that'll serve just to point people in the right direction or put 'em in the right mindset, yes?

' ~Moi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X