BITACHERA: July 2009

This domain tutorial involves the participation of companies with direct and material interests in cellular telephony equipment manufacture, cellular telephony service delivery and in existing patented technology that could be essential to standardized air interfaces. As will be seen in this domain tutorial, some companies that have related interests (supplier and customer) or have competitive interests come together and form strategic alliances wherein they will cooperatively work together in the development of standards to define the evolution of existing, as well as the creation of new products and services in which they each have a business interest.

In this domain tutorial, the end service is telephone service as realized via the use of cellular telephones. All cellular telephones operate via an air interface supported by one or more service providers. The agreement on how that air interface works impacts competitive business opportunities for both the suppliers of the cell phones and associated networking equipment and for the providers of the cell phone service.

The air interface standard is the subject of this domain tutorial; however, it is noted here that the business and use of cellular telephony is directly impacted by many standards ranging from mandatory electromagnetic health, safety, and spectrum requirements through “voluntary” standards involving how local, national, and international networks interface and operate. These related standards will not be considered further in this domain tutorial.
Cellular telephone became possible over 40 years ago when the AT&T Bell System invented and patented the first cellular technology which it named: The Advanced Mobile Phone Service (AMPS). This was an analog system and was first widely deployed in the United States. Later it saw deployment throughout the world.

The cellular system provides for the hand-off of a mobile unit from one cellular radio tower (transmitter/receiver) to another as the mobile unit physically moves from the transmit/reception range of one tower to the next, obviously there is some overlap requiring common control (computer) algorithms being active to make dynamic hand-off decisions. It is also clear that the hand-off has to be either between towers of a single service provider or between towers of two service providers for which the mobile unit (customer) has established service delivery agreements. While the difference is more business than technical, a hand-off between service providers is generally referred to as cellular “roaming.” Clearly, roaming can greatly expand the geographic area for which a customer can maintain continuous service. This ability was a central objective in early technical discussions that took place at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in the 1990s.

While the basic technology defined by the AMPS system was available on a global basis, governmental decisions on the use of radio frequency spectrum within their country boundaries may have differed, thus making it impossible for a single cellular telephone to operate when crossing international boundaries. While this was less problematic in the US, notwithstanding the boundaries between the US and Canada and Mexico, the problem was serious in areas where the geographic size of countries dictated frequent boundary crossings, such as is the case in Europe. This led to focused efforts in Europe under the newly formed European Union (EU) to direct the development of a common cellular (mobile) technology standard for use in all EU countries. This was carried out in the early 1990s by the newly formed European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). This system became known as GSM (Global System Mobile) and is an example of a government entity making a voluntary industry standard a mandatory standard.

The AMPS standard is an example of a “proprietary standard” accepted/used globally. For more information on proprietary standards, see the baseline standards tutorial.
the early 1990s, it also became clear that digital technology could be applied to the cellular air interface and provide service improvements. This resulted in the development of new Second Generation (2G) digital air interface standards, driven by efforts in the US and in Europe. There were also discussions being held at the ITU on how these two efforts could be harmonized into a single global standard. These efforts failed for a number of reasons, including conflict between the EU governmental mandate for a single standard in Europe verses the open market (no limit on the number of standards) environment of the US.

These new digital systems were based on two different digital technologies:

Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), and
Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).
This resulted in the world seeing the development of three primary standards, two are TDMA based (ANSI-136 in the USA and GSM in Europe, with both systems having been implemented in countries outside of the USA and Europe) and one CDMA based system initially based in the USA and named cdmaOne. During the 2G development era, the USA also established a standard called PCS1900, or alternatively GSM1900, which is based on Europe's GSM. The number 1900 is a notation that denotes the associated USA spectrum allocation in the 1.9 Gigahertz band. A different spectrum is allocated in Europe for GSM applications.
One of the key advantages of the cell phone is mobility. For many individuals and businesses, this mobility will range far beyond the geographic service area of any one service provider. In fact the technical ability to support seamless global roaming has been a goal of the cellular phone/service industry for many years.

The lack of global agreement on a single air interface standard in the 2G era (still the predominate technology in 2005) has added considerable complexity to the task of providing customers with true global roaming. The development of multi-mode cellular telephones has addressed some of this need.

In this regard, it is noted that global roaming is impacted both by the lack of a global agreement on the technology standard for the air interface and by the lack of a global agreement on radio spectrum allocations. Both of these contribute to the technical complexity of multi-mode telephones. It is also important to remember that roaming requires more complex service agreements, too. For example, to roam between San Francisco in the USA and Paris, France, one will need to have a service agreement with both a US cellular service provider (e.g., Cingular Wireless) and a French service provider (e.g., France Telecom).

In aggregate, the factors presented on the 2G era clearly demonstrate that technical standards have far-reaching impact on both business and on what the end customer is offered or can purchase.

In the US, look on the web for mobile services offered by Sprint, Cingular, and by Verizon. What types of technology does each offer? Do they each offer more than one type of service/technology?

One of the key advantages of the cell phone is mobility. For many individuals and businesses, this mobility will range far beyond the geographic service area of any one service provider. In fact the technical ability to support seamless global roaming has been a goal of the cellular phone/service industry for many years.

The lack of global agreement on a single air interface standard in the 2G era (still the predominate technology in 2005) has added considerable complexity to the task of providing customers with true global roaming. The development of multi-mode cellular telephones has addressed some of this need.

In this regard, it is noted that global roaming is impacted both by the lack of a global agreement on the technology standard for the air interface and by the lack of a global agreement on radio spectrum allocations. Both of these contribute to the technical complexity of multi-mode telephones. It is also important to remember that roaming requires more complex service agreements, too. For example, to roam between San Francisco in the USA and Paris, France, one will need to have a service agreement with both a US cellular service provider (e.g., Cingular Wireless) and a French service provider (e.g., France Telecom).

In aggregate, the factors presented on the 2G era clearly demonstrate that technical standards have far-reaching impact on both business and on what the end customer is offered or can purchase.