[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ossig] So Iraq will have a US-developed CDMA system?? Asks The Register



Folks,
 
Oooh! How true Thomas Friedman's statement below is:-
 
"The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist.
MacDonalds cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the builder of
the F15 warplane. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon
Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy
and Marine Corps".
 
                                          Thomas Friedman, a New York Times columnist

 
 Just look at the article which follows below.
 
So Iraq will have a US-developed CDMA system??
 
This my friends -- is gunboat globalisation -- the extension of economic, cultural and idelogical globalisation by military means.
 
Where are the weapons of mass destruction? In any case why can't Iraq have nuclear weapons, biological and chemical weapons  when the big imperialist powers attacking it can?
 
The US' CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) mobile communications technology lost to Europe' GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) technology in open competition worldwide and GSM won critical mass worldwide so now US imperialist politicians want to enforce CDMA with the barrel of the gun. So much for free competition.
 
In fact. The failure of CDMA (or any other US standard) to gain worldwide acceptance is precisely due to the failure of the neo-liberal, free-market policy of competition between incompatible technologies hoping that the "fittest" will survive and dominate.
 
On the other hand, this "outdated" French technology called GSM began as a Europe-wide standard and it was developed under the direction of a steering group called "Groupe Speciale Mobile" (GSM), the acronym was later given its current name and now it's the mobile communications standard in most countries outside North America and has made inroads into North America as well and it lets me use my dual-band mobile phone wherever I am in the world (apart from North America) and have the cost of all calls charged to my home account in Malaysia.
 
So a standard won over proprietary technology and has allowed everyone to enjoy the benefits of mobile communications wherever they are.
 
Now I can expect the public relations spin doctors, syncophantic media and consumers rights NGOs cranking up the propaganda against GSM, so we technology journalists in this part of the world had better be careful of what bullshit we read in articles written by journo-prostitutes in North America -- err and some pro US-imperialist journo-prostitutes here as well -- like certain BLOGmeisters.
 
BTW. The very fact that Microsoft Windows and Office have respectively become the dominant PC operating system and office application is primarily due to the same "winner takes all" policy in the US information technology industry which saw US proprietary mobile phone technologies lose to the GSM standard.
 
Microsoft's dominance could come apart if someone, somewhere could come up with an international standard specification for an operating system which software developers could comply with -- and that my friends would enable real competition -- just like you can buy any standards-compliant lightbulb or mobile phone by any manufacturer and be confident that they will work.
 
However, especially the software part of the IT industry is nortoriously unable to agree on standards, unlike engineers like those in the IEEE, ISO and ITU who are able to sit down and work out a standard.
 
This inability is true even within the open-source software community which bases itself on standards-based technologies and protocols but at the same time is so individualistic that they start fighting about what standards, licensing, or even open source operating systems (ie-- Linux, BSD, etc) to adopt.
 
Also thanks to IBM not patenting the design for its IBM PC, it advertantly or inadvertantly gave the world an open standards PC architecture which any Tom, Dick, Harry, Ah Chong or Mydin could build a compliant PC and back then, Microsoft was there at the right place and right time to benefit from the explosion in PCs which was about to take place back and is now still laughing all the way to the bank as a result.
 
Things would be pretty different if there were a "GSM" of operating systems but is the ruggedly individualistic, "do your own thing and pass the joint man" software industry up to it?
 
I don't expect they'd tolerate pot smoking at Redmond.
 
Regards
 
Charles
=======================================================
http://theregister.co.uk/content/59/29974.html
 
Iraq's mobile network - Qualcomm to follow the tanks?
By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
Posted: 27/03/2003 at 11:48 GMT
 

And in a flash, the war on terror started to morph into the war for CDMA. North Korea, watch out - there's a jumping-off point right next door. US wireless company Qualcomm has often been described as the civilian wing of the military-industrial complex, so perhaps the only thing that should surprise us is how speedily its arrival in the wake of the tanks in Iraq occurred.
 
The new Iraq will need (among other things) a mobile phone network, GSM phone networks are supplied by ungrateful and despicable Europeans*, so any attempt by the DoD and USAID to install anything other than a US-designed CDMA system would be, would be... But we'll let the Congressman tell you all about it later.
 
Spread-spectrum radio began life as a military technology; Qualcomm grew fat on Pentagon pork defense contracts in the late Reagan years as it sought to tame CDMA for civilian use. Which it eventually did, after many delays, and with some admirable panache. Only CDMA arrived, when it eventually did arrive - three years after co-founder Dr Jacobs promised - too late to make an impact on the cellphone industry as it was. The world had multilaterally decided on an older time-division digital technology several years previously.
 
The result is that the world has a single standard, and enjoys economies of scale and very, very cool gadgets. The USA on the other hand decided to allow four incompatible standards to battle it out, thus blocking innovation from overseas, and allowing cellphone carriers to play atrocious bait and switch games with cellphone subscribers here. Er, that's us.
 
But back to the Gulf.
 
Congressman Darrell Issa (R., San Diego) yesterday issued a rallying cry for the new, reconstructed Iraq to embrace CDMA instead of GSM. Issa is urging Congress reps to sign a round-robin letter to Donald Rumsfeld, denouncing GSM ("French" and outdated) and urging the cause of the Q stuff instead. Qualcomm, we note chipped in $4,500 for Issa's 2002 campaign, but then so did lots of other outfits. We hope the Iraqis like their Centrinos, too.
 
Says Issa: "We have learned that planners at the Department of Defense and USAID are currently envisioning using Federal appropriations to deploy a European-based wireless technology known as GSM ('Groupe Speciale Mobile'- this standard was developed by the French) for this new Iraqi cell phone system."
 
This is fighting talk, as the mere mention of the word "entree" is enough to send a patriotic USAian into paroxysms of rage, right now. It's also quite incorrect, and ETSI anoraks will tell you all about Groupe Speciale Mobile, should you let them. WIth almost a billion users, in over 150 countries, GSM is the world's cellphone standard. But let Mr Issa continue:
 
"If European [sic] GSM technology is deployed in Iraq, much of the equipment used to build the cell phone system will be manufactured in France by Alcatel, in Germany by Siemens, and elsewhere in western and northern Europe."
 
He seems a little vague here about "Northern Europe" and is very coy about naming the Nordic telephony pioneers explicitly: Sweden and Finland. But he continues, a little shakily:
 
"Therefore, if our understanding of this situation is correct, because of ill-considered planning, the U.S. government will soon hand U.S. taxpayer dollars over to French, German, and other European cell phone equipment companies to build the new Iraqi cell phone system."
 
"This is not acceptable" he cries.
 
Er well, no. American manufacturers such as Lucent and Motorola are very keen to export GSM technology into foreign markets indeed. And the European competitors may well be Siemens, but are just as likely to be LM Ericsson and Nokia, from Sweden and Finland respectively. But they're not quite on the wrong side. Yet?
 
Aside from Issa's objections to the possibility of the French and Germans getting contracts, there is, he says, a security issue at stake here:
 
"... we understand that CDMA cell phones include an integrated global positioning system (GPS) feature that allows the precision location of callers in times of emergency. [do we detect the teensiest of a briefing here?] European GSM cell phones do not have integrated GPS. If US relief workers in Iraq are equipped with CDMA cell phones with GPS, they will be immediately locatable in case of terrorist attack or kidnapping. Finally, because US CDMA systems are compliant with the US Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, this system provides all necessary access for law enforcement in post-conflict Iraq."
 
Depending on who's doing the enforcing, of course. But yes, there do seem to be roaming advantages in the case of US security people commuting between the US and Iraq. We could observe that the European networks make a pretty good fist of figuring out where you are without GPS, and we might mention that there are other points about CDMA GPS. But we won't - not today, anyway.
 
Issa's punchline is quite unambiguous:
 
"If the U.S. government deploys US- developed CDMA in Iraq, then American companies will manufacture most of the necessary equipment here in the United States."
 
Er, wrong again. What bomb-shattered bits of Mesopotamia that may survive will be as intrigued by Lucent's 4G network as anything that "Europeans" have to offer. Issa's shaky pitch is founded on a shaky assumption: that the US national interest relies on one single patent hoarder, in his home constituency, and not the great wealth that the real US-based manufacturers could bring home.
 
You must question, once again, how a patent licensing company came to identify itself so closely with the national interest. Qualcomm's key patents were filed in 1989. Under the seventeen-year rule, the most important of these will expire in three years time.
 
Patient Mesopotamians may be wise to sit this one out, but we doubt anybody will ask them. ®
 
* Some years back The Register picked up the latest edition of what was then a very fat magazine bloated with lovely, lovely PC advertising, but which is now sadly slimmed. And boggled we were to read the amazing diatribe on poison European GSM technology, written by someone who, as far as we know, remains a senior executive of the rump of the publishing company. Had he been getting good brief from something beginning with Q?, we wondered. GSM was nothing like as good as the home-grown technology that was just around the corner. GSM was dangerous. GSM would stop pacemakers, hospitals would cease to function, planes would fall out of the sky... Wheelchairs would run haywire into the paths of uncoming trucks. Excellent stuff, and no, we're not making it up - he was. But at least you seem to get a more sedate class of black propaganda these days.