If want to know the answer, check out an article written by Nortel CTO John Roese in Broadband Wireless Exchange Magazine.
Roese about the challenges facing service providers in providing real wireless broadband, and how 4G will be able to offer high-speed, high-connectivity networks.
“Because wireless will play such a prominent role in a hyperconnected world, it’s critical that the wireline-quality experience and the enterprise Wi-Fi experience into the cellular wireless domain are extended,” he said. “4G wireless technologies are the driving force to achieve this.
Success in 4G will occur when consumers and devices are connected — in fact, when they are hyperconnected — to an affordable wireless broadband network. Low cost and convenience will allow us, the user, to have full access to the web and applications wherever they and their laptop, game device, MP3 player, etc. are.”
The more Nortel talks about Wi-Max and 4G, the more I’d like to know what kind of bold strategic moves are in the works to differentiate itself from other suppliers such as Motorola and Samsung. It is service, an acquisition of leading-edge technology or simply being able to leverage existing relationships? There’s no doubt Wi-Max is a key part of Nortel’s growth-strategy so it will be interesting to see how things unfold.
9 responses so far ↓
1 Casual Observer // Aug 30, 2007 at 5:28 pm
More desperate attempts by nortel to sell the buzz of something they aren’t even the leader in. The leaders in WiMax/4G are Qualcomm, Intel, Motorola, Samsung and others. Essentially the issue w/ most wireless technologies is they tend to become commoditized very quickly and no one player has a big chunk of the market. Its happening with WiFi and WiMax and will also be the case w/ 4G. This is a good thing for consumers.
2 Paul Stevens // Aug 30, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Mark, I agree. I’d really like to hear more about why we should be excited about Nortel’s play in 4G. John Roese write’s like an analyst. Lots of talk about what’s coming but almost no pointers to Nortel’s play other than generalizations about where they’re investing. The Nortel fan club is impatient. It may be that the business units are working on strategic deals that can’t be revealed yet (best case) or it could be that Nortel is full of hot air and just can’t execute anymore (worst case). Time will tell. The sooner we know what’s coming, the sooner the stock price will stop falling.
3 many // Aug 31, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Mark & Paul, I have to agree with you both.
From the responses I have read by John’s peers and direct reports I am not impressed. They still don’t get it as far as I can tell. Statements like there is no evolution path from UMTS to LTE are just not true from what I can tell, but when confronted with fact they can’t provide a convincing argument to support their assertions (to me at least). I like to think I can always be educated, and I will gladly admit it when I am wrong
My sense is that there are too many salesmen and MBAs and not enough technologists with a vision running things.
I reaffirm my support for Roese and Edholms blogs, but the guest speakers (presumably those charged with executing and the comments form their minions) leave *a lot* to be desired. I can’t seem to get answers to direct questions and they are long on spin and short on substance.
Why would 4G strategy be articulated by the head of carrier networks as opposed to being a more overall strategy across lines of business?
Why does Richard Lowe assert “….Bottom line to customers is that there is no true evolution from UMTS to LTE…..†? What does he know that is not availble to the general public?
As well, there seems to me to be a bit of an irrational hatred of Cisco that does not work to their advantage. It comes off a bit paranoid and bitter.
Why is there no recognition that a successful strategy using tactical decisions requires a sense of timing that nortel has repeatedly displayed a painful lack of?
Why is there seemingly no acknowledgement of some of the other (IMO more important) take always from the Chambers/Ballmer interview?
4 The psychiatrist // Aug 31, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Many
If you were one of Nortel’s major carrier customers,what makes you think that they would want to hear it differently than the way Richard Lowe worded it?
“….Bottom line to customers is that there is no true evolution from UMTS to LTE…..†? What does he know that is not availble to the general public?
And furthermore if you were a major carrier which way would you have preferred to hear Nortel express their support from UMTS to LTE and why would you prefer to hear it other than “there is no true evolution from UMTS to LTE from Nortel’s perspective.
What would the advantages be in having it presented differently,from a customer’s perspective of coarse.
5 many // Aug 31, 2007 at 5:20 pm
psychiatrist
How about I work for a major carrier? How about I know that the standards are not set in stone yet? I guess you do have a point though, if nortel looks at it this way they don’t want any established carrier business in either 3G or 4G.
What is even *more* maddening is the nortel press release at http://www2.nortel.com/go/news_detail.jsp?cat_id=-8055&oid=100195516
Which states:
“……………………Nortel’s strategy is designed to bring some of the key advantages of OFDM and MIMO technologies into all broadband wireless systems. This technology was already introduced in WiMAX and has now been introduced in the evolution path for UMTS/HSDPA networks for potential delivery in 2008. The
introduction of OFDM and MIMO into the 3GPP standards for wireless LTE was agreed in December 2005…………”
Remember that the evolution path from GSM to UMTS is 3G handsets that “fallback” when the 3G network is not available, so the evolution is largely outside of the realm of nortels failed RAN products. 3GPP has made the same path a stated goal of LTE. So, according to 3GPP (the standards body behind *both* UMTS and LTE), there *is* a migration path. Furthermore nortels competitors have articulated loud and clear that the believe there is a evolution path. Lowe is alone (as far as I can tell) in this assertion.
I have had some one on Roese blog try to tell me that the “infrastructure” (I am guessing RAN and Transport?) wont evolve but the handsets will? That statement does not pass the laugh test. Please! Show me someone other than Richard Lowe and his minions that are saying there is no UMTS -> LTE evolution path. Show me a technical reason *why* there is no “true” evolution path. Please! Inquiring minds want to know.
6 mart // Sep 4, 2007 at 5:06 pm
First, anyone who knows Richard Lowe knows that he did not write the piece in Roese’s blog. He likely had it revised eighteen times, but he did not write it.
Second, the Roese blog and the Lowe entry are clearly corporate spin jobs. Nortel needs to stop talking and start executing. No one is going to believe a provocative pronouncement from Nortel about UMTS after they exited the business.
Third, Nortel needs to get REALISTIC about its business. speculating about UMTS-LTE compatibility gets them nowhere. Realistically, is Nortel going to be in the LTE business - clearly NO. Realistically, can Nortel re-create itself using CDMA and WIMAX - NO there is not enough revenue in these markets. Realistically, is Nortel going to be able to make game-changing acquisitions - NO, it does not have the financial wherewithall. Is Hyperconnectivity going to save Nortel - I doubt it since its just a concept that requires a lot more than Nortel can offer. So what is Nortel planning to do that is feasible? Other than the talk of capitalizing on Enterprise, I don’t hear much.
7 many // Sep 4, 2007 at 7:20 pm
mart,
I do not know Richard Lowe, but based on what I have seen so far, I would agree.
While it is true CDMA has a better migration path it is whole disingenuous to say there is NO migration path. Duplication in the backhaul, power and site footprint is mitigated by the fallback capabilities and UMTS lower infrastructure cost. Backoffice and interoperability issues drive the change faster and the 8 year average lifecycle of dual networks is compressing significantly.
3GPP2 EV-DO rev A to Rev C is more graceful, but then it dead ends (at least for now). An old friend of mine who shall remain nameless used to say. “never go to market with a problem you don’t have a solution for”
Too bad for them the internet exposes their FUD. I will say I am a bit disappointed in Roese and Edholm for allowing their good names to be used in such a fashion by marketing spin weenies.
8 llin // Sep 5, 2007 at 11:54 am
many,
Great post. Agree with your assessments. I love the “marketing spin weenies” phrase.
Roese is a blowhard spin weenie or weener. Edholm is a quality character.
9 Casual Observer // Sep 5, 2007 at 6:43 pm
Is anyone really drinking this Kool-Aid anymore ?
Leave a Comment