Jean. Christian,
yes I do while at the same time realizing that I could be wrong on this.
Depending upon how Nokia product management intends to position the G4
IT product (eg is it going to be a direct substitute for the iphone with
additional superior features like tethering support and high quality
video that the iphone does not have/support) will determine what
hardware and software goes into the device.
As Nokia and the other device designers fully understand, device
physical dimensions are a key constraint in mobile device design. Here,
for example, is the url to an Adobe Acrobat .pdf of a powerpoint
presentation from a company that specializes in analytical "teardowns"
of devices, especially mobile ones and toward the end there is a section
that discusses the technology in the iphone:
http://www.smta.org/files/CTEA_High_Density_Pkg_Trends-Carey-Portelligent.pdf
You can see, from viewing the iphone PCB discussed on pp 13-17 of that
presentation. that, in addition to having separate power amps for each
of 3 frequency band groupings (it is a quad band device). the device
also has a Multi-chip package (MCP) to handle both a GSM/EDGE chip as
well as a WCDMA chip needed for 3g baseband processing. I could foresee
that another designer, with an application that did not require 2G
"backward compatibility", might :design out: the 2G chip ( "hold the
2g" if you will) in order to save space and power in the design. This,
however, would make the device un-useable in a network that was not 100%
3G/UMTS, UNLESS the device was being used ONLY for non-voice data access
and not for "traditional" voice.
The point here is that given the constraints of packaging, weight, power
consumption and intend use (is it primarily a non-voice data device or
is it mostly a voice device with the need for some non-voice data
capability?), the product designer will have to make design tradeoffs.
Of course with each "turn" of Moores Law, every 18 months or so, the
technology constraints are relaxed by that proverbial factor of 2 but
somehow it does seem that the expectations for the intended use (the
product requirements if you will) increase by a like amount to absorb
whatever performance/size/cost/power consumption benefits accrue from
the corresponding "turn" of Moores Law.
Best Regards,
John Holmblad
Acadia Secure Networks, LLC
* *
Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> John Holmblad a écrit :
>> Jean-Christian,
>>
>> the term "3g radio" is a fairly broad term. The key is what software
>> is going to be in the new G4 IT above the radio/physical layer. It
>> would make sense, especially if Nokia decides that the G4 IT is going
>> to go after the market served by the iphone, to give the G4 IT, full
>> 2G/3G voice functionality in addition to HSDPA. The rub here with
>> such a decision may be the impact on the product cost of having to
>> use a presumably more expensive radio of the kind that are contained
>> in 2G/3G dual mode handsets. I would think that for a product
>> released in 2009 2G support would still be essential.
> [...]
>
> John,
>
> It seem that you think that there exists 3G chip that make only HSPA,
> without voice, and/or without 2G compatibility. You can be right, but
> I have a big doubt on that.
>
> Best Regards,
_______________________________________________
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@xxxxxxxxx
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
