Will we still need overland phone line in future?<\/p>\n
By Zatni Arbi<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Even today, getting a new phone line from our PT
\nTelkom can be as difficult as giving the cat a full bath. The
\ninstallation cost may have dropped significantly in the past few
\nyears and the services have improved a lot, but comparing the
\nquality and the availability of our telephone services with our
\nenvied neighbor Singapore is like contrasting a bajaj motorized
\npedicab and a BMW C1.<\/p>\n
One of the biggest problems, in my opinion, is that Telkom
\nstill works in the same old paradigm as the U.S. telephone
\ncompanies did more than a hundred years ago. They still seem to
\nfollow the belief that there should be a line into every house to
\ncarry the telephone signals back and forth to their network.
\nBuilding such a network has been, and will always be, capital as
\nwell as manpower intensive, and covering the last mile to the
\nhouses will always cost a fortune.<\/p>\n
If you by any chance drop by my house, you will also be amazed
\nto see how the phone lines haphazardly cross each other along my
\nstreet, creating a perfect image of spider webs. With such a
\nhiggledy-piggledy network construction, it's not surprising that
\nmy phone line is never reliable. In fact, the loss of telephone
\nconnection to my house was so frequent that I finally decided to
\ninstall a second line as a backup.<\/p>\n
While PT Telkom and all its KSO partners in the five regional
\ndivisions are busy installing more telephone lines in order to
\nmeet the government's target of having 5 million lines by the end
\nof the current five-year development program, the ground may have
\nshifted. In advanced countries, more and more people now go
\nwireless. Eventually, the trend may make all the phone cables
\nhanging from the pole right in front of my house totally useless.<\/p>\n
Last month's issue of the Tele.com magazine underscored the
\nfact that more people are now using their cellular phones than
\ntheir landline -- or wireline -- phones. In Western Europe, for
\ninstance, where GSM is still predominant, making calls is easier
\nbecause the digital services are richer in features. Calls made
\nthrough the cellular networks still cost 200 percent to 700
\npercent more than the wireline networks, but the convenience of
\nthe cell phones makes the difference worthwhile.<\/p>\n
Frequently irritated by drivers who crawl along as they talk
\non their cell phones? You do not have to go to Europe to find
\npeople who talk more on their wireless phones than their wireline
\nones. Almost everybody I meet carries a cell phone nowadays.<\/p>\n
The problem with the original AMPS and the digital GSM
\ncellular technologies is that the number of subscribers that can
\nbe served by a network is rather limited. A new technology called
\nCode Division Multiple Access, or CDMA, promises that operators
\nwill be able to provide services to far more subscribers than the
\nanalog AMPS or even the digital GSM using the same frequencies.<\/p>\n
What makes CDMA capable of serving more subscribers using the
\nsame amount of resources, which are those radio frequencies? One
\nof the most common examples used is a cocktail party where
\neverybody speaks at the same time using different languages. It
\nmay be noisy, but you know that there are conversations going on.
\nTwo or more people using the same language will be able to
\nunderstand each other against the background cacophony.<\/p>\n
In the same manner, two parties using the same digital code
\nwill be connected in a CDMA network where many other telephones
\nsend and receive signals at the same time. Their opportunity is
\nnot limited by the availability of the time slots, like in
\nnetworks based on Time Division Multiple Access.<\/p>\n
There are other advantages, too, as Bintang Juliarso,
\nQualcomm's regional manager for Southeast Asia, told me at his
\nnewly opened office here one recent afternoon. Unlike in GSM and
\nAMPS networks, he said, the frequencies can be reused in nearby
\nalbeit non-adjacent geographic cells. As the result, more
\nsubscribers can be served in a given area as opposed to other
\nnetwork technologies.<\/p>\n
Qualcomm is the American company that was responsible for
\nmaking the technology, first used by the U.S. military, available
\nto the public.<\/p>\n
Fixed Wireless<\/p>\n
Based on the reports I have been following, it is clear that
\nwireless is the way we will communicate in the future, and the
\nfuture is coming fast. Qualcomm, for example, has the wireless
\nfixed telephone that you can install without the wait that is
\ntypically Telkom's style. Fortunately, Telkom has approved the
\nuse of CDMA, and this may mean that we may soon be able to use
\nwireless phones like the ones Bintang showed me in his office.<\/p>\n
Wireless fixed telephones have been made available here by
\nRatelindo, a subsidiary of Bakrie Brothers. Unfortunately,
\nRatelindo's network uses the older Fixed Extended Time Division
\nMultiple Access (FE-TDMA) technology. While the quality of the
\nconnection is adequate for ordinary voice communication and the
\ncompany's quality of service is improving, you cannot use the
\nline for data connection.<\/p>\n
Ratelindo does offer a separate packet radio service that will
\nenable you to access Internet via RadNet at the speed of 19.2
\nKbps. Increasing popularity of Ratelindo's services confirms my
\nbelief that our telephones in the future will be wireless.<\/p>\n
Today, with our telecom market still regulated, the cost of
\nmaking calls through a wireless phone is still far more expensive
\nthan the cost of using the landline. But that will have to
\nchange. Competition with other services, including the Personal
\nHandyphone Systems -- when they arrive -- will drive down the
\ncost to the customers significantly.<\/p>\n
Besides, there are global services, such as Iridium, that can
\nconnect your phones via one of its numerous low-orbit satellites
\nto any other telephone in the world. It is also becoming clear
\nthat global networks such as Iridium were also built upon the
\nassumption that is no longer valid. Even now people can get
\nconnected to almost anybody else in the world without having to
\ngo satellite. The result is that Iridium will have to make its
\nservices very, very low in order to attract users.<\/p>\n
No, this is not going to happen overnight. But when the time
\ncomes for Telkom to rip down the frightening phone cables
\ncrisscrossing over the street in front of my house, I believe
\nthat they will not be needed anymore. Besides, the coaxial cables
\nfrom the cable-TV provider -- when it becomes available in my
\narea -- will bring Internet-based telephone services into my
\nhouse and let me make international calls at a very low rate. In
\nthe meantime, I may also have one or two other phone numbers
\nusing the wireless network. And, hopefully, our
\ntelecommunications authorities, too, will not as wireline-focused
\nas they are now.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/will-we-still-need-overland-phone-line-in-future-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}