COMMUNITY began to feel the benefits of competition in telecoms and technology competition and business rivalry between operators provide a profitable alternative. With the entry of technology-based TelkomFlexi CDMA (code division multiple access), so now people can enjoy mobile phone services with PSTN fixed phone rates. So cell phones are not luxuries anymore.
IN dealing with this competition, the role and the correct consistency regulators tested. That is how the policy and regulatory policy of telecommunications sector to give priority to public interest above the interests of business players.
The main problem for this government is how to accelerate the addition of telecommunications infrastructure in Indonesia. Telephone density (teledensity) has been only 3.7 percent, or an average of three phones in a hundred residents. Obviously this figure will be even less for the rural areas or remote areas that can only reach 0.01 percent only. Required technology breakthroughs and regulations to boost Indonesia's teledensity figure is far behind compared to our neighboring countries.
In Indonesia, the liberalization of mobile business started in 1995, when the government began to open opportunities to the private mobile telephone business in a way full competition. Can be considered, how when technology GSM (global system for mobile) came in and replace first-generation cellular technology that has been previously entered into Indonesia as NMT (Nordic Mobile Telephone) and AMPS (advance mobile phone system)
GSM technology is superior, higher network capacity, because the efficiency of frequency spectrum. Now, within a period of nearly a decade, GSM technology have become a market with more subscribers than fixed telephone subscribers. This trend will continue because in addition to its features more interesting, a mobile phone is still a prestige, especially for the Indonesian people.
However, until now cell phones are still a luxury, not all levels of society can enjoy it. Transit is still very high compared with fixed line PSTN (public switched telephone network), both for local and long distance communications (long distance), some have reached Rp 4,500 per minute flat rate for long distance communication.
However, no matter what the tariffs offered by GSM mobile operators, because there is no other choice, what can make, is taken as well. Especially since the PSTN phone can not be expected. Thus, the introduction of CDMA technology promises an economical solution to meet the obligations of governments in accelerating the addition of the PSTN. Moreover, CDMA comes with 3G cellular technology, which offers features more sophisticated than the GSM technology. These advantages as well as to meet the lifestyle needs of modern society.
Why CDMA can be cheap?
One time a student at the elevator suddenly ask that question and I just berkometar, lest GSM overpriced. CDMA comes with a price of 200 dollars per SST (telephone unit), much cheaper than other access technologies so far in Indonesia so that PT Telkom dare give cheap rate. In fact, CDMA is more sophisticated and more superior than GSM.
If so, need to be questioned again how exactly the GSM cellular business climate during this includes players who played behind all that. Starting from vendors, operators, and regulators, who most benefited, although certainly not as a consumer society.
Especially if you consider the scheme of cooperation between vendors to operators in the pattern of procurement or purchase of technology. Pain again, is there any technology transfer that means for our country? It's nearly a decade, vendors of GSM technology in and doing business in Indonesia, in fact we were just the buyers and users of technology alone.
Now with the entry of CDMA technology from the other camp with a new business if it was from America, Japan, Korea, or China, is expected to be more open business climate. To be seen whether there are new players in good faith to promote the empowerment of our human resources.
Of course the government and the operators must have strong negotiating power, lest they come with a series of demands and requirements to facilitate their business, while we do not know what the state would ask for them. Although we do not have a competitive advantage in this technology, but a promising market potential, can be used as bargaining power, for example, to fight for a real technology transfer. Another thing that matters more is not to place reliance on one or two vendors such as our previous experience with Siemens.
From the aspect of technology, either GSM or CDMA is a digital cellular technology standard, GSM only difference is developed by European countries, while CDMA from American and Japanese sides. But it should be noted that GSM and CDMA technology from different paths so that the evolution to next generation 2.5G and 3G networks continue to the next will be different as can be seen in the scheme.
Therefore, we must carefully choose the technology. When we choose CDMA, we then have to follow the path up-grade CDMA continues. Keep in mind, the up-grade technology network in a single lane will be easier and cheaper than migrating to other technologies.
Network performance is the next criteria to be considered in technology selection. Performance of cellular networks is highly dependent frequency spectrum efficiency and sensitivity to interference because the frequency spectrum is a very limited resource.
To improve the efficiency of frequency spectrum, the frequency reuse techniques conducted a re-Used, re-use the same frequency in another cell at a certain distance so that no interference occurs. CDMA technology has a higher network capacity compared to GSM technology and the same frequency can be used in every cell of adjacent or adjoining ones.
CDMA technology is designed not sensitive to interference. In addition, a number of subscribers in a single cell can access the same frequency spectrum bands for use coding techniques that can not be done on GSM technology.
Limited Mobility
Mobility is a major advantage compared to fixed line mobile technology. Each customer can access the network to communicate from anywhere and here lies the difference with fixed telephone.
The concept of cellular technology design ensures the mobility of each subscriber to communicate whenever and wherever he was. So from a technology aspect, there is no limit mobility and even customers roaming (roaming) may be international.
If done restriction, especially if the limited use of the technology in just one cell, the customer could only communicate or use the phone within the coverage area of BTS (base transceiver station) in which he subscribed.
To Jakarta certainly very ineffective and inefficient because such customers who have a house in East Jakarta, working in Central Jakarta, or shopping to Glodok, the phone can not be used. In addition, these restrictions can be used to add the cost operators roaming between cells that would be detrimental, difficult, or fooling the public. Do not let the competition of business operators and community sacrificed. If the restriction remains to be done, would be considered a reasonable restriction. For example, limits the scope covering Greater Jakarta (Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang, and Bekasi).
This incident is not much different from what India faced in 2000 when the GSM operators worried about their business is threatened when the CDMA entry. The government gave permission CDMA-WLL mobile technology is operated to accelerate their PSTN infrastructure, to achieve the target of 7 per cent teledensity in 2005 to come. Until now, the Government of India remained consistently maintain the CDMA technology, with mobility remains limited, but wide enough coverage area that is roughly one province.
Facing the increasingly fierce competition and business cycles as well as the increasingly rapid technological competition, in determining policy and discretion, regulators should look at from all points of view with a comprehensive review, not partial. And more importantly, be able to anticipate any changes that might occur so as not to miss continue.
With the convergence of telecommunications with information technology, licensing policy should no longer depend on technologies and services. Each operator is free to choose the most economical technology and is suitable to enhance their competitiveness, in order to offer services to people with low tariffs. Regulators really need to be independent, impartial to any technology or vendor.
Furthermore, the liberalization of this sector requires the regulator to maintain continuity of service to the community, not to place the cherry picking that may be made by new players. When they caught, they just left without a moral responsibility to the community.
Usually these cases occur in developing countries where the laws and regulations are still very weak, as had happened in India so that the strategic measures need to be prepared either by regulators or operators. For example, to anticipate the competition, GSM operators should start thinking about alternative technology solutions whether upgrading or migration.
Therefore, the role of government and regulators still urgently needed to safeguard the interests of a country, especially in transition from monopoly to competition. For our country, which until now only so buyers and users of technology, of course it must be smart to choose the technology most economical and suitable to the needs and economic capabilities.
Do not get hung up on a technology or in one or two vendors only. We must be mobile in a free, not limited mobility.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment