As service providers start placing their bets on WiMAX or High Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) technologies, it is easy to fall into the trap of "technological determinism," the notion that the technology determines adoption or commercial success. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Commercial decisions, not the technology, will be the decisive factor. Business decisions almost always are. One can make a technology either way for WiMAX or HSDPA. But that won't be key. Operational issues, backwards compatibility, installed base, manufacturing volumes and even voice compatibility will turn out to be hugely important.
Some might argue that building a new broadband mobile network with a view to voice performance is nuts. The countervailing argument is that no matter what other "data things" users frequently do, talking will be one of them. And poor voice performance is objectionable in a way that OS instability and Web page unavailability are not. People routinely tolerate lower quality of service for their Web browsers, Internet connections and PC operating systems than they will their voice or video services.
Don't believe that? Watch what happens when movie download services become more prevalent. Every degradation of isochronous service disturbs users more than any non-real-time service. Users are unforgiving of voice or video service hiccups that would not faze them when the hiccups affect a non-real-time data service.
In fact, that's the point: user experience is not degraded by packet loss or some amount of jitter or latency when the application is not real time. User experience is visually or aurally affected in a highly visible way when the application requires predictable, sequenced delivery of the packets. Voice and video, to be specific.
