UmTRX marketing. Was: Selectivity improvement solutions proposal for UmTRX

Alexander Chemeris alexander.chemeris at gmail.com
Sun Mar 18 07:45:34 UTC 2012


Andrey and all,

18.03.2012 2:31 пользователь "Andrey Sviyazov" <andreysviyaz at gmail.com>
написал:
>> Regarding the GSM spec, I believe these blocker tests are hard to pass
and not that useful in most practical situations. However, I do not care
that much about passing this spec for my network deployment in Mayotte but
I really believe passing the spec will be very important for you if you
wish to sell your hardware solution to some major operators. Moreover, as
we would anyway need a superheterodyne selective filtering to get a
reasonably narrow Rx sampling band (< 1.5 MHz LMS band), it does not cost
that much more to try to pass the GSM spec.
>
> You right, it is important for us and may be it is really important for
systems with high channel dencity.

I completely support everything which could make our product better without
increasing its cost. But we also must ensure to release UmTRX in time. What
we all should keep on mind is that "the best is an enemy to a good". We
should focus on those 10% of simple tweaks which bring us 90% of
improvement. Otherwise we'll be swamped with the other 90% of tweaks and
will miss the market opportunity. I can't stress it more - we MUST release
UmTRX ASAP. Even if it doesn't meet macro-BTS requirements. We'll be able
to fix this in the next version if ever needed - we can't know the real
demand until we release the first version.

I would be glad of what I've just said is obvious and already lives in your
heart. Otherwise it's extremely important you understand this deeply, not
formally. Please let me know if you don't, I'll explain in more details.

> Furthermore, it is very easy to lose the reputation of the product, but
it is very difficult then to fix it back.

This is true. And the best way to keep the reputation is to realistically
understand UmTRX capabilities and avoid overmarketing. In other words, with
just reasonable product quality, our reputation depends solely on the right
marketing. E.g. we might explicitly warn customers that it's not suitable
for macro-BTS installations and they could do so on their own risk only.

> I think, low cost doesn't sign low quality, so we must to have good
hardware on market for good sales and promote OpenHW :)

This is very true. Just keep in mind that "good hardware" means "minimally
viable hardware at low price" and doesn't mean "super high quality mumbo
jumbo with many zeros in the price". Our customers value simplicity and low
cost over complexity and golden plates.

That said, I can't help with decisions on the RF side and here I rely on
you, guys. That's why it is so important for you to understand all these
"abstract" marketing ideas.

Sent from my Android device.

--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris
CEO, Fairwaves LLC
http://fairwaves.ru
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/umtrx/attachments/20120318/e2ce11b7/attachment.html>


More information about the UmTRX mailing list