Wireless communication has extensive applications in consumer and business markets. Among the many spread spectrum communication applications/systems are: fixed wireless, unlicensed (FCC) wireless, local area network (LAN), cordless telephony, personal base station, telemetry, mobile wireless, and other digital data processing applications. While each of these applications utilizes spread spectrum communications, they generally utilize unique and incompatible protocols for various signal processing operations, e.g., encoding, modulation, demodulation, and decoding, etc. These unique and incompatible protocols may require unique hardware, software, and methodologies for the communication protocol. This practice can be costly in terms of design, testing, manufacturing, and infrastructure resources. As a result, a need arises to overcome the limitations associated with the varied hardware, software, and methodology for processing digital signals in each of the varied spread spectrum wireless applications.
In contrast to the hardware and algorithmic variations in the spread spectrum wireless applications, they all share a common demand for increased capacity to accommodate new users that continues to grow at an enormous rate. Compounding this problem is the demand for new and more data-intensive forms of wireless communication, such as data transfer with networks, e.g., Internet data transmission. In contrast, the resources available to accommodate these demands, e.g., frequency bandwidth, are substantially limited. Consequently, a need arises for an apparatus and a method to effectively accommodate the increases in the quantity of users and the increase in the quantity of data transferred while using a limited frequency bandwidth.
Besides the variation between spread spectrum communication applications, substantial variations occur over time within a given spread spectrum communication application. For example, within the code division multiple access (CDMA) cellular spread spectrum wireless application, significant changes have occurred over time. These changes take the form of a proliferation of different versions and performance levels, e.g., Telecommunication Industry Association (TIA) Interim Standard-95 (IS-95), IS54B, IS36, CDMA TIA IS2000 and TIA IS 2000A, European Telecommunication Standards Institute (ETSI) wideband CDMA (WCDMA), Global System for mobile communications (GSM), ARIB WCDMA, 1Xtreme, GPRS, EDGE, etc. And the pace at which improvements and new standards arise is increasing as more industry resources are focused on the needs and opportunities in this wireless communication. Unfortunately, all these factors result in minimal uniformity around the world at any one given point in time. For example, different countries and different service providers frequently use systems that are uniquely dedicated to their specific version of a communication protocol. Consequently, a need arises for overcoming the limitations of protocol non-uniformity and proliferation within each of the spread spectrum wireless communication applications.
The proliferation of communication protocols generates yet other problems. For example, the cost of changing communication protocols or upgrading versions or performance levels within a communication protocol can be significant. That is, handset and base station designers frequently improve the signal processing algorithms and processes to improve service. Given the high quantity of base stations, as. Well as user handsets, even a small unit cost for a change can multiply into a very large cost for the entire system. These costs are most pronounced when a hardware change or when on-site field reprogramming is required. Furthermore, a software or hardware change for a new version or performance level may hinder the efficiency of the existing device configuration due to incompatibility, etc. Consequently, a need arises to overcome the limitations of cost and resource-intensive changes in versions or performance levels of a communication protocol.
Changes in performance level or versions of a communication protocol can also affect the network services and coverage, and hence the survival of a wireless service provider or a hardware manufacturer. For example, given the long lead time and the investment required for designing, manufacturing, and installing an infrastructure for a given communication protocol, a future but uncertain specification can be a tremendous risk. This is especially so with an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) device whose configuration is defined primarily by fixed hardware. However, market rewards may be significant for the service provider or manufacture that is able to realize the new protocol in the shortest possible time. Thus, a risk versus reward tradeoff exists with implementing new communication protocols. Given the degree of the risks and promise of rewards, a need arises to overcome the limitations of the long lead-time and the investment required for implementing a new specification.
With the increased sophistication of each new generation of communication device, power consumption remains a significant issue. Among other things, power consumption affects: battery life for handheld devices; cooling systems required for base stations; durability and reliability of semiconductor devices and integrated circuits; and other performance criteria. Conventional alternatives to hardwired ASICs have significant power consumption issues that offset their benefits. Consequently, a need arises to overcome the limitations in power consumption for a communication device.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds