 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
WiMAX 2004 Boston, MA We had this gnawing feeling: Have we not seen this before?
Welcome to the world of wireless data, wireless IP, NLOS broadband, mobile data and MANs. Confused – WiMAX will do it all.
This is the first WiMAX event run by TrendsMedia for the WiMAX Forum. There are 600 here and the turnout is impressive for a first time event. It is like a well run machine. IBM paid for lunch and had a captive audience to hear the same old “wireless is wonderful” talk from the Global VP of Pervasive Wireless e-business Solutions. To get dessert, one had to go to the exhibit which just opened after the IBM presentation ended. It was like bees to honey. Noting like Intel military precision. Motorola did the same thing, food for a talk, when they gave a breakfast pitch to explain why they are into WiMAX big time. Bob Egan the President of Mobile Competency told us why WiMAX was good. And then Dale Kutnick filled the air with vacuous words on how the world is better when we show ROI in our enterprise sales pitches. Yet, as one hears the many questions during the sessions, the obvious “Where is the beef?” pops up. Is this just a reality TV show masking as a technical conference?
We are going to bypass the usual talk by talk blow by blow review of this event. Frankly it would be boring and not get to some of the core issues. At the same, time references will be made to the talks as they provide insights.
On June 24, 802.16-2004 was approved. It was published by the IEEE on October 1, 2004 and is a consolidation of 802.16a, 802.15c and task group d. WiMAX Forum has still not announced the firm that will do the testing compliance for 802.16-2004 and it is not clear what will be required of the testing company for 802.16e. In the standards update, we found that the schedule has slipped. One of the reasons for the slip is the escalating number of tests to be done to assure compliance. This has grown from 400 to over 800 and may need to reach 1,200. Thus during the first “wave” of testing, April to June 2005 to determine product compliance, the number of tests may be truncated. There will be three waves of compliance testing that end in 2005. This is complex technology and what the IEEE and WiMAX Forum are attempting to do is what GSM has done over the last 10 years. In actuality, WiMAX is more complex. One of the questions from the audience was – will we know what companies have submitted products for testing? In response, it was stated that only the successful results will be released with the tests are done. 802.16e adds the following to 802.16-2004: OFDMA, MIMO and 1024, 512 and 128 FFTs. It is unlikely that 802.16e will be compatible with 802.16-2004. The IEEE standard for 802.16e is moving to letter ballot and the first one is to take place this month, November 2004. If this passes, the approval of the standard could happen as early as March 30, 2005. The earliest the products can make it to market would be end 2006 but more likely 2007. The process to define the 802.16e profiles begins in January. It is not clear if 802.16e profiles will support unlicensed spectrum. The upward mobility requirement for 802.16e is 160Km/h, which makes this feasible for mobile broadband in a car. The bands for usage of both 802.16-2004 and e are:
Which bands that will be the focus of the testing, is the subject of a survey of the members now being undertaken. Monica Paolini, Senza Fili Consulting, gave one of the more interesting perspectives of WiMAX mobility. Yes, WiMAX is moving to mobility but this is years away. To make a mobile network, it must be without holes. Further, roaming must be supported both within 802.16e and with other networks, including cellular and WiFi. This will take additional time. One of the problems is that the best performance in mobility is in bands <3HGz and to move into this region would require the use of unlicensed spectrum. Another factor is that the licenses companies gain for fixed services may not allow them to offer mobile services. Device availability for mobile access is a major issue. It is expected that the costs will be high and that terminals which support voice are even farther on the horizon. Other technologies have a significant time to market advantage. Listed were:
The WAVE asked Monica if there is a significant competitive advantage for WiMAX to offer competitive voice using unlicensed spectrum. She felt not so. WiMAX service providers must still invest in the equipment and that competing cell phone service providers costs are declining. Thus, to expect mobile voice based on WiMAX to compete with cellular is beyond what is possible in the next few years. One of the major advantages of WiMAX is that it combines both fixed and mobile services, however, how compatible these will be at the equipment level, including the client devices, is an open question. It was concluded that standardization is only the first step to mobility. Towerstream stated that radio updates are coming about every 6 months. The performance is continuing to improve, especially in NLOS coverage.
The importance of mobility to the WiMAX story was reinforced in both the presentation by the President of the WiMAX Forum, also from Intel, that showed the Forum seeking spectrum at low frequencies, 400MHz to 900MHz for mobility. In addition to the strong value of the propagation characteristics at these lower frequencies, they could avoid the obstacles some operators face at 3.5GHz where they are prohibited from offering mobile services. Over and over during the presentations, one of the most important issues which WiMAX must address is the pricing of the CPE. Many regard the $100 price point as essential and at the same time having self-install modems. Yet, the only market estimate provided did not show this barrier broken in a data-only CPE even by 2008. The expectation of many is that competition will drive down the price of the CPE, yet, there are conflicting views on how and if this can be accomplished. In order to get the necessary gain on the CPE for indoor placement it appears it must have a smart antenna, which will add considerable cost. Yet, one company said that such smart antennas would cost less.
The keynote address and many presentations were much more informative. Yet, the price paid was lack of clarity. That is, these questions remained extant.
By every indication, it will only be the marketplace that can address these issues. Put in another way, a significant investment in infrastructure will be required to determine viability in what is already a very competitive environment in both the fixed and mobile markets.
Rob Resnik, President and Chairman, WiMAX Forum gave the keynote. This was largely the “stump speech.” Some interesting points:
Adlane Fellah, Maravedis, gave an overview of the market for BWA and WiMAX.
Tri-State is a WISP in Atlanta, GA which has broadband wireless installed in 12 rural areas. It is bullish on WiMAX.
The VP of Marketing, Rudy Leser, gave a good overview of WiMAX and one of the more technical presentations. He was also cautious on expecting too much from the technology.
In large part the panel sought to show how each of these technologies are independent. Fujitsu claimed that the processing power in a WiMAX base station is 25% of that required by 3G. One of the factors being that 3G supports undetectable handoff. WiMAX was characterized as “public operator friendly” whatever that means. Airnet took a different position from all the companies at WiMAX World. They are a provider of base station equipment for cellular operators: GMS, EDGE and GPRS. The key is that this is claimed to be the only commercially deployed SDR. Airnet’s view is that its base station can be software upgraded to support both 802.16-2004 and 802.16e. Quite an accomplishment if it is done. This is an early indicator of the power of SDR technology. NAVINI touts its mission of Making Broadband Personal. It claims the broadest selection of products in the bands: 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 3.4 and 3.5 GHz. It also states it is the only company that has commercially available “zero install” portable and mobil broadband. It also provides equipment in licensed and unlicensed bands. With more claims it is the “only firm focused completely on 802.16e.”
WAVE Comments We find it alarming that users, that is, those that will pay for the WiMAX services, are totally missing from these discussions. This smells like the Internet infrastructure debacle that imploded. We propose the following questions:
There is a long, long way to go – and we plan to be there when these areas are finally addressed. |
|||||||||||||||||
| Comments? |
||||||||||||||||||
