Thanks, To be honest I thougt a single nanoBTS would be cheaper. Of course the server and software (if you do not use OpenBSC) adds cost, officially you need permission to use GSM frequencies and a license on that GSM channel you want to use. And there are some patents.
How come that some manufacturers can sell a unit that cheap like AT&T does? Albert On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Sylvain Munaut <246...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > I have been looking around and I am wondering, when you are interested in > a > > consumer 3G / Femto or Pico cell it might be very cheap through AT&T at > > around $150. > > > Might somebody be working rverse engineering on those cheaper > > cells? > > Probably, but theses are 3G only, they won't work if your phone > doesn't support 3G. > The lack of good free ASN1 tool (for PER Unaligned and Aligned) > doesn't help because 3G use those a lot. > > > The nanoBTS from ipaccess is costing euro 3450 Mind you this is without > any > > software or server, just a single nanoBTS unit. > > I thing several things contribute to the high price: > > - That's part of ip.access revenue stream, they need to make money > - Quantity: There is probably much more femtocell made than nanoBTS > - GSM vs 3G. I think 3G was designed from the get go to support > femtocell and so the RF interface has been designed to be doable with > cheap components. > > > Sylvain >
