Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
No, i pretty sure they were all G's. We detune n to g anyway, they can be too powerful and will jam our own incoming signal if set in n mode. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:56 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Chuck Profito cprof...@cv-access.com wrote: Actually we have found Ruckus to do very well with multipath! i.e. boat docks, moving water, moving boats, moving rolled tin structure, generating killer multipath, kills EVERY OTHER ROUTER/AP EXCEPT RUCKUS. try it , you'll like it. Chuck, were these other radios 802.11n? I ask because pre 802.11n, multipath hurt the performance, as 802.11a/b/g were switched diversity (i.e. take the *best* signal and ignore the other ones). Now that the 802.11n standard has MRC, all of those signals are combined automagically (in theory, of course). So, yes...Ruckus has the reputation of making some kickass antennas to deal with multiplath, but I'm wondering if they can still maintain that edge now that the standard is solidified by IEEE. Put differently, how smart are their antennas now that the standard does a lot of what they were bragging about before? Is their secret sauce now simply a commodity? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
Actually we have found Ruckus to do very well with multipath! i.e. boat docks, moving water, moving boats, moving rolled tin structure, generating killer multipath, kills EVERY OTHER ROUTER/AP EXCEPT RUCKUS. try it , you'll like it. Chuck Profito 209-988-7388 CV-Access, Inc. www.cv-access.com / cprofito'at'cv-access.com Providing Broadband Internet Access to California's Rural Central Valley -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:30 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article Since their beam forming is dynamic, I would expect it to work very well in that environment. As Ruckus beamforming is based on selecting a receiver instead of combining the signals, it should indeed deal with ducting but not too well with multi-path. No Beam forming is expected from Ubiquity... just MIMO... If Quantenna, Celeno or the other chip makers come up with a cost-effective 802.11n beamforming solution, and they claim they will, may be UBNT rethinks this issue. Rubens WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Chuck Profito cprof...@cv-access.com wrote: Actually we have found Ruckus to do very well with multipath! i.e. boat docks, moving water, moving boats, moving rolled tin structure, generating killer multipath, kills EVERY OTHER ROUTER/AP EXCEPT RUCKUS. try it , you'll like it. Chuck, were these other radios 802.11n? I ask because pre 802.11n, multipath hurt the performance, as 802.11a/b/g were switched diversity (i.e. take the *best* signal and ignore the other ones). Now that the 802.11n standard has MRC, all of those signals are combined automagically (in theory, of course). So, yes...Ruckus has the reputation of making some kickass antennas to deal with multiplath, but I'm wondering if they can still maintain that edge now that the standard is solidified by IEEE. Put differently, how smart are their antennas now that the standard does a lot of what they were bragging about before? Is their secret sauce now simply a commodity? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
I'm still getting my feet wet with the whole 4G thing and found this interesting http://www.maravedis-bwa.com/Issues/5.29/Readmore3.html (Sorry if it's old news to many...) Almost everyone I know is betting (and betting big!) on LTE. The only ones I know holding out on WiMAX 2 are niche markets in the federal space or ISPs in Africa. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
Depends on the bet you are making. WiMAX as a personal broadband mobility technology in name and ideal is not going to happen. That was made conclusive some time ago. There will be no device ecosystem, etc. However, LTE as a technology is very much WiMAX-like, even using many of the same components. So WiMAX as a TECHNOLOGY very much endurs. But the real and ultimate dream of future WiMAX was not about technology, but rather a mobile environment that was an open networks where consumers chose their devices, applications could be developed without negotiating with carriers, etc. -- sort of a network nirvana from a user standpoint. Problem is, the carriers don't want that and there is no new disruptive carrier to push the market in that direction (that dream died with the last 700 MHz auction). They make money off the applications on their networks, they select the devices on their networks (and the contracts you have to sign to use them). All that said, WiMAX as a fixed technology, with some light nomadicity, has a long life. It is an excellent technology for that need, delivering real QoS in multipoint wireless for the first time. Maybe that is all as it should be since WiMAX was first designed as a fixed technology. It was not the goal of WISPs or most operators for WiMAX vendors to try for the mobile path...it was the goal largely of Intel who was looking to create a multibillion dollar market it would control that would displace the legacy telecom vendors or force them to adopt the technology. So it was a case of technology makers trying to invent a market where the customer demand did not natively exist. And powerful forces were aligned against the effort from the start. So it was a longshot from the start and these two factors, in my view, ultimately doomed it as a mobile concept. Patrick Leary Aperto Networks 813.426.4230 mobile -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 6:18 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article I'm still getting my feet wet with the whole 4G thing and found this interesting http://www.maravedis-bwa.com/Issues/5.29/Readmore3.html (Sorry if it's old news to many...) Almost everyone I know is betting (and betting big!) on LTE. The only ones I know holding out on WiMAX 2 are niche markets in the federal space or ISPs in Africa. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
At 7/1/2010 09:17 AM, Rogello wrote: I'm still getting my feet wet with the whole 4G thing and found this interesting http://www.maravedis-bwa.com/Issues/5.29/Readmore3.html (Sorry if it's old news to many...) Almost everyone I know is betting (and betting big!) on LTE. The only ones I know holding out on WiMAX 2 are niche markets in the federal space or ISPs in Africa. It's not a fair comparison. Some people (is this especially an American disease?) treat everything as a one-on-one death match, and in this case act as if there were a WiMAX Corp. duking it out with LTE Corp. for market supremacy. But they're just tools. Monturus' article is quite good. He notes how similar the two are. Both are OFDMA, so they share components. WiMAX the spec defines less. It mainly deals with the radio network, and aims at chip-level compatibility. Its design center is TDD (single frequency); early dual-frequency WiMAX was still TDD, just split-frequency half duplex (how lame!). LTE defines a complete cellular ecosystem, the successor to both GSM and CDMA, and thus defines handsets better. It is primarily aimed at FDD licensees, though TDD is theoretically possible. LTE has smart antennas (beamforming, muxing) in the basic spec, while it's an option in WiMAX. So again WiMAX can aim lower in the price curve, and at unlicensed markets, while LTE is all licensed. I wonder how WiMAX would work on 900 MHz. Beamforming base antennas would be rather large, but I could see a market, especially if it nulled out interference. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
It should be noted that LTE wouldn't be as good or early available without mobile WiMAX. Even if the final outcome is not the network nirvana, it's a lot better than what was planned by the powerful forces. Comparing technology only, I think 802.16e failed to achieve a good PAPR (peak-to-average-power-ratio) on the uplink, something SC-FDMA does very well and is crucial to mobile. I know WiMAX 2 allows SC-FDMA on the uplink, but that may be little late. The increased latency from 16d to 16e bugs me also, while each UMTS release showed lower latency than the previous generations. Rubens On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Patrick Leary ple...@apertonet.com wrote: Depends on the bet you are making. WiMAX as a personal broadband mobility technology in name and ideal is not going to happen. That was made conclusive some time ago. There will be no device ecosystem, etc. However, LTE as a technology is very much WiMAX-like, even using many of the same components. So WiMAX as a TECHNOLOGY very much endurs. But the real and ultimate dream of future WiMAX was not about technology, but rather a mobile environment that was an open networks where consumers chose their devices, applications could be developed without negotiating with carriers, etc. -- sort of a network nirvana from a user standpoint. Problem is, the carriers don't want that and there is no new disruptive carrier to push the market in that direction (that dream died with the last 700 MHz auction). They make money off the applications on their networks, they select the devices on their networks (and the contracts you have to sign to use them). All that said, WiMAX as a fixed technology, with some light nomadicity, has a long life. It is an excellent technology for that need, delivering real QoS in multipoint wireless for the first time. Maybe that is all as it should be since WiMAX was first designed as a fixed technology. It was not the goal of WISPs or most operators for WiMAX vendors to try for the mobile path...it was the goal largely of Intel who was looking to create a multibillion dollar market it would control that would displace the legacy telecom vendors or force them to adopt the technology. So it was a case of technology makers trying to invent a market where the customer demand did not natively exist. And powerful forces were aligned against the effort from the start. So it was a longshot from the start and these two factors, in my view, ultimately doomed it as a mobile concept. Patrick Leary Aperto Networks 813.426.4230 mobile -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 6:18 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article I'm still getting my feet wet with the whole 4G thing and found this interesting http://www.maravedis-bwa.com/Issues/5.29/Readmore3.html (Sorry if it's old news to many...) Almost everyone I know is betting (and betting big!) on LTE. The only ones I know holding out on WiMAX 2 are niche markets in the federal space or ISPs in Africa. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
It would be interesting to see this So far the only folks who have been successful with beamforming products (off the shelf easily available) in the 802.11n have been the Ruckus Wireless Folks. They had been sticking to indoor units because of their business relationships with the Outdoor beam forming folks like Wavion and Gonetworks both of them built nice outdoor units aimed towards Muni Wireless..but only do 802.11a/b/g no N to the best of my knowledge. Ruckus is slowly venturing out into the outdoor radios market place. Meanwhile... Ubiqiti is doing something very interesting... they are coming up with 802.11n based radios with MIMO antennas for 3.65mhz and 900mhz it will be very interesting to see how these perform. The only other folks who claim to be doing some wonderful stuff with 900mhx are the XgTechnology folks... but you decide if they are for real Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom On 7/1/2010 9:57 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: I wonder how WiMAX would work on 900 MHz. Beamforming base antennas would be rather large, but I could see a market, especially if it nulled out interference. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: It's not a fair comparison. Some people (is this especially an American disease?) treat everything as a one-on-one death match, and in this case act as if there were a WiMAX Corp. duking it out with LTE Corp. for market supremacy. But they're just tools. This disease reference from this TED talk? :) http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
At 7/1/2010 10:20 AM, awrote: It would be interesting to see this So far the only folks who have been successful with beamforming products (off the shelf easily available) in the 802.11n have been the Ruckus Wireless Folks. They had been sticking to indoor units because of their business relationships with the Outdoor beam forming folks like Wavion and Gonetworks both of them built nice outdoor units aimed towards Muni Wireless..but only do 802.11a/b/g no N to the best of my knowledge. Ruckus is slowly venturing out into the outdoor radios market place. Their outdoor products look somewhat interesting. They claim 14 dB gain from beamforming which, with their 22 dBm power, puts them right at the legal PtMP limit. (No doubt not a coincidence!) Anybody here played with them? I wonder if the beamforming is smart enough (dynamic) to deal with tropo ducting, especially over water. E.g., the target is at 20 degrees bearing, but an inversion is diverting the signal away, so maybe pointing at 40 degrees will get through better at the moment. BTW their web site is demented! I use NoScript. When I do NOT allow scripts from them, I can see the whole product page, with the specs. When I allow scripts, it essentially puts up a different, much shorter page, the idiotarian version. In Chrome, the same thing happens if you just turn on or off Javascript support. Meanwhile... Ubiqiti is doing something very interesting... they are coming up with 802.11n based radios with MIMO antennas for 3.65mhz and 900mhz it will be very interesting to see how these perform. I wonder if their low-cost hardware will support beamforming, or just muxing (high speed MIMO). Beamforming takes a lot more software. The only other folks who claim to be doing some wonderful stuff with 900mhx are the XgTechnology folks... but you decide if they are for real :-) XG made some Extraordinary Claims in their startup phase. The company's BoD is all financiers, no techies. They have raised a lot of cash and have no products. Hmmm... But their white paper describes something rather more ordinary. It is a 1.3 Mbps carrier in a 1.44 MHz channel. Yawn. The only secret sauce is a better scheduler than WiMAX, if you're mainly interested in CBR channels like phone calls. I had a long talk yesterday with a vendor I won't name... he made extraordinary claims too, but when I put on my hard-core techie act and started throwing stuff back at him, he backed down fast, and his claims became more ordinary, and frankly behind the market. There are companies designed to sell product to users, and companies designed to sell stock to speculators... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom On 7/1/2010 9:57 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: I wonder how WiMAX would work on 900 MHz. Beamforming base antennas would be rather large, but I could see a market, especially if it nulled out interference. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
At 7/1/2010 12:45 PM, Rogello wrote: On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: It's not a fair comparison. Some people (is this especially an American disease?) treat everything as a one-on-one death match, and in this case act as if there were a WiMAX Corp. duking it out with LTE Corp. for market supremacy. But they're just tools. This disease reference from this TED talk? :) http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html I like Haidt's work. But rather than watch a video, I find it easier to read his article: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html But that's not actually my point. The one-on-one thing is more general. Take, for instance, the network neutrality kerfuffle that the FCC is addressing in the current NOI (which I do have to get around to Commenting on). It's widely assumed in the US, especially by the popular press, that all issues have two, and no more than two, sides. Thus all issues can be settled by a bracketed tournament. In this case, there are three very different, distinct sides, not counting the public interest which could be called the fourth, or Big Content which could also be counted as a side. You have the Bells, the cablecos, and the thousands of independent ISPs and other competitors, mostly small businesses. The third category has no visibility on Wall Street, and no big lobbyists, so he's completely dealing them out, hoping to not be noticed, and to please the two legs of the stool that routinely hire investment bankers. And since the press has a two-side narrative to talk about (either Bell vs. cable, or neutrality vs. evil ISPs), again the more complex realities are lost. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
Xg's product is stated to allow small operators to offer a cellular like service, using the 900 spectrum.They say they can deal with crowded spectrum, and it's designed for low density population. What it amounts to is an IP mobile network, using portable VOIP phones. It is interesting, but I have my doubts as to it's viability market-wise. If it were more commodity priced, we (WISP's) might get interested and take it on. I'd LOVE to have my own 900 mhz based voip phone network. The range is considered to be quite large in rural and unobstructed areas, farther than WiMax stuff.Who knows. What I do know, is that Xg started with a bunch of UWB stuff and made a lot of really wild claims, and then suddenly changed direction to this. It SEEMS whole, and it does seem like they've built something serious. I just don't know if it's really a viable operation. ++ Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 ++ -- From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 10:04 AM To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article At 7/1/2010 10:20 AM, awrote: It would be interesting to see this So far the only folks who have been successful with beamforming products (off the shelf easily available) in the 802.11n have been the Ruckus Wireless Folks. They had been sticking to indoor units because of their business relationships with the Outdoor beam forming folks like Wavion and Gonetworks both of them built nice outdoor units aimed towards Muni Wireless..but only do 802.11a/b/g no N to the best of my knowledge. Ruckus is slowly venturing out into the outdoor radios market place. Their outdoor products look somewhat interesting. They claim 14 dB gain from beamforming which, with their 22 dBm power, puts them right at the legal PtMP limit. (No doubt not a coincidence!) Anybody here played with them? I wonder if the beamforming is smart enough (dynamic) to deal with tropo ducting, especially over water. E.g., the target is at 20 degrees bearing, but an inversion is diverting the signal away, so maybe pointing at 40 degrees will get through better at the moment. BTW their web site is demented! I use NoScript. When I do NOT allow scripts from them, I can see the whole product page, with the specs. When I allow scripts, it essentially puts up a different, much shorter page, the idiotarian version. In Chrome, the same thing happens if you just turn on or off Javascript support. Meanwhile... Ubiqiti is doing something very interesting... they are coming up with 802.11n based radios with MIMO antennas for 3.65mhz and 900mhz it will be very interesting to see how these perform. I wonder if their low-cost hardware will support beamforming, or just muxing (high speed MIMO). Beamforming takes a lot more software. The only other folks who claim to be doing some wonderful stuff with 900mhx are the XgTechnology folks... but you decide if they are for real :-) XG made some Extraordinary Claims in their startup phase. The company's BoD is all financiers, no techies. They have raised a lot of cash and have no products. Hmmm... But their white paper describes something rather more ordinary. It is a 1.3 Mbps carrier in a 1.44 MHz channel. Yawn. The only secret sauce is a better scheduler than WiMAX, if you're mainly interested in CBR channels like phone calls. I had a long talk yesterday with a vendor I won't name... he made extraordinary claims too, but when I put on my hard-core techie act and started throwing stuff back at him, he backed down fast, and his claims became more ordinary, and frankly behind the market. There are companies designed to sell product to users, and companies designed to sell stock to speculators... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom On 7/1/2010 9:57 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: I wonder how WiMAX would work on 900 MHz. Beamforming base antennas would be rather large, but I could see a market, especially if it nulled out interference. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
Anybody with a screwdriver and a Motorola PMP320 AP will find a DesignArt 2400 chipset under the hood of a $3500 BaseStation that is 802.16e mobile WiMAX which does 2x2 MIMO. The same chipset also powers a 6x6 MIMO PureWave BTS @ 3.65 GHz. http://www.designartnetworks.com/InfoProducts.asp?PageID=9SubID=21 As can be seen from their 2008 press release, the 2400 chipset was purported as capable of LTE. http://www.designartnetworks.com/News2.asp?ItemID=87subID=14pageID=36 Since, they are now saying that the 2400 is for WiMAX only and the new 3000 chipset, shipping in Q3, 2010, will do WiMAX or LTE. So really, considering the Nokia Siemens FlexiBTS design is reprogrammable as well, touting LTE and WiMAX running simultaneously on the same platform, but having abandoned those claims in the last few months, it shows that there is commonality between both standards from the point of view of software reprogrammability of the hardware. F. On 2010-07-01, at 9:57 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 7/1/2010 09:17 AM, Rogello wrote: I'm still getting my feet wet with the whole 4G thing and found this interesting http://www.maravedis-bwa.com/Issues/5.29/Readmore3.html (Sorry if it's old news to many...) Almost everyone I know is betting (and betting big!) on LTE. The only ones I know holding out on WiMAX 2 are niche markets in the federal space or ISPs in Africa. It's not a fair comparison. Some people (is this especially an American disease?) treat everything as a one-on-one death match, and in this case act as if there were a WiMAX Corp. duking it out with LTE Corp. for market supremacy. But they're just tools. Monturus' article is quite good. He notes how similar the two are. Both are OFDMA, so they share components. WiMAX the spec defines less. It mainly deals with the radio network, and aims at chip-level compatibility. Its design center is TDD (single frequency); early dual-frequency WiMAX was still TDD, just split-frequency half duplex (how lame!). LTE defines a complete cellular ecosystem, the successor to both GSM and CDMA, and thus defines handsets better. It is primarily aimed at FDD licensees, though TDD is theoretically possible. LTE has smart antennas (beamforming, muxing) in the basic spec, while it's an option in WiMAX. So again WiMAX can aim lower in the price curve, and at unlicensed markets, while LTE is all licensed. I wonder how WiMAX would work on 900 MHz. Beamforming base antennas would be rather large, but I could see a market, especially if it nulled out interference. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
Faisal Imtiaz At 7/1/2010 10:20 AM, awrote: It would be interesting to see this So far the only folks who have been successful with beamforming products (off the shelf easily available) in the 802.11n have been the Ruckus Wireless Folks. They had been sticking to indoor units because of their business relationships with the Outdoor beam forming folks like Wavion and Gonetworks both of them built nice outdoor units aimed towards Muni Wireless..but only do 802.11a/b/g no N to the best of my knowledge. Ruckus is slowly venturing out into the outdoor radios market place. Their outdoor products look somewhat interesting. They claim 14 dB gain from beamforming which, with their 22 dBm power, puts them right at the legal PtMP limit. (No doubt not a coincidence!) Anybody here played with them? Their outdoor stuff is new, recently shipping...I have not played with it. I wonder if the beamforming is smart enough (dynamic) to deal with tropo ducting, especially over water. E.g., the target is at 20 degrees bearing, but an inversion is diverting the signal away, so maybe pointing at 40 degrees will get through better at the moment. Since their beam forming is dynamic, I would expect it to work very well in that environment. BTW their web site is demented! I use NoScript. When I do NOT allow scripts from them, I can see the whole product page, with the specs. When I allow scripts, it essentially puts up a different, much shorter page, the idiotarian version. In Chrome, the same thing happens if you just turn on or off Javascript support. You are on your own on this one lodge a complaint with them :) Meanwhile... Ubiqiti is doing something very interesting... they are coming up with 802.11n based radios with MIMO antennas for 3.65mhz and 900mhz it will be very interesting to see how these perform. I wonder if their low-cost hardware will support beamforming, or just muxing (high speed MIMO). Beamforming takes a lot more software. No Beam forming is expected from Ubiquity... just MIMO... The only other folks who claim to be doing some wonderful stuff with 900mhx are the XgTechnology folks... but you decide if they are for real :-) XG made some Extraordinary Claims in their startup phase. The company's BoD is all financiers, no techies. They have raised a lot of cash and have no products. Hmmm... But their white paper describes something rather more ordinary. It is a 1.3 Mbps carrier in a 1.44 MHz channel. Yawn. The only secret sauce is a better scheduler than WiMAX, if you're mainly interested in CBR channels like phone calls. I had a long talk yesterday with a vendor I won't name... he made extraordinary claims too, but when I put on my hard-core techie act and started throwing stuff back at him, he backed down fast, and his claims became more ordinary, and frankly behind the market. There are companies designed to sell product to users, and companies designed to sell stock to speculators... The claim to have FCC Licenses for their base station . The Mumbo Jumbo and the Financial Dance is hard to decipher . Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom On 7/1/2010 9:57 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: I wonder how WiMAX would work on 900 MHz. Beamforming base antennas would be rather large, but I could see a market, especially if it nulled out interference. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] yet another WiMAX vs LTE article
Since their beam forming is dynamic, I would expect it to work very well in that environment. As Ruckus beamforming is based on selecting a receiver instead of combining the signals, it should indeed deal with ducting but not too well with multi-path. No Beam forming is expected from Ubiquity... just MIMO... If Quantenna, Celeno or the other chip makers come up with a cost-effective 802.11n beamforming solution, and they claim they will, may be UBNT rethinks this issue. Rubens WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
