Well depends what you are looking to solve. WiMax is not only about coverage and range.
The relevent question is not to compare 802.16d to 802.11. Its well known the benefits of a TDD based system over a contension based system like 802.11 with side effects of latency and lower throughput per bit, and hidden node type problems. The relvent question is why would someone choce Wimax 802.16d over pre-existing non-WiMax TDD gear. The first answer is "they don't". Standardization, 802.16d's big promise, isn't really standard between vendors, and not something that Providers really care about. All they care about is getting the best performance for the lowest price. One o the reasons that Wimaxd has not had skyrocketed success as many thought it would. 802.16e on the other hand had a whole different market. It attracted the interest of Telecom mobile carriers, to compliment their business models. Ironcially, WiMax 802.16e is becoming more of a commodity low cost best effort option for consumers, compared to the original promise that WiMax will be the next "better more powerful solution". Right, its the Clearwire/Sprint type providers marketing to the self install, low $25 cost, home user best effort, underserved tier2 markets. Where as its the 802.16d fixed models that typically are engineered installs, for optimal performance and reliabilty. WiMax 802.16d is generally showing to be more cost effective, (since they are the underdog less feature rich technology to 802.16e). So what I'm saying is the difference between 802.16e and 16d is not the technology, it is the providers that chose to deploy it. 802.16d is more reliable because, WISP chose to deploy it, who are focused on engineering each link., and whom are OK with a "Fixed" model. 802.16d offers some benefits... that is compiling all the most recent technology features into a single platform. For example now, non wi-max gear... Caonopy has one feature, trango has another, Alvarion another. The goal is the best of all features get combined into the Wimax 802.16d feature set. The question that comes up is.... Did the 802.16d vendors successfully accomplish that goal? And is the price point good enough, to entice Service providers to buy into it, and pay more? I think sometimes the success of a technology is not always a conscious choice from the buyer. WISPs didn;t rush out to replace their existing TDD networks with WimAx before, and they don;t do it now either. But, when they are buyign new gear for new fresh free spectrum, WiMax good is as good as any other if that is what is available. In 3650 WiMax gear was often chosen simply because the WiMax gear was available. The WiMax vendors were at the front door to certify their 3650 Wimax product. And therefore WISPs were eager to immediately buy it to deploy their new networks. What WISPs need is spectrum. Spectrum is more precious than any technology features. People didn;t chose WiMax, they chose 3650, and WiMax jsut came along with the package. Sure WiMax Providers will contest that, to try to elevate their own network, piggy backing on the WiMax marketing hype bandwagon. But I pose the question... If 802.11 3650 gear was available first, what would WISPs be using most today in 3650? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Baird" <m...@tc3net.com> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 6:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wimax 802.16d v 802.16e > Have you deployed it? From my initial research, it appears that the > bigger vendors Motorola/Alverion are supporting the 802.16e variety, > while the smaller vendors such as Tranzeo are supporting the 802.16d > variety. I'm aware of the advantages at the Mac Layer, but why would > 802.16d at 3.65 with a slightly higher EIRP at 7 mhz channel spacing > have better range then 802.11 variants at 2.4? > > The 802.16d unit specs I've looked at don't appear to scale much higher > then the 2.4 units, but 802.16e appears to have the 2x2, 4x4 antenna > tech that it seems would make a big difference at range. What's the > magic that makes 802.16d work better then 802.11 variants as far as > coverage, with essentially the same power but at a higher frequency? > > Regards > Michael Baird >> Here is the quick answer: >> 802.16d is a fixed only technology (no mobility) which performs quite >> well for delivering broadband to homes and businesses. Highly >> available. Secure. More expensive, more scalable and somewhat higher >> latency than similar fixed technologies based on 802.11 and other >> proprietary systems similar to 802.11. Most prominently used in 3.65 >> GHz in the US. Heavily used in 3.5 GHz in international areas where >> no copper plant has been installed previously. Unique feature of this >> technology is the ability to provision service flows with predictable >> performance criteria. This enables SLA provisioning on wireless >> broadband virtual circuits and many other advantages over any other >> broadband platform (wireless or wired). >> >> 802.16e is a fixed and mobile platform. This is being used now in 2.5 >> GHz licensed band in the US and elsewhere. Very little has been done >> to take full advantage of mobility in this band. More expensive to >> deploy than 802.16d. Higher latency than 802.16d. This is a direct >> competitor to LTE systems for cellular. If you do not hold an >> exclusive licensee in 2.5 GHz then this is not likely an option for >> you at this time. >> >> For more input and more help take it to the memb...@wispa.org list for >> paid members and we can dig into it deeper including step by step >> instructions for getting your own 3.65 license and applying for >> locations. >> Scriv >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Michael Baird <m...@tc3net.com> wrote: >> >>> I'm researching these two technologies and Wimax in general, does anyone >>> have any firsthand experience with the two current different types of >>> Wimax, or references to the differences in the two different types of >>> technologies for broadband fixed rural deployments? >>> >>> Regards >>> Michael Baird >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
