UMTS TDD versus WiMAX

[dorris]

This was a great read, just when you thought things could not get any worse in South Africa, according to this article published by axcera, WiMax promises to bring a bigger failure to SA than IPWIRELESS did.

TK, its going to be hard to beat Sentech, but lets see how low you can go next year!

There has been an enormous amount of market hype recently around the proposed 802.16 standard, commonly known
as WiMAX. Beyond the hype, however, another standard has quietly emerged as the <b><i>leading standard in the global
next-generation broadband wireless market.</b></i> This standard is UMTS TDD, also known as TD-CDMA. UMTS TDD
actually already delivers—today—the vision that WiMAX proponents such as Intel are promising for the future.

LEADING STANDARD??? WTF????

no, really, it was quite interesting, even though its a shameless plug from an IPWIRELESS partner, it is good at pointing out the expected flaws we could be seeing in WiMax in the VERY NEAR FUTURE, hopwfully axcera is wrong, the last thing the South African consumer needs, is more paperweights!

Despite all the hype over WiMax, I have to wonder if it deserves the hype, or if it is the resultant of it being an INTEL product.

To see the article, check http://axity3g.axcera.com/umts_vs_wimax.pdf

FOr some more good laughs, check http://www.ipwireless.com/products/nm_software.html -- Thats a link to IPWireless Network management software, this is probably what Sentech once relied upon to manage their bandwidth!!

 

[Perdition]

I wouldn't read too much into this document. WiMAX hasn't been finalised yet so this is basically just hype from the other side of the fence. Even if WiMAX does not perform as well as UMTS TDD it will certainly be better than what we have at the moment.

 

[noswal]

For stupid people like me who dont know what UMTS TDD means google took me to a site http://www.umtstdd.org/ which seems to say the same thing, but now I've found out what UMTS TDD means it makes more sense: Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System - Time-Division-Duplexing

thanks to http://www.acronymfinder.com


_________________________________________________________________________
custenna, variable 8 - 13 signal, ber 28% - 42%.<i> "I am the only one with this problem." </i>

 

[dorris]

For those that aren't aware, the reason I found this so controversial, is that UMTS-TDD (Time-Division-Duplexing) is the architecture IpWireless implement, IpWireless creates the modems for MyWireless.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Even if WiMAX does not perform as well as UMTS TDD it will certainly be better than what we have at the moment.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> At the moment , we have UMTS-TDD in the form of MyWireless.

Keep in mind that the article is a head to head comparison, by an IPWireless partner, so obviously its geared at pointing out flaws in WiMax, and UMTS-TDD's strengths.

 

[dorris]

This sparked off a bit of interest in the technology's for me, and a bit of googling, led me to the conclusion that in fact, wiMax is not nearly all its cracked up to be, In the future it plans to be very viable, but is not there yet, according to PCCW, an IPWireless implementation in the UK, they are still sticking with TDD technology, because currently, it IS better than WiMax standards, but on the release of 802.16e, they will move over to it!
see http://www.techdirt.com/news/wireless/article/4489

What I want to know, is what this is all about, according to http://www.umtstdd.org/technology.html <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Mobility:
UMTS TDD subscribers can stay connected while traveling in excess of 120 km/hr, so long as they remain within the network footprint. Tower-to-tower handoff, and network-to-network roaming are supported.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

SO WHY DOESN't IPWIRELESS SUPPORT THIS, or why does the Sentech network not handle it correctly??

 

[arf9999]

I notice that there is no reference to 802.20 in the article (iBurst are using this, right?)

Probably the points mentioned in the article are correct (if you ignore the poetic license about "successful implementation", but I don't think that anyone should underestimate the power of Intel. Yes, notebook manufacturers will not be so happy to include the functionality of 802.16 at first. But that just assumes that Intel gives them a choice. Chances are that Intel will include it in the CPU architecture, and you'll have to buy it whether you want/need it or not. Centrino anyone?

-A

edit: fixed spelling

 

[dbnnet]

My vote goes with arf9999 here
Intel have already declared their intension to integrate 802.16 into their future products, so watch this space.
(Intel is simply too big and powerful to fail).
Also… don’t forget that 802.16 is fast becoming “the” standard in Silicon Valley.
(They always tend to lead ... and the rest of the world follows!!)

As for 802.20, it’s only real support has been in high speed commuter transportation systems.
(It knocks the **** out of all the other technologies when used at high speed)
Some of these installations are however currently even being replaced, which would explain how iBurst SA
managed to purchase their node equipment second-hand.

As for 3G... it's strong-hold appears to be in Europe, and it's too
early to determine if they will continue along this path.
(The Intel factor is probably going to be the major decider though!!!)

<font size="1"><font color="black">Bay of Plenty :</font id="black"><font color="blue"> Signal 48% - SNL 17 - ber 71% :</font id="blue"><font color="green"> D-Link DI-604 - PPPoE :</font id="green"><font color="orange"> 8dBi Patch Antenna :</font id="orange"> Firmware 5.0.1.60</font id="size1">

 

[Jerrek]

UMTS is a bad idea, and was a bad idea from the start. IPWireless should have gone with the more mature and advanced CDMA EV-DV. Or even, flash OFDM which is what Nextel is doing in the United States. It gives what no other 3G service can't give: low latency, as low as 25ms.

WiMAX looks promising. But I want to wait and see where it goes. I just wonder what cell phone companies will do when people start bringing out VoIP cellphones that run on WiMAX networks. It will completely kill GSM, UMTS, CDMA, and the rest.

 

[Perdition]

I think that is exactly why Telkom is so interested in WiMAX.

 

[bdt]

A vendor-agnostic reality check re WiMAX, from http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20041012-4301.html

WiMAX panned as mere hype?

10/12/2004 4:48:12 PM, by Ken "Caesar" Fisher


Based on the IEEE 802.16 wireless broadband standard, WiMAX has been touted as a high-speed, wireless broadband solution for both rural and urban markets. Trial deployments are supposedly slated to begin [http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20040907-4160.html] sometime in 2005, provided the 700MHz spectrum WiMAX plans to use is "cleaned up" and made available by the FCC. The proposed specs for 802.16e are impressive: speeds of up to 70Mbps over a range of up to 30 miles.

But analysts are calling Intel's WiMAX push hype[http://tinyurl.com/3vg88], pointing their fingers at Intel's PR machine, joining the voices of many of our own readers who have been vocal about Intel's presentation of the technology. Intel has aggressively beat the WiMAX drum, arguing that the wireless spec will lead to networking capabilities that will make the likes of DSL and today's broadband obsolete. Originally pitched as a "last mile" solution for hard-to-reach places, the proposed speed prospects led many to fantasize about urban areas drenched in high-speed wireless in only a matter of couple of years.

iSuppli Corporation has issued a report saying that, despite what Intel would have us believe, WiMAX adoption will be very slow in the US, as providers see little reason to invest in it. Once the 70Mbps accounts for transmission errors and other threats to throughput, the question is how much does it really offer existing solutions? Will there even be enough manufacturers to make a dent?

"These applications will not be large enough to sustain the multitude of silicon suppliers and equipment manufacturers who have expressed interest in developing products for WiMAX," iSuppli said. "The hype surrounding WiMAX ... as a fixed wireless access technology will remain just that -- hype."

ABI Research this week also poured water on the flames, saying that the notion that WiMAX will replace WiFi is misguided in the short term. While Intel plans to build WiMAX support into their some of their chipsets by 2006, it will likely be years until WiFi is actually challenged. Indeed, many have said all along that even if WiMAX were adopted, it would be very unlikely that it would connect clients to the 'net. Instead, some envision situations where WiMAX delivers connectivity to the home, where it will then be dispersed either by Ethernet, phone lines, or WiFi. In the end, connecting many users to WiMAX will reduce the throughput, and make it a solution only ideal for high-speed LANs or rural locations where DSL and cable currently can't travel. And while WiMAX is still largely theory, the telco companies are rushing to roll out fiber-to-the-premises [http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20040719-4007.html].

Personally I don't see this tech as becoming any kind of major force in ZA, not with Telkom at the helm!