06-10-09 08:51 AM
30 12
tools
  1. trocks797's Avatar
    ok first off I am a HUGE verizon person. i dont work for them but they are the only service I have known to work consistantly across the US when I travel. my buddy has AT&T and when we travel, he has terrible reception when hes not in metropolitan areas. here is my question. I live in Louisville KY. every year when I go to the ky Derby, I have to lend my VZW phone to all my friends with ATT because ATT locks up because of all the usage....obviously ATT cant handle it all. VZW handles it with no problem. even at the 2009 inaugration, vzw reported fewest problems. I know CDMA (vzw) utilizes bandwidth much better than GSM, allowing it to operate much better under stressed situations....

    but now that verizon is going to GSM for 4G, can I expect the same terrible lock-up that gsm has suffered all these years? or will vzw's LTE 4G still hold up like im used to. i have NEVER seen "call failed" on any of my VZW phones like my friends ATT phones, and I am not wanting that. any help? thanks guys
    06-07-09 01:36 AM
  2. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    ok first off I am a HUGE verizon person. i dont work for them but they are the only service I have known to work consistantly across the US when I travel. my buddy has AT&T and when we travel, he has terrible reception when hes not in metropolitan areas. here is my question. I live in Louisville KY. every year when I go to the ky Derby, I have to lend my VZW phone to all my friends with ATT because ATT locks up because of all the usage....obviously ATT cant handle it all. VZW handles it with no problem. even at the 2009 inaugration, vzw reported fewest problems. I know CDMA (vzw) utilizes bandwidth much better than GSM, allowing it to operate much better under stressed situations....

    but now that verizon is going to GSM for 4G, can I expect the same terrible lock-up that gsm has suffered all these years? or will vzw's LTE 4G still hold up like im used to. i have NEVER seen "call failed" on any of my VZW phones like my friends ATT phones, and I am not wanting that. any help? thanks guys
    Not to worry - LTE is not GSM. LTE shares far more with WiMAX & CDMA than it does GSM.

    I know some of the fansites have said it is the next-gen of GSM, but fansites don't always have a grasp of reality.

    GSM is a channeled technology - once the finite number of channels are in use, no more connections can be made. Think of seats on a Ferris wheel. CDMA, WiMAX & LTE are more like a large room. You continue to stuff more & more in & wjen there is no more room, everyone gets smaller & smaller, making some extra room.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-07-09 02:51 AM
  3. just txt and calls mam's Avatar
    verizon will not offer the full gsm service

    lte is similar but with the ability to retain customers to the brand in the way that cdma achieves at the momment
    06-07-09 06:57 AM
  4. Gawain's Avatar
    Not to worry - LTE is not GSM. LTE shares far more with WiMAX & CDMA than it does GSM.

    I know some of the fansites have said it is the next-gen of GSM, but fansites don't always have a grasp of reality.

    GSM is a channeled technology - once the finite number of channels are in use, no more connections can be made. Think of seats on a Ferris wheel. CDMA, WiMAX & LTE are more like a large room. You continue to stuff more & more in & wjen there is no more room, everyone gets smaller & smaller, making some extra room.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I love your knowledge, but LTE is most definitely a "channeled" standard, for the downlink and uplink. The uplink is a single-channel FDMA and the downlink utilizes frequency division multiplexing.

    From there, I turn into an absolute dummy with the technology, but the very standard clearly denotes that there isn't the "spread spectrum" that CDMA is famous for.

    ...doesn't it?

    Or, does the difference with LTE allow for changes in the size for each channel (thus allowing more channels to be "stuffed" in a room)?
    Last edited by Gawain; 06-07-09 at 01:56 PM.
    06-07-09 11:12 AM
  5. sprke81's Avatar
    I wouldn't worry bout VZ not performing well on lte. A top VZ executive made the comment lately that VZ has so much more spectrum then ATT that VZ "floor" would be ATT "ceiling"

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-07-09 04:44 PM
  6. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    I love your knowledge, but LTE is most definitely a "channeled" standard, for the downlink and uplink. The uplink is a single-channel FDMA and the downlink utilizes frequency division multiplexing.

    From there, I turn into an absolute dummy with the technology, but the very standard clearly denotes that there isn't the "spread spectrum" that CDMA is famous for.

    ...doesn't it?

    Or, does the difference with LTE allow for changes in the size for each channel (thus allowing more channels to be "stuffed" in a room)?
    GSM = TDMA or Time Division Multiple Access. A technology which assigns a channel based on usage. Channels are finite in number. GSM/TDMA is not adaptive. Bandwidth is fixed based on use and not dynamically allocated based on need.

    CDMA = Code Division Multiple Access. A technology which uses an adaptive process of dynamic sub-channels, which allows a much wider use of available bandwidth, including division of channels & frequencies based on actual need. CDMA transmissions are routed, encoded & decoded using code, instead of time of use.

    Now for the new stuff.


    LTE uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, which is superior to the orthogonal processing used by its predecessor CDMA. OFDM is a logical progression of CDMA, not GSM. Those who say LTE is GSM do not know what they are talking about.

    OFDM is a key technology enabling non-line of sight wireless services making it possible to extend wireless access systems over wide areas not previously serviceable by wireless. It's a variation of Frequency Division Multiplexing theory where the frequency channels are divisible into multiple smaller sub-channels based on code definition & bandwidth requirements. OFDM closely resembles CDMA in that it is also a spread-spectrum technology. Radio transmission energy is spread over a much wider bandwidth across channels. This makes it more resilient to interference & jamming & far more resistant to cloning. Coupled with the dramatic increase in actual available bandwidth, OFDM acts like a super-CDMA technology.

    Additionally, unlike CDMA, OFDM allows dynamic adaptive assignment of subcarriers to subchannels based on channel conditions which makes it more robust and allowing higher spectral efficiencies than even CDMA. Comparisons between LTE and GSM show the two aren't even in the same area code, much less the same ballpark.

    The technology progression of digital telephony is TDMA, then CDMA, then LTE. GSM is a modification of TDMA, while LTE is an advancement of CDMA. CDMA is so advanced, compared to TDMA, the two can't really be compared. To try would be like comparing a 1969 Chrysler slant-6 with a 2009 BMW twin-turbo 6.

    About the only thing GSM & LTE have in common is they are both radio transmission technologies. Some might bring up SIM cards as a reason LTE is like GSM, but the reality is that CDMA could have used SIMs. All of the radio technologies could use SIMs, but CDMA chose to forego SIMs for cost reasons - it wasn't needed unless an open network structure was desired.

    And the little engine comparo I mentioned with TDMA & CDMA? LTE is like throwing a Formula 1 engine out there against the Chrysler & BMW.

    And for you WiMAX fans out there, with the exception of speed, WiMAX can't even compare with CDMA. Yes, it is faster than CDMA & GSM, but it is a stationary technology patched up to work in a mobile environment. Hard tower handoffs, limited authentication & a reliance on outside resources makes WiMAX problematic & the technology of fools.

    Does this answer your question?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 08:56 AM
  7. Gawain's Avatar
    GSM = TDMA or Time Division Multiple Access. A technology which assigns a channel based on usage. Channels are finite in number. GSM/TDMA is not adaptive. Bandwidth is fixed based on use and not dynamically allocated based on need.

    CDMA = Code Division Multiple Access. A technology which uses an adaptive process of dynamic sub-channels, which allows a much wider use of available bandwidth, including division of channels & frequencies based on actual need. CDMA transmissions are routed, encoded & decoded using code, instead of time of use.

    Now for the new stuff.


    LTE uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, which is superior to the orthogonal processing used by its predecessor CDMA. OFDM is a logical progression of CDMA, not GSM. Those who say LTE is GSM do not know what they are talking about.

    OFDM is a key technology enabling non-line of sight wireless services making it possible to extend wireless access systems over wide areas not previously serviceable by wireless. It's a variation of Frequency Division Multiplexing theory where the frequency channels are divisible into multiple smaller sub-channels based on code definition & bandwidth requirements. OFDM closely resembles CDMA in that it is also a spread-spectrum technology. Radio transmission energy is spread over a much wider bandwidth across channels. This makes it more resilient to interference & jamming & far more resistant to cloning. Coupled with the dramatic increase in actual available bandwidth, OFDM acts like a super-CDMA technology.

    Additionally, unlike CDMA, OFDM allows dynamic adaptive assignment of subcarriers to subchannels based on channel conditions which makes it more robust and allowing higher spectral efficiencies than even CDMA. Comparisons between LTE and GSM show the two aren't even in the same area code, much less the same ballpark.

    The technology progression of digital telephony is TDMA, then CDMA, then LTE. GSM is a modification of TDMA, while LTE is an advancement of CDMA. CDMA is so advanced, compared to TDMA, the two can't really be compared. To try would be like comparing a 1969 Chrysler slant-6 with a 2009 BMW twin-turbo 6.

    About the only thing GSM & LTE have in common is they are both radio transmission technologies. Some might bring up SIM cards as a reason LTE is like GSM, but the reality is that CDMA could have used SIMs. All of the radio technologies could use SIMs, but CDMA chose to forego SIMs for cost reasons - it wasn't needed unless an open network structure was desired.

    And the little engine comparo I mentioned with TDMA & CDMA? LTE is like throwing a Formula 1 engine out there against the Chrysler & BMW.

    And for you WiMAX fans out there, with the exception of speed, WiMAX can't even compare with CDMA. Yes, it is faster than CDMA & GSM, but it is a stationary technology patched up to work in a mobile environment. Hard tower handoffs, limited authentication & a reliance on outside resources makes WiMAX problematic & the technology of fools.

    Does this answer your question?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Good stuff......now you've spawned more questions though...

    I've never considered CDMA an evolution of TDMA. I've not really looked for any real relationship there.

    Back in my "ol' GTE days", this is how it was explained to me (please excuse my quick-home-made graphs):


    One of the Data Engineers at the time described it to me that CDMA used no channeling of spectrum what-so-ever. No multiplexing, no division - all code across the spectrum, the only limitation being how much code could be crammed within the spectrum and the amount of power needed to handle the load (thus shrinkage under loaded conditions)...just stack the load, use all the spectrum, something that TDMA and GSM cannot do.

    TDMA (and thus GSM which used larger channels) would literally run out of room based on how the spectrum was divided and how many time-slots in the sequence were allowed.

    So, with Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, doesn't that describe that the spectrum is divided into channels of some sort (regardless of the algorithms that allow dynamic use of sub-channels etc)?
    06-09-09 09:50 AM
  8. amojeba's Avatar
    TwinsX2Dad - Thank you so much for the thorough explanation. I'm a technology geek myself, and your explanation was the most thorough I've ever seen on the subject, so thanks!

    Quick side-question for you: I know "SIM" cards don't matter in terms of network performance, but is Verizon indeed switching over to a Sim card? Or are they sticking with their existing setup?
    I ask b/c this could unlock the door to a wider selection of phones (I hope)....
    06-09-09 10:48 AM
  9. numus's Avatar
    And for you WiMAX fans out there, with the exception of speed, WiMAX can't even compare with CDMA. Yes, it is faster than CDMA & GSM, but it is a stationary technology patched up to work in a mobile environment. Hard tower handoffs, limited authentication & a reliance on outside resources makes WiMAX problematic & the technology of fools.
    Twin you never address 802.16m which hopefully is what WiMAX will be adopting in the long term (yes i know the standard is still in the works but it should be coming soon), you only address 802.16e ... 802.16m is theoretically suppose to hit 100 Mbit/s for mobile device.. and hopefully it hits upwards of 1 Gbit/s fixed (so i can finally ditch comcast) ... any thoughts? you should know how IEEE works..

    TwinsX2Dad - Thank you so much for the thorough explanation. I'm a technology geek myself, and your explanation was the most thorough I've ever seen on the subject, so thanks!

    Quick side-question for you: I know "SIM" cards don't matter in terms of network performance, but is Verizon indeed switching over to a Sim card? Or are they sticking with their existing setup?
    I ask b/c this could unlock the door to a wider selection of phones (I hope)....
    Can't speak for Twin.. but the simple answer is no...
    Verizon will still be using 1xRTT for voice coverage (CDMA)... LTE is only planned for data currently (same as WiMAX).. and no real reason to shy away from 1xRTT since it is very well developed and blanketed in the United State and very reliable...
    Last edited by numus; 06-09-09 at 11:12 AM.
    06-09-09 11:04 AM
  10. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    I've never considered CDMA an evolution of TDMA. I've not really looked for any real relationship there.
    Very true - I really meant CDMA was an evolution of mobile telephony, not of TDMA. An oversimplification is that CDMA uses subchannel encoding, while TDMA uses time of connection encoding in its channel selection.

    As for the rest of your comments, those are very valid & easy to see. What is more difficult to understand & explain is that CDMA is channeled, too. All radio frequency transmissions are. The difference is whether your transmissions can overlap those channels.

    GSM cannot dynamically overlap or adjust. As you know, a fixed channel is opened. Whether the user needs a torrent or a trickle, the same space & resources are allocated.

    CDMA can adapt dynamically by ignoring channels, using uncontrolled subchannels. But this can create come issues with stationary applications. Your home computer or video service can benefit by using some static channel resources. With sub-carrier technology, LTE adapts further. It can act fully channeled, partially channeled or non-channeled, depending on need - and can do so on the fly. Using subcarriers can further optimize the service based on need or application.

    I think the biggest difference is in the area of utilization. CDMA did not truly recognize the channels, while LTE will be able to in some situations, as needed.

    And as mentioned above, VZW will maintain 1xRTT for voice. LTE will be primarily data-oriented, but can backup the voice side, if needed. The transition is supposed to be seamless and again based on network needs. Voice does not require anything more than 1xRTT, which is well established.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 12:38 PM
  11. numus's Avatar
    Twin.. i believe sprint and verizon will be continuing to transmit 1xRTT, EVDO, and LTE (V)/WiMAX(S) for a period of time even after the transition...
    I haven't really heard of either of them cutting EVDO transmission for atleast a year or so, due to the fact some people might not be eligable to upgrade to a 4g phone... That would be crappy if either decided to cut EVDO transmission while some people still use it and force everyone to buy a new phone..
    06-09-09 12:43 PM
  12. amojeba's Avatar
    Thanks for the clarification. I look forward to LTE data speeds
    06-09-09 12:44 PM
  13. roos85's Avatar
    Verizon will never go to GSM solely. They might make it where you can use both but they will never give up CDMA, that would be foolish

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 01:01 PM
  14. patches152's Avatar
    roos, have you read anything in this thread? they're gonna ditch CDMA eventually too...LTE will host voice AND data service on one technology. there will be an overlap, but after they do the full LTE data rollout, they'll start to integrate voice services into the exiting infrastructure for LTE.


    and LTE is NOT GSM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!
    06-09-09 01:28 PM
  15. numus's Avatar
    roos, have you read anything in this thread? they're gonna ditch CDMA eventually too...LTE will host voice AND data service on one technology. there will be an overlap, but after they do the full LTE data rollout, they'll start to integrate voice services into the exiting infrastructure for LTE.


    and LTE is NOT GSM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!
    Who has said that LTE is going to host voice? I am pretty sure the current word is 1xRTT is going to remain voice even with the rollout of LTE...
    06-09-09 01:30 PM
  16. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    Quick side-question for you: I know "SIM" cards don't matter in terms of network performance, but is Verizon indeed switching over to a Sim card? Or are they sticking with their existing setup?
    I ask b/c this could unlock the door to a wider selection of phones (I hope)....
    While SIMs are not needed with LTE, VZW has said they will use them with LTE devices. As noted, they do make it easier to "run what you brung" on the network - since VZW has committed to an open network, this will make it easier to pick up unlocked devices.

    As for the WiMAX question, the biggest difference in protocols is speed. WiMAX is still basically a technology rooted in stationary applications. LTE will do the same thing, and will eventually provide stationary service (bye-bye CATV), as well as mobile - and preliminary tests show it to be not only faster, but VZW's available bandwidth spectrum should offer load speeds that are far greater than WiMAX or AT&T LTE will reach.

    Picture this - one account - mobile service, computer broadband, video & on-demand services - watch your TiVO recordings while out of town, except instead of the 60inch panel at home, it is on your four-inch phone screen. Forgot to program something at home? Do it from your laptop, from a thousand miles away. It is coming - the question is, when.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 01:59 PM
  17. patches152's Avatar
    i can't wait to build my own phone on a breadbox
    06-09-09 02:05 PM
  18. sprke81's Avatar
    I thought the word was VZ was going to offer SIM cards but they would only work in VZ approved devices

    I hope I'm wrong.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 02:10 PM
  19. numus's Avatar
    While SIMs are not needed with LTE, VZW has said they will use them with LTE devices. As noted, they do make it easier to "run what you brung" on the network - since VZW has committed to an open network, this will make it easier to pick up unlocked devices.

    As for the WiMAX question, the biggest difference in protocols is speed. WiMAX is still basically a technology rooted in stationary applications. LTE will do the same thing, and will eventually provide stationary service (bye-bye CATV), as well as mobile - and preliminary tests show it to be not only faster, but VZW's available bandwidth spectrum should offer load speeds that are far greater than WiMAX or AT&T LTE will reach.

    Picture this - one account - mobile service, computer broadband, video & on-demand services - watch your TiVO recordings while out of town, except instead of the 60inch panel at home, it is on your four-inch phone screen. Forgot to program something at home? Do it from your laptop, from a thousand miles away. It is coming - the question is, when.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    You missed the question... All that information is based on 802.16e which is currently what is being implemented by Clearwire and Sprint as "WiMAX" but there are suppose to upgrade to the new 802.16m once the protocol is approved... All current tests and benchmarks on WiMAX are done under the 802.16e which is ment for stationary use(ok that is 802.16d but they are similar)... 802.16m is suppose to be around 100 MB/s once the protocol is finished by IEEE but it hasen't even been completed yet... When 802.16m comes out, what difference between WiMAX and LTE will there really be in the end... Thats what the original question was about
    06-09-09 02:14 PM
  20. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    Twin.. i believe sprint and verizon will be continuing to transmit 1xRTT, EVDO, and LTE (V)/WiMAX(S) for a period of time even after the transition...
    I haven't really heard of either of them cutting EVDO transmission for atleast a year or so, due to the fact some people might not be eligable to upgrade to a 4g phone....
    EVDO will be around until 2014 at the earliest. 1xRTT will be around at least for the next dozen or more years. No worry about being obsoleted yet.
    Verizon will never go to GSM solely. They might make it where you can use both but they will never give up CDMA, that would be foolish
    Holy Moses - I think I mentioned those who mistakenly think LTE is GSM in a post above. Please reread the info provided, as LTE is NOT and NEVER will be GSM.

    VZW will never go to GSM at all. Not partially, not solely, but never.

    Even AT&T's roadmap has them abandoning GSM. It is an ancient technology which reached its service limits years ago due to being supported primarily by two non-VZW North American carriers with no track record of seeing the technology to its maturity.
    LTE uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, which is superior to the orthogonal processing used by its predecessor CDMA. OFDM is a logical progression of CDMA, not GSM. Those who say LTE is GSM do not know what they are talking about.
    See? I knew I mentioned it.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 02:33 PM
  21. patches152's Avatar
    Who has said that LTE is going to host voice? I am pretty sure the current word is 1xRTT is going to remain voice even with the rollout of LTE...
    long term plan is to integrate voice services into LTE...less back end network equipment required. thats what i've heard from my VZW buddies who are in charge of testing and stuff...but this is a long ways away from being reality and stuff might change between now and then.
    06-09-09 02:35 PM
  22. numus's Avatar
    long term plan is to integrate voice services into LTE...less back end network equipment required. thats what i've heard from my VZW buddies who are in charge of testing and stuff...but this is a long ways away from being reality and stuff might change between now and then.
    Single signal coverage would be a horrible idea... would be a fortune to redo the infrastructure to blanket all the places that atleast have a 1xRTT signal... plus would have no redundency... 1xRTT is amazing for voice. Also equipment costs would raise on low end phones since they would need to incorporate LTE antennas.
    06-09-09 02:51 PM
  23. patches152's Avatar
    i don't disagree with you. i'm just doing the "my friend at VZW told me..." thing. i personally like the concept of the 1X housing all voice. emergency services rely on "our" network and the emergency planning and preparedness that VZW hosts is amazing. coming from someone who has experience helping wite preparedness documents for U.S.A.R. it's pretty important. i know many urban interface fire departments have ditched the radios and gone to the cell phones during a state of emergency. the radio channels get filled up super quick, and VZW will bring out COWs and COLTs to support the fire supression efforts.

    all good.
    06-09-09 03:06 PM
  24. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    i can't wait to build my own phone on a breadbox
    Oh come on - get ambitious. Build it on a matchbox!

    You missed the question... All that information is based on 802.16e which is currently what is being implemented by Clearwire and Sprint as "WiMAX" but there are suppose to upgrade to the new 802.16m once the protocol is approved... All current tests and benchmarks on WiMAX are done under the 802.16e which is ment for stationary use(ok that is 802.16d but they are similar)... 802.16m is suppose to be around 100 MB/s once the protocol is finished by IEEE but it hasen't even been completed yet... When 802.16m comes out, what difference between WiMAX and LTE will there really be in the end... Thats what the original question was about
    I didn't miss it - the standard isn't yet ratified & it still doesn't change the root architecture of the technology. Everything most of us may know about upcoming standards may bear little resemblance to what is actually ratified. We also don't know if it will be adopted by WiMAX carriers, much less be available in a certain neck of the woods.

    WiMAX is best suited to stationary applications - if all you want it for is your home or office & you have good coverage @ a good pricepoint, it will be good. Still, the letter changes deal mostly with speed increases & feature compatibility.


    But I doubt the laboratory derived speed goals for it - insiders put 'm' at real-world speeds of somewhere closer to 15-20mbps, nowhere close to the hype. This is still better than the 2-4 we are seeing currently and better than most of the CATV/DSL options, but below the best fiber optic solutions. Come to think of it, 'e' was dubbed the "mobile WiMAX - but the technology is still problematic with mobile applications. While 'e' made tower handoffs better, WiMAX still suffers from extremely hard handoffs - it makes GSM handoffs look tame, by comparison. WiMAX can be thought of as WiFi on steroids. With WiFi, each new connection requires authentication & login - a process simplified with newer standards (such as 'e' & 'm'), but not eliminated.

    Don't forget that as with WiMAX, as well as CDMA & GSM before it, LTE will see revisions & improvements. What was once dubbed "Advanced LTE" now appears to be coming with the first LTE rollouts & newer "Advanced" standards are already being designed.

    In the end, it will be primarily what works better for each user, based on needs & price. Sprint/Clearwire are still fiddling with pricing and rumors are that to recover infrastructure costs, price will go up - comparisons with your CATV pricing history may be appropriate. While the same thing might be said for LTE, thus far it is proving to be less expensive than CDMA or GSM upgrades. Unlike WiMAX, LTE will be replacing existing infrastructure & uses existing tower facilities. WiMAX, on the other hand, is often requiring new locations - as such, even if all else remains equal, costs will rise. Sprint/Clearwire isn't in as good a position to amortize/depreciate the investment costs of their new technology as are VZW & AT&T.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    06-09-09 03:39 PM
  25. numus's Avatar
    Oh come on - get ambitious. Build it on a matchbox!



    I didn't miss it - the standard isn't yet ratified & it still doesn't change the root architecture of the technology. Everything most of us may know about upcoming standards may bear little resemblance to what is actually ratified. We also don't know if it will be adopted by WiMAX carriers, much less be available in a certain neck of the woods.

    WiMAX is best suited to stationary applications - if all you want it for is your home or office & you have good coverage @ a good pricepoint, it will be good. Still, the letter changes deal mostly with speed increases & feature compatibility.


    But I doubt the laboratory derived speed goals for it - insiders put 'm' at real-world speeds of somewhere closer to 15-20mbps, nowhere close to the hype. This is still better than the 2-4 we are seeing currently and better than most of the CATV/DSL options, but below the best fiber optic solutions. Come to think of it, 'e' was dubbed the "mobile WiMAX - but the technology is still problematic with mobile applications. While 'e' made tower handoffs better, WiMAX still suffers from extremely hard handoffs - it makes GSM handoffs look tame, by comparison. WiMAX can be thought of as WiFi on steroids. With WiFi, each new connection requires authentication & login - a process simplified with newer standards (such as 'e' & 'm'), but not eliminated.

    Don't forget that as with WiMAX, as well as CDMA & GSM before it, LTE will see revisions & improvements. What was once dubbed "Advanced LTE" now appears to be coming with the first LTE rollouts & newer "Advanced" standards are already being designed.

    In the end, it will be primarily what works better for each user, based on needs & price. Sprint/Clearwire are still fiddling with pricing and rumors are that to recover infrastructure costs, price will go up - comparisons with your CATV pricing history may be appropriate. While the same thing might be said for LTE, thus far it is proving to be less expensive than CDMA or GSM upgrades. Unlike WiMAX, LTE will be replacing existing infrastructure & uses existing tower facilities. WiMAX, on the other hand, is often requiring new locations - as such, even if all else remains equal, costs will rise. Sprint/Clearwire isn't in as good a position to amortize/depreciate the investment costs of their new technology as are VZW & AT&T.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Old statement holds true...
    Only time will tell..
    You are right, the new protocol has yet to be ratified.. the only advantage to WiMAX is MIMO...
    06-09-09 04:16 PM
30 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD