Wireless Broadband At 170MbpsNew LTE tests in Germany show technology's promise.... 01:49PM Friday Sep 19 2008 by Karl Bodetags: business · wireless · bandwidth · networkingTechnically, there's three front-runners for the fourth-generation wireless broadband crown: 3GPP LTE (Long Term Evolution), mobile WiMax and 3GPP2 UMB (Ultra Mobile Broadband). All three standards will offer low latency and theoretical max speeds that will eventually make current EVDO and HSDPA services seem anemic. Sprint, of course, is hitching their wagon to Mobile WiMax. Much of Mobile WiMax's success hinges on Sprint's Xohm launch, expected within weeks. Meanwhile, both AT&T and Verizon have stated they'll be migrating to LTE. Given the size and wealth of those two carriers, their decision effectively means LTE is, barring catastrophe, going to dominate the next-gen wireless broadband field in the United States. That makes tests this week in Germany conducted by T-Mobile and Nortel Networks all the more interesting. The companies have just completed a test in Bonn where they obtained downstream LTE data rates of 170Mbps and upstream speeds of 50Mbps in a car moving 67kph (41mph). Granted this was a controlled experiment in close range to three towers, but it does highlight LTE's promise. Now all you'll have to do is wait. AT&T and Verizon both started tinkering with the technology this year, but serious deployment isn't expected until 2010 or later. AT&T's in no particular rush: they say they already have 7.2Mbps working in their labs, has said they want to transition to HSPA release 7 sometime in 2009, offering 20Mbps in the process. Motorola announced earlier this month that they've started U.S. tests on the Verizon network. Related:- Mogul First Sprint Phone To Get EVDO Rev. A
- Bell Labs Looks Inside Wireless Networks
- Siemens Speeds Up EDGE Networks
- AT&T: 20Mbps Wireless By 2009
- Microwave: Sprint's Weak (Backhaul) Link
- Comcast To Deploy Femtocells
- How To Tether The 3G iPhone
- XOHM: P2P May Be Throttled
|
 expert007
join:2006-01-10 Buffalo, NY | Yeah But..... 170Mbps in metric is only like 768Kbps in Uhmerican.  | |
|  |   meh37
@verizon.net | Re: Yeah But..... Actually, both 170 mbps and 768 kbps are decimal (same as metric).  | |
|  |  |   phoneboy3
@shawcable.net | Re: Yeah But..... Ummmm, well no your both wrong. It's in binary aka bits per second. | |
|  |  |  |   freeze Magic Murder Bag Premium join:2001-05-13 Columbus, OH | Re: Yeah But..... Looks like two people missed the sarcasm. | |
|  |  |  |  |   meh37
@verizon.net | Re: Yeah But..... I didn't actually "miss" it (Uh). (I'm just a nit-picker for accuracy. ) | |
|  |  |  |   meh37
@verizon.net
| No, the whole point is that it's not binary. Data comm speeds are never measured in binary but always in decimal--bits are simply counted using standard base10. They are represented in decimal or metric; "k" in "kpbs" represents 1,000 and not 1024. Raw speed includes both data and overhead, so "storage" equivalence (binary) has no significance. | |
|  |  |  |  |   meh37
@verizon.net | Re: Yeah But..... Typo: "kpbs" should be "kbps" (see... nit-picker ) | |
|  |  |  Nuts
join:2006-04-27 Forest, OH | Re: Sounds like its gona be great, But is there a catch? The most speed they'll give you is going to be 10mb down and 768kb up. Caps will be 5GB/month. | |
|  |  |  EPS
join:2008-02-13 Hingham, MA
| Re: Sounds like its gona be great, But is there a catch? Makes sense to limit the speed to allow more capacity on the network- imagine if all cable companies offered only 38mbps tiers, the DOCSIS capacity crunch would be that much worse.
Actually, I wonder if there will be speed tiers now? In the past wireless broadband has tended to be bought on the principle of "you get whatever speed you get". | |
|   ninjatutle You can keep the "change"
join:2006-01-02 San Ramon, CA | Don't care what standards they use, just bring it! I'm not too picky  | |
|  xenophon
join:2007-09-17
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
edit: September 19th, @02:49PM
| Backhaul and spectrum Providing enough backhaul to every site will be a major challenge for all 4G carriers. Then there is the spectrum issue. ATT and Verizon may only have 25Mhz per market while Sprint/Clearwire combined will have well over 100Mhz per market.
And, WiMAX 802.16m is expected before LTE is widely available. 16m is spec'd to up to 1Gpbs fixed and 200Mbps mobile. While Sprint will have enough spectrum to do it, backhaul will still be the challenge. | |
|  |   MarkyD Premium join:2002-08-20 Oklahoma City, OK clubs: | Re: Backhaul and spectrum that's just it. Backhaul should NOT be a huge issue for the LTE guys. They have a couple years to get the circuits in place. That's plenty of time to equip all the cell sites in most large metros with fiber backhauls to handle the speed. | |
|  |  |  SierraRob
join:2007-01-10 Prather, CA
| Re: Backhaul and spectrum "in most large metros..."
Yeah, because that is where next-generation wireless is so badly needed: in major metro areas, as there is certainly no other way for those poor city-dwellers to connect to the Internet. While us in rural areas have so many options: dialup, satellite, dialup, satellite, dialup, satellite...
SIGH | |
|  |  |  |  Mattie_B
join:2008-05-16
| Re: Backhaul and spectrum said by SierraRob :"in most large metros..." Yeah, because that is where next-generation wireless is so badly needed: in major metro areas, as there is certainly no other way for those poor city-dwellers to connect to the Internet. While us in rural areas have so many options: dialup, satellite, dialup, satellite, dialup, satellite... SIGH Amen! Its great to see tech like this but you know they will start it in big city's. It seems that's what company's care about. Getting big city's faster and faster speeds and wonder why they are not signing up new customers. There just passing there customers back and forth on whoever has the better speeds.
Why not bring this tech into rural areas first. That will be a real test on how well it works. As well as gaining lots of new customers that have not been able to get anything else. | |
|  |  |  |  |   meh37
@verizon.net | Re: Backhaul and spectrum Higher population density => higher ROI => more $$$.
Until they see the profit in doing it, they'll be in no hurry to deploy outside large population areas. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  Mattie_B
join:2008-05-16
| Re: Backhaul and spectrum said by meh37 :
Higher population density => higher ROI => more $$$.
Until they see the profit in doing it, they'll be in no hurry to deploy outside large population areas. If you fish in the same pond with everyone else eventually there will be no more fish to catch. At some point these ISP's need to start fishing in the streams that feed the ponds. | |
|  |  |  |  |   MarkyD Premium join:2002-08-20 Oklahoma City, OK clubs:
·Cox HSI
·AT&T FTTP
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by Mattie_B :said by SierraRob :"in most large metros..." Yeah, because that is where next-generation wireless is so badly needed: in major metro areas, as there is certainly no other way for those poor city-dwellers to connect to the Internet. While us in rural areas have so many options: dialup, satellite, dialup, satellite, dialup, satellite... SIGH Amen! Its great to see tech like this but you know they will start it in big city's. It seems that's what company's care about. Getting big city's faster and faster speeds and wonder why they are not signing up new customers. There just passing there customers back and forth on whoever has the better speeds. Why not bring this tech into rural areas first. That will be a real test on how well it works. As well as gaining lots of new customers that have not been able to get anything else. While I feel your pain, do you have any idea how much it costs to provide high bandwidth backhaul to towers in the middle of nowhere? It's business 101...ROI is just not there. I know if I were a major wireless carrier/ISP, I'd naturally start with the larger, more dense areas, and work my way to the rural areas. It's just common sense. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |   waldojim
@alltel.com
| Re: Backhaul and spectrum that is true... BUT the tech never seems to get there while its useful. I finally got fair evdo at my house, good for 150KBps down. That sounds good until you consider that an update for Vista can still take an hour, or my update for World of Warcraft that still takes the better part of a day.
They never have cared if the rural market gets anything. They keep giving the Metro guys bigger, better, faster... and we get... leftovers. | |
|  |  |  BF69
join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN | So fricking what As long as the wireless companies continue to have 5 GB caps what good is it to have that much speed? So you can reach your monthly cap in literally 4 minutes? | |
|  |  SierraRob
join:2007-01-10 Prather, CA | Re: So fricking what Nothing to worry about. For the new faster technologies, they will almost certainly increase the cap to a very generous 10GB. (And they will add to your bill a $2.99/month Next Generation Access Deployment Recovery Fee.) | |
|  Test99 Premium join:2003-04-24 San Jose, CA
·DSL EXTREME
·InPhonex
| LTE may not win LTE is, barring catastrophe, going to dominate the next-gen wireless broadband field in the United States. Size and wealth have not led to dominance in the current wireless broadband market.
Verizon's wireless broadband terms of service are so restrictive that they might as well say "Police line. Do not cross." AT&T's terms of service are restrictive too. And at least here in Northern California, AT&T wireless broadband coverage ends at the boundaries of major metropolitan areas.
Only Sprint has wireless broadband coverage in less populated areas. Millenicom, a Sprint reseller, offers uncapped and unrestricted service without a contract. Sprint/Xohm/Clearwire are rolling out WiMax service in some markets now. By all accounts, Verizon and AT&T are lagging a couple of years behind.
I think it's far from clear that LTE will dominate the market. | |
|  |  BF69
join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN
| Re: LTE may not win said by Test99 :LTE is, barring catastrophe, going to dominate the next-gen wireless broadband field in the United States. Size and wealth have not led to dominance in the current wireless broadband market. Verizon's wireless broadband terms of service are so restrictive that they might as well say "Police line. Do not cross." AT&T's terms of service are restrictive too. And at least here in Northern California, AT&T wireless broadband coverage ends at the boundaries of major metropolitan areas. Only Sprint has wireless broadband coverage in less populated areas. Millenicom, a Sprint reseller, offers uncapped and unrestricted service without a contract. Sprint/Xohm/Clearwire are rolling out WiMax service in some markets now. By all accounts, Verizon and AT&T are lagging a couple of years behind. I think it's far from clear that LTE will dominate the market. Verizon is the only carrier that offer statewide covererage of EVDO. At&t broadband is pretty much confined to the 4 large metros in my state. And although Spint has more boradband coverage than at&t they don't have near as much as Verizon. Hell I can't even get Sprint cell service in my area let alone broadband. | |
|  | |  |
|
|