BT is already testing WiMax in four rural areas

zod

Is WiMax a promising new wireless technology, or just a load of hot air?

IF YOU find it difficult to get excited by the details of a new wireless-data protocol, you are not alone. So what explains the current buzz in the telecoms and computer industries surrounding WiMax, a high-speed, long-range wireless standard? This week investors pumped $20m into Aperto Networks of Milpitas, California, one of several firms planning to launch WiMax products this year. Heavyweights such as Intel, Nokia and AT&T are lining up behind the standard. Sean Maloney, the head of Intel's telecoms division, says it will put “the next 5 billion users” on the internet. But whereas WiMax has promise, says John Yunker, an analyst at Pyramid Research, it is currently surrounded by much confusion and “a ton of hype”.

Indeed, all this is strongly reminiscent of the fuss over Wi-Fi, a popular technology that uses a small base-station plugged into a high-speed (broadband) connection to link laptops within 50 metres or so to the internet. Wi-Fi is undoubtedly useful—in 9% of American households, for example—but it is used mainly to provide wireless internet coverage inside homes, offices and schools. Few people seem to be prepared to pay for fee-based Wi-Fi access in “hotspots” in airports and railway stations, and schemes to cover whole cities with Wi-Fi and make expensive third-generation (3G) mobile-phone networks redundant have got nowhere. But whereas Wi-Fi provides coverage within a small hotspot, WiMax, which has a maximum range of 30 miles, could provide blanket coverage. It could, as a result, prove to be a far more useful, and disruptive, technology.


The initial aim of WiMax is modest: it will ensure compatibility between different vendors' fixed-wireless broadband equipment, which provides fast wireless-data connections between fixed points over long distances. This ought to help to expand the market for fixed-wireless access, since operators will no longer have to worry about being locked into vendors' proprietary technologies, and economies of scale will bring prices down. That is good news for people in rural areas, for whom broadband access—via cable networks or supercharged telephone lines—is often unavailable. Subscribers simply fix a WiMax receiver to the outside of their homes and plug it into a Wi-Fi base-station, or directly into a PC. In Britain, BT is already testing WiMax in four rural areas.

Another promising area for WiMax is for use as a wireless “last mile” in the developing world, since it can carry voice calls using voice-over-internet protocol. Instead of laying copper cables, network operators would set up far less expensive WiMax towers, and then install WiMax telephones in subscribers' homes. Internet access could also be provided. Mr Maloney says 20 or 30 operators in developing countries have expressed interest.

So far, this all sounds sensible. The cause of the excitement is what might happen next. At the moment, WiMax is a fixed technology. But if the technology can be scaled down to fit inside mobile devices, says Mr Yunker, “that changes everything”. Intel, the world's leading chip-maker, plans to make WiMax support a standard feature of most laptop computers starting in 2006 or 2007. By then, a mobile version of the WiMax standard is expected to have been approved.

It would then be possible to provide fee-based Wi-Fi-like coverage to mobile users over wide areas. This might have far more appeal than a service limited to a few hotspots; it would, for example, work in a taxi. Mobile WiMax could also be used in mobile phones, allowing fixed operators that have built WiMax networks to transform themselves into mobile operators. (No wonder BT, which sold its mobile-phone arm, is interested.)

Not everyone is convinced, however. According to Brian Modoff, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, Intel “has been drinking too much of the WiMax Kool-Aid”. For one thing, equipment vendors may be reluctant to push WiMax gear, since it could cannibalise sales of more lucrative 3G equipment. And operators are playing wait and see; they are reluctant to commit themselves until the technology is proven. Furthermore, few of them have the spectrum needed to deploy WiMax.

There is also opposition from some people in the mobile-telecoms industry. Turning WiMax from a fixed into a mobile standard is a crafty trick, they argue, since a separate mobile broadband standard, known as 802.20, is already in development. But the momentum of WiMax means 802.20 could be a dead duck, says Zvi Slonimsky of Alvarion, the leading maker of fixed-wireless gear and a strong backer of WiMax. Proponents of 802.20 retort that it will require less spectrum than WiMax, and will work in fast-moving cars and trains, which WiMax will not. Besides, mobile WiMax is still science fiction, notes Ronny Haraldsvik of Flarion, an equipment maker that is the leading advocate of 802.20. “The industry doesn't serve itself well by hyping something it can't deliver,” he says. Amid the hype and the confusion, WiMax is evidently worth keeping an eye on. Watch this airspace.

zod

WiMAX companies say the new standard, a metro area network (MAN) technology, is capable of providing up to 31 miles of linear service area range and eliminates the need to be in direct line of sight to the base station, a critical flaw undermining earlier efforts at fixed wireless broadband. The technology can also pool capacity to deliver rates up to 70 Mbps, enough bandwidth for 60 T-1 type connections or capacity to deliver DSL-level speeds to hundreds of homes using a single sector of a base station, which are expected to come equipped with six sectors.

Hoping to emulate the success of the Wi-Fi Alliance, which spurred the current Wi-Fi revolution, WiMAX will develop conformance test plans, select certification labs and host interoperability events for equipment vendors, as well as work with the European Telecommunications Standards Institute to develop test plans for HIPERMAN, the European broadband wireless metro area access standard. Vendors who pass the interoperability tests will get a “WiMAX Certified” seal of approval.

It's clear that very high-speed fixed wireless can be complementary to WiFi for broadband wireless, and it's good to see industry collaboration around standards that will make it effective (e.g. eliminating line of sight problems that have stalled fixed wireless in the past), but given the incredible investment surrounding WiFi access points and cards, and the R&D around extending 802.11's effective range, it seems that this will ultimately be a competitive situation.

zod

Intel also updated its vision for WiMax, the metro-area wireless networking standard that the company thinks will help solve the "last-mile" problem of broadband penetration. Only Japan and South Korea have more than 50 percent of their households using high-speed connections to get on the Internet, and WiMax could help increase that number, Maloney said.

Wired broadband connections are costly to install and maintain, but Intel expects WiMax will jump over all those hurdles.

Maloney says the first WiMax products will roll out over the course of 2004.

Consumers should be able to install an antenna on their homes that can access WiMax signals during the first half of 2005, Maloney said. He expects the technology will advance to the point that connections are possible without an antenna by the end of 2005.

krom kruak

Christ almighty, can you not just give us your opinion or synopsis and post the fughing link to the site your copying this from.

zod

give me your credit card details and I'll pay your subscription also...

SkepticOne

It is interesting to see BT testing this technology in rural areas in Britain. Bad news for Britain, however, if BT go on to monopolise it.

Urban Weigl

SkepticOne, they could not really do that, unless they owned all the radio spectrum. Of course the other way would be to sell it at a loss, which would prevent competition. That would still be good for consumers though, so I am not sure if I would have anything against that.

SkepticOne

One of the advantages of wireless is that there is less infrastructure build and lower barriers to entry. However, the ubiquitous deployment of WiMax by BT in addition to their wired infrastructural monopoly would have a large negative effect on competition. Their charges would not need to be low to begin with, they would only need to drop them in the event of competition emerging. Competing operators would be aware of this and would steer clear, not wishing to be put out of business.

If, however, there was no chance of competition in the first place, then yes, it would be better to have a monopoly than no services. This is very far from the ideal situation, imo. I believe that the Government should specifically target genuine competitors of Eircom with funding to make sure such competition does appear and that they should also get preferential spectrum allocation.

Urban Weigl

BT only want to deploy WiMax (if the tests are successful) in a few rural areas, where ADSL does not work due to people being too far from the exchange. They do not want to deploy it in areas such as cities, from what I understand.

SkepticOne

Yes, they would hardly set up two competiting technologies in the same area. However, even in rural areas, it would be far better for consumers to have competing wireless operators rather than one (a company that already makes money out of line rental and phone calls). BT would have a lower cost base since their wireless services could piggyback on their wired infrastructure extending it out into rural areas.

In the case of Ireland, if your area was served by Eircom Wireless, since proper broadband would canibalise line rental and possibly voice revenue through VoIP, Eircom would need to add these on to the cost of your service. And despite these high charges, competitors would be put off from competing there because of the threat of Eircom suddenly lowering their charges to drive out competitors.

Urban Weigl

In these rural areas we are talking about, no matter what way it goes, people will be very lucky to have one broadband provider that is not via satellite. I do not think BT will even want to make money there, it's more a matter of getting 100% coverage, and doing the last 5% of that on very little margin, possibly even making a small loss. It is not an environment where competition would want to exist.

The only competition that might arise would possibly be community based co-operatives. The areas where you will see competition will be more built up areas.

bk

BT has been given the task by the British Government to get 100% bb coverage. They have about > 90% with DSL, but it is the last 5% or so that will be the toughest part for them. Therefore I'm not at all surprised that BT are looking the WiMax to reach the last 5%.

SkepticOne I think you are worrying too much about the effective of BT (or Eircom in Ireland) rolling out WiMax. They will probably only roll it out in really rural areas.

The big difference between this and landlines, is that as long as the bandwidth is fairly regulated, there is no reason why other companies can't get involved. Look at IBB, they are more then happy to compete with Eircom.

Once you take away the telco's monopolisitc control of the infrastructure, lots of other companies would be more then happy to compete with them.

Of course this would only be in commercially viable places in Urban and densly populated rural areas.
I do see how it could have an adverse effect on the co-ops in very rural area, if Eircom where given grants to roll out there.

Interestinlgy no one has mentioned the possibility that if BT are trialing this tech, then there is no reason why EsatBT couldn't also run with it here in Ireland.