Receive new posts as email.
RSS 0.91 | RSS 2.0
RDF | Atom
Podcast only feed (RSS 2.0 format)
Get an RSS reader
Get a Podcast receiver
Sun | Mon | Tues | Wed | Thurs | Fri | Sat |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
This site operates as an independent editorial operation. Advertising, sponsorships, and other non-editorial materials represent the opinions and messages of their respective origins, and not of the site operator or JiWire, Inc.
Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2006 by Glenn Fleishman. Some images ©2006 Jupiterimages Corporation. All rights reserved. Please contact us for reprint rights. Linking is, of course, free and encouraged.
Powered by
Movable Type
« O2 Trials Alvarion in Ireland | Main | 802.16e Takes Center Stage »
Intel is again pushing unreal timeframes and generalities about WiMax: Intel is saying that 802.16e will arrive shortly. The standard isn’t even complete so shortly is pretty far from the truth. Intel is also saying that WiMax-capable laptops will be available next year, a time frame that also sounds wishful to me.
But Sean Maloney’s statements about 3G are comical. He says that 3G is a fragmented technology with no global standard. In fact, 3G has two global standards and a fairly unified spectrum position. Talk about fragmented—the closest thing that WiMax will have in the short term to a single implementation is networks that operate in the 3.5 GHz band, a spectrum that is spottily available around the globe. Often, different spectrum bands will require different so-called WiMax profiles, which may not be interoperable. There is activity now to try to free up 2.5 GHz in many parts of the world for a more unified WiMax approach, but that initiative is in quite early days and because it involves regulators around the world is likely to take a very long time to get in order. The WiMax market is incredibly fragmented because there is no unified spectrum approach to it on a global basis.
That’s not to say that the standard doesn’t have worth. Vendors will be able to cut their costs by using many of the same components for equipment that operates in different bands. However, it’s like the pot calling the kettle black for Maloney to diss 3G for being fragmented.
Posted by nancyg at April 13, 2005 4:52 PM
Categories: hype
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://db.isbn.nu/mt3/mt-tb.pl/3173