On Mar 18, 2011, at 9:50 PM, Jeff Lasman wrote: >> http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/howto-install-ntp-to-synchronize-server-clock/ > > Did you mean to post something else? The above is nothing to do with > Clearwire.
Whoops, wrong URL. I sent that to a friend and it was still on my clipboard. ( Of all of the URLs on my clipboard at at various times, I suppose I lucked out this time.) > I keep seeing that. I never see the justification. Can you point to > something? Clearwire's burn rate is insane. Sprint is screwed, as they are a major equity holder. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-18/sprint-s-technology-lead-at-risk-as-clearwire-faces-cash-crunch.html > >> http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/03/sprint-if-we-do-decide-to-go-with-lte- >> we-can-cover-america-by-the-end-of-2013/ > > Couldn't they do the same with WiMax if they did it themselves? I agree it > looks like they're going to abandona WiMax, but I don't see the reason. WiMAX is not made for mobility quite the same way that LTE is. WiMAX is okay if you're sitting in one place (and arguably better for applications like video, last mile connectivity, etc). We like WiMAX because it "fixed" some of the inadequacies of WiFi for "last mile" sort of applications. It has weird quirks, so it's typically on licensed channels. (WiMAX has all sorts of weird issues with collision, which make many people shy away from it and use different protocols on that band (e.g. using WiFi 2.3 / 2.5 GHz). You're almost 100% sure that a WiFi client device will attach to a WiFi access point. WiMAX, on the other hand, tends to be a lot more vendor specific.) LTE is built from the ground up with everything a telco wants and needs--- fast roaming, fast throughput, IP-based, backwards compatible with older legacy technologies. It takes some of the best things from WiMAX, cellular GSM technologies, CDMA, etc. 3GGP release 10 will be the big one (LTE-advanced) that is supposed to live up to ITU's true definition of 4G (100 Mbps roaming, 1Gps stationary). Channels are reserved for those who want to do TDD and FDD, and operators have many options on how they plan their networks (700/900/1800 MHz, 2.6 GHz ; 1.4/3/5/10/15 MHz size channels, etc). Imagine the best traits from GSM, WiMAX, and CDMA. LTE is sort of like that....in theory, at least. It's the new new thing. > Note: My netbook runs fast enough on 3G (the "mifi" device) for the few > times > I need to use it. My only interest in 4G would be to replace my wired > connection at home, and I can only do that with either unlimited or a cap of > minimum of a few hundred GB. So far Sprint is the only company doing that, > and only with 4G. First, no company really hits the 4G requirements set by ITU. Recently, ITU relaxed their original definition, which allowed AT&T to then pretend heir HSPA+ upgrades (3GPP release 7) as "4G" (much to the chagrin of the likes of Verizon and Sprint). It's ultimately an issue of shared capacity. The older 3G cell towers have too many people using them (one YouTube stream takes up like 70 voice calls), and the only way that they can increase capacity is... (a) build more towers (and shrink the area of those covered), (b) make a bigger pipe (higher throughput access with technologies like HSPA+ or LTE, better fiber backhaul links transporting that data back to the mothership, etc), and/or (c) use unlicensed wireless as a way to offload data. _______________________________________________ LinuxUsers mailing list LinuxUsers@socallinux.org http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers
