> It is time the Forum own up to their own words, so Aperto is going to > asking the question at 4G World coming up in Chicago next week. The fact > is, the fixed standard is stable and ideal for what it was designed to > do: deliver fixed (and limited nomadicity) wireless broadband. This > version of the standard is better, yes better, than the mobile version > for doing metroscale fixed. It provides 13% more capacity per MHz and
Are you counting both polarities on both systems ? Are you counting advanced antenna systems on 802.16-2005 (aka 802.16e), as MIMO can easily be used to increase capacity when remotes are outdoor units ? > 35% or so less latency. It can also be configured for symmetric or even That's a thing I'm very curious about, why 802.16-2005 has higher latency than 802.16-2004. > higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, which is critical for networks > doing high capacity upstream like video surveillance. The chinese have done higher ratio upstream with 16e-derived technology for the Olympics... using non-standard gear for specific application is not that different from using 16d, as 16d gear can't always mix and match, as we discovered with Alvarion, Redline and Aperto. > networks. They also think they can get self-install -- something this > community knows is not possible in 3.65 GHz due to the power > restrictions placed on indoor modems. Operators and other would-be WiMAX > deployers are being hoodwinked. Outside the US, it's feasible to do 3.5 GHz self-install. Done that with Redline units. > The E standard does enable use of diversity, but it comes at a high cost > and is of limited benefit for rural operators. The truth is that > diversity is designed to increase link budgets to support self-install. Or increase system capacity, which is a good thing with larger distance where modulations won't be QAM64 5/6 for all subscribers. > Basically, each standard has its place, E is for people in 2.5 GHz doing > self-install, like Clearwire, and we all know the low service > (especially low upstream) packages offered in Clearwire's service. D is > better and cheaper for rural fixed operators, and especially for public > safety video type networks and definitely for voice-centric users. D is > better for enterprise, where many users sit behind the CPE. E is better > for roaming individual users with modest expectations. There are E vendors that provide Ethernet capabilities. I agree the majority only do IP, but the ones with Ethernet capabilities can be used for fixed enterprise and home users. > We'd like to hear your opinions, and if you like to discuss this with us > while at 4G World, please drop me a note. I've been to Chicago last year, couldn't make it this year. It seems I will miss these interesting discussions and the everlasting WiMAX x LTE battle... Rubens -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
