On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Rubens Kuhl <rube...@gmail.com> wrote: > I know they call it 4G, but it's not 4G. See > http://www.wirelessweek.com/Archives/2007/10/WiMAX-is-3G/ > Even LTE (when deployed) won't be 4G, only LTE Advanced will, but LTE > will be much closer to 4G than WiMAX 802.16e, see > http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/cellulartelecomms/4g/3gpp-imt-lte-advanced-tutorial.php. > May be 802.16m can achieve 4G goals, if WiMAX still lives by then.
LTE-advanced may approach ITU's 4G standards, as 802.16m (WiMAX 2) might also... Some call LTE "3.9G" (or something weird) because it's way beyond 3G, but technically falls short of the ITU's official standards. The final goals of LTE-advanced, as I understand, will exceed 4G requirements. (But no telling when that will be, of course.) As for 802.16m (WIMAX 2), it will have its place, particularly in surveillance and grid networks. A lot of countries are auctioning off 2.3 and 2.5 GHz, and many companies are buying these frequencies with WiMAX solutions, but for the most part I've seen 90+% of carriers (e.g. AT&T) betting big on LTE. There is some speculation that later this year, WiMAX 2 will be at a "better" (faster, etc) place than LTE at the same time. WiMAX supporters say that WiMAX is "more open" (and thus "better" in the long haul), but as we see in the Linux vs BSD arguments, "open" comes with a set of problems that more structured solutions don't always have (and vice versa). Others thoughts? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
