What We Mean When We Say '4G'

COMMENTS

Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View

<< < Page 2 / 5 > >>

elgato990 12/5/2012 | 5:38:51 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

4G is just a marketing term for clearly faster than 3G.

 

HSPA+ at 20+ megs in real world tests is plenty for 4G for anyone

 

http://www.tmonews.com/2012/03...

 

You can get all puffy about OFDM, but real people care about real throughput.  That is why 4G is system agnostic.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

joset01 12/5/2012 | 5:38:50 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

AT&T will be in 40 cities with LTE by the summer.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

hbatikhan 12/5/2012 | 5:38:50 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

In January 2012, ITU confirmed its previous definition for "next generation mobile technology" by stating that  LTE-Advanced and WirelessMAN-Advanced should be accorded as official designation of IMT-Advanced. It seems to be a step back as compared to December 2010 press release in which ITU had relaxed its 4G definition.

http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2012/02.aspx

Regardles of ITU's technical definition, the industry (especially North American wireless operators) has already taken a different path to define 4G in terms of their marketing needs. HSPA+ is a way enhanced technology compared to early 3G and LTE is another major step for higher speeds and lower latency. After billions of dollars of investment into their networks and providing much more enhanced services, the operators may have right to call their HSPA+ and LTE networks as 4G. I think ITU, as a technical body, set the bar too high by its 4G definition initially, which is the major reason for the chaos related to who thinks what 4G is today.

 

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

joset01 12/5/2012 | 5:38:49 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

Yes, it has definitely become a marketing term for operators. That isn't making people flock to LTE as far as I can tell though. Simply marketing your network as 4G is useless really.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

CITADEL4U 12/5/2012 | 5:38:49 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

Good comment.

The chaos really started when the Bell companies saw that WiMax, the only real 4G definition still to this day, could do major damage to their pocket books.

They flipped out and started serious attempts to slow it down, or stop it all together.

That's were all the confusion came from, the numerous attempts by various telephone companies both in the USA and International, to stop the 4G deployment of a WiMax/Wi-Fi open access network.

I saw all the Lobbying and millions of dollars being spent in Washington to stop WiMax first hand. So don't be fooled by all the techinial BS.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

CITADEL4U 12/5/2012 | 5:38:49 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

Very interesting point, but that's what really happened.

I owned telephone companies in the 1990s and also served on numerous IEEE standards committees. I deployed WiMax 4G equipment in 1998. The standards were still being written, but the equipment was being sold with proprietary systems.

Several utilities deployed massive amounts, only to be caught later with no support when the final 4G Wimax standard 802.16 was approved and it did not include their equipment.

It's the exact same thing as Verizon did in their Northeastern networks. They deployed equipment hoping that the LTE standard would accept their equipment. They even kept money back to replace it, if the standard made it unusable. They tried to push a "DeFacto," standard with some success.

Verizon probably wrote the whole initial LTE off as advertising. Because, they were attempting to stop WiMax from becoming the USA standard.

3G has been around since the 1980s and is old stuff.  Study the history.

By the way, I was helping deploy WiMax 4G in Moscow in 2002. Long before it was, or even still is, available in Washington, DC.

You really have to understand how much damage ATT, and the other Bell Carriers have done to America's telecommunications systems. By, holding back technology.

The very best thing that can happen to America is to break up the Bells, CATV'S & SAT companies. If that were to happen, you would see the biggest boom in US industry since the 1980s-90s. Just like the last time, when 77% of the US economy's growth was in High Technology and the NASDAQ was at 5000+. That all happened until the Bell companies paid off Washington with the 1996 telecommunications Act. Which allowed them to reform and then kill off competition and thus, the deployment of new equipment.

END OF STORY!!

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

DCITDave 12/5/2012 | 5:38:48 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

This is a great discussion but one point I'd like to throw out there for feedback is the decision to even bring 4G up in the first place. I think the wireless operators have made a big mistake by marketing anything as 4G. 

The emphasis on the network technology just shows that there really isn't that much more possible on one network vs. the other. Coverage is still the killer app and it's odd that so many ads focus on technical terms instead of just showing what consumers can do with the device/service combo.

I think most consumers would be content to hear that their phones ran on magic, so long as it connected when they needed it to and allowed them to do a handful of other things. 

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

^Eagle^ 12/5/2012 | 5:38:47 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

hbatikhan: 

who do you think is on the ITU and IEEE.  The carriers themselves are major members. So the standards bodies are not just some nameless group of people.  They are the carriers themselves.

The carriers created this mess.  No one else.

sailboat

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

^Eagle^ 12/5/2012 | 5:38:47 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

Brookseven,

lol, indeed, AMPs could easily have been declared 4G...  

I am old enough that I helped build SMSR systems with full phone features back about 10 years before the first "cell" system was installed.  Then later in my career I actually helped install the 3rd-4th& 5th cell systems ever turned up in the world.

So, considering all that, I do find the nomenclature funny.  

I also note that there is NO guaranteed through put on any of these mobile services.

wish I had been able to sell Frame Relay with no committed data rate!  roflol.

sailboat 

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

shygye75 12/5/2012 | 5:38:47 PM

re: What We Mean When We Say '4G'

Hasn't 4G (like 3G before it) been co-opted as a marketing term from the start? It may be meaningless, but it's not necessarily useless as far as mass marketing is concerned. As in, if you don't paste the 4G label on your service now, you may be seen as being somewhere behind the leaders. It's not as pathetic as everybody sticking Twitter and Facebook logos on all their marketing stuff, but it's kind of the same principle.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

<< < Page 2 / 5 > >>