Page 1 / 2   >   >>
nasimson 7/30/2015 | 1:04:00 AM
Wi-Fi, where to Given the ubiquity and mass scale adoption of Wi-Fi I don't see it going away anytime soon.
MordyK 5/5/2014 | 3:25:12 PM
Re: Goin' for broke A Muni WiFi style deployment that rides on existing small cells and public safety gear with just fequency support added, is something I envisioned when I first got wind of LTE-U.
Mitch Wagner 5/5/2014 | 2:36:28 PM
Re: Goin' for broke Even if LTE-U creates technology problems, it will still end up being deployed if it offers significant other advantages. That seems to be just the way the technology industry works. 

Does LTE-U offer any inherent advantages over WiFi to balance out its rudeness? Greater range or bandwidth?

Sarah Thomas 5/5/2014 | 12:38:21 PM
Re: Goin' for broke Is that something the 3GPP can do through standards -- modify it to be polite? The industry might not wait on standards to implement, but I imagine that's one goal the 3GPP is working towards.

Dean Bubley predicted on Twitter that someone would "probably hack LTE stds & do an unlicensed-band unofficial non-carrier version & then if there's available LTE-U chips for devices, how long before we'd get unlicensed "community 4G"?
fgoldstein 5/5/2014 | 12:23:45 PM
Re: Goin' for broke Rude behavior can lead to congestion collapse, as unreadable messages are retransmitted, causing more traffic, causing more unreadable messages, etc.  Recall the history of the Internet before everyone adopted VJ Slow Start, and likewise fear the growth of UDP streaming.

LTE was designed for reserved, clear bands.  If you're going to modify to tolerate interference -- necessary on unlicensed frequencies -- then you should modify it to be polite.  WiFi is incredibly valuable, and isn't going to surrender.  Nor would the public tolerate loss of unlicensed use -- unlicensed is the more efficient future, not more exclusionary licensing.
Sarah Thomas 5/5/2014 | 11:57:54 AM
Re: Goin' for broke Yeah, even with all the disagreement over LTE-U, it's interesting that the conclusion was they just need to work out the timing. Can't stop innovation from happening, even when it's not operator friendly (and it usually isn't).
kq4ym 5/5/2014 | 11:51:41 AM
Re: Goin' for broke It's hard to see that unlicensed spectrum can remain that way for long. With the growing technical capabilities and competitiveness of the industry, it would seem only in a short time, the need for either regulation or lots of industry cooperation to keep the frequencies clear and useable.
Sarah Thomas 5/5/2014 | 11:05:20 AM
Re: Goin' for broke That's true. LTE-U will be more expensive, at least initially, to implement. I also fail to see where it's really necessary. You might need the extra boost for video downloads or intensive streaming, but the operators, including Verizon, were already working on that with "turbo-boost" tech over LTE only. Is this more effective or, at least, cost effective?
mendyk 5/5/2014 | 10:59:45 AM
Re: Goin' for broke A lot will depend on service cost. Right now WiFi has a big advantage on that count as far as end users are concerned. But that's right now.
Sarah Thomas 5/5/2014 | 10:29:06 AM
Re: Goin' for broke I agree. It's interesting that the lines are being drawn between operators early on to. How much they have invested in WiFi determines how interested they are. I wonder if Verizon wnill look like the smart one for holding off after this is all said and done.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>