AT&T CEO Says It Will Deliver 20Mbps Downloads

you are mistaken wimax is a standard and is actually been installed and is active in atleast 4 cities. baltamor washington boston and chicago. the network it up and running. the back hall is causeing a few issues but the actual wimax portion is working quite well. wimax will go active later this year a full 2 years ahead of lte.

wimax is a standard and was developed in huge part by intel who has spent several billion $$$ to make sure it works. the largest micro chip manufacturer in the uniteds states has even gon so far as to offer to subsodise all the wimax chip sets and devices. which also gives wimax a huge advantage over lte.

carriers who offer lte will have to continue to subsadise there handsets out of there own pocket which wi...
(continues)

Wimax is 3G, not 4G. No official 4G standards have been ratified yet. Much like the fact that EVDO 1xRTT was not actually 3G, but at the time, companies who had deployed it referred to it as so.

http://www.wirelessweek.com/WiMAX-is-3G.aspx »

1xRTT is NOT, and has NOT never been referred/confused with EV-DO.


1xRTT = "Vision"
EV-DO = "Power Vision"
EV-DO Rev. A = "SprintSpeed"

They had a technology before, I believe, that ran the "Wireless Web" system. It may have been the same 1xRTT though... Not sure.

I'm not saying that 1xRTT is confused with EV-DO, I'm saying that when 1xRTT was first implemented, many referred to it as 3G, where it's actually more like 2.5G. Likewise, WiMax is probably closer to 3.5G than 4G.

Gotcha. I didn't know people referred to 1x as 3G... oh well

Call it what you want but it is still faster than anything else right now. 🙄

Hmmm... I guess someone hasn't heard the latest news on 3g speeds... check engadget mobile. Interesting little read there. 😉

First of all, learn how to spele. Second, wouldn't you say that the likelyhood that verizon, att, t-mobile, and altell suporting each other in their development of LTE will make it the 4G network of choice. The four companies will be able to support devices from each other's network enabling roaming agreements. The technology will be deployed quicker and that two year headstart that Wi-Max has will probably be Sprint's biggest mistake.
This mistake will probably be bigger than their acquisition of Nextel.

YOU are mistaken. Try paying attention.

I'm not talking about WiMax's definition, I'm talking about the 4G definition. It hasn't been ratified.

Sprint claims that WiMax is 4G. It's not... not because WiMax isn't defined, but because 4G isn't defined. NOTHING is 4G right now.

If Sprint wants to launch WiMax as its 4G service, it's going to have to wait until 4G has been ratified. Just like AT&T.

What are you saying? Do you know what your talking about? I see your posts all the time and wonder how you don't seem to get any more knowledgeable about phones/networks/carriers.

Yeah, I see your reading comprehension hasn't improved with time either. Pay attention.

I have to agree with stevelvl. Maybe we could compare the cost of proprietary CDMA implementations to the cost of similar GSM implementations of devices. It's more cost efficient to develop a product that is capable of serving a population of 2 billion as compared to a device that will only serve 300 million people.

algorithmplus said:
I have to agree with stevelvl. Maybe we could compare the cost of proprietary CDMA implementations to the cost of similar GSM implementations of devices. It's more cost efficient to develop a product that is capable of serving a population of 2 billion as compared to a device that will only serve 300 million people.

The fact that Sprint is going to be the ONLY major wireless company using WIMAX, that pretty much destroys your argument. Almost every major wireless company has decided to use LTE. It's these companies that service 2 billion+ people, not Sprint.

CamelTowing said:

algorithmplus said:
I have to agree with stevelvl. Maybe we could compare the cost of proprietary CDMA implementations to the cost of similar GSM implementations of devices. It's more cost efficient to develop a product that is capable of serving a population of 2 billion as compared to a device that will only serve 300 million people.

The fact that Sprint is going to be the ONLY major wireless company using WIMAX, that pretty much destroys your argument. Almost every major wireless company has decided to use LTE. It's these companies that service 2 billion+ people, not Sprint.

...If you assume that each of those customers has only one device that wor...
(continues)

Wimax lets do some very quick addition.

WiMax:
China=1,321,851,888
India=1,129,866,154
US=301,139,947
South Korea=49,044,790
Africa=922,011,000
Asia=3,879,000,000-Japan(127,433,494)=
3,751,566,506

LTE:
Europe=712,000,000
US=301,139,947
Japan=127,433,494

So Wimax has to serve a total of 4,974,717,453 if the rest of Asia follows along with SK and China. Africa already is building its Wimax network.

Wimax with China, SK, US, and Africa alone is 3,723,913,779 billion people.

LTE so far if created today would cover a whopping 1,140,573,441 billion people.

Yeah how in the hell did you get 2 billion people????????????????????????

so your telling me that they are going to cover EVERY SINGLE person in Africa with WIMAX?

you also counted China twice for wimax...

you failed to realize that Rogers in Canada is going with LTE, Russia's 2 major carriers MTS and Zao Smarts also chose LTE to cover their major metropolitan areas...

the point is the countries that PAY for cellphone service are choosing LTE... the only thing your going to get out of Africa is AIDS... not money.

most people in India own a cellphone that has a monochrome screen- you cant do anything 3g with that. Companies don't count people they count dollar signs.

stoopered said:
Wimax lets do some very quick addition.

WiMax:
China=1,321,851,888
India=1,129,866,154
US=301,139,947
South Korea=49,044,790
Africa=922,011,000
Asia=3,879,000,000-Japan(127,433,494)=
3,751,566,506

LTE:
Europe=712,000,000
US=301,139,947
Japan=127,433,494

So Wimax has to serve a total of 4,974,717,453 if the rest of Asia follows along with SK and China. Africa already is building its Wimax network.

Wimax with China, SK, US, and Africa alone is 3,723,913,779 billion people.

LTE so far if created today would cover a whopping 1,140,573,441 billion people.

Yeah how in the hell did you get 2 billion people????????????????????????

Oh...so now I see why your logic is s...
(continues)

Wow your an idiot. South Korea already uses Wimax and the similar WiBro. Do you think that Wimax is only going to be used for phones? They plan to cover most of Africa with Wimax to bring internet to poorer countries. I never said Africa was a country. If you could read you would have see that. China will have Wimax. In fact a majority of countries will offer Wimax as the standard for inexpensive highspeed internet. Im not assuming they won't build LTE, but like I said in a previous post in case you didn't read it... Wimax will be cheaper, have a larger range, and be multipurpose. LTE has only been announced for internet use on phones. Wimax is for any device and has planned on delivering Cable. Wimax has also said it will offer interactive ...
(continues)

well stated. very few people actually know what wimax is. most people who have heard of wimax think it is a cell phone technology. like evdo edge or lte. the truth is it is nothing at all like those for all those to work they have to be supported by a voice infrastructure such as cdma or gsm. the truth is that when wimax is released it will only be wimax devices that only offer wimax data no cdma or gsm for voice.

the truth is wimax probably will not even compete with lte. wimax will be competing directly with the local telephone provider and the cable provider.

another reason wimax is a good choice for companies like sprint and clear wire, wimax works very well on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. lte not so well. this is why there was a huge d...
(continues)

stevelvl said:
well stated. very few people actually know what wimax is. most people who have heard of wimax think it is a cell phone technology. like evdo edge or lte. the truth is it is nothing at all like those for all those to work they have to be supported by a voice infrastructure such as cdma or gsm. the truth is that when wimax is released it will only be wimax devices that only offer wimax data no cdma or gsm for voice.

the truth is wimax probably will not even compete with lte. wimax will be competing directly with the local telephone provider and the cable provider.

another reason wimax is a good choice for companies like sprint and clear wire, wimax works very well on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. lte not so w

...
(continues)

stoopered said:
Wow your an idiot. South Korea already uses Wimax and the similar WiBro. Do you think that Wimax is only going to be used for phones? They plan to cover most of Africa with Wimax to bring internet to poorer countries. I never said Africa was a country. If you could read you would have see that. China will have Wimax. In fact a majority of countries will offer Wimax as the standard for inexpensive highspeed internet. Im not assuming they won't build LTE, but like I said in a previous post in case you didn't read it... Wimax will be cheaper, have a larger range, and be multipurpose. LTE has only been announced for internet use on phones. Wimax is for any device and has planned on delivering Cable. Wimax has

...
(continues)

Exactly and if people are going to make the argument that just because the biggest chip maker is backing WiMAx than what about Vodafone one of the biggest service providers in Europe and I believe bigger in renenue than Intel, is backing LTE. Also the cipset is just a part of the device. Who is going to build the rest. Intel? I think not. Once the manufactures see that all these wireless carriers are jumping to LTE who do you think the Samsung, Motorola, LG, ect will cater to? Sprint? the only service provider to choose WiMax or a group of service providers all over the world with huge Global buying power. I think this is a no brainer. Now after you have read this please explain your logic on how WiMax will have cheaper handsets.

if you look at the cost of a cheep keyosera handset the full price is 150$ the there is three qualicom chipsets in that device. those three chips cost keyosera 100$ that is 2/3 of the total price. of the other 50$ that is production cost as well as profit for keyosera. now the cheepest qualicom chipset is 100$ the price goes up from there and can actually reach over 200$

now the carrier takes that hand set and then gives it away for free to the consumer. in essence they take a 150$ loss. the carrier subsadises the hand set 150$ they loose 150$ off the get go. they there for have to try and recoup the loss of 150$ over the life of the customer. this results in conteactual agreement and higher wireless prices.

in the case of wimax inte...
(continues)

stevelvl said:
you said vodaphone sells more handsets then any one else. well they do not subsodise hand sets vodaphone sells the phone at full price to its customers which in turn use that hand set for a really long time and rarely buy the ultra high end devices. and let us also remember that voda phone is not in the us and there fore does not count in this argument.

Actually Vodafone does subsidize their phones in case you're not aware. They do offer them at full retail (like you stated), but also offer contracts for 12 or 18 months. So don't say that they only sell full price phones. At least they have a choice of a full price or retail priced phone. Here, carriers usually want a contract, even i...
(continues)

Why would I care if WiMax phones will not be locked if the only network that exists to use it on is Sprint?

the fact the devices are not locked is directly correlates to the fact any wimax device could also be used on the network. you would no longer be dependent on the carrier for the hopes they have the cool new device you want to use. att has cool phones but what if you really wanted a phone you saw at tmobile but they are the only ones that sell it? then you have to settle for another device.

and second of all you are talking phones. you clearly at all do not know what wimax is. it is not phone technology there is no voice technology in wimax what so ever. if you want voice you will have to run voip. wimax is strictly data. this means not only is att wireless in threat bus so is att dsl. why do you think all the cable companies are getting...
(continues)

stevelvl said:
the fact the devices are not locked is directly correlates to the fact any wimax device could also be used on the network. you would no longer be dependent on the carrier for the hopes they have the cool new device you want to use. att has cool phones but what if you really wanted a phone you saw at tmobile but they are the only ones that sell it? then you have to settle for another device.

and second of all you are talking phones. you clearly at all do not know what wimax is. it is not phone technology there is no voice technology in wimax what so ever. if you want voice you will have to run voip. wimax is strictly data. this means not only is att wireless in threat bus so is att dsl. why do you think

...
(continues)

stevelvl said:

and let us also remember that voda phone is not in the us and there fore does not count in this argument.

Another reason your argument is completely wrong.
Vodaphone sells more handsets than almost anyone in the entire world. Are you trying to say that the cost of manufacturing LTE devices will only be affected by sales in the US? That's pretty silly considering that this is the argument that can be leveled against WiMax.
The cost of making LTE devices will be greatly reduced simply because the entire world(ATT, VZW, Orange, TMobile, Vodaphone,Alltel) will be using the technology. This will be much like why GSM devices are cheaper than their CDMA counterparts. There are more than 2...
(continues)

the amount of handset sales has nothing at all to do with the cost of chip sets. as i stated before 50-66% of the cost of a phone is strictly the cost of the chip set.

the reason why gsm chips prices is lower is due to the fact the chip set is significantly cheaper to manufacture. the code devision multiple access nature of a cdma chip requires and infinitely more complex chip set which in turn raises the price. do not make the mistake of applying marketing and economics to hand set sales. they do not follow those rules. gsm phones are cheeper not because most people have them but because the chip set is much simpler.

lte how ever will not be the same lte will have the same level of chip complexity and there for you will see a quant...
(continues)

stevelvl said:
the amount of handset sales has nothing at all to do with the cost of chip sets. as i stated before 50-66% of the cost of a phone is strictly the cost of the chip set.

the reason why gsm chips prices is lower is due to the fact the chip set is significantly cheaper to manufacture. the code devision multiple access nature of a cdma chip requires and infinitely more complex chip set which in turn raises the price. do not make the mistake of applying marketing and economics to hand set sales. they do not follow those rules. gsm phones are cheeper not because most people have them but because the chip set is much simpler.

lte how ever will not be the same lte will have the same level of chip complexity

...
(continues)

yes go ahead and assume that every one is like you and works in call center. i don't even remember stating i work for sprint? hunh. you assume quite a bit. ie that you know the cost of a hand set chip when i am doubting that you have even talked to an exec for a vinder let alone talked nuts and bolts with one. but go a head and make your assumptions be cause we all know what assuming does.

I assume nothing. I used to work under Ralph Dela Vega at Cingular. I know a little bit about Mobile Marketing. You on the other hand.... don't.

Dummy. India, China, SK, Africa, almost all South Asia. Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, Clearwire, Intel, Google, Comcast, TimeWarner, and Brighthouse. All which support or will have Wimax. So what were you saying about more people using LTE?

Oh to all the readers, Wimax will be considered 4g. If you read the press releases from companies such as Samsung and Motorola you will see that they refer to it as 4g.

you are waisting your breath trying to argue what is and is not 4g.

2g was easy to define. it was the switch from analog to digital. how ever after that 3g and 4g. there is not set standard. Some say 3g is defined as high speed data. well when 1x roled out in is-95 it had speeds of 144kb/s at the time most people were only getting 33.6 on there dial up modem. so 144 was high speed data. but then perspective changed with dsl and cable and all of a sudden 144 looked not so fast.

1x 2.6 evdo 3g wimax 3.5g that is all semantics. there is no real definition for 3g 4g ect. it is all sematics. 3g and 4g are more accurately described by carriers evolution. there is no clear cut dffinition for 3g 4g.

I know this. I read a many argue that 3g is to 10 mbps 4g is between 10-100 mbps or up to 1gbps.

stoopered said:
Dummy. India, China, SK, Africa, almost all South Asia. Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, Clearwire, Intel, Google, Comcast, TimeWarner, and Brighthouse. All which support or will have Wimax. So what were you saying about more people using LTE?

Oh to all the readers, Wimax will be considered 4g. If you read the press releases from companies such as Samsung and Motorola you will see that they refer to it as 4g.

Only problem with your theory is that all those U.S. companies you mentioned will just be selling Sprint/Clearwire devices that will run on the Sprint/Clearwire network. I haven't read too many articles that talk about anyone else building a network like that. There are a few in other coun...
(continues)

Show me an article that says LTE will be released in Africa, Japan, Thailand, India, and China. Samsung, Nokia, Motorola... How many of these are actually building these networks? Samsung is running the release of Wimax in Dallas, meanwhile Motorola is running the release in Chicago. So I ask are these companies saying they will support LTE or are they investing in it? Don't answer, I already know. Just except your wrong and move on.

Sanyo is also making their own Wimax chips.

stoopered said:
Show me an article that says LTE will be released in Africa, Japan, Thailand, India, and China. Samsung, Nokia, Motorola... How many of these are actually building these networks? Samsung is running the release of Wimax in Dallas, meanwhile Motorola is running the release in Chicago. So I ask are these companies saying they will support LTE or are they investing in it? Don't answer, I already know. Just except your wrong and move on.

Sanyo is also making their own Wimax chips.

Just as soon as you "EXcept" that you can't spell worth a damn.

I apologize. Accept. I type quick and sometimes fail to catch mistakes.

stoopered said:
Show me an article that says LTE will be released in Africa, Japan, Thailand, India, and China. Samsung, Nokia, Motorola... How many of these are actually building these networks? Samsung is running the release of Wimax in Dallas, meanwhile Motorola is running the release in Chicago. So I ask are these companies saying they will support LTE or are they investing in it? Don't answer, I already know. Just except your wrong and move on.

Sanyo is also making their own Wimax chips.

Gee... Sanyo.... you mean the maker of cell phones for Sprint. What a shock that they would use the technology that Sprint has chosen... And the Motorola and Samsung networks are being built for SPRINT/CLEARWIRE!...
(continues)

Not true. Not at all. Wimax in general is cheaper to employ, run, and maintain. Also more people will be using Wimax, which drives up demand, and brings down price. China, Sk, India, Africa, and US will use or have Wimax. LTE chips will be more expensive especially since the WiMax will be deployed well before LTE.

stoopered said:
Not true. Not at all. Wimax in general is cheaper to employ, run, and maintain. Also more people will be using Wimax, which drives up demand, and brings down price. China, Sk, India, Africa, and US will use or have Wimax. LTE chips will be more expensive especially since the WiMax will be deployed well before LTE.

So, upgrading 2 billion+ gsm phones and 1 billion cdma phones to LTE phones won't drive the price down? I will bet my paycheck that you will see more WiMax chips in Dell computers than you will from every phone manufacturer in the world. Not only that, but most of those chips in the pc's will be unused. I really think that the technologies don't even compete with each other. I thi...
(continues)

Why do you keep saying 2 billion please specify where your getting an extra 1.1 billion? Umm its not upgrading. If you check out Youtube you can see some Wimax in use. Pretty cool stuff.


Wimax has already been used in 2005 after the hurricane hit SE Asia, oh and also after Katrina.

stoopered said:
Why do you keep saying 2 billion please specify where your getting an extra 1.1 billion? Umm its not upgrading. If you check out Youtube you can see some Wimax in use. Pretty cool stuff.


Wimax has already been used in 2005 after the hurricane hit SE Asia, oh and also after Katrina.

Great... so 4 rescue workers came out and used it when every other technology got wiped out during a hurricane.... maybe you are hoping for something similar to happen when WiMax is released commercially.... that way there isn't any competition.... it's really the only way WiMax would win.

As far as the 2 billion+ number, I was being conservative. The GSMA announced in April that GSM had reached 3 Bill...
(continues)

The range advantage of WiMax is very significant, especially in large (read: US, China) or underdeveloped countries. Setting up a WiMax network should be cheaper and easier.

Personally, I don't think the speed difference is going to matter. In either case we're talking several multiples of the speed of cable modems, and at least for me a cable modem is pretty close to good enough. I'm not going to care if 4G is 10x or 15x the speed of a cable modem... either is plenty fast.

The biggest advantage of LTE as I see it is that it isn't defined yet, which means that by the time they're done with the definition there may be new, cool features added to it that might be difficult to retrofit onto the already existing WiMax definition. But t...
(continues)

stoopered said:
Let me start out by saying if LTE had the range of Wimax I would say its better. You see LTE runs off 20 Mhz so its range won't be nearly as practical for a large country like the US. Wimax is said to have the potential of 70 km and could exceed the speed ceiling of 70mbps with future upgrades and technologies. But for some reason these companies are hopping on the bandwagon with Japan and Europe, while Wimax is being used in SE Asia, including Thailand, Korea (WiBro/Wimax) India, and also Africa. Wimax has a better potential then LTE because of its timing. Companies like Time Warner and Comcast will fuel the future of cable on the wimax network. Processor giant Intel is implanting these MiMo processors in

...
(continues)