<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none;" alt="" src="https://px.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=1448210&amp;fmt=gif">
Free Research
ABI Research Blog (117)

Looking at the 4G Issue as Marketing vs ITU Definition Misses the Mark

Nov 4, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

Almost everyone is casting the debate around 4G's definition as having just two sides. One side is a pure marketing side uses 4G as a label to sell services. The other side hinges on the ITU's definition of IMT-Advanced. Since the ITU is equating IMT-Advanced to 4G, those going by ITU's definition can now point to WiMAX (802.16e) and LTE as not being 4G. By that logic, Sprint's WIMAX network and Verizon's LTE network are "technically not 4G." Based on this, one can only conclude that they are 3G. This leaves the door open for T-Mobile USA to say that their network is a 4G network too.

There is a third side here that is being ignored by most people. The only reason there is this much confusion is because instead of the ITU defining IMT-Advanced with all of its speed and latency requirements, they have in fact equated IMT-Advanced with 4G. But all logic fails here. As I said in an earlier post, 1G = analog, 2G = TDMA, 3G = CDMA, and 4G = OFDMA. It is really that simple. Today's 3G technologies are all based on 3G. OFDMA is a completely new technology compared to 3G technologies. What comes after 3? 4 does. OFDMA technologies are the 4th generation of WWAN air interfaces.

So does that mean people will call WiMAX 2 (802.16m) and LTE-Advanced 5G? No. These are also OFDMA-based technologies. I've always disliked the use of decimals in these generations, but if you are going to used that to make it easier to understand, then the IMT-Advanced versions of these technologies will be referred to as 4.5G.

All these WiMAX and LTE technologes are 4G. It's easy to prove. Just as 3G technologies could fall back to their slower versions, these 4G technologies will do the same. EV-DO Rev B can fall back to slower versions, such as EV-DO Rev 0. HSPA+ can fall back to HSDPA. 802.16m can fall back to 802.16e. LTE-Advanced can fall back to LTE. Any argument that WiMAX and LTE are not 4G quickly falls apart because of the core technology as well as what they are compatible with.

So there are 3 aspects to this argument.

  • 4G as a marketing term - this is arbitrary
  • 4G as a core technology - this makes the most logical sense and can proven by compatibility with the IMT-Advanced versions - this is ABI Research's stance
  • 4G as the ITU defines it - this is based on arbitrary numbers for speed and latency (I mean arbitrary for the fundamental technology - it is not arbitrary in terms of meeting performance goals)

WiMAX and LTE are 4G - they bring with it:
  • Faster data rates
  • Lower latency
  • Lower cost/MB
  • Compatibility with their IMT-Advanced versions

T-Mobile's network is not a 4G network. They feel they have license to call it a 4G network for two reasons:
  • Their network runs faster than early 4G networks
  • The ITU said that WiMAX and LTE are not 4G, so if Sprint and Verizon are calling it 4G, then it's OK for them to do the same.
But this is completely wrong. Here's why:
  • Speeds of generations can overlap. The latest versions of 3G can certaintly be faster than the newest versions of 4G. The same thing happened with 2G and 3G. It's not just the speeds, but the fundamental technology and what it is compatible with. HSPA+ is the end of a 3G roadmap. WiMAX and LTE are the beginning of 4G roadmaps.
  • HSPA+ is a CDMA technology which is 3G.

So we have covered Sprint's WiMAX, Verizon's LTE, and T-Mobile's HSPA+. AT&T jumped into the fray saying that they have had an HSPA+ network for longer than T-Mobile has. Yes, that is true. That is the reason why their networks are not the same HSPA+ networks. AT&T has older base stations that can only handle 16 QAM. T-Mobile rolled out its 3G network much later, allowing it to do so with newer, more powerful base stations that support 64 QAM. This is one of the components that goes into how fast an HSPA+ network can go. T-Mobile's HSPA+ is faster than AT&T's HSPA+. They are not the same.

Read More

Dragonwave reinforces their unified legacy and IP backhaul

Nov 3, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

With the recent acquisition of Axerra​, Dragonwave has made a move to diversify their reach in terms of backhaul. Supplying most ofClearwire's backhaul for WiMAX networks through their microwave products, Dragonwave has had a revenue boost due to the 4G service provider deploying and expanding their networks in many major cities throught the United States. This has positioned the company in providing anall-IP based microwave backhaul for service providers. Not limited solelytoWiMAX, their solutions areattractive to new greenfield, overlay, and network expanding LTEdeployments.

The Axerra acquisitionpositions them for providingTDM supportover pseudowire technology, throughtheir packet based microwave solutions. This places them in a good position to provide microwave backhaul to service providers with legacy infrastructure who are not willing to let go of the advantages TDM has to offer. Incumbent operators are amongst these service providers, and their transition away from TDM technologies can be slow and may go through transitional phases.

TDMbackhaul provides for these service providers withlegacy equipment, a certain quality of service and ease of management that can't be found on a regular Ethernet backhaul.

With the acquisition valued at $9.5 million, both sides are eager to expand their customer base and work towards a unified backhaul solution.The complications of having to upkeep 2 separate TDM and IP networks, and in some cases, 3 if they also have an SDH/SONET network, adds value to their services and can attract carrierswhom have been watching this company's product shipments and portfolio grow.

Read More

Amazon and Vudu’s Digital Lockers offer instant gratification

Nov 3, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

Recently, both Vudu and Amazon provided instant gratification for people buying DVDs or Blu-ray discs. These announcements are likely to bring digital lockers into primetime. Vudu announced that it will delivery physical and digital copies together with Toy Story 3, allowing the instant gratification of Video on Demand, coupled with a physical disc which can be picked up at Walmart (Vudu’s parent). This strategy will give customers a chance to become familiar with the Vudu platform with little risk, provide instant gratification for the impulse purchase, and drive traffic to Walmart stores among video customers. No word on other titles to be included in this program.

Amazon’s similar “Disc+ On Demand” announcement was more far-reaching, covering 10,000 titles! This will include previous purchases of eligible titles. Unfortunately, none of the three items recently purchased for me as a gift by Mom – Cars, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, or March of the Penguins was available. Even if they were, I would need to log into my mom’s account! Hopefully, they will work out a way to gift a digital copy as the service becomes more popular.
Assuming Vudu does expand its offerings – which one should you choose? It depends on what brand of internet TV you use, as shown on HD guru. If you use an internet adaptor, Roku and Google TV both support Amazon VoD but not Vudu. Boxee supports Vudu both not Amazon VoD. Apple TV doesn’t support either!

Read More

Nokia launches Digital Radio Headset (DAB)

Nov 1, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

A few months ago when I published our Digital Radio report, I stuck my head out and suggested that network operators would push handset manufacturers to include digital radio (DAB or HD Radio) receivers in handsets to provide high quality music experiences – with smartphones starting to include them in 2011. Recently, Nokia launched a headset accessory that includes a DAB receiver with a micro-USB interface to enable handsets to receive DAB radio. They previously announced a video versions supporting DVB-H. The device is expected to start selling before the end of the year in the UK for 40- 45.

While this falls short of incorporation in the handset itself – it points to continued demand for DAB radio in Europe, and handset manufacturers paying attention to the trend. Nokia’s strategy could include testing demand with a standalone product, capturing a larger market than their own handsets and/or avoiding adding cost into a competitively priced phone while leveraging a strong accessory market.

Read More

Broadcom buys Femto chipset vendor Percello – Positive endorsement for Femtocell market

Oct 27, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

Broadcom is the largest Wi-Fi chipset vendor in the market. Its purchase of Percello, a small and upcoming femtocell chipset supplier from Israel is a positive endorsement of the state of the femto market. It also is proof of the complementary nature of femto and WiFi where vendors are becoming more open to the need for heterogeneous access technologies.

The femtocell market has definitely turned a corner in 2010 with femtocell shipments expected to cross the 1 million milestone, with larger volumes expected in 2011. There are around 17 operators across the world that are offering a commercial femtocell services. Contract manufacturers in Asia are known to be feverishly ramping up capacity in the last few months preparing for a wave of orders. One of the prominent femtocell vendors Alcatel-Lucent has announced 14 femto contracts that it has secured during 2Q-3Q 2010. There is momentum in the market, something which Broadcom felt was reason enough for it to invest in.

Broadcom has been known to be shopping around, looking for the right time and right supplier to acquire. With Percello it has acquired a growing business that is now supplying to leading femto vendors like Ubiquisys. Most femtocell operators are now diversifying with their OEM supply chains as networks mature and interoperability starts to set in. Femto OEMs are also diversifying their chipset supply chains. This is a sign of a maturing market.

Broadcom could trigger the introduction of Wi-Fi/Femto integrated SoCs. Integrated Wi-Fi femto/pico access points have already surfaced especially for outdoor/metro deployments. Broadcom not only brings with it the cash reserves and clout of a large chipset supplier into the femto market, but it also brings with it experience of riding the Wi-Fi chipset wave where integration and cost reduction have been key to the success of Wi-Fi.

Broadcom also supplies chipsets for 2G/3G handsets as well as DSL/Cable Modems and IPTV set-top boxes. Therefore, Broadcom brings expertise not only in WiFi but cellular, DSL, cable, IPTV all of which are candidates for femto integration. Broadcom’s portfolio lends itself very well to femtocells complementing and strengthening its position as a leading telecom chipset supplier.

One aspect on the timing of this acquisition could be that Broadcom have their eye on LTE and with this announcement they probably get to catch up with their rival Qualcomm. Broadcom recently purchased Beceem to strengthen its WiMAX client base and build its WiMAX/LTE strategy. Percello is also known to have an LTE multimode femto chipset in the works, which could prove valuable to Broadcom. While that could very well be the case, the femtocell chipset battleground we expect the femto chipset battleground to be around WCDMA in the near-medium term where majority of the shipments are expected to be.

While the technicalities and legalities of the acquisition are figured out in the next few months, Broadcom needs to roll up its sleeves and get working from day one. They will need to act quickly, align their strategy and product portfolio with Percello to compete and differentiate themselves in this fast changing, super competitive marketplace.


Further analysis on the impact on this announcement on the femto chipset ecosystem is available in an upcoming Research Insight which is part of our Femto and Small Cell Research Service.


Read More

TV Apps get some AIR

Oct 25, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

Adobe’s MAX global developer conference starts today. They are releasing a new version of Adobe AIR 2.5, and providing a number of significant updates on Flash 10.1. AIR is essentially Flash in a box rather than in a brower – so AIR is a good technology for building Apps. Some say there are two types of Apps developers in the world – those that prefer Java, and those that prefer Flash. The big brouhaha with Apple’s lack of Flash support was that it forced many Flash developers to migrate to new platforms for publishing their Apple applications.
AIR provides cross-platform development tools that work on multiple platforms – from mobile phones to tablets all the way to the TV. It was already announced that Flash 10.1 is working on Google TV, and this announcement is another piece of news that points toward a Google Apps store, filled with Adobe Apps.
More notable is that Samsung will ship AIR 2.5 in Samsung SmarTV devices early next year. Samsung has been trying hard to woo developer’s to their TV’s application software development kit (SDK) – including offering $500K in prizes to the best applications developed in a soon-to-end contest. Samsung has now taken another step to make it much easier to develop applications for their TV platform – they have announced support for Adobe AIR which will allow developers to take web-based applications (or even those written for the iPhone, now that Apple has opened the door again for Flash-based Apps), and just make minor tweaks (if at all).
In the last few years, the mobile app world has flourished – with Apple’s App Store and Android App Stores generating significant revenues. Adobe’s push to new platforms – notably tablets and TV’s – will help to take this healthy market beyond mobile. Adobe is pitching a one-size fits all App Store submission model called InMarket. While this is a good response to the increasing number of device types, OS platforms and app stores, the idea that the same app will end up on platforms which include mobile devices, tablets & notebooks, and TV’s is a little hard to swallow. There are too many format-specific, and form-factor specific features.
I look forward to seeing compelling new Apps on our TV – it may give family game night a whole new meaning.

Read More

Softbank Will Buy WillCom

Oct 22, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

Softbank's impending purchase of Willcom is something that has been talked about for about one year now. WillCom has provided PHS services and has been building its XG-PHS network, which some people refer to as a 4G network since it uses OFDMA. Why would Softbank buy Willcom?

Softbank wants Willcom's spectrum. In Japan, 2 companies won the beauty contest for valuable 2.5 GHz spectrum. One is UQ Communications, of which KDDI had to reduce its ownership to less than a third. UQC chose to deploy WiMAX. After some setbacks and delays, UQC's network achieve very fast speeds, its coverage is expanding, and its subscribers are growing. The other company that received 2.5 GHz spectrum was Willcom. Willcom chose to deploy XG-PHS, a next generation PHS network. Since then, it has run into financial trouble, and Softbank has long been rumored to be interested in buying it.

Now it looks like Softbank will be buying Willcom. Softbank intends to deploy LTE, but they must keep up the XG-PHS network as well to adhere to the requirements for winning the spectrum. It will require devices that use chipsets that support both LTE and XG-PHS. This provides Softbank with the backdoor it needs to use this spectrum for LTE. It's very analogous to how LightSquared is using satellite spectrum for LTE by ensuring that devices have chipsets that also support the satellite connectivity (essentially all of the Qualcomm chipsets - see ABI Research's upcoming Insight for more on that).

If you want to know more about the 4G chipset vendors who are supporting XG-PHS, and thus will have an opportunity to work with device vendors selling devices for Softbank's upcoming LTE network, you can read more about that in our report on the 4G semiconductor market.

Read More

Why Today's WiMAX and LTE Are 4G Technologies

Oct 21, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

​What is 4G?

This is a question that I have discussed with perhaps hundreds (literally) of people throughout the mobile wireless industry over the last 5 years or so. ABI Research considers today's WiMAX (802.16e) and LTE technologies to be 4G. Some people in the industry agree with us on this, and others disagree. Now that the ITU has officially accepted 802.16m and LTE-Advanced as IMT-Advanced technologies, this issue has come up again. What makes it more confusing is that where the ITU mostly referred to IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced in the past, they are including "3G" and "4G" with these groupings, respectively. WiMAX and LTE, in ABI Research's opinion, are still 4G technologies. Here is why:

Designation of technology generations (1G through 4G) are used to describe different types of air interfaces. They are grouped like this:

  • 1G - analog, frequency division
  • 2G - shift to digital, frequency + time division [TDMA]
  • 3G - frequency + code division [CDMA]
  • 4G - orthogonal frequency division [OFDMA] (and offshoots of OFDMA)
It has been argued that some of the criteria to meet IMT-2000 or IMT-Advanced are arbitrary, such as the data rate - why 100 Mbps and not 107 Mbps or 39 Mbps? It's just a number - a number that is necessary to set a threshhold to meet a goal, but it does not change what the technology fundamentally is.

Within 2G, technologies in a family are compatible. The latest iterations of EDGE can fall back to older iterations of EDGE, back to GPRS, and even back to GSM. Within 3G, it is the same. The most complex version of HSPA+ can fall back to a very simple and slower version of HSPA+, back to HSPA, back to HSDPA, and even back to WCDMA. EV-DO Rev B can fall back to Rev A and back to Rev 0. (It can even fall back to CDMA 2000 1x, because it is based on CDMA.)
All 2G air interfaces are based off of a form of TDMA. All 3G air interfaces are based on a form of CDMA. WiMAX and LTE are not based on CDMA, but rather OFDMA.

Of course, WiMAX and LTE do not meet IMT-Advanced specifications. WiMAX 2 (802.16m) and LTE-Advanced, however, do meet IMT-Advanced specifications. 802.16m can fall back to 802.16e, and LTE-Advanced can fall back to LTE. So if the IMT-Advanced-compliant versions are 4G, then today's WiMAX and LTE technologies surely must be 4G technologies as well, because they are forward and backwards compatible. A 4G technology cannot fall back to a 3G technology - that is impossible.

As a background, it was the WiMAX Forum who lobbied hard to get WiMAX (802.16e) accepted as an IMT-2000 technology. It is not because the WiMAX Forum thought it was also a 3G technology. It has to do with a different reason - spectrum. The WiMAX Forum wanted the possibility and potential of WiMAX to have access to IMT-2000-designated spectrum. The 3GPP pushed for LTE to be accepted as an IMT-2000 technology as well.

Some people will say that dual-carrier HSPA+ with 64 QAM with MIMO can go faster than today's initial WiMAX technologies. Yes, they can. But it is not just about speed, but about the combination of speed, latency, capacity, and cost/MB. There is where WiMAX and LTE are different. More importantly, it is more about the fundamental radio technology being used.

Some people describe 1G through 4G as marketing terms. They are certainly used as marketing terms because they are easier to grasp than "IMT-2000" or "IEEE 802.16e." But they are more than just marketing terms, because engineers and product managers use "3G" and "4G" as well, since they are shorter to say and align very well with the fundamental technologies behind them.

WiMAX and LTE are based on OFDMA and are something completely different from the 3G technologies on the market. They have room for improvement in their current form, but as their IMT-Advanced versions develop and come to market, today's 4G technologies will not be left stranded because they will be compatible with the coming IMT-Advanced-compliant 4G technologies.

Read More

Cheering for Hulu

Oct 21, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

I cut the cord around 2004 when I moved from LA to SF – we had lived in apartment complexes where the cable was heavily subsidized and was really the only option. We elected to use Netflix to catch up on a lot of movie’s we’d missed, watch TV shows from start to end, etc. There are a few reasons I really wish I had cable, notably: Food TV, the Tour de France, and watching more MLB (luckily, the post-season is on Fox. Go Giant’s!) I’ve recently started to use Hulu to watch a few shows and be a little more current than Netflix allows – mostly shows I wouldn’t admit I watch (OK, I had a crush on Ali – the Bachelorette). I’m eager for the release of Hulu Plus on my Sony Blu-ray player (coming this fall), so that I can fork over $10 per month to watch Hulu content in my Living Room instead of my study (OK – I can do it with a laptop now).

I absolutely understand that the networks – who own the content – want Hulu revenue to supplement (or replace in full measure) their broadcast revenue. While we watch less ads on Hulu than broadcast TV (in minutes) those ads are much more targeted – they are delivered based on what Hulu (and any search partners) know about us. They should ultimately be able to achieve higher bids per impression, and similar revenue per airing. Hulu also has interactive ads that connect you to more information about product and services, merging impression ads with click-through ads.
Hulu is the networks’ extension onto the internet, and is often forced to push their defensive tactics to the customers. They recently did so by enforcing a black-out of Fox content to Cablevision customers – extending the cable carriage dispute onto the internet. I’m glad they acknowledged their distaste for the matter: “Unfortunately, we were put in a position of needing to block Fox content on Hulu in order to remain neutral during contract negotiations between Fox and Cablevision.” Also – it appears to have been a short-lived action, given the inability of Hulu (Fox) to distinguish between Cablevision Cable customers and Cablevision Internet customers.
The News Corp (Fox) action was anti-competitive. These customers can watch the signals over the air with an HD antenna – why should the internet be different? More avenues of content means more competition – which is better for consumers. Period. Hulu, from now on, please stand up for your customers a little more against your big daddy (News Corp / Fox).

Read More

Who Wins with Limited Access Mobile Broadband Plans - Wi-Fi

Oct 21, 2010 12:00:00 AM / by Admin

0 Comments

Wi-Fi equipment growth continues on a healthy pace in part due to businesses and customers purchasing the recently (relatively) approved IEEE 802.11n standard. Another driver includes more devices with embedded Wi-Fi including smartphones, netbooks and media tablets. ABI Research projects that by 2015, 94% of all smartphones will have Wi-Fi radios. Nearly 100% of all new netbooks and media tablets include Wi-Fi. Businesses continue to deploy the technology with healthcare and education the top two industries for Wi-Fi access point shipments.

But another driver which has received little fanfare for promoting Wi-Fi is the recent shift by many operators to offer limited access broadband data plans. These plans were introduced to help curb the rapid growth of mobile data traffic on cellular 3G networks. For customers on these plans, they will now be more cognizant of available Wi-Fi access rather than simply connecting only on cellular via an unlimited data plan.

This may seem like a minor addition to the many drivers supporting Wi-Fi. But it is important because cellular networks continue to improve. 4G is the latest iteration and offers average speeds on par with 802.11 b/g. IT managers now consider 4G a viable alternative/addition to Wi-Fi. Because cellular is a WAN technology, its advantage is customers have to think less if at all about where they are for access. However now with limited access mobile broadband plans, cellular is notthe panacea -customersneed to think about how much they use.

Forward thinking Wi-Fi vendors such as Cisco know that they need to move beyond a Wi-Fi only world particularly now with 4G networks imminent. While this is a good strategy since Wi-Fi will likely never be a truly WAN technology, the capacity crunch on cellular networks which ushered in limited access mobile broadband plans arrests the advances cellular was making on Wi-Fi. Not many Wi-Fi equipment vendors talk about this but they should be jumping for joy...and thanking the operators.

Read More

Lists by Topic

see all

Posts by Topic

See all

Recent Posts