NEWS: Skeptical Qualcomm crashes WiMax lovefest

<http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003298579_wimax11.html>

Two developments in the past year have given WiMax, the wireless
broadband technology that promises high-speed Internet access to
almost any device anywhere, virtually unstoppable momentum. One is
Kirkland-based Clearwire's expanding national WiMax rollout. The
other was Sprint Nextel's decision to use it to build nationwide
wireless broadband networks.

The energy generated by these moves is noticeable at WiMax World, an
annual industry conference that kicks off today in Boston, with some
preliminary events held Tuesday.

But not every company at the conference is high on WiMax, even though
the two major commitments for two nationwide networks clearly put it
ahead of other technologies.

Enter Qualcomm.

The San Diego wireless giant is at WiMax World to explain its
alternative technology and provide what may be the sole opposition to
WiMax at the conference.

Qualcomm was one of the companies competing to win Sprint Nextel's
business to help build a national, next-generation network. It was
thought to have a good chance, given that it provides the CDMA
technology that supports Sprint's cellphone network.

Furthermore, it purchased a company called Flarion Technology, which
conducted a successful wireless-broadband trial with Nextel before
Sprint acquired Nextel. So the news that WiMax, and not Qualcomm's
technology, would be the backbone of Sprint's wireless broadband
network, put Qualcomm on the defense.

...

Belk, the Qualcomm executive, said such predictions promise more than
the technology can deliver. He expressed skepticism over WiMax's
apparent cost advantage. He also said 3G networks -- and their future
technology paths -- will deliver the network capacity consumers need,
and when carriers are ready, Qualcomm will be able to deliver a
wireless broadband technology from Flarion.

[MORE]

MY COMMENT: Can you say, "sour grapes?"

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 20:54:25 GMT, John Navas
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<(E-Mail Removed)>:

><http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003298579_wimax11.html>
>
> Two developments in the past year have given WiMax, the wireless
> broadband technology that promises high-speed Internet access to
> almost any device anywhere, virtually unstoppable momentum. One is
> Kirkland-based Clearwire's expanding national WiMax rollout. The
> other was Sprint Nextel's decision to use it to build nationwide
> wireless broadband networks.
>[SNIP]

As I posted in another thread: VoIP over WiMAX. Think dirt cheap
"killer app."

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:52:01 GMT, John Navas
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>As I posted in another thread: VoIP over WiMAX. Think dirt cheap
>"killer app."

Close. I suspect that an alternative method of yacking on the phone
is not going to be much of a draw, especially with toll free calling.
However, methinks that Cellular Video Phone might be a bit more
compelling. Just one problem. The camera lens is on the wrong side
of the cell phone (unless you use a headset).

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 03:32:24 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<(E-Mail Removed)>:

>On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:52:01 GMT, John Navas
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>As I posted in another thread: VoIP over WiMAX. Think dirt cheap
>>"killer app."
>
>Close. I suspect that an alternative method of yacking on the phone
>is not going to be much of a draw, especially with toll free calling.

I'm talking about cost to the carrier, not the consumer.

>However, methinks that Cellular Video Phone might be a bit more
>compelling.

Video phone is one of those seemingly cool ideas that's never caught on.
I'm not surprised, because I personally don't like the idea. Do you?

>Just one problem. The camera lens is on the wrong side
>of the cell phone (unless you use a headset).

There are already phones with the lens in the correct side.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 06:52:29 GMT, John Navas
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>However, methinks that Cellular Video Phone might be a bit more
>>compelling.
>
>Video phone is one of those seemingly cool ideas that's never caught on.
>I'm not surprised, because I personally don't like the idea. Do you?

Nope. Not me. However, I know a few parents and kids that are
literally addicted to various IM chat programs that support video.
Also some commercial services that I'm sure would be interested in a
cellular version of their exising bedroom camera offerings.

>>Just one problem. The camera lens is on the wrong side
>>of the cell phone (unless you use a headset).
>
>There are already phones with the lens in the correct side.

I just burned a few minutes looking at the handset pictures on
verizonwireless.com. None of the ordinary or PDA phones have the
camera on the users side.

Nokia has the N80, which does have a video phone feature and the
camera on the user side:
http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/N80/0...feat:1,00.html
It's the only one that I could find and I'm not even sure if the lens
near the top of the phone is the camera or a view finder.

I'm also not sure about the N93, which is more of a digital camera and
video recorder, than a cell phone:
http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/N93/0,7747,,00.html
The rest of the camera phones have the camera on the opposite side.
What model where you thinking of?


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:10:07 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<(E-Mail Removed)>:

>On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 06:52:29 GMT, John Navas
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>There are already phones with the lens in the correct side.
>
>I just burned a few minutes looking at the handset pictures on
>verizonwireless.com. None of the ordinary or PDA phones have the
>camera on the users side.

Verizon tends to be behind the technology curve, so I suggest you check
cell phone review websites in the future.

>Nokia has the N80, which does have a video phone feature and the
>camera on the user side:
> http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/N80/0...feat:1,00.html
>It's the only one that I could find and I'm not even sure if the lens
>near the top of the phone is the camera or a view finder.
>
>I'm also not sure about the N93, which is more of a digital camera and
>video recorder, than a cell phone:
> http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/N93/0,7747,,00.html
>The rest of the camera phones have the camera on the opposite side.
>What model where you thinking of?

Nokia N70
Sony Ericsson K800i
Sony Ericsson P990i

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:28:08 GMT, John Navas
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Verizon tends to be behind the technology curve, so I suggest you check
>cell phone review websites in the future.

I wanted something that I could buy. The review sites are fine if I
know the maker and model number, but not so great for searching for
obscure features. I agree that Verizon is somewhat technically
retarded.

>Nokia N70

| http://www.nokia.com/nseries/index.h...nside,main_n70
That will work. GSM/WCDMA only. The list of features does offer
"Two-way video call capability". There's my killer application of the
near future. If it can be done with UMTS today, it can be done better
with Wi-Max.

>Sony Ericsson K800i
>Sony Ericsson P990i

| http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?...=pp1&pid=10407
Yep. "Video phone" is on the feature list. GSM/WCDMA only.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 02:01:49 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<(E-Mail Removed)>:

>On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:28:08 GMT, John Navas
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Verizon tends to be behind the technology curve, so I suggest you check
>>cell phone review websites in the future.
>
>I wanted something that I could buy. The review sites are fine if I
>know the maker and model number, but not so great for searching for
>obscure features. I agree that Verizon is somewhat technically
>retarded.

I've had pretty good luck with site search engines, and with Google
site-restricted searches.

>>Nokia N70
>
>| http://www.nokia.com/nseries/index.h...nside,main_n70
>That will work. GSM/WCDMA only. The list of features does offer
>"Two-way video call capability". There's my killer application of the
>near future.

Maybe, but I'm skeptical.

>If it can be done with UMTS today, it can be done better
>with Wi-Max.

I personally don't see any real advantage to the consumer of WiMAX (as
compared to Wi-Fi) over HSDPA. What am I missing?

>>Sony Ericsson K800i
>>Sony Ericsson P990i
>
>| http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?...=pp1&pid=10407
>Yep. "Video phone" is on the feature list. GSM/WCDMA only.

As I write, Verizon (CDMA 2000) tends to be behind the technology curve.
Bluetooth was another notable case in point. Perhaps you should
consider another carrier.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:28:08 GMT, John Navas
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Verizon tends to be behind the technology curve, so I suggest you check
>> cell phone review websites in the future.
>
> I wanted something that I could buy. The review sites are fine if I
> know the maker and model number, but not so great for searching for
> obscure features. I agree that Verizon is somewhat technically
> retarded.


Actually it is different than you think. They tend to be behind on the
toy stuff that users see. But as far as having a solid redundant
technically advanced network they are way ahead of the others.

Did you know that most GSM installations don't have battery or
generators or redundant data paths?

>
>> Nokia N70
>
> | http://www.nokia.com/nseries/index.h...nside,main_n70
> That will work. GSM/WCDMA only. The list of features does offer
> "Two-way video call capability". There's my killer application of the
> near future. If it can be done with UMTS today, it can be done better
> with Wi-Max.
>
>> Sony Ericsson K800i
>> Sony Ericsson P990i
>
> | http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?...=pp1&pid=10407
> Yep. "Video phone" is on the feature list. GSM/WCDMA only.
>

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:23:25 -0400, George <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
in <(E-Mail Removed)>:

>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:28:08 GMT, John Navas
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Verizon tends to be behind the technology curve, so I suggest you check
>>> cell phone review websites in the future.
>>
>> I wanted something that I could buy. The review sites are fine if I
>> know the maker and model number, but not so great for searching for
>> obscure features. I agree that Verizon is somewhat technically
>> retarded.
>
>Actually it is different than you think. They tend to be behind on the
>toy stuff that users see. But as far as having a solid redundant
>technically advanced network they are way ahead of the others.

Irrelevant in this context, whether true or not, and many such features
are anything but "toys", notable case in point being way behind on less
functional Bluetooth.

>Did you know that most GSM installations don't have battery or
>generators or redundant data paths?

In fact GSM "installations" and technology are roughly comparable to
CDMA 2000.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>