Stop Swift Boating WiMAX

Xohm is a 4G network because it is an OFDMA network. 4G does NOT equal IMT-Advanced. 4G = OFDMA.
The reason for 16m is not to compete with LTE, but to meet the requirements of IMT-Advanced.
LTE is a 'WiMAX me too' If WiMAX is so bad and "unproven", then why is LTE coming? LTE is almost exactly the same thing as WiMAX with a different uplink technology. And LTE is NOT backwards compatible with the existing GSM ecosystem because 2G and 3G are completely different technologies. Sure, you can do multimode EDGE/HSPA/LTE, just as you can do EDGE/HSPA/WiMAX and EV-DO/WiMAX too.

Journalists compare WiMAX to municipal Wi-Fi networks because they do not understand what they are writing about and think that WiMAX is "Wi-Fi on steroids." Combine that with wanna-be sensational headlines, and it comes out all wrong.

Agreed. 4G/3G/3.5G who knows what they really mean? Even when they specify download speeds it is not straight forward. ATT 3G network can reach a theoretical limit of 7.2 Mbps for the downlink, but that translates to actual speeds of 700 Kbps—1.7 Mbps. With WiMAX, Sprint is seeing real world speeds between 2-4 Mbps with a theoretical rates much higher (I've heard 11 MBps when sitting next to a tower). Two of the main reason for these speed discrepancies are distance from the tower and the number of users that are on the same cell site. Another Sprint advantage is that with 100 MHz of 2.5 Ghz spectrum each tower can support more users. So even though they need to build more cell towers since 2.5 GHz spectrum doesn't travel as far, each one of their towers can support more users. I'm not factoring in the backhaul equation which is going to be an issue for all carriers.

I'm going to dive into the 4G terminology mess on Friday. It's one of these elephant problems created by the marketing people.

There currently is no technology that delivers 4G capabilities that is available for the mass market. However as the first poster alluded to LTE and next-gen WiMAX [IEEE 802.16m] will be 4G like and available at roughly the same time (2011-2012). Sprint's WiMAX network will be upgradeable to the new standard when its ready which is one advantage that is has over AT&T/Verizon. Sprint can use its existing 100 MHz (approx) they use now to deliver 4G capabilities. AT&T and Verizon will need new spectrum (like their 700 MHz) or refarm their 2G spectrum for LTE. So Sprint and WiMAx will have 2-3 years headstart on perfecting their technology and it should be an easier upgrade for them when 4G Wimax is ready. I think AT&T/Verizon see that reality and are rightfully worried.

All non-AT&T, Verizon Wireless players should be looking at Wi-Max Baltimore very closely from a market acceptance point of view. A concern is the amount of marketing clout that Sprint can put into the effort with stock trading at $5.00.

Marketing programs supporting launches that create a "viral effect" (aka-IPhone) result from game-changing technology aligned brilliantly with user demands (net speed, user interface simplicity, number of applications, etc.).

Let's hope that all of the scary negative [Wall Street] "headwind" does not impair what should be a positive market contribution. I wish SPRINT success...and it may be time for the other Clearwire partners to pitch in - they are all family now with big bad competitors (with 75%+ market share).

Dude, check yourself. The whisper campaign is real. WiMAX is all about wresting power away from the AT&Ts and Verizons of the world. Case in point-- If Verizon was really serious about a truly open network, Google wouldn't be forking over half a billion dollars to support the new Clearwire. When these kind of stakes are on the table there is no reason to act shocked or surprised about a whisper campaign.

Doug,

I think WiMAX IS an unproven WWAN technology in any kind of mobile, scaled deployment. It has been ridiculously OVER-hyped for about 6 years by biased companies with something to gain, and massive budgets out of Santa Clara. LTE is much further along NOW than WiMAX was in 2004, when Paul Otellini said we'd have it in our laptops by 2005.

I don't agree with your theory of a "whisper campaign". I think WiMAX has been given a free ride by the press and analysts for too long. It is repeatedly spun as the next coming. Entire conferences, like the WCAI.org, have had their Boards and their agendas fully consumed by the WiMAX hype wagon. To suggest that WiMAX gets harsh treatment in the court of public opinion is a farce.

But I do agree with you on this point: there's no need to talk down Sprint's WiMAX effort at this particular juncture. Now we have a real world test that will show us once and for all how well it works. If it goes well, and the business case works out, we'll see subscriber growth and Sprint will expand Xohm's footprint rapidly, if it has problems, we'll see delayed roll-out, excuses, and little growth.

So at this point, why argue about it? Let's give it a chance. I have my doubts about WiMAX, but I hope it succeeds. This country needs much more innovation, telecom competition, and broadband providers - and right now Sprint is the one bringing that to market.

You're right that there's no legitimate reason to bias Xohm news articles as negative...or positive. Let's watch closely and see how it goes.

The technology that WiMAX is based upon ALREADY will form the VERY BASIS of any 'true' 4G technology.

In fact, WiMAX's design is already scalable to '4G'... The minute 4 x 4 MIMO base stations and receivers come to play, and 20Mhz WiMAX channels are a reality (again, CPE's and BTS's don't support such techs yet), you'd be easily to get data rates up in the league of '4G'.

LTE = NothingG. Doesn't even EXIST, and won't for many years to come.

Spot-on Doug! Those of us who are *actually* following this technology have witnessed the ITU-R (specifically Working Party 8F, the group defining IMT-Advanced) behave like a highly politicized process controlled largely by wireless incumbents. Thus endth the lesson.

Who cares what 'G' it is!!!!????. If it performs well and is affordable, people will sign up. End users don't care what the ITU calls it, or what 'IMT-Advanced' means. The fact is, WiMAX is a multi-megabit, all-IP, OFDMA-based, MIMO capable broadband wireless network technology. It will clearly be a better performing and more economical solution for wide area mobile broadband than any existing narrowband cellular network, regardless of what 'G' it is.

Corrections:
IEEE806.12e-2005 --> IEEE 802.16e-2005
IEEE806.12m --> IEEE 802.16m

I don't understand why so many people call XHOM a 4G network. It simply isn't. IEEE806.12e-2005, which the current mobile WiMAX (Release 1.0) is based on, won't meet 4G requirements or IMT-Advanced -- a standard yet to be decided. You have to wait for WiMAX Release 2.0, based on IEEE806.12m, to be standarized in 2011 to compete with LTE.