Show All
Top 5
There are few reports in the networking industry that illicit as much dialogue and debate as Cisco’s annual Visual Networking Index (VNI). This year’s report proves no different. Released yesterday, the report has already garnered significant media coverage and a brief glance through some of the figures reveals why. There are some incredible predictions here, but one in particular has caught my attention.
Cisco forecasts that by 2015, there will be a significant shift in global IP traffic, with WiFi devices consuming more bandwidth than wired devices. The report highlights that WiFi traffic (including mobile devices) will rise to a commanding 54% of all IP data consumed, while wired traffic will decrease from 63% in 2010 to 46%. This is the first time that such a swing has occurred and there’s no indication that this trend will stop any time soon. Indeed, many analysts believe that wired traffic will only diminish as the proliferation of WiFi-enabled devices continues to grow.
It’s this proliferation that really captures my imagination. Cisco expects the number of Internet-connected devices to grow over the next four years to 15 billion. Globally this represents two connected devices per person; a figure that will no doubt increase as the tablet market continues to expand. The cultural significance of this could prove immense, especially in regards to education, healthcare and especially communication. There can be no question that the applications we’re developing now will impact upon how future generations live.
A recent report from the Pew Internet and American Life Project already underlines this impact, revealing that over 24% of American adults are now using VoIP services to communicate with friends and family. This figure marks an increase of 17% from 2007. However, Pew’s research indicates that most of these calls are made from urban environments. Imagine how this figure will change once rural communities have access to such services. What’s more, consider the impact of mobile VoIP applications as they grow in availability and popularity.
In an earlier post, I highlighted the threat VoIP services pose to mobile carriers, especially as we continue to migrate to LTE and 4G technologies. In an all data environment, mobile carriers will have to drastically redevelop their business models if they wish to remain financially viable and avoid becoming purely a transport link, the ‘dumb pipe’. Yet they will have to tread very carefully here. The end of the unlimited data package has already drawn significant concerns from users as they seek to take advantage of IP-based voice and video calls. These concerns will only grow as access to mobile bandwidth becomes increasingly reliable and widespread.
One direct impact of the removal of unlimited data packages is the significant increase in WiFi offloading and this is clearly reflected in Cisco’s forecast. Consider, for example, how many of your wireless devices are currently connected to your home router. I can count six, including two that are streaming video and one that’s streaming music. However, what’s frustrating here is the lack of WiFi connectivity away from your home environment. Yes, Starbucks has a great network of hotspots, but what about outside of this? The much-discussed WiFi blankets are still years from reality and it appears the appetite from carriers to work together to develop them is limited.
Even without any significant developments in WiFi blankets, there can be no doubt that we’re entering an age of WiFi connectivity. Cisco’s figures firmly highlight a trend away from wired devices to a mobile environment where access to video, communication, gaming and countless other applications is only an arm’s length away. As mobile devices become increasingly powerful this is surely a trend that will only accelerate.
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on Cisco’s report and especially the growth in WiFi traffic. Are you seeing a rise in the number of connected devices? Are you using WiFi networks more than cellular or wired? If so, what impact is this having on your life? Do you find yourself engaging more frequently in online activities?
New comment from James (Jim) F. Roche on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Excellent article! The potential of wi-fi has been not been exploited as it could/should have been in recent years. Early issues such as hardware costs, difficulties in establishing and maintaining connections, poor security, etc. have all been resolved. Experiments in public wi-fi have generally failed but there have been some successes. Many users of smartphones today don’t realise they have a wi-fi option that can significantly reduce their monthly usage bills. Technology advancements have also improved matters significantly: 802.11n, MIMO, WPA2, VPN’s have all helped to make wi-fi more usable than ever before.
Thanks, Jim. I appreciate the positive feedback. I completely agree that WiFi has been heavily underutilised. What fascinates me is how public WiFi networks develop from here. The data offload that many mobile carriers were hoping for hasn’t happened and the much-discussed WiFi blankets don’t appear to be arriving any time soon. Earlier in the week, I was glad to see the announcement of the Two Trees WiFi network in Brooklyn; the first of the five boroughs to rollout such access. Do you believe that this rollout signals a change in pace? Will other neighbourhoods and cities follow suit?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Kevin Meagher on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Thanks Gareth, good piece. I suggest that some of the developments in low-power wifi could make many of these predictions seem conservative. The battle for standards in the home could be over if small, low cost, sensors for energy management, automation and security could be networked over wifi. Have you any view on this?
Thanks, Kevin. This is an interesting question. There’s been a tremendous amount of investment in low-power WiFi technology over the past few years, especially in regards to chips. As the Internet of things becomes a reality, it will be critical to develop greater energy efficiency in WiFi-enabled devices, especially in the battle to reduce overall energy costs.
If we can achieve this, then I agree that the figures quoted in the VNI report will be dwarfed as more and more domestic appliances come online. What are you seeing in this space? Do you believe that we’re edging closer to the Internet of things?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Kevin Meagher on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Gareth – sorry for the delay responding to your question. This is a good debate.
We have seen huge changes as a result of the internet but it’s only just beginning and we have gone through the initial phase of growth based on content but what that has essentially done is make everything faster and better. The next phase will be control and this is where the Interent of Things will be realised – everything will be ip addressable. The benefits are huge and the value will be in exploiting data from Things to offer services so issues on revenues will not be so much about the icome from the pipe but from the value of data and 2-way control.
Evidence can be seen from big service providers (Comcast/Verizon et al) starting to work in home automation and the proliferation of broadband, apps on smart phones, agreement on standards (although there are still too many), and pressure on traditional service providers to find new revenues will all drive take up. The whole Smart Grid initiative is a classic driver for the ‘Internet of Things’ and I do believe wifi will actually be the key enabler when the dust settles on the early market
Thanks, Kevin. Sounds like a tantalising future. I’d be interested to know more on how service providers will capitalise on this opportunity. You mentioned that they’re already building the apps that will enable the Internet of things. However, do you expect Internet companies to rush in here? I’ve already seen Google positioning itself.
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Kevin Meagher on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Gareth, service providers are working hard to launch a range of new value added services that exploit their exsiting resources and capabilities to generate new revenues and the article on Verizon is very typical of what they are doing, http://bit.ly/k0fcOy
The problem is lack of standards and they are eagerly watching the wifi space because it could greatly simplify deployments. Indeed, Google is attacking the space but you need ‘things’ (by that I mean devices) and it’s unclear how they would roll out. Telcos and retailers sell things as well as services but Google have a gap. However, never underestimate their ingenuity – I can see a world where manufacturers supply devices to consumers that could automatically network using the Google platform via APIs and be managed through Apps. This woudl really challenge many traditional business models.
New comment from Mikko Jaakkola on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
I believe this is good assesment of the situation. LTE certainly helps on the cellular network capacity challenges but the demand is raising much faster than mobile operators can fulfill the need. By looking the predictions, it can be seen that added capacity by introduction of LTE is going to be eaten by the data growth around 2015. Also if you look that the connected devices are moving into lower price ranges, I have hard time to see those devices (and their user) be able and willing to carry $10 operator data-plan tax. World and the devices are certainly getting more and more connected and one big mobile operator pipe won’t be the most optimal solution (even for the operator) but good combination of WAN/Wireless LAN will do the trick. Wifi is the most promising technology today and while working over 12 yrs with the technology I’m not a least bit sad to see that happening
However, many things needs to happen in usability front to see the true explosion around the technology.
Thanks, Mikko. You make some great points here. There can be no question that data demand is outstripping network capacity, especially when we look at the timescale for LTE and 4G rollouts. Yes, parts of the US and Asia are moving forward with LTE deployments, but much of Europe will not have access until at least 2013. By this stage the number of connected devices will have once again leapt forward, especially, as devices continue to lower in cost.
As you highlight, it appears that WiFi is the only viable option to offload data demand. But how do we achieve this? As I mentioned in another reply, I was glad to see the announcement this week of the rollout of the Two Tree WiFi network in Brooklyn; the first of the five boroughs to rollout a WiFi blanket. Is this an indication that other rollouts will be happening soon? What do you see as the main obstacles to developing citywide WiFi blankets?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Pradeep Kumar on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
The future is definately a Wifi-Connectivity. The increase penetration of the smartphones, Tablet PC will definately create a need to Wifi Connectivity everywhere across the globe. The companies are heavily investing on this and will come up with better hardware and low cost solutions.
Thanks, Pradeep. This is a strong statement and one I agree with. We need to start leveraging WiFi technology to ensure that we’re able to capitalize on the significant advancement in smartphones, tablets and the applications that they enable. It’s incredible to imagine how some of the applications in remote learning, telemedicine, education, etc, could impact upon our communities once we have the necessary connectivity.
Do you believe that we’ll see the rollout of WiFi blankets soon?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Joseph Brunoli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
I recently gave a presentation on the future of WiFi in a 4G world. We ran some surveys among our HotSpot and got some very interesting results. For example, only 25% of respondents said they expected to stop using WiFi once LTE/4G became available. There are many more data points germane to this discussion.If you would like a copy of the full presentation let me know.
Thanks, Joseph. This sounds like an interesting survey. I’d be fascinated to review this in more detail. My email address is gspence@advaoptical.com. I have to confess that with the removal of unlimited data packages, I’d be tempted to continue using WiFi even with the availability of LTE/4G networks. Do you believe that mobile carriers will significantly alter pricing tariffs once we migrate to all-data networks? Indeed, how will the business model change for mobile carriers here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Mazlan Abbas on the Broadband World Forum LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/ljzdyp
Juniper Research predicts that Wi-Fi will play a significant role in easing data traffic by carrying 63% of data traffic.
Thanks, Mazlan. This is an interesting figure. Do you have any further details on this, especially in regards to timelines? I certainly agree that WiFi has the potential to play a significant role in offloading data, especially from already overburdened mobile networks. The key question is how we achieve this. The rollout of WiFi blankets appears to have largely reached a standstill and there appears to be little activity from mobile carriers to work together to build citywide hotspots.
Do you see any developments here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Mazlan Abbas on the Broadband World Forum LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/ljzdyp
The details are here http://bit.ly/leVp99. In my country, the mobile operators have shown their interests to deploy WiFi. There are plenty of places which are not covered. The cities need more WiFI coverage.
Thanks, Mazlan. I’m looking forward to digging a little deeper into this report. In regards to Malaysia’s mobile operators developing greater WiFi coverage, is this a consequence of the government’s HSBB project or wider market factors?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Mazlan Abbas on the Broadband World Forum LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/ljzdyp
Gareth – yes, you are right. Its also part of the new initiatives in having coverage everywhere.
New comment from Gavin Johns on the Broadband World Forum LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/ljzdyp
We recent conducted some research into the effect switching to WiFi has on delivered broadband performance and found that performance degrades by an average of 30%. If you are interested you can find the report at http://bit.ly/lfXAbk
Thanks, Gavin. WiFi performance is an increasingly hot topic, especially as video services become pervasive on smartphone and tablet devices. Yet one need only experiment with video conferencing on Skype or video streaming on BBC iPlayer to see that the quality of service is mixed to say the least. However, Cisco’s VNI figures highlight that people are willing to sacrifice performance for ease of use and convenient connectivity.
It will be interesting to see how governing bodies, standards groups and manufactures respond to the challenge of increasingly intensive WiFi data transport driven by video. One recent response from hardware manufacturers is to build video support directly into chipsets. Such a move signals the need to greatly improve how we accommodate the growing appetite for mobile video services in the hardware and not purely at the application layer.
How do you see the industry responding here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Good points are raised by all commenters. Like Mikko I have been involved with Wi-Fi for a lonf time – 20 odd years in fact. WiFi was considered a threat to the mobile operators but that picture has changed. Most of us agree that Wi-Fi has the potential to deliver the required capacity at reasonable cost. I am not sure that LTE will be able to do the same given the business model. In the case of Wi-Fi a lot of access points can be privately- or business owned where as LTE – presumably – will be operator owned, if only because of the need to protect the macrocells from undue interference.
Thanks, Jan. As you highlight, it’s incredible to see how WiFi has changed from a threat to the mobile industry to an ally. Yet do you believe that mobile carriers are doing enough to seize the opportunity here? There can be no question that mobile bandwidth demand will outstrip what LTE can deliver, especially as tablets and smartphones continue to become more affordable. What can mobile carriers to adequately respond?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
To Gareth’s question about the mobile operators and Wi-Fi: their biggest problem may well be a culture problem: train drivers do not easily become truck drivers and train operators do not easily become fleet managers…..:-) As every parallel this one is not accurate but you get my point. Both LTE and Wi-Fi use OFDM but that is where similarities stop. One danger that I see is that Wi-Fi, because of its much hyped performance will be seen as a panacea rather than as a technology with its own set of technical and operation issues. And as with any wireless technology, understanding RF propagation and RF re-use is key. This suggests one possible answer to yuor question: hire or acquire the right expertise!
New comment from Oli Rhys on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
The problem as I see it is that while LTE is going to be a big help in moving the market to a wireless defacto, there is currently a big ignorance of how WiFi and mobile 3G can interact to move data. The current thinking is that WiFi is for notebooks, and 3G is for smartphones and they don’t mix.
The crux of the problem is the cost issue. 3G, and presumably, LTE, will be charged on a Per GB measure. How difficult is this compared to Voice per second billing to understand and calculate? WiFi on the other hand is ‘free’. Yes, it is also measured in the same way on the company broadband, but it doesn’t register with the user in that way.
Telecom companies do need to address this issue to help them find an income stream in the next generation, however, maybe this is more about marketing than it is about a new solution. I look forward to the future!
Thanks, Oli. This is a fascinating question and one that I’ve been musing for some time. How do mobile carriers develop financially viable business models as we move to all-date networks? Microsoft’s recent purchase of Skype clearly underlines the role VoIP will play in LTE/4G networks, yet how do mobile carriers respond to this. With no traditional voice billing, how do they find new revenue streams? As I highlighted in an earlier post, one of the biggest fears for mobile carriers is that they become purely the transport link, the ‘dumb pipe’.
What do you see happening here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Ray Winter on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Oli & Gareth,
Like it or not, VIDEO eats network capaacity like no other service and therefore all the Network Operators will have to supplement their capacities by employing WiFi as part of their network.
I see the key to the Operators retaining and increasing their revenue streams is for them to expand their Data Bundling packages to include WiFi and Video, thus encouraging their customers into staying with them. The operators will also need to ensure VCC is operable (Voice Call Continuity). This is where a call (Data or Voice) calls began within a WiFi Network are transparently switched to the GSM network if the customer walks away from a WiFi Cell. I perfected VCC some three years ago for our Dual WiFi + quad band GSM Frequencies handset.
Clearly, the GSM operators are going to have to develop and expand their Data services portfolios to hold onto their customers. Interestingly Apple has done this with iTunes, Apps and iCloud and all it needs now is for Apple to establish themselves as a dual GSM/CDMA Operator for the industry to really get a wake-up call. My guess its around a year away. Google seem to be following the same strategy and the purchase of SKYPE by Microsoft together with the change of Nokia from Symbian to Windows means they are also following the same strategy. Vodafone et al had better watch out.
New reply from Oli Rhys on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Ray
What a fascinating insight. I had the mobile carriers having the major advantage over the fixed telecom companies, but I never thought of the IT companies having such an advantage over the likes of Vodafone.
The issue that I still see is that customer perception of the IT companies proposals is valueless, or rather, it is potentially available for nothing. However, to ‘steal’ telco provision is a major crime. The likes of Google etc will need to work on creating a marketplace where it is the norm to pay for data services, and that is going to be very difficult considering everything they do at the moment is ‘free’
It is possibly the only advantage that Vodafone and the other mobile telcos have!
New reply from Ray Winter on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Oli,
Google bought ON2 [Videos] and a major VOIP operator in past 12 months. Why?
Their business model is Advertisers pay for their services, not their users.
They also promote sales of Android Apps. It will not be long before App & Video suppliers will be forced to revenue share with Google
Apple’s business model is revenues from handset sales and ongoing per user monthly revenues from the GSM operators.
They also sell Music and APPS and they now want to charge the App suppliers for each one they sell to an iPhone user.
These revenues will in future will come from Music held by their iTune users via the APPLE iCloud and users will be forced to pay for storage space from Apple as well as for the music.
Vodafone sells Voice and an occasional App plus Internet Access Data Packages. There is very little money in voice, Apps and data transfers is where the ‘sticky’ money is. Apple and Google know this.
So if Google and Apple offer their services over The Internet, including VOIP and DATA and put VCC within the package, they have effectively disenfranchised Vodafone’s customer base or left some crumbs of the table for Vodafone. LTE is GSM and CDMA. The GSM Operators need to urgently counter Google and Apple’s two year start on Apps and I know exactly how to do that and am building the Apps to ensure they succeed.
Ray
New comment from Nitin Mittal on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Very true. In Indian context , WiFi is turning into a Broadband Revolution.But this requires right technology and right skill set to handle its challenges. All big telcos have already starting exploring opportunity in WiFi to offload 2G/3G traffic.
Thanks, Nitin. I’ve been reading a great deal on India’s networking infrastructure and am fascinated by the size and scope of some of the WiFi projects currently being discussed. One example is Bharti Airtel, which recently announced plans to build a WiFi mesh network with over 20,000 access points.
Do you believe the drive in WiFi connectivity will help the Indian government achieve some of its 2014 broadband goals?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Nitin Mittal on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
As I said , WiFi has its own challenges which requires right technology and skill set to handle it. New age WiFi (MIMO) is turning out be a big game changer in Indian environment. Since Big telcos have already made investments in other technologies , not showing much interest in deployment of larger WiFi Mesh networks. Need of hour is to attract fresh investments with new setups to take up this drive at a larger scale to achieve Broadband goals. Market potential is enormous and requires positive view of investors.
New reply from Nitin Mittal on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
“Apple’s iCloud Lets Wi-Fi Take the Strain ” , hope this statement shows existing and upcoming potential of Wi-Fi.
http://bit.ly/kbEC6c
New comment from Shariff Abdul Rahman on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
mobile carrier should be concerned on this trend. most new devices come with wifi enabled. if we’re talking about data offloading it is OK. I’m seeing voice offloading as well. it is fairly easy to run a sip server connected to best global routes nowaday, and resell the minutes. all you need is a good marketing, fair user interface (dialer, payment gateway etc) on sip client side.
for carrier, I would expect them to offload it to picocell (3g or LTE). they shouldn’t let their users detour into unlicensed band, loosing control over them. this is purely from commercial perspective and some security/consistency offered by 3G/LTE picocell. User stay in the same gsm network. check out picochip.com, I was using their first generation picoarray chip during my time in R&D.
New reply from Mikko Jaakkola on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Picocells are still using limited licensed bandwidth (and possibly always causing some interference to its normal network) and consume more network resources in many case than Wifi. I’m not saying that operators shouldn’t deploy picocells for the reasons mentioned above but I still claim that these two technologies are here stay and rather complement each other than compete. And yes, there are operators who will do everything in their power to own customers 100% but there will be more who recognize the strength of using both technologies in their business. Eg. if operator have flat data and voice calls, then they would rather have their customers use their network as little as possible and would be very happy to offload all data and voice traffic over the local ISP (as long as they get their monthly fees).
I wouldn’t overly worried about voice traffic and Wifi. VOIP will happen regardless what operators do so from that point of view the battle is already lost. The adoption rate is something that operators can have some control over (making phone calls dead cheap) but eventually VOIP adoption will stabilize to certain level (it won’t be 100%). You still want to have the monthly subscription for your cellular as there is still need for having WAN connection (on average price of the minutes would go down and monthly subscription fee would go up). Essentially, if Wifi voice would break through, the operators that charge only by minute would have to change their business plans or go out of business.
IMHO, Wifi can be used for voice at semi-controller environments (homes and enterprises) but I wouldn’t trust to it as my only voice technology in busy hotspot areas so I would have cellular voice plan as well as data plan.
To accelerate, entering into age of Wifi, I would like to see more free hotspots without landing pages (they kill all in pocket wifi offloading). Also hidden SSID should be banned altogether. This is a horrible feature making mobile devices into genital heating power-hungry devices when the device is forced spending the battery into probing each SSID separately – if you have tens or hundreds of profiles in your devices it will add up. Then there are a couple other nice little enhancements that would help but I don’t I let others to share their thoughts. I would be interested to know what you feel as being the blockers of entering into the age Wifi.
New reply from Shivkumar Jagannath on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
@Mikko EAP-AKA and EAP-SIM are two mechanisms for seamless authentication from 3G/2G to Wi-Fi in hotspots. Towerstream-like wholesale Wi-Fi business models would probably augur well for all operators who can have an SSID each on this infra at all hotspots.
Unfortunately, we see some operators in India wanting to setup their own hotspots.
New comment from Steven Namaseevayum on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
From our perspective WiFi has been an important technology for more than 5 years and has become strategic over the last couple of years because of the 3G network capacity and cost issues. There are solutions out there to seamlessly offload traffic onto WiFi and my expectation is that the two will co-exist in the longer term as eluded to by Joe.
Thanks, Steven. I notice that you’re based in the UK. What are you seeing in regards to WiFi offloading here? Looking around I see very few provisions for WiFi services, especially outside of London. BT has some traction, but the volume and quality of hotspots appears to be mixed at best.
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Steven Namaseevayum on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
There are a number of things happening at a broader level than the UK. My company itself is working on how to offload traffic onto WiFi and has recently announced a deal with Deutsche Telecom for the mass market. There are other initiatives such as the the Wireless Broadband Alliance is working with WiFi players on a new spec to assist in the seamless offload from 3G to WiFi – WISPr 2.0.
Thanks, Steven. I’d be fascinated to learn more about the DT news. Can you share any further details? It sounds as though this may be a large-scale project.
In regards to WISPr 2.0, I’ve been reading a lot about this and am excited by the prospect, especially as there seems to be strong interest from UK carriers. However, I haven’t seen any updates here in the past few months. Do you know of any activity?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Steven Namaseevayum on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Gareth, please see the news at the following link: http://bit.ly/k0DhbC.
Reference WBA, it’s a current initiative which is mentioned on the web-page: http://bit.ly/iO6nms. I will be at the next Roundtable next week where this will be discussed so it will be interesting to hear what the latest is
New comment from Tamer Shoukry on the Broadband World Forum LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/ljzdyp
We have a very unfortunate expereience here in Kuwait with WiFi implementations, as mobile operators here are forced to obtain their bandwidth from the ISP’s, so regardless of whether you are trying to get content off your HSDPA/UMTS connection or through the WiFi service at the mall, you are bound by the QoS at that moment provided by the ISP’s. So degradation of service is a given here. Making matters worse, becuase operators & ISP’s know that their WiFi service is substandard, they encourage users to get it when its available because its “free”, as most data subscriptions here in Kuwait are monthly flat rate! Try that on for size!
Thanks, Tamer. I’ve been reviewing reports recently on the state of Kuwait’s infrastructure and was surprised to find that it has some of the lowest growth rates among Gulf countries, especially in regards to penetration levels. However, I recently read news suggesting that the Ministry of Communications is planning to reduce its influence on the telecoms industry and develop a Telecom Regulatory Authority. Has any progress been made here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Petri Saarinen on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
I hope we are not entering WiFi age… I hope we are not entering in era of charging customer by bandwith or by Gb, etc. I hope we are entering to a seamless era of mesh networks with value added content. Consumer, both business and private are not buying data, they are buying usability and content. They don’t want to know if they are using 2G/3G… LTE/4G …WiMax… WiFi or any other method of connection, and that should be the way.
For mobile operators wifi is bringing additional security to the investments they have and will make into their core networks. As mentioned, data traffic growth is exceeding the future 3G/LTE network capacity by 2015 or before… Key point for operators is to have smart mechanism for offloading traffic from Cellular to Wifi networks by default, if overload, or by client contract type or by client device type.
WiFi Offloading and user authentication is bringing also new ways to deliver sponsored or payed content for users, WiFi operators(hotel chain, ISP, MVAS, MVNO, etc) can create new revenue by selling content and capacity for e.g. mobile operators.
I somewhat disagree to the vision that customer are not willing to pay for data plan “tax”… yes, I think they will do that. They will pay for “data plan” in the content they are using, movies, music, files.. etc..
Flat rate or no rate business models will be history, eventually there will be somebody paying the bill… ?
Thanks, Petri. You present some fascinating suggestions here. The concept of a user paying one fee for their broadband connection, regardless of the technology they’re using is an ideal that we should all be aiming for. Removing the complexity from billing and data usage and developing a transparent structure that combines all your connected devices is one, I’m sure, many people would support. The question is how do we get there?
Also, do you see any progress in mobile carriers developing stronger WiFi offerings, especially in regards to data offloading?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Petri Saarinen on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Hi Gareth,
You may read some of our whitepapers regarding the challenges of wifi offloading and road to future “transparent” cellular networks. http://bit.ly/ktHvjG
One of our integration partners has also a video on the deployment of WiFi Offloading from 2G/3G, LTE, 4G networks.
Lemcon Networks WiFi Offloading: http://bit.ly/lyQ3QF
Cheers, Petri
New comment from Frank Ramirez on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Really: I was director at T-Mobile that launched national wifi as commercial service (2003). This is a pretty old issue. Some points I would make.
* Technology has a way of defining new business models, old business models applied to new technologies is not sustainable
* Customers seek value and convenience, driving attribute = price with good-enough quality 2nd, and backhaul is expensive and it makes a big difference in quality
* Powerful chipsets + software radio for WWAN-WLAN negotiation, intelligent automation, VM + cloud = much more change is on the way
* Margins at risk for many players as channel strength erodes due to peer-peer networking capabilities and ease of entry
*Networks, apps and devices in isolation are all quickly commoditized – defensible value is created through aggregation and integrated scenarios based solutions focus that creates barriers to churn based on CSAT w/o resorting to closed garden
* Competitive advantage requires execution across marketing mix- sales funnel including: operational efficiency, consistent innovation resulting in ease of use/ appreciable value, marketing management, and maintaining lifecycle CSAT through customer intimacy
New reply from Ray Winter on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
It always amused me to see T-Mobile threatening their customers if they attempted to use VOIP, whilst still prmoting WiFi in Starbucks. As one of the team that was involved in 121 at Mercury, a diviion of C&W, and responsible for new VASs, a great network at a competitive price motivates customers to stay with their mobile provider. I agree that technology seriously impacts business models and I believe that strong future revenues will be driven by a new sector, mobilephone based participatory entertainment. After all voice revenues will, at best remain static, and could still get cheaper so something new, exciting and viral is necessary to drive future revenues.
New reply Frank Ramirez on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Not sure what you’re referring too regarding the “threat” I left T-Mobile in 2004 – maybe I missed that. Such behavior sounds uncharacteristic of T-Mobile and counters to their brand identity. My efforts were as innovator as the team I led introduced first voice integrated Blackberry, first flat rate data, first wifi/wwan data cards, and commercial wifi. My belief is that long term if your focused on customer LTV you cannot hold back the ocean or their use of new technologies. Its best that you capture goodwill for brand and cannibalize yourself vs. competition doing so. As for future revenues I think that risk/value/technology is driving pay-per-use efficiency while demand for simplicity promotes service aggregation. Finding the right value based packaging that maximizes revenue is always a challenge. Re: Voice, it is not going away it’s just going to be IP based streaming and it will slowly be more integrated with other data services. That is unless someone has telepathy tech out there (BTW if you do have telepathy tech I will answer phones for a job with a good equity grant
haha )
New comment from Pungki Shidik on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
WiFi technology will be a dominant connection in the future of cloud computing & networking, with the combination of LTE and WIMAX technology, the world today will face-to-face with mobile employee and mobile enterprise in the future….everything will be mobile…
Thanks, Pungki. I strongly agree that WiFi will play a critical in the development of our networks, especially as we strive for a state of continuous connectivity. You’re the first person in these comments to mention the role WiMAX could play here. In the UK, WiMAX has met with limited success and there appear no signs that this will change any time soon. Indeed, this is a trend that is reflected throughout much of Western Europe.
The success of WiMAX differs wildly from region to region. There can be no questions that WiMAX continues to gain traction in the US. One need only look at Clearwire to see what’s possible here. There is also significant WiMAX traction in parts of the developing world. Only yesterday I was reading an article discussing plans to build a WiMAX network across Africa.
What are you see in Indonesia? Does WiMAX have a strong foothold here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Pungki Shidik on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Hello Gareth, in Indonesia WiMAX technology is under-development for real application by some telecomunication provider and still a hottest discussion between WiFi development and colleagues. Maybe the WiMAX connection for public will be “grand opening” soon, if goverment as a regulator will give permission for WiMAX technology as soon as posibble…
New comment from Mikko Jaakkola on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
AT&T in USA is the nation’s largers Wifi hotspot provider so they are very serious about Wifi offloading. They are using WISPr as the means to authenticate the user and this client is part of all AT&T smartphone SW. Also if you have home internet access from AT&T, then you get to use also their Wifi hotspot network (need to do manual login).
Also with AT&T wireless plans (assuming that you take the more expensive plan) you get free AT&T Wifi hotspot access and this essentially materializes the vision where users pay one fee for all broadband connection.
So there are some existing solutions that delivery operator data connection with inside the operator cloud. However, talking about Wifi inside mobile operator domain is limiting our thinking and I believe age of Wifi means much bigger scope than this.
Certainly seamless mobility is the ultimate goal but that is reality with many platforms already today. I don’t know if my mobile is using Wifi or 3G today. Browser capabilities to render pages is limiting my UX and not the network bandwidth so it is not often even visible from speed perspective if I’m using Wifi or my CAT10 mobile.
Of course, I have had to configure those Wifi APs into my device that are automatically then used by my phone but after they are there, then things work pretty seamlessly.
Thanks, Mikko. I clearly need to relocate to the US. The situation is radically different in the UK and Europe. Once you leave your home, the very notion of seamless connectivity is still many years from a reality. The volume and quality of hotspots fluctuates wildly with no real consistent offerings.
I certainly agree that WiFi connectivity needs to be thought of outside of the mobile carrier domain, especially if we’re to take any real steps forward. Yet how would this impact upon a mobile carrier’s business? For example, if BT was to strengthen its WiFi offerings in the UK, especially in urban areas, it’s conceivable that I would no longer need to use my cellular connection, specifically if I was to use Skype for all calls. Circumnavigating the mobile carrier in this fashion could have significant business ramifications.
Do you believe this is a real threat?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from David Bird on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
While 802.1x remains the best authentication/security model for WiFi, it’s true that WISPr 2.0 is a good step forward in securely authenticating onto open networks that are using a captive portal. Our open-source access controller Coova-Chilli supports WISPr 2.0, and you can now find our free Android app that will do EAP-TTLS/PAP and EAP-MD5 authentication in the android market. Any operator wishing to test EAP-SIM authentication are encouraged to contact us!
New comment from Carl Hirschman on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
I think we can all agree that everything will eventually be IP based. The question will not be who your TV or phone provider is, but who your Internet provider is because all of these services will run over the Internet. This will take a lot of bandwidth and demand a ubiquitous standards base. Cellular devices do not have either of these. The capital cost is too great to build the cellular networks to stay ahead of the increasing demand, let alone keep up with it. Different cellular carriers rely on different RF frequencies and different technologies and are likely never to be truly ubiquitous.
This leaves WiFi as the only solution if you don’t want to be tethered to the wall. Not that cellular is obsolete in the efforts for consumers to be mobile, but it instead continues to be a handy utility to augment the traditional Internet connection required to meet all of the wants and needs of the consumer.
Thanks, Carl. You make some good points here. I was especially interested in your mention of cellular networks. I’ve been reading today about the first voice calls conducted over LTE using a test network in Hawaii. Initial reports suggest that the results were far from wonderful.
How do you see data networks living next to cellular networks? As you mentioned, the endgame is for an all-data environment, but it appears that we have some way to go here. Do you believe that we’re many years away from achieving this?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
The specification work on WISPr 2.0 has been completed last year and the trial was not continued due to some pending patent applications. The link to the WISPr 2.0 and other roaming assets of WBA are at the below link: http://bit.ly/mw3Bm9
New comment from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
There is active work that is going on the next generation of hotspots both in Wi-Fi Alliance and WBA with basic aim to provide 3G like experience and seamless connectivity. WBA will be opening up a trial for the mobile/wi-fi ecosystem on this technology post Round Table in Paris (June 20-22).
As I understand the NGH (next generation hotspot) is designed with 802.1x in mind with support for various EAP methods for authentication. There will care taken for the over the air encryption which is what most of the mobile operators are worried about in WISPr 2.0.
No doubt NGH could be a comprehensive technology but what would it cost and how long will it take to be adopted by the operators all over is the question.
The decision operators have to take is if WISPr 2.0 is a mid-term solution or wait to invest in the new next generation hotspot network.
Thanks, Bhavani. I appreciate the further insight into what’s happening in the WISPr 2.0 space. It appears there are serious issues here that could potentially see carriers continue to wait before moving forward with WISPr 2.0. It would be unfortunate to lose momentum but I appreciate the huge investments being made. In an earlier comment, it was noted that WiFi is proving to be a game changer in India. Would you agree with this?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Two of the big mobile operators have launched serious wi-fi services in the past few months and so they should be seeing something. With the past I cannot comment much as 3g networks have been launched in the last 8 – 12months. The multiple tablets and iphones which have created a lot of data traffic have just entered the market so looking at these and looking at the subscriber density atleast in the urban market wifi could play a huge role.
New reply from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Just to add to that there is no sign of LTE in India as of yet and at least I’m not aware of any mobile WiMax implementations (someone correct if I’m wrong) in India, as of now Wi-Fi looks like a favorite in case there is a mobile data explosion.
Thanks, Bhavani. It’s fascinating to see the different regional approaches to solving the mobile bandwidth demand. In regards to India, I’ve seen a number of statements over the past few years from Tata and equipment vendors regarding plans to blanket India with WiMAX networks, but this doesn’t appear to have moved beyond dialogue and into deployments. It will be interesting to see whether WiMAX or LTE gains a foothold first. Any predictions here?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Mark Roberts on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
It is not often that I read these blogs and agree with almost everything.. The current issue I face is getting people to understand how all these fit together and it is different in different Countries – All the technologies must co-exist for their own purpose BUT their purpose changes as the technology progresses. Wired broadband can be backed up by wireless 3G. However in places that are more than 100 feet away from a wired exchange, suddenly the banwidth diminishes. A system 1 km away from an exchange will get 1M. MOST people do not even notice as browsing etc works ‘fast’. Sending a 1k email / blog takes ‘no time’ whether at 1M or 20Mps. So yes I totally agree that there is a huge difference with USE. Currently we install systems that use WiFi to send stuff to the back office and wired broadband to send it on, this is backed up with 3G systems that can happily send kbytes.
However if this is moved to a video security system – 3G is a bit ‘bumpy’ as a fall back, OK for monitoring but not useable for streaming. With prioritised 4G (LTE) no problem in remote locations and wired becomes the fallback. Plus for security – anyone can cut through a wire, but taking out cells in a cellular network is a bit more difficult.
Thanks, Mark. I certainly agree that the number of competing protocols, standards and technologies used on a global scale creates a complex and fragmented marketplace. What I increasingly find is that people care only about the end result and little for the inbetween stages.
What do you see happening in the future? Do you believe that technologies will eventually standardise or will there always be regional variations?
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Mark Roberts on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Surely that could just come down to using something like Skype ?
We have been running data over LTE for almost a year seeing rates ON THE MOVE of 20 to 30 Meg. OK the networks are not busy yet but that is pretty impressive. Static rates of 50 Meg burst are normal
Thanks, Mark. I certainly agree that when discussing voice applications on LTE and 4G networks, you immediately think of VoIP solutions such as Skype. However, the mobile industry is currently developing a somewhat different approach based on Voice over LTE (VoLTE). Much of the development here is being driven by some of the world’s largest mobile carriers under the name One Voice. Including AT&T, Verizon, Orange, Telefonica and Vodafone, One Voice represents an enormous force that will shape how we use voice services on LTE networks. This represents a clear attempt from mobile carriers to ensure they retain revenue from voice services when we migrate to all-data networks and that customers don’t move en masse to free VoIP alternatives. However, we’re still a number of years away from seeing VoLTE deployments.Will be interesting to see how this develops.
Do you believe that the mobile industry is right to be worried?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Ray Winter on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
I think we are already seeing a massive network topology change with the recent deployments of 60Ghz wireless backhaul networks, which also deliver geared down 802.11N end-points. This network design will support high data throughputs and they are relatively low cost to install.
Thanks, Ray. I wasn’t aware of this. What are you seeing in the VoLTE space? As I mentioned in an earlier comment, it’s fascinating to see the development of One Voice as it edges closer to the marketplace.
Thanks,
Gareth
New reply from Ray Winter on the Telecom Executives Business Network LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/iMxDaM
Whenever an industry or a leading company begins to get worried they talk about the next big thing coming along in an attempt to keep their customers locked-in and thinking they will receive some enormous benefits. VoLTE is one such reaction to the fast spread of VoIP. The leading MNO’s got together to protect their investments which are in great danger of being disintermediated by efficient high-speed 802.11N networks. The next two years will be most interesting.
New comment from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Post 2010 BWA auction of a whopping $5.5 Billion, at least most of the doubts of what is going to be the dominant BWA (using the licensed spectrum) has been decided.
All of them (I cannot call all of them operators yet) who won the spectrum and who did not have WiMAX (please read non-mobile WiMAX) assets have shown interest in deploying LTE-TD (same trend as China). There were two others who had WiMAX assets as I have heard only speculations and nothing substantial that they may be following suite on LTE-TD.
Also the fact that none of the major existing mobile operators have won the BWA auction in majority of the circles, the following could be the choices for them to achieve seamless data access to their subscribers:
1. Roaming partnership
2. More obvious and may be an easy path to build a complimentary Wi-Fi network of their own or partner with exisiting Wi-Fi operators
3. Other business transactions (M&A for example)
If you see option 2 is definitely the front runner which is why Bharati Airtel (3rd largest operator in the world) and Aircel both are investing in the Wi-Fi networks.
I just read a news item that LTE-TD lab tests in China have lead to 50 Mbps throughput.
We’ve been in the age of Wifi for many years now.
Thanks, Ed. This is a strong statement and one that I’m sure may divide opinion. I would certainly agree that WiFi has been growing in popularity for some time, but I don’t believe that we’ve seen the technology achieve critical mass or its true potential. Where are the citywide WiFi blankets? Where’s the ubiquitous access? I spent this morning in one of the U.K.’s largest cities but was unable to find a reliable WiFi hotspot.
There can be no question that WiFi is improving and that we’re at the cusp of exciting new developments, but I believe that we have some way to go before we can say that we’re truly living in the age of WiFi.
I’d be interested to know more on your thoughts here. Are you based in the U.S.? Is there strong WiFi connectivity outside of your home? Do you experience seamless connectivity at home and on the move?
Thanks,
Gareth
New comment from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Quote: “I just read a news item that LTE-TD lab tests in China have lead
to 50 Mbps throughput.”
Lab tests are great; reality is harsh. Remember the WiMAX hype of a few
years back: “72Mb/s and 32 miles range” ?
Real world performance of any RF technology is limited by link budget and
interference conditions. For “link budget” read “distance”. At a distance
of a mile, 50Mb/s is possible – in free space. Most of us live in densely
populated areas in which signal propagation is dominated by variable but
strong attenuation and unpredictable interference and therefore the 50 Mbps
of the lab is more likely to be
5 Mbps or less for all users served by a given base station or base station
sector.
Wi-Fi delivers a much better performance because its coverage (range) is
much, much less.
Jan
New reply from Curtis Hensley on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
I live in a Verizon LTE service area and we currently get a consistent 20 meg up and 30 meg down. But that does not hold a candle to the 180 meg throughput of my WiFi link.
New reply from Mikko Jaakkola on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Do you, Curtis, get 180 meg all the way to Internet and web-servers are able to feed you information with speed (and your processor is able to render the information with that speed)?
The raw transfer speed is important for home/enterprise use cases but today’s Internet doesn’t often give you many tens of Mbits end-to-end throughput so in many situations the case for Wifi cannot be justified by PHY but through business models (for consumers and the operators).
If you have flat rate for your operator and can consistently get 30meg down, then you don’t necessarily benefit for you Wifi. I have 12meg line at home and it doesn’t matter how fast my Wifi is as I don’t get more than from my WAN link Of course, you mobile operator would like to offload your traffic to Wifi to reduce their OPEX.
At the moment, it seems that in US it is almost cheaper to get bandwidth via LTE than DSL/Cable. Either fixed-line cost is not right or LTE is been sold way below its market-price. Maybe LTE speeds go down once more people start using it.
New reply from Curtis Hensley on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
You are correct on all points. My WiFi is bottlenecked at the internet link.
But across the LAN those speeds stand up. Network speed is all about proper hardware and design. You do have to scale the network and servers to handle the traffic. But current 5gig channel bonded .11n WiFi will and does produce those speeds in real world settings. And within the next 6 months WiFi raw TCP traffic speeds should come up to around 270 meg per AP.
As for LTE I also agree with you, I think the speed will decrease as more devices come on line.
So as a technology .11 WiFi is quickly becoming the choice for workstation traffic. The point is that we are truly entering the WiFi era. The wave is building. Some lay on the beach, some fight the tide, some surf.
New reply from Curtis Hensley on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
More to your point here I have already been off loading data in large venues. You can slice and dice 180 meg of data traffic on the Ethernet side of WiFi and give each vendor a slice. Their phones can off load the data to WiFi and out the wired network it frees up the cell network for phone calls. It works but is not perfect yet, mostly due to the user devices. The phone vendors have just not caught the vision yet. We have closed, integrated systems in venues like a large conference centers. Use a unified cell antenna system and a unified WiFi coverage pattern with enough back haul to handle the massive load and it works. But as I say not perfectly yet. How to scale in open air? The genie is still in the bottle but it has been uncorked.
New comment from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
That is the main reason I highlighted “lab test”. Even if I give 50% discount on the figure it still is on par with Wi-Fi. Wi-Fi will always play a role in wireless data coverage but at the same time a fixed mobile solution cannot say that it has everything that 3G/LTE/WiMAX has and the same with 3G/LTE/WiMAX technologies cannot deny the fact that Wi-Fi gives them an edge.
I re-iterate Wi-Fi will always be the best complimentary technology for other 3G/4G wireless networks for many reasons one of them being the most implemented in world among the other competing technologies, less investment, etc. The issue of the user experience not being good I guess the experts from the Wi-Fi industry are already addressing hopefully there will be a good solid consensus built solution which will help the Wi-Fi technology.
New reply from David Bird on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
On the topic of WiFi / WISPr, I don’t believe WISPr 2.0 will only be an interim solution. While 802.1x is certainly the preference when talking about accessing (known) operator or home networks, it doesn’t necessarily help the nomadic user much otherwise. Wireless security is of course important, but it is also no replacement for end-to-end security and users should not be taught to rely on it. Mobile apps should instead protect their users by using SSL, VPN, and so on. The Open access point means just that: open to all with no expectation of security (I.e. Use at your own risk). I believe this is an important concept when thinking about ubiquitous WiFi. You wouldn’t, for example, want WiFi clients probing and attempting to authenticate to every 802.1x ‘private’ network it finds (would that be legal? A nightmare for RADIUS servers as EAP clients tend to never stop trying).. And once authenticated, are you really on a ‘trusted’ network? Whereas an open ‘public’ access point is there for anyone to access. Today, you will not find that many open networks that were not intentionally left open for anonymous users to access. Indeed, your smartphone likely informs you when it finds an open access point – prompting you to connect to it. If I had a suggestion for WISPr, it would be to add an optional feature to specify the preferred 802.1x network to use. But, the open signal, captive portal, and WISPr 2.0 still serve an important purpose.
New reply from Bhavani Prasad Yerrapalli on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
@David – a question on WISPr 2.0 do you know if re-authentication can be initiated from the network (AuC/HSS) towards the device? Last time I heard this was a flaw (due to client/server architecture used) but not sure if the 3G/4G operators ever use the re-authentication procedures during a data session. I agree beyond that anyway you use different (Internet/IP methods like VPN, etc.) secure methods as normal elsewhere in the IP world. The ones who are worried about the over the air breaches of security will use 802.1x.
WISPr is in some form or shape used in the WI-Fi world and using that with a better user experience will help current Wi-Fi players around the world. But when you are working with cross-technology other technology requirements, consitent UE, consistent SLA’s (which the user is used to on the other technology) and such other considerations which will evolve to NGH (as I mentioned in the responses before) or some other means.
Yes my view is even these new definitions of standards should allow both options of 802.1x/WISPr so that the Wi-Fi operators who do not want to upgrade to 802.1x do not leave the industry fragmented (from UE perspective) even after a standard is defined. .
New comment from Amelia Goyena on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
“Are we entering the age of WIFI?” : for an answer, maybe, it’s safe to say, its reality is as good as predictions coming true. All would be dependent to the device usage results, or how the majority of the internet users -public or private, will demand for it.
To think of it, integrating your internet communication activities into something wireless, sounds definitely awesome. Just grab your pc, or mobile, wherever you’re in, you’ll never be out of contact-be it, via the net writing your email, or just plain engaging yourself in this thinged VoIp IP technology-the current phone systems, reinvention. No hassles, plugging in, or checking again and again, resetting your wires from your workstation, making sure, your hooked properly to the routers-inspecting the signal of the led indicators being turn on for line signal, and so on.
It’s so nice to be updated with the CISCO forecasts, but then again, the statistics, would only be validated, after the regular users have their systems registered. Thence, making their devices counted on. This proliferation, to capture from one’s imagination, is like having 2 things: causing the end of one to give birth of another , as has been written-that wired traffic will only diminish as the proliferation of WIFI enabled devices continued to grow.
“World of WIFI” , sounds a promise of a very pleasant communication systems. But, there’s so much to be considered. Will this mean diminishing the wired systems? And there is still this other side of the coin, however, that of what this lighting technology (fiber) is being utilized. Or is this another technology equally important to be considered to? Whichever way, up or below (ground), what matters for many, is how their data, or services, they pay for, they get them right-far from the hassles of being cutoff, slow, and worst, being charged for nothing.
New comment from Eduardo J. Ortego Martinez on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Dear Mikko, perhaps you can notice some difference in your power consumption if you are using WiFi or 3G.
New reply from Mikko Jaakkola on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Wifi is much better when you need to transfer a lot of data and have applications sending a lot of keep-alive data. 3G is better if you want to just have well optimized always-online applications that are mostly idle. The challenge in mobile phones is that you can never turn cellular connection off so Wifi is always adding something extra on top of the normal operations (and thus making it worse in some cases). So in mobile phone case, it is hard to make sensible comparisons.
New reply from Amelia Goyena on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Dear Mikko, hello. I think it’s nice to point if how safe it is when you need to transfer a lot of data in WIFI application. In my experience, I find this technology so weather dependent. Therefore, the risk of losing your data during transport is always there. While this 3G for mobile application fall in a much lower freq. bandwidth, so the communication flow is better, as you have mentioned “you can never turn cellular connection off”. But still the question about how safe or which medium where our data will be sent the safest , is something statistics can validate to us.
To Mr. Kruys reply: For my opinion, WIFI technology will be having a bit of difficulty in covering up services that the wired technology can -distance wise. While pricewise, it’s said that the wired technology fall much cheaper. However, the WIFI technology, since there are some establishments rendering free availability of it, this somehow compensates that what the wired tech. users can get. However, as we have said, there are still limitations on WIFI-more developments ahead in regards to its mass usage.
I have not read so much complains on the 3G applications, except that mobile data is getting much bigger, so the possibility of data traffic predictions. LTE on the other hand, yes, as currently termed as the solution for all of these present data traffic and those that are about to come. There are still issues @ hand, but I think, most of the countries are up already for its implementation.
New reply from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Hi Amelia, you are correct about Wi-Fi and short distances. The small “cel size” of Wi-Fi assures a large throughput per user – but that user has to be close to a wi-Fi access point. Wi-Fi and 3G/4G should not be compared – they are complementary: one offers very high throughput over short distances, the other less throughput but over large(r) distances. There is no way around the Shannon channel capacity constraint.
Business-wise the two technologies are also complementary: one is very low cost (no service fee!) but not always reliable, the other requires a service fee but is “almost” always on!.
New reply from Amelia Goyena on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
This is a question which everybody may answer: What is you response to the observation that WiFi technology is actually weather dependent, or one of its vulnerabilities is the condition of the weather ? Another observation: what determines the speed of data loading/uploading, is it the 1st pc who is connected 1st in the area, like sort of 1st come , 1st serve basis? We have tried 4 pcs. connected @ the same time, and at the same location, yet 1 or 2 pcs. had difficulty connecting to the internet, and/or cannot connect @ all. The other observation is 1 pc. find it too slow to download data. You may also correct me if I’m mistaken: that the current stated maximum coverage area in WiFi is 30Km (radius). So this thing in a WiFi, in a free access area, is actually not a secure way of dealing over the internet , critical transactions, like sending important data.
New comment from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
To Amelia’s question about wired networks: the irony is that more wi-fi means more wired networks because the “cell size” of wi-fi is small. Since wired connectons are fr cheaper (per bit) than wireless, the broader trend is towards wireless as a “last few meters” connection. Wi-fi Hand-off etc is needed for local mobility; for general mobility 3G and LTE remain the more effective solution.
To Mikka’s comment on power consumption – it may not take long before smart phones and tablets will allow the user a choice of default always on connection: cellular or Wi-fi. With automatic fallback to cellular in case the latter is selected. There are many ways to implement this.
New reply from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Wi-Fi range is about 30 meters at 54 Mb/s, a bit less at higher rates. The protocol assures error detection and is secure against eavesdropping and other security threats.
The case you describe I have never seen in practice. On the other hand, at IEEE meetings with 100′s of people in the same room, Wi-Fi generally worked well, although it was sometimes a bit slow.
The 30km range you mention applies to WiMAX. not Wi-Fi…:-)
New reply from Amelia Goyena on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
I suspect what you had in IEEE meeting before was a WiFi connection that is IEEE designated as 802.11g. That is transmitting at 2.4GHz, handling capacity of 54Megabits data/sec, distributed via OFDM (Orthogonal Freq. Division Multiplexing)-to figure it easier, is like having your data into 4 parts altogether sent to get the least possible bit loss during transport. If that is the case it is possible that the location was in a network congestion free area.
So, what could possibly be the cause of WIFi of being slow sometimes, if there are many factors that we can suspect of, like maybe the BW is set to the low side BW assignment? Next, if the are got so many users around, this could lead to that network traffic. But definitely, I would say, also , and would want to hear from you if, up to what extent that the weather condition affect the WiFi technology? This surely has an effect. How can it be solidify the transport of data during transmit, if there’s no encryption, it’s like sending it without security , and user is just left hoping that his/her transmit is successful.
In real-world, this 54Mb of data/sec. is from theory, what’s actually achieved is a speed of about 24Mb of data/sec.-this is when the user can say, he/she is lucky of being in a WiFi hotspot, connected, and able to surf the net. If unlucky, any typical user can experience what we experienced in our case, where 2 of our 4 pcs. were not able to connect. But to think that it’s just actually a free service WiFi hotspot, who would complain anyway.
New reply from Jan Kruys on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Hi Amelia, I have been at many IEE meetings, 6 times a year; same for other fora: generally Wi-Fi works fine, even with a very high number of users. Wi-Fi has always had rate adaptation to counter signal attenuation or interference. Weather conditions do not affect Wi-Fi when used indoors but outdoors it is clearly different. For short links, it should not make much difference – below say 100m, weather conditions have little impact. With good planning of antenna gain and direction, weather impact on long distance links can be minimized and link reliability assured – same as for any other wireless technology.
Encryption is provided for in Wi-Fi but users (or operators) have to set the right crypto keys – as in WiMAX.
You are correct about the 24Mb/s net throughput, in fact that varies with the packet size.
Sorry to hear your experience with free service hotspots is dismal – my experience is generally very positive!
New reply from Amelia Goyena on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
To Mr. Kruys: Thanks for sharing your experience, and direct hands on of the WiFi technology. Yes, I think most people are aware of the limitations of it. And as for our direct experience as we tried to avail the free WiFi service in our area, we thought, perhaps, because during that time when we went to the area, it was peak hours in the evening, and there were lots of users already, engaged in the internet.
In our house, we are also using WiFi , and it’s no different also with what we have experienced before with it. We have 24/7 connection, but as I mentioned the connectivity largely varies with the weather condition. During the rainy days, it’s so hard to get the internet connection. And for regular days, on the other hand, livestreaming won’t come that satisfactory. We can upload videos, but most of the time to play videos from livestream gets too slow.
Do you think, our WiFi needs to have a sort of signal amplifier? Does the location of the workstations has something to do with it? If the stations are distributed in 4 different rooms, and being used at the same time, where is the hierarchy of good reception starts? Thank you for your reply.
New comment from Curtis Hensley on the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Hi Amelia, There are so very many factors that go into the quality of signal and data throughput of each client that it would be impractical to go over all of them in this format. But at a high level yes, the things you have noticed do cause degradation of usability of WiFi. I often have customers with similar questions and observations. I use more common points of reference to help them understand. WiFi signal is very similar to AM/FM radio signals or waves. The wave length and frequency is different so the waves react a bit differently but at a base level they are similar. So just as in AM/FM as the distance from the radio station increases the less you can hear the channel, the same holds true for WiFi, only WiFi has much less range or coverage. And as you go from one city to another in a car sometimes you can get two different stations on the same channel in WiFi we call that co-channel interference.
The biggest difference between AM/FM radio and WiFi radio is that AM/FM is only sending data while WiFi sends and receives. This means that the radio station or Access Point (AP) has to process the signals in both directions. This processing often causes additional points of degradation of usability. This usually manifests in total number of users or clients associated to the AP and how much data they are moving.
So WiFi has the environmental conditions, like rain or water in the air, obstructions like trees, buildings, walls, etc. and also must deal with how many clients attach and how much data they are moving. What this really means is that WiFi networks are far more complicated to design in order to provide a useable experience. In my opinion the biggest problem we have had as an industry has been our inability to manage the expectations of our customers, or for marketers to over promise what their design can produce.
From a home or small business perspective with <20 clients almost any WiFi AP on the market with a standard omi-directional antenna can deal with this and produce acceptable results. The difference in experience and usability gets exponentially more complex as you add distance and number of clients. Every WiFi vendor seems to take one issue or the other and focus on solving that as a way to separate them from the pack. My company is focused on providing the largest number of clients with the most throughput on the fewest number of devices while giving the customer the greatest flexibility in design and management options. We have build a product line that replaces the Ethernet workgroup switch.
From what I gather in your posts I would say that for your particular situation a WiFi bridge with an external directional antenna pointed at the strongest WiFi signal you can find might be your best solution. Then on the back side of the bridge you can connect your home to either all wired connections or get a consumer grade AP and rebroadcast the signal inside your house.
New reply from Amelia Goyena the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
To Mr. Hensley: During the rainy or winter season where the signal WiFi gets poor, it can be described as an inherent factor. How do you find solution to this vulnerability?
The thing is , not all customers would be likely willing to get extra cost from their pockets just to find solution to their poor WiFi reception. Although, there is a more compact electronic solution to that, as I mention, the WiFi signal (internal) amplifier. It’s physique is almost accustomed to that of a router. Maybe ,it can also be an alternative solution for few users, as minimum as 4 or 5 workstations, yet separated by walls. Walls , as we all know, really largely can block signals. Do you have any feedback on this?
The 802.11n which is described as the newest standard that’s widely available. and that this standard improves speed and range, from that of 802.11g where the throughput tends to be halved due to network congestion, as has been said, is this the SOP applied now for all the new WiFi registrants? Or BW assigned depends on how small or big the coverage area will be?
This 802.11n is reportedly can achieve speeds as high as 140MBits of data/sec. Therefore, to think of it, under all worst conditions, most probably , it will still be capable of providing about 70MBits of data/sec. -foreseeing throughput be cut into half. With this, the user will be happy already because he/she can do surfing, download/upload, and even livestreaming in an acceptably better speed.
Anyways, going back to my access point (AP), it’s still summer. Thanks for your reply.
New reply from Jan Kruys the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
To Amelia: Curtis has given us nice overview of the factors involved in wireless data transmission – there is little to add to that. However, your experience of bad Wi-Fi performance being associated with (bad) weather is fairly unique – at least for APs tied to a landline – e.g. ADSL. To (try to) understand this weather dependency better, a picture of all the network elements – wireless and wired – between your house and the internet server – would be helpful.
New reply from Amelia Goyena the Wifi LinkedIn Group: http://linkd.in/knf3hj
Don’t worry. The events shared about poor WiFi happened in the last part of the last winter season. The spring time that succeeded it, poured us acceptably numerous rainshowers. But now, it’s still summer here in our area, the reception is so far ok. I was reviewing what could have affected then. Those were patterned observations, 1st hand, seems supports the statement that weather conditions indeed affect WiFi performance, or any other transmission for that matter.
As Mr. Hensley has stated also. I quote:
“The processes (transmit/receive) often causes additional points of degradation.”
“So WiFi has the environmental conditions, like rain or water in the air, obstructions like trees, buildings, walls, etc.” .
Thanks for you article. I am just curios about something that I heard recently. I want to know that what’s your opinion regarding integrating WiFi and 4G (WiMAX for broadband and LTE-A for mobile phone). One of my friends told me that Cisco announced this issue and I want to know if you have any information regarding that I would be more appreciated to sharing them with me. I want to do researching in this regard.
It is appropriate time to make a few plans for the longer term and it’s time to be happy. I have learn this publish and if I could I desire to counsel you some interesting issues or tips. Perhaps you can write subsequent articles referring to this article. I desire to read more issues about it!