| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1969
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| isamu wrote: | | Are these new XOHM services/gadgets/etc supposed to improve latency/ping times? |
Yes, latency could be 30-80ms depending on conditions, but higher in poor conditions. With fixed LOS very near tower, I saw a posting as low as 10ms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
xrayman
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 259
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Today in an article by the Kansas City Star, a Sprint WiMAX spin-off venture is talked about again. In an interview with the Star, Sprint CEO Dan Hesse, did not provide any details about a new WiMAX deal. He did say: “It’s clearly where the industry is evolving, and it gives us an opportunity to get there first.”, “Stay tuned. We believe that our WiMax plan and strategy will be very beneficial not only to Sprint and our future, but will be seen positively by the financial community.”
http://www.kansascity.com/746/story/548020.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xrayman
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 259
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Motorola to showcases new CPEi 150 WiMAX device at CTIA Wireless 2008. It will features one data port, remote management and operates in the 2.5GHz band.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JGriggs
EVDO User
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 59
Location: North Central Indiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JGriggs
EVDO User
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 59
Location: North Central Indiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1969
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like the Chicago/DC/Baltimore rollout will be delayed. There are differing reports to why but Infoworld is saying because of logistics of backhaul. Backhaul (supplying enough bandwidth to each site) is going to be a major challenge for all the 4G carriers. Verizon/ATT are going to benefit from Sprint doing this first on a large scale.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/04/02/Backhaul-woes-slow-Sprints-WiMax-rollout_1.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xenophon
EVDO Addict
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1969
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gizmodo on Xohm..
http://gizmodo.com/374899/sprint-xohm-wimax-test-drive-just-like-cable
Showing tests of 4.5Mbps down and 1.8Mbps up. It shows 50something ms ping, but speedtest.net ping times are not accurate, usually showing high than actual. An iTunes download only got about 150KBytes/sec (1.2Mbps). Hopefully it was just a busy download server. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim_in_VA
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 368
Location: On the Chesapeake Bay, Virginia
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
That InfoWorld article certainly doesn't paint a rosy picture for Sprint's backhaul capacity. Sad to say.
_________________
evdo-tips.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sirwoogie
EVDO User
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 29
Location: MI
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jim_in_VA wrote: | | That InfoWorld article certainly doesn't paint a rosy picture for Sprint's backhaul capacity. Sad to say. |
My response to their backhaul woes is "No $h1t sherlock!" Engineers at Sprint are not stupid, they know they had to do this. I'm sure at the very outset Sprint new they would have problems here, but just hid the problems until now (when they're ready to roll out and the spotlight is shining bright on them). I know in my area there are a bunch of towers servicing sprint that have microwave drums on them, so they're not completely in the dark. Perhaps they just discovered the political issues with zoning were harder to overcome, or that towers were placed with LOS issues more than they thought).
I don't know why during the initial planning they just didn't settle on Microwave as the strategic plan. I'd have to think it would better future proof their investment as they would no longer be tied to leased line carriers. According to the article, the price differential wasn't that much.
Guess I'll have to suffer with Rev.A a bit longer.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JUMBOshrimp
EVDO Newbie
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 3
Location: Rosslyn, VA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| New to the forums but not new to Xohm and very interested in it so I thought I'd make it my second posting. Living in the DC area, I'm really excited about the planned roll out in the area |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
expert007
EVDO User
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Does this look like a red herring to anyone else? I don't see how Sprint could underestimate the need for vastly increased bandwidth in developing Xohm plans, and then come up with such an incredibly important issue in the 11th hour.
And to satisfy my own curiosity, why would zoning be such an issue? If there are existing towers that the PtP backhaul antennas can be mounted on, would zoning restrictions change? Or do they actually have to build out new sites just for backhaul? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xrayman
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 259
Location: Kansas City
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Xohm backhaul delay,
Last year FiberTower Corporation, a wireless backhaul services provider, announced an agreement with Sprint. FiberTower said the deployment was to be based on Ethernet-based backhaul, new for any mobile backhaul provider.
In addition to the time it takes to get local zoning permissions for the microwave dishes could some of the problem be with this new Ethernet-based system.
http://www.fibertower.com/corp/news-press-releases-080107.shtml |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
expert007
EVDO User
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
That sounds like an absolutely enormous undertaking!!!
My hopes for WiMax anytime soon are waning.....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JUMBOshrimp
EVDO Newbie
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 3
Location: Rosslyn, VA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Update from Dan Hesse:
wimax-vision.com/newt/l/wimaxvision/article_view.html?artid=20017519854
Slow but steady progress |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n6gn
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 347
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| expert007 wrote: | Does this look like a red herring to anyone else? I don't see how Sprint could underestimate the need for vastly increased bandwidth in developing Xohm plans, and then come up with such an incredibly important issue in the 11th hour.
And to satisfy my own curiosity, why would zoning be such an issue? If there are existing towers that the PtP backhaul antennas can be mounted on, would zoning restrictions change? Or do they actually have to build out new sites just for backhaul? |
It may be a red herring, I can't say. However zoning certainly is a big issue. There's quite a difference between the sites required for LOS backhaul and base-to-user communications. Just adding backhaul antennas to existing sites won't solve the problem. While significant antenna size may be achievable, zoning permitting, the backhaul is generally at frequencies higher than PCS, has more incremental attenuation due to foliage and other 'slight' obstructions and is totally hosed by intervening terra firma, buildings etc.
Why this is just now coming to the fore is a good question though. I suspect that a lot of what we're hearing is for the benefit of stock holders who had their expectations set "a bit high" in the first place.
It all reminds me a bit of the Iridium fiasco. There it was easy to prove from the outset that technically the whole thing was a charade but that didn't prevent a great marketing effort from raising $7Billion, prior to it's collapse, at which point everyone noticed the technical fallacy.
n6gn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
