Wow -- the last couple of months have been insanely busy, to say the least. The end of 2009 definitely saw business heating up at the day job (Proxim Wireless), which has led to an exciting 2010 thus far. With the whirlwind of activity, I was faced with the all-too-common and unfortunate situation where I had a ton of topics and interesting items I wanted to blog about, but the volume of activity prevented me from actually sitting down and doing so. BUT, now that we are into March, I am making a delayed resolution to take more time to write here -- both about trends we're seeing in the wireless world as well as the other interesting things swirling around us in 2010.
I'm starting off by sharing a new article I wrote this week for GoingWiMAX.com (one of the sites I write for regularly). The topic is one that I have been harping on for a while now -- the need for widespread, carrier-grade Wi-Fi networks as a means to provide data offload for today's ultra-congested 3G networks.
As we all know, the introduction of the ultra-smartphones such as the iPhone and the new Android devices has caused the use of data applications over the 3G networks to skyrocket. Now that everyone has millions of data-hungry apps at their fingertips at any given time (and use them a LOT), the 3G networks are getting hammered, and the user experience for everyone (especially in busy metro areas) has tanked. This problem rears its ugly head all the time -- my iPhone works fine in Milpitas at the office, but slows to a crawl when I head to San Francisco for meetings.
As frustrating as this problem is, the solution is something that these devices were pre-built to leverage -- Wi-Fi. All of these devices have Wi-Fi built in, and are ready to use the (much faster) Wi-Fi network for data applications at any time. The problem? Most of us smartphone users don't only use apps when we're at a Wi-Fi hotspot, so we are forced to use them over the 3G network when not in range of a hotspot.
The natural solution would be to deploy large scale, carrier-grade Wi-Fi networks that cover large metro areas that have the worst 3G congestion, enabling these devices to automatically leverage the Wi-Fi network for data usage and saving the 3G network for voice. But as soon as I say "citywide Wi-Fi", something in your brain starts to hurt, doesn't it? Yeah, that's because your mind harkens back to the "municipal Wi-Fi" craze where everyone wanted to provide free, citywide Wi-Fi to everyone. Though a great, humanitarian concept -- "free" turned out not to be a business model (shocker), and that market flopped.
The difference between the "municipal Wi-Fi" movement and the "data offload" market (notice that one is a "movement" and one is a "market") is that the data offload market is supported by an actual business model, not to mention an urgent need. The carriers need to find a way to offload the data traffic quickly and cost effectively, or else risk losing customers who are displeased with the service. And since all of these devices already have Wi-Fi built in, Wi-Fi as a data offload mechanism makes perfect sense.
This article that I wrote this week focuses not only on the need for data offload networks, but also the role of WiMAX in enabling these Wi-Fi offload networks. WiMAX provides the perfect, cost-effective technology to backhaul all of the outdoor Wi-Fi access points that would be required to provide large scale Wi-Fi offloads networks, and would greatly increase the speed in which these networks could be deployed.
For the complete article, please click HERE.
As a wireless integrator I agree to a point. As an avid iPhone (3G) mobile user I again agree somewhat. I do enjoy using the built in Wi-Fi on my mobile device. I use it all the time at home and at the office. Sometimes even at airports. I agree that in many places (depending on your location) 3G networks are heavily congested. 3G is though expanding and provides decent bandwidth (soon to get better as 4G gets deployed - someday).
The problems with the idea of large scale Wi-Fi deployments are who is going to pay for it and who would maintain it? The telco's have no drive to spend huge money on another means of backhaul when they are already spending a lot to build out their current networks. 3G / 4G is their core competency and business model, not Wi-Fi. If they were to try and deploy a large scale Wi-Fi network they would still need to backhaul it to one of their gateways (most likely a cellular tower location). They would have to add large scale back-end monitoring systems and support centers. Other issues could be: interference, site acquisition, security, liability, etc.
With the push for faster mobile networks LTE / WiMax a lot of money and effort is being spent. Carriers moving to a WiMax model makes sense, but Wi-Fi I don't feel would ever be a reality. It would still be cheaper and faster for the carriers to move to 4G technologies rather than developing an augmenting Wi-Fi network.
Wi-Fi is a great option on many mobile devices, but someone has to provide the infrastructure and maintain it. No one will build it if it doesn't add revenue (no matter how good the technology is).
Posted by: Joe Wargo | April 24, 2010 at 05:46 PM
Correction on my contact for the post above (http://www.aowireless.com)
Posted by: Joe Wargo | April 24, 2010 at 05:49 PM