Comments on: Former Australian WiMAX operator: “WiMAX may not work” http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/24/former-australian-wimax-operator-wimax-may-not-work/ Gadgets, gear and computer hardware. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 05:34:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Amitabh Kumar http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/24/former-australian-wimax-operator-wimax-may-not-work/#comment-623809 Amitabh Kumar Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:00:33 +0000 http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/24/former-australian-wimax-operator-wimax-may-not-work/#comment-623809 Mobile WiMAX falls short of expectations? It has been reported that “Dispute erupts over bad WiMax performance” based on the report by an Australian WiMAX operator. The report cites of loss of service with direct connectivity beyond 2 Km and inbuilding coverage of only a few hundred meters from the base station. WiMAX technology has proved itself in more than 300 trials and a number of commercial launches. Some of the recent ones are the QMAX harbour area WiMAX in Singapore, Wateen telecom in Pakistan, Tata Indicom in India and a number of operators in Latin America. A network can not defy the laws of physics and the link performances need to be built in. First of all, the higher frequency ranges used in Australia ( nearing the extended c-band at 3.6 GHz are no help as the loss increases with square of frequency as well as distance. Secondly WiMAX base stations come in different versions such as carrier grade, Micro base stations and Pico base stations. These are with different power levels and can not deliver more than their scheduled range. Hence it all boils down to sectorization and base station densities. http://www.wimax-home.com Mobile WiMAX falls short of expectations?

It has been reported that “Dispute erupts over bad WiMax performance” based on the report by an Australian WiMAX operator. The report cites of loss of service with direct connectivity beyond 2 Km and inbuilding coverage of only a few hundred meters from the base station.
WiMAX technology has proved itself in more than 300 trials and a number of commercial launches. Some of the recent ones are the QMAX harbour area WiMAX in Singapore, Wateen telecom in Pakistan, Tata Indicom in India and a number of operators in Latin America.

A network can not defy the laws of physics and the link performances need to be built in. First of all, the higher frequency ranges used in Australia ( nearing the extended c-band at 3.6 GHz are no help as the loss increases with square of frequency as well as distance. Secondly WiMAX base stations come in different versions such as carrier grade, Micro base stations and Pico base stations. These are with different power levels and can not deliver more than their scheduled range.
Hence it all boils down to sectorization and base station densities.
http://www.wimax-home.com

]]> By: Josh http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/24/former-australian-wimax-operator-wimax-may-not-work/#comment-622818 Josh Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:52:24 +0000 http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/03/24/former-australian-wimax-operator-wimax-may-not-work/#comment-622818 This post, and the underlying article, are just not clear or detailed enough to make the criticism interesting or useful. If there are latency issues (as alleged), that's notable and a problem. But the line-of-sight problem (which would be very serious too) can't really be assessed without understanding what frequency spectrum was being used (3.5? 2.5? 1.9) and what the cell density was. Bring on some gory details and then we can all make our own judgments. This post, and the underlying article, are just not clear or detailed enough to make the criticism interesting or useful. If there are latency issues (as alleged), that’s notable and a problem. But the line-of-sight problem (which would be very serious too) can’t really be assessed without understanding what frequency spectrum was being used (3.5? 2.5? 1.9) and what the cell density was. Bring on some gory details and then we can all make our own judgments.

]]>