Regarding Cisco V-OFDM and Wi-LAN W-OFDM:
If the W-OFDM encoding were deployed in the PCS frequency, then the sustained rate would be 128Kbps, HDR would do a lot better at a sustained rate (and 1x and 3x technology will do well too); although the W-OFDM peak bursts would be faster, around 10Mbps according to Hatim. As a whole new W-OFDM mobile support infrastructure would have to be developed, years of testing and financing undertaken, and with no clear benefit for mobile it seems pretty pointless IMO to go ahead, as CDMA is already established, 1x and HDR well understood and well along to being first to market for higher mobile speeds. Wi-LAN's work with W-OFDM is for fixed communications, and mobile work would take a lot of $ to develop; Cisco's work with V-OFDM is also addressing the fixed area.
For fixed point, W-OFDM has a good shot, but so does V-OFDM and from what I've read V-OFDM is much better at penetrating leaves and dealing with echos, etc., although it is not clear how much W-OFDM and V-OFDM IPR get in the way of each other. So far Cisco has not mentioned Wi-LAN in their announcement (as far as I know); W-LAN's announcements re: W-OFDM have been for indoor distribution / sharing of data from the network access point, although they have some work going on with outdoor fixed systems. IMO, IN THE VERY LONG RUN FIBER WILL CRUSH ALL WIRELESS FOR FIEXED HIGH SPEED ACCESS EXCEPT IN THE REMOTE AREAS.
IMO, W-OFDM / V-OFDM is not a problem for QCOM, because the mobile market is absolutely massive around the world, years of work has already been done reducing the problem to robust ASICs, and I think the main market for HDR is in boosting the speeds in this massive mobile market.
John |
