Broadband Wireless Internet Access (BWIA) News

My Take On The iPhone (2 updates)

As I post this, the iPhone goes on sale in slightly less than ninety minutes (Pacific time zone). I write this without benefit of any hands-on time with the iPhone whatsoever... but I'll certainly try it out as soon as I get the chance - at an Apple store.

Regular readers might be amused at my speculations of an earlier handheld Wi-Fi device - the Palm Tungsten C (PDF, starts on page 4 or Google's HTML translation)

Every other writer in the tech, PC, Mac, and wireless (especially wireless telephony) industries has weighed in on the iPhone... so here are my thoughts from, of course, a Broadband Wireless Internet Access perspective... as well as some personal observations.

I personally won't be buying in, though I'll probably take a drive tonight to see if my local Cingu... er, AT&T stores are swamped by the iPhone-atics, especially in nearby Redmond, the late, now largely deserted headquarters of AT&T Wireless. At least as of last night, the closest AT&T store didn't have a rabid line forming, possibly because they just barely made the branding transition with what looks like a hastily-erected banner draped over their Cingular lighted sign (that'll probably look a bit muddled in the dark - the Cingular logo trying to shine through the AT&T banner).

What I think is right with the iPhone:

• It's beautiful, pretty, sexy, and looks remarkably easy to use (overall).
• It's a real Internet device with real access to the real Internet - no walled gardens, no not-quite-real-Internet browsers like on almost every other wireless telephony handset. It just gets you onto the Internet, with some neat gadgets to speed things along, like Google Maps.
• It has Wi-Fi built-in, and it "prefers" it (defaults to it when available); it seems like a nearly-ideal handheld "webpad".
• It "does the right thing" in regards to music and other media that you have- if you can get it into iTunes on your desktop/laptop computer, you can get it into the iPhone, with no compromises, no hassles, unlike every other wireless telephony handset that made it damn difficult to load your media and often force you to purchase media through their obscenely expensive walled-garden, use-up-your-minutes virtual stores.
• There don't appear to be any AT&T "walled gardens" content issues on the iPhone; AT&T only provides data and voice transport and associated services like voice mail, Caller ID info, etc. For most of the functions of the iPhone, your primary relationship is, like all Apple products, is with Apple (including great in-person support at the Apple Store, if you're in a reasonably-large city.) It sounds Apple doesn't allow AT&T to get in the way of, or take a cut of content downloads (which is a point in favor of using iTunes on a desktop/laptop computer, not wireless networks for content downloads).
• On a Mac (Yay! Heh!), the iPhone "just syncs" with your Address Book, Calendar, Music, (Safari  - bah) bookmarks, documents (?), etc. so you have usable (as opposed to "marginally usable" on an iPod) access to all of that on your mobile device.
• The associated AT&T service plans all include unlimited (wireless telephony) Internet access, as opposed to inane metering by transfer or minutes... nor do there seem to be any restrictions on what you can do with your Internet access.
• Power / recharging "interface" is USB 2.0... very, very nice, but I'm sure that charging the iPhone will require a "dedicated" USB 2.0 port on a (powered) hub or computer... but it IS nice to not need yet another highly specialized charging brick that you'll have to lug around.

The main things I think are wrong with the iPhone (a slightly longer list):

• What gripes me most... I think it's completely odious (I'm sorely tempted to use much stronger invectives)... is that Apple cripples the non-phone functions such as the iPod functionality of the iPhone so that it's useless until you activate it by signing up for an AT&T iPhone service plan. If... and only if... the iPhone were being sold at a discount with activation, I may see the point of this decision. But the iPhone is being sold at (what apparently is) full list price - $499 and $599. Not only that... if you discontinue your AT&T iPhone service plan, you again lose all functions of the iPhone. This is Apple's arrogance at its worst.
• Apple's decision to use AT&T as the launch carrier. How can I say this... bad mistake! I've personally switched away from AT&T, back when it was AT&T Wireless (yes, way back before they were Cingular) when they made the decision to start screwing over customers whose recently-bought handsets used AT&T Wireless' TDMA network. What they did was, in essence, "starved out" the TDMA users by "robbing" TDMA channels from base stations for their new GSM network, all without even trying to persuade (at least with me) TDMA customers to convert to GSM. AT&T Wireless, Cingular's, and now AT&T-formerly-Cingular's service, at least in my experience, can be described at best as "service with a snarl", and my pleasant experiences with the retail customer service personnel of my current carrier was an absolutely night versus day contrast with the personnel at the nearby AT&T Wireless / Cingular store.
• No Instant Messaging / iChat; what looks like iChat on the iPhone is actually the iPhone's client software for wireless telephony Short Message Service (SMS) messaging... not exactly useful for chatting with your friends on Instant Messaging networks (which can really help pass the time.) I certainly applaud the usability improvement of the iChat interface applied to SMS... but I should be able to use IM and SMS interchangably. (I'm guessing the [lame] reason there's no IM client is because it would cause too much EDGE traffic, and have to keep the iPhone connected full time so you don't miss an IM message. It's not widely understood that to communicate on a wireless telephony data network like EDGE, a "session" has to be "initiated" and then "torn down"; we're talking about a circuit-switched network, not always-on packet-switched; it merely transports packets - over a circuit-switched connection.)
• Integrated, not-user-swappable battery; non-elegant or not, I predict that the very next iPhone, due out within months, will feature a user-swappable battery. That's just a necessity for the heavy users. The early adopters will put up with a non-swappable battery, but the masses won't.
• The AT&T iPhone service plans don't include any Wi-Fi "roaming"... even on AT&T-owned Wi-Fi HotSpots (formerly SBC FreedomLink). Dumb, DUMB, DUMB!!!! I agree with Glenn Fleishman that AT&T, despite owning Wi-Fi HotSpots, just doesn't get the utility of Wi-Fi at all (and haven't, ever; the most spectacularly clueless-about-Wi-Fi "professional" in the wireless industry that I've ever had the displeasure to talk to in my entire decade of writing about Broadband Wireless Internet Access... was an AT&T Wireless middle manager in Redmond, WA (pre-Cingular, pre-SBC takeover).
• No VOIP, including on the non-existent iChat client. Demand for this may well also get initially buried in the feeding frenzy, but soon enough the early adopters are going to start howling for their favorite VOIP client, especially Skype. I'm sure that "Absolutely NO VOIP, dammit and-we're-deadly-serious-about-that" was a primary condition of Cingu... er, AT&T coming onboard with Apple for the iPhone, so it will be interesting to see how the battle for VOIP on the iPhone shapes up.

Things I'm neutral about:

• Basing the iPhone on using EDGE Broadband Wireless. I part company with the rest of the pack in saying that (sight unseen), EDGE at least gets you on the Internet wherever you are. It sure beats no connectivity, or resorting to something like having to hunt for a Wi-Fi HotSpot (sometimes tough in a small town or remote area) or (shudder!) having to fall back to using dialup. So... yes, EDGE isn't as good as 1xEV-DO Rev. A or HSDPA... but, for me, it would probably be good enough, especially since I wasn't really paying extra for it on the service plan.
• YouTube... couldn't care less!!!
• Price - there's a lot of cool, new, expensive technology embedded in the iPhone, and at least we're not playing the subsidy game with this device. Price isn't going to really matter initially - Apple will easily sell out the initial production run in record time.

The Nokia N800

I've talked about the iPhone with some colleagues, and not surprisingly, they're passing on the iPhone (even some that have stayed with Apple during its darkest days of incredible "crappiness"). Their handheld Internet communications device of choice at the moment is the Nokia N800 Internet Tablet. It's reasonably priced, has lots of expansion capability (USB, memory card slots), completely unencumbered by wireless telephony service plans (it's Wi-Fi / Bluetooth only), runs on Linux, and experimentation and third-party applications are actively encouraged by Nokia. There's a very triving community building around the N800; enthusiasm that might well have been directed to enhancing the iPhone. I can't see myself buying this generation of iPhone, but I'm looking forward to buying an N800 in the near future.

Update 1:

As to the odious locking of the iPhone until activated, two workarounds have been discovered to get you a  "non-cellular" iPhone:

1. Deliberately fail the credit check during activation by typing in 999-99-9999 as your social security number and then sign up for prepaid service, then cancel. From what I've read, the non-cellular functions of the iPhone remain active.
2. It's unclear if you have to first activate the iPhone, but a non-iPhone or "no account", old, etc. SIM card will allow the non-cellular functions of the iPhone to be used.

I hadn't realized that prepaid service was an option for the iPhone (and then choosing not to add minutes). Hmmm... the iPhone is looking better.

The Nokia E90 Communicator looks like a worthy, at least in some respects, competitor to the iPhone.

Update 2:

Then there's the ever-helpful DVD Jon's approach to unlocking the iPhone (again, the cellular functions aren't active, but everything else works).

I probably should make it clear that I'm in no way encouraging or cheering cellular theft-of-service. I just feel that, for the (full, unsubsidized, as far as anyone has been able to determine) price one pays for the device, you should have the ability to use the functions of the device that are not involved with the separate, and as far as I'm concerned (should be) optional purchase of cellular service that enables the cellular functions of the device.

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh

Ruckus Inspires (A) RIOT

Ruckus Wireless has partnered with a number of vendors of Metropolitan Wi-Fi network systems to improve interoperability between Ruckus Wireless products such as the Ruckus MetroFlex DZ that are used as Customer Premise Equipment and Metropolitan Wi-Fi networks.

The initial Metropolitan Wi-Fi vendor participants in Ruckus Interoperability and Open Testing (RIOT) are:

• BelAir Networks
• Mesh Dynamics
• Motorola
• Proxim
• SkyPilot Networks
• Tropos Networks

This is an entirely logical development in the evolution of Metropolitan Wi-Fi networks. The intial promise of such networks was that "ordinary Wi-FI devices" such as those built into laptop computers could be used as access devices. However, the technology of Metropolitan Wi-Fi networks has largely not lived up to that promise because Wi-Fi signals do not propagate very well through foliage and buildings, and Wi-Fi devices built into laptops and other devices transmit at very low power levels (as well as having relatively poor receivers). So, higher-power, directional antenna "bridge" Wi-Fi devices such as Ruckus' MetroFlex DZ are often required to relay signals from Metropolitan Wi-Fi devices mounted on streetlights into the building and  then to Wi-Fi devices within the home.

Incorporating more sophisticated Metropolitan Wi-Fi technology into Metropolitan Wi-Fi networks, such as  Access Points incorporating beam forming offered by Wavion Networks may well obviate the "physical layer need" for devices. However, another reason to use bridge devices is that such devices can better interoperate with Metropolitan Wi-FI networks, bringing management, monitoring, and "mesh control" into the customer premises:

Under the RIOT Metro program, metro partners are invited to test and validate complete end-to-end solutions, trial and tune services, ensure technical interoperability and leverage unique functionality and features to optimize higher-layer applications.

Ruckus Wireless is impressive that they are developing highly-differentiated Wi-Fi devices for, among other things, distributing Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) within the home.

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh

New Wi-Fi Base Station Product

From a Press Release this morning I learned of Alti Technology Limited and their A8 Wi-Fi Base Station shown at right.

Although Alti claims to have "created smart antenna signal processing technologies", it looks to me like a conventional 8 (or so) sector base station utilizing Wi-Fi.

It continues to amaze me how many new systems keep emerging for outdoor Wi-Fi.

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh

Frontline Wireless L.L.C. Emerges As Another Nationwide Public Safety 700 MHz Network

Frontline Wireless L.L.C. has emerged as another private entity that wants to leverage 700 MHz spectrum, both the already-allocated public safety portions, and at least part of the remainder that is intended for commercial auction to the highest bidders by January, 2008, to build a nationwide "Public -Safety-First-Responders-have-priority" network.

Frontline joins Cyren Call  in positing that the best and highest use of the remaining 700 MHz spectrum is a privately constructed and operated nationwide  network that offers priority for public safety first responders, with "excess capacity" available for commercial use.

Both plans address some key issues in new generations of public safety networks:

• Realistically, having a single nationwide provider is one of the only ways that true interoperability can be assured. If the traditional "piecemeal" approach of building new Public Safety networks on an area-by-area or even region-by-region basis, choosing different vendors and systems makes interoperability problematic at best.
• How to fun these new networks is a huge issue... we're well past the post-911 giddiness of imagining that the federal government will be able to fund anythng more than a very small number of demonstration systems, and having a private entity be willing to build such a network, backed by investment capital that sees potential profits from being able to sell excess capacity seems feasible.
• In any nationwide system, there has to be some provision for subsidy to insure that rural areas are covered and a system that generates commercial profits, part of which can be reinvested in the system, is one way to insure that rural area buildouts are funded.

One unanswered question in my mind is how to insure that such systems are actually built to "Public Safety" standards instead of the more lax (and less reliable) "commercial" standards?

One effect these proposals may have is that companies like Verizon may renew their calls that the only practical, cost-effective way for any national Public Safety Network to be built as an overlay/extension to the existing wireless telephony (cellular) infrastructure.

Background:
Frontline Wireless L.L.C. Press Release
Daily Wireless.ORG has a good writeup.
RCR Wireless News story

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh

Impressive New Product From Redline Communications

This article is original content, written exclusively for
Broadband Wireless Internet Access / WiMAX News
http://www.bwianews.com.

It's been a long time since I've gotten excited enough about a new Broadband Wireless Internet Access (BWIA) system to write a dedicated article, but Redline Communications just tripped that threshold with their new version of their AN-80i radio that now operates in the "new" 255 MHz of license-exempt spectrum at 5.470 - 5.725 GHz. I heard about this new system in a session by Kevin Suitor, Vice President of Marketing and Business Development, while attending WISPCON 2007. I think that this product is a real "game changer" product, especially for the smaller, rural, entrepreneurial Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) that are prepared to take advantage of its capabilities and the new business models it enables.

I wrote this brief blurb about the AN-80i in Wireless Internet Service Provider News (WISPNews):

Product Anouncement: AN-80i - FCC certified for operation in new 255 MHz of 5.4 GHz band, 9 Mbps - 90 Mbps upgradeable with software keys, 10/20/40 MHz cnannels, PMP is in beta, Power Over Ethernet (all outdoor), simple mounting - starts at under $2000 per end. Specifically designed to be a good match for Wi-Fi mesh systems.

Links:   Press Release   Product Information

First things first. While this product was supposed to be formally certified by the press release date of Wednesday, February 21, 2007... the FCC hasn't completed its work, so as of this writing, this product isn't (quite) certified and thus not formally available for sale in the US.

Second... this article isn't based on any direct, hands-on experience in real-world field conditions.

OK, that said...

To me, this is a really exciting product for a number of reasons:

1. It's one of the first... perhaps the first certified (we'll have to wait to see what "pops out" of the FCC certification process first) product for outdoor use in the US 5.4 GHz band. This "new" 255 MHz of spectrum can provide Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service Providers a lot of new options. Even though the range is somewhat restricted - 3-5 miles, you can capture a lot of customers in that kind of short radius, and so doing, conserve "long range" 5.8 GHz spectrum.
2. The stated (list) price point - under $2000 per unit, is impressive considering that "upgrade in place" software keys enable the same installed hardware to increase from "stock" configuration (from memory - Redline's literature doesn't seem to state this) link speed of 9 Mbps up to (in steps of speed and channel size) 90 Mbps. Service Providers can install these units to provide fast (much better than even bonded T-1s) connections to businesses, and then upsell those businesses to higher speeds without ever physically touching the radios again (assuming no hardware failures, of course.)
3. The hardware is impressive! It's all one unit; the radio lives on the tower within a few feet of the antenna or even on the back of a panel antenna. Base and client units are exactly the same device - just different software (multipoint base functionality is a future software option). Unlike a lot of similar units that use proprietary Power Over Ethernet, the AN-80i uses 802.3af standard Power Over Ethernet; it's impressive that they could get the power demands of the radio low enough for 802.3af to be adequate.

One of the most notable things about this announcement is that the AN-80i products are proprietary, not WiMAX! That's a very calculated, careful, sober business decision on Redline's part, all the more remarkable because the AN-80i products were developed after the rapid acceptance of certified fixed WiMAX systems... unlike other vendors who are continuing proprietary product lines that were developed prior to the rise of fixed WiMAX. Paraphrased from a brief conversation with Kevin Suitor: "With WiMAX, we couldn't do as good a job emulating E1s and T1s, handling of video couldn't be done as well, WiMAX precludes large channels, and if we stuck strictly to WiMAX we couldn't come out with products for emerging "non-WiMAX" bands. So we decided to reinvest in, and reinvent the RedCONNEX product line."

Planned enhancements include Point to Multipoint (PMP) capability, encryption up to 256-bit AES, and a third unit that will operate in the US Public Safety 4.9 GHz band and the license-exempt 5,2 GHz band that is now subject to Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) requirements like the 5.4 GHz band.

One minor criticism of Redline about the AN-80i is that in Redline's marketing material, AN-80i specifications are stated interchangably (the all-too-painfully familiar "up to..." disclaimer) between the 5.4 GHz AN-80i and the 5.8 GHz AN-80i... whichever unit's specs are more impressive.

Lastly, I love this Unstrung article that gets the 5.4 GHz RedCONNEX AN-80i announcement exactly wrong (at least in their original posting; they may correct the article)- the entire point of the RedCONNEX line, and especially the AN-80i products, is that they are deliberately not WiMAX; the point of the RedCONNEX product line is that it's able to do things that aren't currently possible with WiMAX systems.

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh

Towerstream Selling Big Pipes In Century City

Think about this scenario. You're doing digital video editing (and, from what I've read, no cinematic production is anything but digital video editing) and you need to get your big... really big video files to another location so they can look at them, or perhaps do something like add Computer Generated Imagery (CGI). There's no fiber to the building you're shooting in, or maybe there is fiber but the time it takes to activate it is way too long, or if it's active, the price is obscene (transfer priced by the bit).

Years ago I did an background interview with a very small Wireless ISP that was operating in the Los Angeles area providing quick-install, fast Internet access for the television and movie industry that at that time was starting to rely on being able to transmit digital video instead of courier'ing film from production to studio for approval, special effects, etc. He was gleeful because it was a "stealth" market and other than the pretty-clueless telcos trying to sell fiber service, he (claimed to) have the market to himself.

In this market - the Century City area of Los Angeles, Towerstream Broadband Wireless Internet Access service is now an option. In a press release this morning, Towerstream announced an expansion of their service area in Los Angeles. Buried in the annoucement is this startling nugget... a real game changer that may well tip the balance in favor of BWIA instead of fiber:

All of Towerstream’s Los Angeles customers have a range of bandwidth options to choose from, including T1, T3, 100 and 1000  Mbps connections...

Did you catch it? 1000 Mbps connections? I guess that's marketing at work, saying 1000 Mbps instead of  1 Gbps.

Think about the implications... Just being able to "order up" a 1 Gbps Internet connection. That's as fast as a lot of internal Local Area Network systems can go... and this is a connection to the Internet at that speed!

I suspect that Towerstream is being a bit "generous" with its coverage claims given that they'll only be able to provide 1 Gbps connections within a mile or so of each Point of Presence where they operate, but still... that's a lot of real estate where 1 Gbps Internet Access is suddenly available.

This is a game changer; Kudos to Towerstream!

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh

Wi-Fi / WiMAX Mesh from Proxim

This one slipped past me last week. Proxim has announced (related story) that MeshMAX - a mesh networking system that uses 2.4 and 5 GHz Wi-Fi for access, and 3.5 GHz and 5 Ghz WiMAX for mesh communications.

This is a logical development, and impressive that Proxim (apparently?) got there first (I'll reserve judgement on this; it seems to me that there have been others that have announced such a capability, but no specific announcement comes immediately to mind.)

I'm still pretty sanguine about Metropolitan Wi-Fi systems in general unless they are designed to deal with the very serious problems inherent in the vast majority of Wi-Fi access devices designed and implemented as Wireless Local Area Networks - communicating over 200 or so feet, not appreciable fractions of a mile required by most Metropolitan Wi-Fi networks.

To me, the innovation is being able to deploy Wi-Fi access nodes either in a mesh network configuration or connecting to a WiMAX base station for backhaul. Other mesh systems only communicate for backhaul with the same vendor's mesh nodes.

 

It will be interesting to see when we see the next big logical leap - mesh systems using WiMAX as access, not just backhaul. There are about to be a lot of inexpensive WiMAX access devices, and mesh networks rather than base station architectures make a lot more sense in a lot of deployment scenarios.

My thanks to WiMAX Networking News for mentioning this and thus bringing it to my attention.

By Steve Stroh

This article is Copyright © 2007 by Steve Stroh.