Slashdot Mirror
Is Verizon Up to Speed?
Dejected @Work writes "IBM developerWorks just ran this article on Verizon's partial 3G network set up in some areas of the US, most of the North East. The article goes into some good technical background about these fatter pipes called Express Network. Has anyone tried this out?"
Verizon dosen't have a 3G network.
144kbps theoretical max. Wonderful stuff, you can even watch streaming movies. At 10 megabytes for $35, that's $3.69 a minute for that streaming movie. Still interested?
Besides having the really annoying "Can You Hear Me Now" commercials, this will probably end up being a bad idea.
The way these things work is that it can allow 1 phone to use up to 6 phones worth of airway resources. Now, during peak times, it's hard to get cell phones out. Now imagine that a large portion of the population is using more than one share worth of resources. I wonder how much incentive Verizon will have to increase their resources by 3-6x.
I bet this will be damn expensive for about 5-10 years, then we'll get "unlimited downloads" on weekends/nights, etc, until cellular data rates approach current voice deals..
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
It should be noted up front that Verizon predicts 40-60 kbps will be the initial routinely obtained transfer rate in Express Network service, that is, the same as one would expect from a current V.90 dial-up modem. (Still, it's better than 14.4!) The system architecture (currently at the 1X-RTT level) can easily be scaled up to the 3X level, which would give it a 153 kbps transfer rate. The 3X upgrade works by chaining together enough bandwidth for 16 voice calls and delivering them to the same user.
Some of these statements are inaccurate. 1x-RTT offers rates even beyond 153 kbps today. Verizon is choosing to limit speeds within the scope of 1x-RTT, but 153 kbps is certainly available. 3x takes three 1x channels and sandwiches their spectrum offering max speeds in the Mbps range, not kbps. However, almost no one believes 3x will ever happen, since it requires major changes to the RF portion of the network infrastructure (read: megabucks), and of course like 1x, requires brand new hand sets/modem cards. Far from an easy upgrade.
Anybody want a peanut?
>>In Japan, video phones are available.
:)
sure - but does anybody really give a rats ass?
Seriously - we could all have home videophones now if we wanted, and we don't. Videoconferencing is available, and use useful in some situations, but i think by now it's been shown that the general public could care less about videophones. I know I do... When I'm on the phone the LAST thing i want is the other person to be able to see what i'm doing. Don't know about u, but when i'm on the phone about 10% of my attention is directed to the call and the rest is elsewhere. Not to mention i'm probably in my underwear
Popular Science has been promising us videophones for 50 years. And still nobody cares. 3G needs to find a different killer app.
I had an opportunity to try out a Laptop that was connected via verizon's new network. The little PC card they supply as an interface option is stinking sexy but that's a separate issue... I would compare the speed to single ISDN. The verizon rep I talked to said the average sustained throughput was 45-65K with the occasional burst to 144K. The brief surfing session I had confirmed that the connection wasn't spectacular. I would say 45-65k is accurate based on my thumb in the air gadge. It does have tangible benifits though. Almost zero wait time to connect, totally wireless and slightly faster then 56k dialup. If travelling was part of my business I would be all over it. Beware of roaming to non-built out areas though: It will work but only at 14.4k.
I stopped by a Verizon store on a whim and found out that the service can be obtained on a trial basis for 14 days, after which you can return the phone for a full refund. I already have Sprint PCS data service on my Motorola StarTAC 7867W and I didn't need the higher speeds, so I opted not to keep the service. Service is $30 for Express Network access (you can still get 14.4Kbps CDMA data without that fee), plus a monthly contract to get minutes which are shared between voice and data usage. The prorated amount for my 14 days of usage was:
- Monthly plan access: $21.77 (14 days of the $45.00 / month plan for 400 anytime minutes)
- Express network: $14.51 (not $30 because I only used it for 14 days)
- 411 charges (I called information a couple times): 3 times at $0.99 each = $2.97
- Taxes: $1.71
- Total: $41.48
They refunded my $150 for the phone and data cable upon return with no hassle.There was only one phone that supported the service at the time, the Kyocera 2235. I noticed that the voice quality was superior to my StarTAC, especially in analog mode. Since I'm a communications specialist, the lack of codec delays in analog mode was immediately apparent and the sound quality seemed superior to CDMA digital mode.
The phone was about $75, and I had to pay an additional ~$70 for the data cable, which was a complete ripoff. The data cable package included the Windows driver CD, instructions, and the USB to phone cable itself. The phone didn't come with a belt clip (which I need when I'm in the field), but had indentations on both sides which makes me think that you could buy a clip that snaps onto the phone.
The windows installation worked fine on my Windows 2000 SP2 partition on my laptop. The initial data transfers seemed to be modem speeds, but then I realized I was being limited by the network at the peer side. I connected to a site I knew was only a few hops away from the Verizon gateway, and wow, it was fast. It started pushing data at about 140Kb/s raw, in addition to the packet headers. I didn't do anything special to get good reception either - it was about 2 signal bars IIRC on the ground floor of a window office in an industrial park.
The phone had a real IP, so I did some latency tests using pings. That resulted in about 300-400ms of delay, similar to a dial-up modem, but far worse than the typical 40-50ms on a BRI ISDN link. I didn't play any games, so couldn't tell you what the interactive performace will be like. SSH responsiveness was similar to a 33.6 modem. Ping times were usually within one standard deviation, although it would occasionally glitch and drop a packet or give me a 3000ms return.
So I tried it under Linux, and found out that the cable wasn't supported. After taking the cable apart, I found out that it contained a Kawasaki KL105 USB to serial chip, which didn't even have a driver written for it. I contacted Kawasaki and got this document which contained the protocol for the chip. Turns out that the chip comes in several different flavors, some with custom firmware loads, all of which have different protocols. I wrote a preliminary Linux driver for the chip, but ran out of time before my 14 days were up. I think that the driver can do data transfers, but the control line code is still kind of screwed up. Email me if you want a copy of the driver source.
The chip provides transfer speeds of up to 230Kbps, which is necessary to support the 153Kbps maximum speed of the network plus the packet overhead from the phone. The phone itself uses 11 pins of it's connector to talk to the chip in the cable. The PCB in the cable wart contains a power jack so you can charge the phone and use the cable at the same time, which is nice because the power connector from the AC adapter is mechanically incompatible with the data cable - you can't have both plugged into the bottom of the phone at the same time. The power lines account for 2 of the eleven pins, and I assume the other 9 are the standard 9 serial pins. Tracing the pins made me think that the UART outputs from the phone were electrically compatible with TIA-232, although I couldn't confirm it for sure.
When I returned the phone, I found that they now have DB-9 serial cables which don't require any special driver software - you just plug one end into the phone and the other end into the computer. Note that this will limit your speed to 100Kbps, because most serial ports have a line rate of 115Kbps, but you have the protocol overhead which will limit you to 100 Kbps given a standard packet size histogram for someone browsing the web. Those cables are still overpriced, so I'd recommend looking on eBay or contacting your local plastic injection firm and asking them if they're interested in a little side business :)
-- thalakan
I work for Verizon Wireless in Rochester NY. We've been playing around with it, testing it etc... Well, here's the scoop. Right now the speed is about 128K (ISDN speed) and about as expensive. My phone is free because I'm on call 24 x 7 and they want me to support this product. However, they want to charge us, the employees, 30 bucks a month to have it. My boss won't let me expense it and I'm not about to pay for the service. However, the best use I've had with it is when I connect with my laptop and VPN into work. It's actually not too bad. I'm normally a very impatient person but I have to say that even with the encryption overhead, I was able to obtain my mail, logon to the network and even my CISCO softphone worked! (Boss, I'll be working from my pool today.) I did some benchmarks on the speed of the connection and with our special software, we average about 11K to both local broadband access providers. (Basically I ftped a 5 meg picture from my digital camera to both the Time Warner Roadrunner ftp server and Frontier's Lightning link ftp server.)
In Japan, the best selling mobile handsets
are the ones with cameras in them.
I used a FOMA video phone in Japan, and the reaction I had was that I must get one. It is not
for showing your face when you talk, but for
pointing at things, like "I'm trying to unjam
this printer" or "I'm trying to remove my sink
in the bathroom, how do I disconnect the water pipes?". And when you have real 30 fps frame rate
on video, it is qualitatively different experience than
crappy ISDN video conferencing.
People will make imaging a mandatory feature
on phones, when they actually see it. It is only
the US mobile phone industry that is screwing
up so badly that we are 2-3 years behind the
Japanese in terms of technology. WAP was probably
the cause of at least half the lossage. In Japan,
they just deployed plain old HTML (i-Mode) on phones and it worked ten times better than
the WAP garbage that was being pushed in the US
and Europe.