802.11 vs. 3G For Mobile Access

bobdole34 writes: "A new way to give us fast mobile net access spells further trouble for 3G.Imagine being able to surf the net at speeds faster than DSL from anywhere, at any time - you could watch a live video webcast while waiting for the bus, email photos to your friends while sitting in the park, or download the MP3 of the song that's playing in the pub before it finishes. I smelled vapour until I saw a demo of MeshNetworks at 802.11Planet in Philly."

Comments

Where's the bandwidth going to come from

[grahamsz]

Connecting things in a mesh is all good and well and certinaly more efficient - but is it efficient enough?

Wireless networking occupies a relatively narrow band of the frequency spectrum, and probably less than the 3G ranges offered to telcos.

I highly doubt that an 802.11 mesh will ever provide that much bandwidth - especially once things start relaying in many directions at once.

Imagine splitting it up into cells, each one where a user is. As something transmits from one cell to the next, it'll use bandwidth (or available frequency space) in the neighbouring cells.

Anyway this could work for dense areas but screws over the people living in the country - worse still, it's not dependable. What if you need to make an emergency call and nobody is within range?

I heard nokia were wokring on a hybrid tech that allows you to use mesh networks when they are around and 3G otherwise - that would be cool :)

Also i could raise the usual problems of accounting for bandwidth use on this kind of net - who pays for it all?

Re:Where's the bandwidth going to come from

[Brian Stretch]

The Seattle Wireless crew came up with the best solution I've seen: the local net is "free", but Internet access is via gateways that might not be free. A local ISP could hook up to the "free" net and sell subscription access to the Internet, as could the more clueful national ISPs like Earthlink. This would actually lower the ISPs costs and remove their #1 headache: dealing with the telco and/or cable monopolies. The companies currently building home WiFi routers could build mesh network APs for not much more.

Also, we already have a 22Mbps variant of the 11Mbps 802.11b standard, and the 55Mbps (or thereabouts) 802.11g standard is in the works. There's no reason why the mesh network APs couldn't start with at least 22Mbps radios. Even with real throughput at a bit over half the stated amount, that's enough to start.

Fundamental difference is...

[Kragg]

Power.

Think about it. You plug a wifi card into your laptop and start surfing. Battery life cuts from 4 hours to 2.

This study examines current 802.11a solutions... chances are there will be some improvements, but it averages 100 microwatts/sec regardless of whether it's in use or not.

OTOH, 3G phones (with their tiny ickle bodies and tiny ickle batteries) consume power at 25 microwatts in TX/RX, and only 1 in idle mode.

This article talks about how 3G power is a challenge for handset manufacturers even now, designing for 3G. You think your phone is gonna be able to cope with 802.11a? You're wrong.

3G and WiFi are both cool. But they are different.