Slashdot Mirror
2gbps Wireless Network Rollout this Summer
cpfeifer writes "Washington Post has this article about Verizon rolling out it's ultrawideband wireless service based on EvDO (Evolution Data Only). Reiter breaks 1xEV-DO down for us."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
If so how much?
I hate reading about this stuff. It seems to take years from when I read about it until something filters down to where I can use it. And then, it always seems to cost a fortune. Is it just me?
It declined to comment on prices; a spokeswoman said the initial target market will be business customers.
Looks like I won't be seeing it for a good, long time. By the time we consumers see it, it will probably be fairly bogged down. I love being the kill-joy.
In the long run, we're all dead.
2gbps? The article says 2.4mbps... 2gbps would be really cool :)
This is not 2gbps nor is it "ultrawideband". As we all know, 1xEV-DO is more like 2Mbps, and the story is quoted as saying it "Ultra Fast Wireless", not UWB.
... when you can't even get 56kbps right.
And do the mean 2gbps? What's a little g? 2Gbps would be smoking. Note the big G.
This is in fact not even CDMA - the voice technology used by Verizon. It is a TDMA technique which uses the fact that data is NOT delay-sensitive to increase the data-rate by waiting out 'bad times'.
The technology provides a high bandwidth to users who are in 'less noisy' areas, where the signal is powerful, and a lower rate, delayed stream to users who are in 'more noisy' areas.
The technology is Qualcomm's and they are coming up with a hybrid voice-data called EV-DV where DV = Data Voice).
All bow to his Noodliness!! His Noodle Appendage has touched me!
For years now, we've been getting the wireless internet dick tease and it hasn't really happened on a grand scale. I know that a lot of folks are probably going to say "yeah, but this is the real thing..." However, I am going to argure that it isn't. I think that the "REAL THING" will happen when people realize that all the world needs is just one big 802.11? blanket. Everything and anything connecting to each other for standard ports only and blocking everything else. No need for privacy since that is a thing of the past, just open the floodgates and let it happen. Once that happens, the wired Internet will dissipate into the background...
Find out why it is that Slashdot's moderation system is broken by clicking here...
Un-news
profitabull. it's ALL bull. Godless greed/fear based bs.
sing it dionne. maybe some psykick intuition is in order?
I am currently using GSM/GPRS for my wireless connectivity needs on my handheld (a PalmOS deice) and it's certainly enough for what I need on this sort of platform. Since this device only has 8MB of RAM a 2Gbps connection to the Internet using 1xEvDO won't do me a lot of good. Even on my Notebook computer, I don't need this much connectivity. This is especially the case if I have to pay a premium price of it.
Part of the problem for Sprint and Verizon is that they have put out a lot of money for data networks that are not being used. Current 1xRTT usage is nowhere near the levels that were once forecast. The truth of the matter is that msot mobile wireless users are using PDAs and other handheld devices don't need these "high speed" data services yet. Until there is such a demand, I see little reason for these carriers to put in the capital required to roll out these services.
These are the good old days you'll be telling your children about. Make them worthwhile.
Anybody want a peanut?
"wireless service based on EvDO (Evolution Data Only)"
actually, it should be "wireless service based on P2pDO (Peer2Peer Data Only)"
It is 2Mps NOT 2gps. And the 2.4Mps are teoretical if the network is free.
http://ebgp.net/ccc/
Really, what "good" use does joe blow have for having anything faster than about 100kb/sec, especially if you are including on their cellphone/pda/etc. The main things an overload of bandwidth brings with it is
1. More porn downloading. And higher res!
2. More games/movies/mp3 downloading...now I can download the 4.3 gig version (one dvd) of the movie still in theaters instead of the measely 1.2 gig version (2cds)
3. Abuse. Hey...now I can packet you.
To be completely serious now, bandwidth does have its advantages. I also notice a large difference between surfing the internet @ work *cough*, and surfing the internet at home.
But, all I would like to bring across is that if you give someone a truckload of bandwidth, they are going to abuse it. Just like if you give someone a billion dollars, they wont be as economically sound with it as they would with a thousand dollars. After all, more bandwidth is nice, but it costs more somewhere, it doesnt magically appear.
(I also do not condone/perform any of those 3 items on my list, excluding 1-3 which I may be known to sometimes do sometimes)
And happy Saint Paddy's Day! Green beer for all, and possibly a presidential announcement that iraq is going to get blown up. At least the pres will be drunk during it.
[I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
Furthermore, it's common to roll out a new technology in a few test markets. It's quite a bit cheaper to work the kinks out on a limited scale, rather than do a national deployment and hope for the best.
BTW, the DC area isn't only home to politicos, it's also a high-tech hotspot.
-Hal
Not to say that it's not cool. I've been using 144Kbps to stay connected from my favorite brewpub while writing my latest book (the sequel to Llama book). Nice.
Of course, if I could just convince them to install an 802.11 link... that'd be so much nicer. {grin}
I am all for faster connection speeds. I would like to be able to download software apps at something faster than 30-100 kbps (depending on that site I am at). I am sure this will benefit tons of people, but I do have a few questions. Yes, I read the article, but I am still unsure about a few things.
/.er, but I am just trying to understand a few things, and just like my mom taught me, there is no harm in asking.
1) As always, service tends to go down, no matter what ISP you are using. So I was wondering how reliable this service will be when it gets up and running. I know Verizon is already known for it good service on cell phones, but I just want to make sure that it won't go down as often as RR, or any other Cable/DSL ISP.
2) For the wireless people, how are they going to provide security for using this faster connection (if any would be provided. I am not sure if it is the company's or the customer's responsibility for the security of data transmitted over a wireless connection)
3) Would this service require more digging/repairing/installing new component and ripping out the old on, or are they going to build on top of existing hardware/software already in the works?
I know that some of these questions sound stupid to the average
The Galatic Freedom Force marches on! Defend!
Checklist for Summer -
Shorts
Sunblock
Cold Beer
Tinfoil Hat
I just wonder when there will be support for Gigabit wireless devices in Linux.
IIRC the support for Gigabit ethernet adapters came in the 2.4.x release.
Note to self: get smarter troll to guard door.
Average Internet User: My hard drive used to take a week to fill up with pr0n but thanks to Verizon, it crashed from overloading in only 5 minutes... Thank you Verizon!
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
i would expect the charges to be similar to express network--$99.00 for unlimited usage. i am online 3-4 hours a day and haven't been booted. i could not get dsl in my area, but for double the cost i use wireless and get 88k. it is suprisingly useful and supposedly can go up to 144k. bandwidth can be overrated. being able to connect anywhere is very cool--almost anywhere...
Wouldn't it be cool if they allocated a little more bandwidth to the voice channel instead of allowing users to "download a spreadsheet" to their phone? When I can't tell you're calling from a cell phone, I'll be willing to listen to claims of high bandwidth.
For more information about this wireless technology, please read this column. And for more comments abot today''s Washington Post article, check this one.
my experience has been good in chicago. oddly enough evanston--northwestern u--has a crappy cell network, so my connection there blows. but, at home i measured 88k. connections are stable and i have not dropped any in 3 months of service. since i am essentially an ip address i block my tablet from access--security!... but likwise, if you are using a "secure" servic as opposed to telnet or something, you are secure--correct me if i'm wrong, i'm a lowly designer... the article states that new cards, drivers, etc have been added, so i imagine that most of the equipment is modular. it is essentially tdma afterall.
it will be run by the phone company.
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
i think there's a licensing issue here. lets see who gets sued first
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
It's freaking INSIDE the beltway. I wish I could move in there but it's to damn expensive.
Hemos, do you actually bother reading these articles before you post them? For starters, this isn't UWB technology -- UWB doesn't have the reach to do cell service. (UWB is a short-span technology a la bluetooth -- you can find out more at http://www.ultrawidebandplanet.com.)
The wireless network itself is CDMA based which takes more than the average person to pull your signal out of the myriad of others within the cell's coverage.
Secondly this is going to be mainly a business venture so most customers will be connected to a VPN client and those are encrypted also.
Verizon also uses Lucent cell towers in seattle and SF which do not require anything but a few minor components to be replaced at the cell tower and a new software load at the cell processor.
The only other thing in need for the high bandwidth is bandwidth which most cell towers today in urban areas are connected via fiber which is easy to upgrade bandwidth.
Speeds are the problem in most cases...
Availability and usefulness of applications are. For example why don't we have mobile ordering for repair guys, because noone built the application.
We have to face it, mobile devices will never use the full size internet applications our laptops and desktops will. And those that need Mobile apps USUALLY won't drag a latop to be bluetooth tethered or IR or whatever to the handset with the connectivity.
All wireless technologies produce great possibilites but, noone is taking them up. Developers unite; take on the carriers and deliver that killer 3G app.
Usually when the "initial target market is business customers" this means cost is $100/month or more. Meanwhile, wardriving is free. Which do you choose?
sulli
RTFJ.
Need I say more.
More speed, more brain cancer, more fun for everyone.
Compulsory voluenteerism is slavery.
If this new service is as good as Verizons cell phone coverage in Northern VA, I wouldn't bother with it. You won't get a reasonable signal when you are stationary never mind if you are on the move.
Of course, the same can be said for almost all of the cell phone providers for N.VA. I know, I have tried them all.
The Final Word
Here's a paper I wrote a few months ago entitled
n 3g .pdf
The Evolution towards 3G and Beyond
http://www.cs.yorku.ca/~jgryn/research/evolutio
What's an order of magnitude among friends?
Sigh... You mean 3 orders of magnitude?
You're obviously not with us today. (sniff) You must have forgetten to shower with your caffienated soap again.
Who was the brain that assumed if a geek doesn't have time to get his caffiene from soda, he's going to make time for a shower?
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
It is more of a hybrid as it is CDMA but uses time divided slots. UMTS will likely adopt a similar technique too.
It seems like everyone is always talking about downstream speed like that is all that matters.. Actually, latency and packet loss are often times more important. I remember when everyone was saying that broadband by sat would take out terristerial networks.. These people didn't understand how far the radio wavs had to go. Latency on Sat connections sucks - bad.. Unless your just doing bonehead http surfing, it really slows things down.
I use Verizon Wireless data connection on my CDMA cell phone and have for a few years now. Yea, it's a measly 14.4 connection. That is not really the bad part.. The latency runs around 500-800ms just to their gateway, and, if your moving packet loss can get really bad if your not right under the cell tower. That can make an ssh session painfully slow. Even if your sitting still, and got tons of signal, the RT latency makes doing a lot of work slow. Most of the latency here has to do with the CDMA system. Have you ever called another digital CDMA phone from another one in the same room.. Notice the delay? It's double there because it has to be encoded/decoded for each phone. It can get annoying on cell to cell calls.
But still, I really appreciate being able to pull over, and log into my servers to check e-mail or fix/change something from the road. So for me, this announcement is nice that they are rolling out faster wireless data networks.. but I'd sure like to know more about the connections made on that network.. TDMA typically has less encoding delay.. so perhaps that is why this is TDMA based??
Even with the event of this new high-speed data transmission; one would think that if WiFi ever reached even 70% coverage in a populus that maybe a "WiFi enabled" or even a "WiFi Only" mobile phone wouldn't be that far-fetched? I mean, for the casual user, imagine no charge calling...ever? (negating that WiFi networks you're on are free) 'course business users will still require real cells being WiFi is typically a hotspot paradigm.
EVDO and 1xEV-DO and "evolution data". New terms this week. What actually are we talking about that is different from last week's new pnemonics. Anybody ever thought that half the readers have no idea what you're talking about? Pnemonics are great, but remember your audience!
Look at their coverage map... Sprint PCS coverage isn't nationwide, it's "Little itty bitty spots scattered across the nation".
Did you know that Sprint PCS doesn't even have coverage for their headquarters building?
Sprint also can't even cover more than 50% of the landmass of the most densely populated state in the USA (New Jersey). Verizon America's Choice, on the other hand, covers every single inch of NJ. Yes, VZW is much more expensive than any other wireless provider and has a more limited selection of phones. You get what you pay for. (In terms of service coverage and quality. Verizon's limited handset selection is due to their EXTREMELY high quality standards.)
Let's not forget that neither Vision nor Express Network are 3G. They are 2.5G interim. 1xEV-DO is true 3G, as is UMTS. (Although so far, EV-DO and EV-DV have had FAR more commercial success than UMTS. Only UMTS rollout so far has been DoCoMo, which was a flop. Meanwhile, KDDI rolled out EV-DO or DV with great success, and Korea also has one of the two.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Which is more that I can say for most of US here re: slashdot.
but without verizon in the middle, how can your phone be tapped.
think about the children
Just like saying I have 2 grand = $2000, 2gbps means 2 grand bits per second
One barrier to rollout of EvDO has been that the technology requires wireless companies to set aside valuable airwaves just to carry data.
Not really.
You can just put the voice on the same packet stream. Use MPLS and a bandwidth-reservation protocol to reserve a slice of the channel, giving the voice connection the necessary bandwidth and latency gurarntees for voice service. Non-phone-call packet servcie get everything left over after the currently-active phone calls reserve their cut.
This also lets the phone company charge you a telephone-ish rate for the reserved bandwidth. Charge cell-phone minutes for a phonecall-sized reserved slice, flat rate for taking your chances.
They can also do multi-tier billing:
- Charge regular rate for a cellphone-quality compressed connection.
- Charge a premium (1 1/2 cell minutes per minute?) for a landline-quality 64kbps (plus overhead) slot and run G.711 (like a DOCSIS-compliant POTS-over-cable box) or some other DS0-in-packets protocol. Run your fax machine via your cellphone at full rate. (Or your laptop's 56k modem if you're feeling silly, or can't get hold of the right cables and software.)
(If the base has a LOT of capacity they might just want to charge the same for 64k as for other calls, or just make all calls 64k: They take more bandwidth than compressed but are a straight encoding of a digital phone line, so the don't require a bunch of DSP crunch at the POTS/packet gateway.)
- Charge a discount (1/2 cell minute per minute?) for highly-compressed voice.
- Maybe charge a steeply discounted premium rate for, say, participating in an outbound multicast group to hear a broadcast stream. (Think XM radio or webcasts via your cellphone, or at least via its network infrastructure.)
And so on.
Maybe let you make premium-priced bandwidth reservations on any suitable stream, rather than just those that represent calls via, or broadcasts from, their own servers.
This lets you take your own choice:
- Make an internet "free" phonecall, and take your chances on voice quality. If it's breaking up too badly:
- Reconnect (or promote) the call to a reserved-bandwidth service if the net weather is stormy.
- Pay different rates for different quality connections. Sound just like a POTS landline for a bit extra. Sound like a cheap long-distance carrier if you're on a budget.
Now the carrier might want to limit the percentage of bandwidth that can be reserved, so a heavy phone day will only slow, not stop, internet access. But there's no need to earmark a bunch of channels and install a bunch of hardware JUST for the low-dollar IP packets.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I would love something like this in my home, even if it was at 144k/s. I'd love DSL or Cable or anything with decent downloads and good pings. Sadly I doubt I'll see this come to little Camden WV, where basically putting broadband out here would justify the cost of doing it because all of 4 people (and maybe a couple cows and sheep) would subscribe. I hope for the day that maybe they either put a remote DSLAM out here or replace the current SLC-96 with a Litespan. Anybody know if that Verizon Virtual Office ISDN is any good?
"pnemonics are great"
It's related to memory. It starts with M.
-Johnny Mnemonic
Yes, VZW is much more expensive than any other wireless provider and has a more limited selection of phones.
Where are you at?
I'm in central northern California and Vzw is available here for very reasonable rates! I'm paying $45/mo for 700 anytime, unlimited night/weekends. In the bigger cities like Sacramento and the Bay Area, there are cheaper services but I've never heard of anybody actually liking them.
Also, walking into the local cell shops, I find plenty of different models of phones.
Heh?
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Strange, I was at the world hedquarters the other day and there sure were lots of people talking on PCS phones. I guess they were all just faking it.
"The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
Major Major
America's Choice 300 minute plan is $35/mo, $45/mo only gets you 400 minutes. (Although there's something about 100 bonus minutes...)
Still only 500 and not 700. Those plans are REALLY expensive per minute compared to Sprint, T-Mobile, etc., but those minutes are worth every penny due to Verizon's superior service and coverage.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Monet Mobile Networks launched EV-DO services in Duluth, Sioux Falls and Fargo (possibly more).
The price is something like $40 a month with unlimited usage.
The downside is 2.4 megabits is theoretical, and only achievable in lab conditions.
Real-world performance is between 300k and 600k. In certain conditions, we have seen consistent performance of 1.4 megabits (connection to server on local loop)
For those of you who are considering a mobile webserver, be warned that your best upload is 153k, and that's in the lab. Look for 32k - 64k uploads.
Remember folks, this is cellular technology. The same technology that makes your voice sound 'digitized' in bad signal area can cause major errors in data.