Disruptive Tendencies

White Spaces: Wi-Fi on Drugs?

(Originally posted at http://www.von.com/blogs/guest/2009/02/white-space-wi-fi-on-drugs.aspx )

Firstly, I’d like to say that I applaud the FCC for opening up additional unlicensed spectrum for Internet use, but “white space” has set a new record for going from zero to the Peak of Inflated Expectations!

When Larry Page speaks of Google’s vision of “Wi-Fi on steroids,” it has a nice ring to it, but where have we heard that before? Hold on. Maybe it was three years ago, when Intel touted that WiMAX “was like Wi-Fi on steroids” and demonstrated a point-to-point link streaming video over 12 miles. In the same article, Clearwire had “introduced a precursor to WiMAX in four cities in Florida, Texas, and Minnesota, and hopes to use Intel's technology to add 16 more cities by year end.” Fast-forward three years, and Clearwire WiMAX service is available in Baltimore and Portland, and promises download speeds of “up to 6mbps,” hardly steroid like performance.

What does it mean to be “on steroids” anyways? Does it mean higher data rates? Increased range? Greater capacity?

In wireless, things are seldom cut and dry.

Many have commented on the increased range of a radio operating in the 50-700MHz bands as opposed to the 2.4GHz or 5GHz unlicensed bands. Technically, this is true, and these propagation characteristics are of value if there is a wide area to cover, and a relatively few devices. To achieve this, the base stations will look more like cell towers than wireless LAN APs, due to the very long (6m at 50MHz!) wavelength at these low frequencies. However, propagation is a double-edged sword. In environments where capacity is more of a consideration, frequency re-use is an imperative, and white space propagation will work against you.

Many have commented on the ability of 50-700MHz to penetrate walls. The answer here is, “Yes, the free space loss in these bands will be anything from 11 to 32dB better than Wi-Fi, so outdoor range in open areas will be much improved. And yes, the attenuation through materials such as concrete will be improved (maybe up to 10dB) but the long wavelength will make aperture effects -- like going through windows -- worse than at 2.4GHz.” Bottom line -- the jury is still out!

With respect to data rates, it is important to appreciate that the channel widths in white space are 6MHz as opposed to the 20MHz channels found with Wi-Fi in the unlicensed bands today. For this reason alone, it will be impossible for user performance to approach that which is currently available today. Then when macro-cell architectures are factored in, it won’t even be close. So much for Wi-Fi on amphetamines, Mr. Commissioner!

Stephen Rayment, BelAir’s CTO, recently drilled down into many of the specifics around white space in an online webinar. Sitting on IEEE committees, Stephen has first-hand visibility into many of the issues related to standards adoption, chipset availability and so on. It’s definitely worth a listen.

The industry does itself a disservice when it uses sound bites to articulate a position. Had Larry Page or Kevin Martin said, “Television white space will allow the Open Internet to bridge the Digital Divide, by bringing the web to rural areas across America,” it would have been equally compelling and more accurate.

As it stands, the Gartner Hype Cycle lives on with “white space,” but we’d all be better off if more of an effort was made to temper expectations with realistic dialogue. The eventual disillusionment would be less acute.

Drugs make for bad similes. We tell our kids that steroids are bad. They’re bad for athletes and they’re equally bad for technology.

That’s my .02!

Martin Suter

Martin Suter is vice president of business development at BelAir Networks, a provider of broadband mesh solutions for Wi-Fi, WiMAX, 4.9 GHz Public Safety and 5.9 GHz ITS networks. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise. Prior to Cohda, he was vice president of business development at MeshNetworks Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola. Martin also was responsible for building several high profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, Sun Microsystems, and Teradata. Additionally, Martin has successfully negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and Sun.

A Cell for all Reasons

(Originally posted at http://www.von.com/blogs/guest/2009/01/a-cell-for-all-reasons.aspx )

Fortunately, service providers and technology vendors understand the principles previously described. Typically, a network is deployed for coverage in the first instance, by using large (macro) cells. These tend to be mounted on towers with high transmit power and highly sensitive antenna arrays to hear the low powered “whisperers” at the edge of coverage. Of note, however, is that while published 3G data rates (HSDPA) may claim to be in the 1.8mbps to 14.4mbps range, the “real” capacity throughout the cell of a 3G macro-cell base station is around 10mbps, meaning that there’s 10mbps to share across all of the users in the coverage area. Even the much vaunted 4G, with the first release of LTE offering data rates of over 320mbps for downlink and over 170mbps for uplink, has an estimated capacity per macro-cell of ~45mbps. This means that the performance averaged across all users will not (cannot) approach the types of speeds being talked about loosely in the press.

As user density increases, it becomes necessary to add capacity to the system. This is done by sub-dividing macro cells into smaller micro and picocells. Average data rates increase, as more users are able to transmit and receive at higher modulation rates (because they’re closer to the “bullseye”). System capacity increases as a multiple of the [number of cells per cell capacity]. What this means is that it is possible to deliver far greater capacities over a comparable area (greater than 1gbps per square mile!) by shifting to a micro-cell-based network design. But what it also means is that there is a need to have a backhaul strategy that supports both this level of capacity and that which is implementable in the physical location of the micro-cell nodes.

At the complete other end of the spectrum is the emergence of the femtocell. Think of this as a combination of a Linksys style gateway/router with an HSxPA, WiMAX or LTE access radio. The rationale behind this is to extend 5-bar performance indoor, to users in their homes or offices. End users will connect this to their existing cable or DSL connections and be able to use their LTE devices indoor, much as they do with Wi-Fi today. Whether customers feel a need to deploy cellular femtocells when they already have Wi-Fi deployed is an open question and one deserving of consideration.

That’s my .02!

Martin Suter is vice president of business development at BelAir Networks, a provider of broadband mesh solutions for Wi-Fi, WiMAX, 4.9 GHz Public Safety and 5.9 GHz ITS networks. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise. Prior to Cohda, he was vice president of business development at MeshNetworks Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola. Martin also was responsible for building several high profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, Sun Microsystems, and Teradata. Additionally, Martin has successfully negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and Sun.

To LTE or not to LTE

(Originally posted at http://www.von.com/blogs/guest/2008/12/to-lte-or-not-to-lte.aspx )

Talk about confusion in the market! Is the arrival of LTE-based 4G imminent or still years away? Depending on which articles you’ve been reading, you could draw highly contradictory conclusions.

Earlier this month, Qualcomm announced it is dropping development of its flavor of 4G technology, known as Ultra-Mobile Broadband (UMB), and is shifting its focus to LTE technology.

Qualcomm’s announcement comes on the heels of Nortel Networks Ltd.’s announcement this past summer that it’s shifting its development focus from WiMAX to LTE and Motorola Inc.’s announcement that it’s planning to release 700MHz LTE products in 2009.

It sounds like 4G is right around the corner! Or is it?

It’s not surprising to see vendors jumping on the LTE bandwagon. Qualcomm had $600 million tied up in goodwill related to UMB (Flarion M&A), and without carrier support for UMB, it’s possible some level of writedown may be in the cards. Both Nortel and Motorola have seen their stock prices decimated this past year, and announcements related to “the next major thing” allow them to add some (Gartner) Hype into their stories for the Street without having to back it up with any performance metrics.

In early October, AT&T Inc. (T), North America’s largest wireless carrier, suggested publicly that its HSxPA-based 3G networks still have a lot of life left in them, and is projecting LTE won’t be deployed on a commercial scale for another five years. Of note is that in the month following this disclosure, AT&T announced its acquisition of Wayport, the country’s largest commercial Wi-Fi service provider. With this acquisition, AT&T adds very significant wireless data capacity, for devices of all kinds, across its footprint without having to spend anything on additional spectrum.

And what of the prospects for 4G to get mired down in a patent quagmire? Some of the handset vendors have banded together to create a patent framework for LTE, but other key players are absent. ADC has indicated it has several key patents related to 4G. There also has been speculation Qualcomm may attempt to assert its OFDM patent portfolio, much of which was acquired with its Flarion deal announced back in 2005. With the discontinuation of its UMB (i.e. Flarion) development, it is not a stretch to imagine attempts to recoup its $600 million price tag via threatened litigation and broad-based licensing of the related IP.

Will LTE be rolled out? In all likelihood, the answer is yes. However, three things threaten to continue to push this date further to the right:

• Capital markets
• IP landscape and uncertainty
• Existing, low-cost substitute technologies like Wi-Fi

Previously, I blogged that the debate as to which technology is better, is moot. Ultimately, the market will dictate timing and required capabilities. There are true broadband wireless devices shipping today in the hundreds of millions of units, heading to over a billion per annum. While AT&T has come out and indicated its 3G network has legs, its investment in Wayport is a strong indication that Wi-Fi has legs too!

That’s my .02!

Martin Suter is vice president of business development at BelAir Networks, a provider of broadband mesh solutions for Wi-Fi, WiMAX, 4.9 GHz Public Safety and 5.9 GHz ITS networks. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise. Prior to Cohda, he was vice president of business development at MeshNetworks Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola. Martin also was responsible for building several high-profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, Sun Microsystems and Teradata. Additionally, Martin successfully has negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and Sun.

Mobilizing Web 2.0

(Originally posted at http://www.von.com/blogs/guest/2008/11/mobilizing-web-2-0.aspx )

The launch of the iPhone by Apple and AT&T in June 2007 was a seminal event in the evolution of the mobile Internet. For the first time, a handheld device delivered much of the usability and functionality that is available to laptop and PC users, in a form factor and interface that people wanted to use. The iPhone allows users to stream YouTube, purchase from the iStore, upload pictures to Facebook, and of course, make plain old phone calls.

Entire ecosystems are being enabled, as we speak, by companies like Apple, Google and RIM Blackberry releasing software development kits (SDKs), and creating a revenue-sharing business model that gives these developers a route to market (Apple App Store). Marquee VCs, like Kleiner Perkins, are committing hundreds of millions of dollars to fund startups focused narrowly on Mobile Web 2.0 application development.

The Mobile Internet is happening. Now.

But all is not idyllic. Many iPhone users report being frustrated by the limitations of current cellular networks. In many respects, it’s analogous to driving your Ferrari over a dirt road. Much of the functionality described above is only available over a Wi-Fi network, when available.

A short-term answer for the Mobile Internet is more ubiquitous Wi-Fi. We’re not advocating blanket, citywide coverage, but rather strategic deployments in areas where it makes sense to do so. This may be as simple as re-thinking the hotspot coverage area — perhaps placing a high-powered, highly sensitive access point on the outside of a location, rather than placing a low-power, enterprise AP inside. Conceivably, this simple step would provide coverage inside the establishment and its patio, just as the indoor AP, but it also could create a “virtual patio” covering about 10 times the area of the indoor AP alone. If you think about it, the location’s SSID could be used as an advertising beacon, pulling in more customers from the surrounding area, not simply serving those customers already inside the establishment.

Other locations where it might make sense to deploy Wi-Fi access include convention centers, hotels and resorts, sporting venues, commuter rail stations and lines, shopping malls, urban cores, multi-tenant dwelling units, etc.

The long-term bet carriers are making is LTE, 4G. In April 2008, the FCC raised $19.6 billion from 4G spectrum auctions and the major LTE equipment providers have agreed on an intellectual property model to accelerate adoption. 4G trials are expected to begin in 2010, with wide-scale rollouts beginning in the 2012 timeframe.

Whether Wi-Fi, WiMAX or LTE, or most likely some combination of all three, the challenge of deploying a network with the capacity capable of delivering applications and content to many of these devices simultaneously, at rates approaching 100mbps, is not trivial. Wireless networks are constrained by the laws of physics, notwithstanding the unfortunate hype that inflates expectations with every new generation of technologies. The infamous WiMAX promise of “70mbps over 70 kilometers” sounded good to the marketing department, but the reality is that this is an either/or proposition. Distance and power dictate data rate. Handheld devices are, by definition, low-powered, range-limited devices. For 4G to deliver on anything approaching its promise, much smaller cells (micro and picocells) will need to be used outdoors, with even smaller femtocells expected to provide an answer indoors, in the home and office.

That’s my .02!

Martin Suter is vice president of business development at BelAir Networks, a provider of broadband mesh solutions for Wi-Fi, WiMAX, 4.9 GHz Public Safety and 5.9 GHz ITS networks. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise. Prior to Cohda, he was vice president of business development at MeshNetworks Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola. Martin also was responsible for building several high profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, Sun Microsystems, and Teradata. Additionally, Martin has successfully negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and Sun.

Some Thoughts on Wireless Standards

(Originally posted at http://www.von.com/blogs/guest/2008/11/some-thoughts-on-wireless-standards.aspx )

To many outside the industry, standards bodies often appear as an arcane group of eccentrics who spend years debating minutiae. Actually, they appear this way to many of us in the industry as well! However, standards bodies play a critical role in industry, as they drive toward consensus related to supported use case requirements, and technical means of achieving these. While representatives from most companies participate in these meetings, there is an element of democracy contained within the process and overt politicking is severely discouraged.

Many have suggested that the reason the U.S. lagged behind Europe in wireless deployments and adoption was that there was no unifying technology standard, in contrast to Europe, where GSM was widely adopted as the consensus standard. This enabled seamless roaming across the continent and allowed handset manufacturers to achieve economies of scale more easily.

If you look at the wireless industry holistically, there are two main standards bodies: 3GPP and IEEE. Each will say that they’re very different from the other, with 3GPP focused on cellular standards, while IEEE is focused on a broader range of standards, from wireless personal area networks (WPAN), wireless local area networks (WLAN) to wireless wide area networks (RAN).

Historically, there has perhaps been an acceptable rationale for this bifurcation. The cellular industry was focused on the delivery of voice-over-legacy circuit-switched networks, and used a whole host of air interfaces (time/frequency/code division), each designed to support large numbers of users in very narrow bands of licensed spectrum.

The IEEE was focused on the delivery of data across IP networks, and has developed a series of air interfaces based on particular use cases. With the exception of 802.11b, which uses a direct sequence, spread spectrum modulation, every other flavor of 802.11 (i.e. .11a, g, n, etc.), 802.16 (aka WiMAX), 802.20 (aka Mobile Broadband Wireless Access or MBWA) use OFDM (orthogonal frequency division multiplexing).

What the industry is finally seeing is a degree of convergence, although not yet formally.

There is some debate as to which technology becomes the official “4G” standard. There are proponents of 802.16-2005 (Mobile WiMAX), while others support the proposed 3GPP 4G standard, LTE (Long Term Evolution).

Notwithstanding this debate, legacy circuit-switched voice networks are becoming packet switched, and increasingly capable of supporting significant data traffic. Data networks are increasingly capable of supporting significant voice traffic, with applications like VoIP and VoWLAN. 3GPP standards, such as LTE, are migrating to OFDM and IP.

The debate about which standard is “best,” is largely irrelevant. One could make a strong argument that 802.16 (WiMAX) is a better outdoor standard than 802.11 (Wi-Fi), or claim that its performance exceeds current 3G systems. Yet many remain skeptical as to the widespread adoption of Mobile WiMAX.

Time will tell.

“Best” is not only a function of waveform or data rate. Cost, ubiquity, market timing, industry uptake and standards roadmap all impact the commercial success or failure of a particular technology. At the end of the day, it is too much to expect that a single technology will be “best” in all use cases. Seamless, transparent interoperability is what matters, as both 3GPP and IEEE standards are likely to co-exist and ultimately, complement the other.

That’s my .02!

Martin Suter is vice president of business development at BelAir Networks, a provider of broadband mesh solutions for Wi-Fi, WiMAX, 4.9 GHz Public Safety and 5.9 GHz ITS networks. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise. Prior to Cohda, he was vice president of business development at MeshNetworks Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola. Martin also was responsible for building several high profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, Sun Microsystems, and Teradata. Additionally, Martin has successfully negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and Sun.

On Hype, Troughs & Enlightenment

(Originally published at http://www.von.com/blogs/guest/2008/10/on-hype-troughs-and-enlightenment.aspx )

Let me begin with a short story:

"Once upon a time, a technology is announced that generates significant press and industry interest. There’s a period of over-enthusiasm and unrealistic projections, a flurry of well-publicized activity by technology leaders ... some successes, but more failures... The only enterprises making money are conference organizers and magazine publishers. Because the technology doesn’t live up to its over-inflated expectations, it rapidly becomes unfashionable. Media interest wanes, except for a few cautionary tales. However, focused experimentation and hard work by an increasingly diverse range of organizations lead to a true understanding of the technology’s applicability, risks and benefits... Finally, the real-world benefits of the technology are demonstrated and accepted ... increasingly stable as the technology enters its 2nd and 3rd generation. The final height of the plateau varies according as to whether the technology is broadly applicable or benefits only a niche market..."

How familiar is this story?

Most of us in technology have seen Gartner’s famous Magic Quadrant. Many of us, in startups, have taken the published version for a particular space, copied it into PowerPoint and inserted our companies in the lower right (Visionaries) for presentation to investors and potential strategic alliance partners. The implication is, of course, that by aligning with a larger company with the "Ability to Execute", together we could own the coveted Magic Quadrant.

But another Gartner tool that I find even more compelling is the Gartner Technology Hype Curve. The story above is simply the definitions of each of the five steps in the model strung together: Technology Trigger, Peak of Inflated Expectations, Trough of Disillusionment, Slope of Enlightenment and the Plateau of Productivity.

What blows me away is how consistently this cycle reflects reality.

I’ve spent a lot of time in wireless. Intuitively, it is possible to place a given technology somewhere on this curve.

If I were to say "outdoor Wi-Fi" today, most people would quickly come back with "Trough of Disillusionment.” Given the media reports of the past 6-12 months, it’s easy to see why, but that’s what the cycle does. I personally believe that outdoor Wi-Fi is now on the ascent up the Slope of Enlightenment, as witnessed by major build-outs that are happening (“Cablevision more than doubles Wi-Fi coverage area”), but it will take some time for the public perception to catch up.

But if I were to say "WiMAX", what would you think?

Judging from all of the press and conference hype (see Gartner definition about the only people making money), and it’s easy to see that it’s on the ascent and climbing inexorably toward the Peak of Inflated Expectations. Having attended WiMAX World a couple of weeks ago, I can attest to the hype that is being generated, but the Hype Curve tells us that it is inevitably heading for the dreaded Trough ("What do you mean it doesn’t do 70 mbs over 70 kilometers?!?").

What about LTE? If you read the press, you’d think it was imminent, and there’s not even consensus on what the 4G standard is, with some proposing that LTE and Mobile WiMAX somehow merge into “4G.”

It’s amazing how accurate this model has proven to be, and how it can be used to explain market behaviors. Entrepreneurs produce buzzword compliant business plans early on in the lifecycle, and find funding in the Technology Trigger phase. Money starts to dry up and vendor shakeouts occur during the dark days of the Trough. Management teams and the resolve of boards are tested, and only the strongest survive. It is a Darwinian process, but those that do, those that have differentiated themselves and executed, emerge from the other side as real companies. There is money to be made the old fashioned way, not by hype driven valuations, but by rational, solid business fundamentals and execution for the few and the brave.

It’s easy to buy into the hype - it’s always about the "next greater thing." WiMAX is better than outdoor Wi-Fi ... Who needs WiMAX with LTE ... and so on. But is WiMAX really better than Wi-Fi? Does it matter? LTE’s at least five years out, but we have iPhones today. What can we do to empower users today with wireless broadband connectivity? It ain’t EDGE, it ain’t WiMAX, and it won’t be LTE for a long time yet.

It’s important to recognize hype for what it is. Outdoor Wi-Fi is on the Slope of Enlightenment and its second coming. Embrace it.

That’s my .02!

Martin Suter is vice president of business development at BelAir Networks, a provider of broadband mesh solutions for Wi-Fi, WiMAX, 4.9 GHz Public Safety and 5.9 GHz ITS networks. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise. Prior to Cohda, he was vice president of business development at MeshNetworks Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola. Martin also was responsible for building several high profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, Sun Microsystems, and Teradata. Additionally, Martin has successfully negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and Sun.

Intel: D éjà vu all over again?

TheStreet.com reported today that a $2b investment from Intel may revive the Sprint-Clearwire WiMAX joint venture.

Can you say déjà vu all over again?

One word: Cometa.

The vaunted joint venture, founded in late 2002 and backed by Intel, AT&T and IBM, with venture backing from Apax and 3i, Cometa had grand plans to roll out 20,000 Wi-Fi hotspots by 2004, so that people nationwide would be no more than a five minute walk from one.

In a Wi-Fi Planet article, one of the founders is quoted as saying: "If we knew all about where demand for wireless broadband access is going to end up, it would be too late to start the company. Clearly, there's a leap of faith required here.”

In a stunningly prescient comment later in the article, Marcos Lara, founder and managing director of Public Internet Project, points to the failure of wireless Internet access provider Ricochet as a cautionary tale: “My point is, the model for Ricochet was no different.”

Eighteen months later, despite the backing of 3 heavyweights, Cometa quietly fizzled out, closing its doors in May 2004.

But here we are again, with Intel, Clearwire and Sprint trying to drag WiMAX, kicking and screaming, up the technology hype curve to the peak of inflated expectations. But like Groundhog Day, we’ve already lived through this twice already. Maybe the third times the charm, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

It’s not a question of technology, it’s a function of business model.

That’s my .02!

Martin

(martin.suter@iplicensing.net)