Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Aussie Telcos Consider 3G For Last Mile 65

Mattygfunk writes "Whirlpool reports Aussie telco R&D labs are scrambling to transform 3G mobile networks into last mile solutions rivaling the best wired broadband networks, as telcos come to grips with lack of consumer interest in 3G mobile services and a likelihood of no payback on their multi-billion dollar investments in the spectrum."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Aussie Telcos Consider 3G For Last Mile

Comments Filter:
  • by davids-world.com ( 551216 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:03AM (#4494320) Homepage
    wow, finally an affordable application. in europe, 3G almost ruined a major player in the telco market, and severely damaged the financial situation of the German Telekom, after the govt made some 60 billion EUR.

    (Oh, as a small remark.. German Telekom's shares are in public hands.. )
  • Sounds like a stroke of genius. A profitable 3G service, and a cheaper way to connect remote areas. Consumers also benefit. It just has to be technically sound. Any info on this?
  • Proper Use (Score:4, Insightful)

    by e8johan ( 605347 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:12AM (#4494358) Homepage Journal
    Finaly the telcos have realized what 3G is, i.e. a broadband packet based data network. 2G is already adequite for talking, so 3G must offer good data transfer solutions. It may be files, it may be movies, or any other data, but not soley speach. With the suggested rates for the Swedish 3G networks I doubt that this will get a proper breakthrough, but still, it is cheaper and faster than my crappy 9600 GSM transfers.
    • Absolutely right (Score:3, Interesting)

      by tgma ( 584406 )
      I was at a conference with a guy from Qualcomm the other day, talking about their CDMA-450 technology, which is basically their CDMA-2000, only operating on the 450MHz band (or maybe 400). The NMT-450 operators in Russia are looking at this as a way of upgrading their networks.

      I said that I thought this lacked the critical mass, and the momentum to really compete with GSM 2.5G as a mobile voice/data solution, particularly when you look at how ghastly the handsets are for CDMA450. He said that even so, there is a use for CDMA 450 as a fixed wireless technology.

      This makes a lot of sense, because laying cable in urban Russia is a bureaucratic nightmare, not to mention the fact that your competitors may control the ducts that you want to use. Even when you can lay cable, it's much more fun building a wireless link in a climate like ours. Actually my last mile in my apartment at home is wireless (point to point microwave, rather than cellular) and I'm very happy with it. And there is a real shortage of fixed lines in Moscow - one of my colleagues had to wait two years for a line to be installed by the public operator. I was told four years when I asked.

      The other thing that I heard at the same conference was that in those areas where the license payment was sensible, 3G would be used to build extra capacity in the wireless network, on the assumption that there are quadra-mode (?tetra-mode) handsets to work on all 3 GSM standards, and W-CDMA. I've seen mention of these handsets already, although given how long it's taken with 2.5G, I'm not holding my breath.
  • Last Mile... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JumpingBull ( 551722 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:21AM (#4494410)

    The last mile has been a stumbling block for telcos for about two decades, now. Available silicon can easily handle fibre to the curb, but getting it in already existing buildings has been a problem.

    The ISDN suffered from unknown physical plant characteristics - stubs, splitting pairs, and other analogue phone cruft seriously debilitated ISDN acceptance. ADSL leapfrogged the ISDN performance by learning from the mistakes in the ISDN development/deployment.

    Hopefully, this repurposing of technology may be just the boost that an ailing telecommunucations industry needs. The hardware portion of the high-tech sector has suffered an abundance of losses after the dot-com meltdown.

  • Number of Users? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by billwie ( 257149 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:32AM (#4494450) Journal
    This may be totally off base, but do any of you Teleco people out there know how many users can get access on a single 3G cell? might this be significantly less people that are within that cell (and wanted access), not only within a city, but in the suburbs too?
    • Re:Number of Users? (Score:5, Informative)

      by nchip ( 28683 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @09:46AM (#4494828) Homepage
      not a teleco person, but let me answer still.

      Afaik WCDMA cell can scale from 512 users at 8k/s to 2 users at 2mb/s. Sounds like too little? Well, the cell size for WCDMA is significantly smaller than on gsm, and as the voice calls will be mostly routed through the gsm network, the improvement should be pretty visible. But definetly no warezing channel.

      What I'd like to know however, is the roundtrip time over different 3G technoligities. Even GPRS has adequate bandwith for browsing/mail/messaging, but the 1 second roundtrip time with The TCP 3-way handshake really kills the experience.

      WCDMA is the non-qualcomm version of 3G, as qualcomm got too greedy with it's CDMA tecnology patents. Yet another case in to the "patent system needs to fixed" bucket. Someone else should write about how much users their CDMA2000 can handle. (The UMTS version, not the 1x version).

      3G is just one step that provides extra wireless bandwidth. Next step would be roaming from high-speed WLAN networks to larger coverage 3G networks, and finally to The everywhere covering satellite network. The obstacles are mostly commercial, as everyone want's start billing everyone else for the roaming.

      • WCDMA (UMTS) comes in two flavor today... FDD mode and TDD mode. The one vendors are pushing for today is the FDD mode which max out at around 384kbps per channel (and not that many users per cell, close to nchip's suggestions).

        TDD promises 2mbps but there are a lot of catches to it... limited cell range much smaller than FDD, no handover and best of all, afaik, the standards are not finalized yet. Which makes it too late and too little compared to 802.11x

        Lets come back to FDD mode. As you know CDMA theory which WCDMA is based on says that the cell radius depends on the number of users and bitrate required. Which means if you use the max 384kbps, you probably can't get such a big cell radius. Not sure the range, but somewhere at a few km max.

        If last mile broadband is what they're looking for they might as well go for technologies such as LMDS or 802.11... at least they're much more mature/cheaper than 3G.

        IMHO WCDMA is a technology in search of an application... problem is... no one can come out with something better than the usual data content on the mobile BS...

  • The China story (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:32AM (#4494452) Homepage Journal
    If you look at the GSM coverage map [gsmworld.com] of China you will see that it has a large coverage for country so large. From what I undestand the reason for this, which is along the lines of the last mile, is that China did not have any cabled phone network covering that area to start with. Since it was going to cost them as much to wire such a large area and that mobile phones were growing in popularity they decided to go the wireless approach.

    The reason I bring the story up, is because once you are in a rural area it becomes increasingly more expensive to connect to homes. The problem is that you get less inhabitants per length of telephone cable, thus making it extremely more expensive short and long term. The long term cost is the inspection of such a coverage of phone lines. The wireless approach allows a much larger area to be covered, and it ends up being cheaper as there is there are less inspection points. It also provides the advantage that the phone company also gets money from visitors to the area and not just the inhabitants. Additionaly, for a farmer, this is great as it allows him/her to phone home when they are somewhere in the middle of their land. This sort of solution could be easily applied to other countries with the last 100 miles problem, not just the last mile.

    The only question I ask myself, is whether there are any solutions for solar powered transmission towers?
    • Re:The China story (Score:2, Insightful)

      by packeteer ( 566398 )
      This worked in China but wont in America. You failed to mention the Chinese govt. "my way or the high way" approach to laying this out. If you live where they want a tower built your gone and the tower goes up. True to communism its probably better for the greater good but it would never go over in America. Have you ever been to Asia? They all have cell phones, good/inexpensive ones too. Maybe our system is antiquated. We cant rely on battling companies to do all of this for us.
    • > The only question I ask myself, is whether there are any solutions for solar powered transmission towers?

      Australia's main telecommunications carrier, Telstra, makes extensive use of solar powered microwave and optical fibre repeaters in 'the outback' (rural areas).

    1. Spend billions on a 3G license.
    2. Realise that you've bought a license to emit low power, short range, easily garbled RF not that far away from the visible spectrum.
    3. ...
    4. Profit!

    I'm glad to see someone filling in step 3 at last.

    • by madprof ( 4723 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @10:01AM (#4494938)
      Not specifically aimed at your comments:

      3G is just a faster mobile data pipe. What services someone wants to run on it is up to them.
      You're right that there are more masts required.
      You may well be able to get a mobile always-on net link with a 3G service provider. You may well find that some licence holders don't offer this sort of service at all.

      3G will be a profit-making technology but not tomorrow and not next year. It's a long-term investment which so many analysts seem to forget.

    • When the Europeans were deciding what their 3G telco standards would be, there was a division between Siemens (who wanted to use a Time Division Duplexing System called TD-CDMA) and Nokia and Ericsson (who wanted to use an Frequency Division Duplexing system called W-CDMA). Rather than choosing a winner, the European Telecommunications Standards Institude (ETSI) adopted both standards, and technically UMTS supports both, although W-CDMA has got all the publicity. Spectrum bands were allocated for both, paired (for W-CDMA) and unpaired (for TD-CDMA). In Europe, telcos are required to use these standards, but there certainly have been allocations of unpaired spectrum. Australia decided to auction the same spectrum bands that were auctioned in Europe, but put no restrictions on the technology they were used for. 3G licences were sold in Australia for not much money, as the number of licences and number of players were the same. Arraycom bought some unpaired spectrum for not much money, and always said that it would use the spectrum for its i-Burst technology. This is now happening. (The article is false when it said that Australia uniquely allocated unpaired spectrum. Most of the world did. Australia merely put uncommonly few restrictions on its use. This was not unique either, as other countries (eg New Zealand) did the same.

      I don't think i-Bust is technically '3G', but it does use '3G' spectrum.

      Michael.
  • by Mattygfunk1 ( 596840 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:43AM (#4494490)
    I submitted the article, but after I did I found at australia.internet.com [internet.com] also carried the story way back in June.

    Anyway interesting concept.

    -----

    i need a ciggie bbl [wallpaperscoverings.com]

  • by Sherloqq ( 577391 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @08:49AM (#4494525)
    Since 3G seems to be offering higher speeds, will the telco(s) introduce the service at low prices, only to win customers, garner major share of the market, only to raise prices afterwards (price increase follows bandwidth increase; "gotta pay recoup the cost of 3G license")? How are they coping with potential interference issues? What *is* the range of 3G anyway?
  • by Cato ( 8296 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @09:10AM (#4494622)
    The journalist who wrote the article seems to be assuming there will be no payback at all from 3G, in its UMTS or CDMA2000 incarnations, to make a more exciting story. Some of the developments discussed aren't really competing in the same market as 3G in any case, e.g. the Arraycomm technology is mainly for fixed wireless last-mile access, and doesn't have much to do with 3G. The Flarion flash-OFDM approach is interesting, though.

    While it may take a lot longer to get a payback than people planned, it's mainly a question of pricing and services. The real issue is delivering, at reasonable price points, services that are of interest, e.g. multimedia messaging (zap a photo to your friends/family), location-based services (where's the closest garage/ATM, and how do I get there?), multiplayer gaming (already happening with text messaging, one game lets you zap combatants who are in the same part of the physical world as you are), and much more. An open market for 3G services is critical, the idea being that anyone with a bright idea can put together their own service.

    Of course, it doesn't make such a good story if telcos aren't 'scrambling' to fix 3G - in any case, these are all post-3G developments and will be competing with next-generation WiFi as well.

    • Actually, ArrayComm's I-Burst technology is far more than a fixed last-mile solution. The setup they're currently testing in Sydney is not the first deployement of this technology, but it is a first for Australia where wide-ranging, wireless broadband access is prettymuch non-existant.

      I-Burst, at least in Australia, is focused on giving city areas (and perhaps suburban areas), pervasive, roaming wireless Internet access for mobile devices across every major city in the country. And doing it at 1Mbps per connection.

      For more information, see this article: http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/iburst.asp [atomicmpc.com.au]
      • Good point about ArrayComm - http://www.arraycomm.com/internetproducts/system.h tml gives a bit more detail but the size of their cells and the power consumption in mobile devices is unclear. It's possible it's not really a 3G competitor, since it may not be able to reach 3G phone battery consumption (but maybe it can in the future). Probably best to think of it as aimed at PDAs, laptops and other devices, whether at home, at work or out and about.

  • Why ? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Nickdawwg ( 609344 )
    Someone tell me again. Why do I want a 3g enabled phone ?
  • by lgftsa ( 617184 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @09:21AM (#4494675)
    At AU$0.20/Mb for anything over the base plan, data costs are what's keeping the internet expensive here. The current pricepoint is AU$80-90/month with a 3Gb cap. It doesn't matter what the delivery medium is used to deliver the data, that cost sets a lower limit for any pricing scheme.

    Cable is severely restricted to the highest areas of population density in the south-east of the country, ADSL is available in a high percentage of exchanges(both metropolitan and regional), and satellite is used for those areas where copper doesn't reach and can afford it($$$$$).

    A 3G infrastructure depends on a good underlying data network - which basically describes ADSL(plus ISDN, ATM, etc).

    As far as I can see, the areas which have that infrastructure, but where 3G is the only solution are extremely limited. Add that to the very limited market of high-speed-mobile-data users, and you have a solution which has an extremely small number of users for a high development and setup/intrastructure cost.

    I doubt it will be a competitive or affrodable "last mile" solution for the forseeable future, outside of a few PR "success stories".
    • It was recently revealed that nine per cent of connections [katelundy.com.au] (affecting over one million customers [readytorun.com.au]) are supplied by using pair-gain [ozetechnology.com] technology to provide multiple virtual telephone lines over one physical copper line. These virtual lines can not be used for broadband internet services such as ADSL.

      If "third-generation" wireless technology can be used to provide the "last mile" of the connection (instead of relying on copper wires), this means ADSL can possibly be provided to the substantial number of customers whose telephone lines are pair-gain. For most of these customers, the only high speed internet access option previously available to them was satellite internet, which (as you said previously) is well beyond most people's budgets, and offers none of the benefits of ADSL connectivity [bigpond.com].

    • I recently looked into getting GPRS to use with a laptop. Tel$tra charge $22.00 per MEGABYTE!!!

      (offically, 2.2cents / kilobyte)

      This is ridiculous.
  • ... I don't think it'll be Telstra doing it. By the looks of it, the Australian Federal Government is going to sell Telstra whether or not it meets its 'bush coverage and standards' requirements (they'll fudge the figures to make it look like it has passed). A privatised Telstra will have no interest in the bush.

    Over the next 12 months, Australia (or at least the main cities) is going to see many 802.11b ISPs set up shop. With Australia's low population density (making it expensive to have cables running to every home) and Telstra's reluctance to provide even semi-decent infrastructure, I think this sort of thing will be the future of Australian telecommunications.

    In the end, this should be a good thing, since competition will be greater. Compared to a cable-based (telephone, fibre optic, etc.) market, there are far fewer barriers to enter a wireless market (the hardest part is getting a spectrum license). Scores of smaller companies will enter, and we will no longer be as subject to a predatory, uncompetitive monopolist (read: Telstra) as we are now. Only time will tell if that situation will last, though.

    I'm pinning my hopes on ultrawide broadband (UWB) communications. Bob Cringely wrote earlier this year that it has the potential to be simultaneously ultra-fast, secure and frequency-neutral (i.e. since it uses the whole spectrum, a virtually unlimited number of UWB signals can be running concurrently). The only problem is the range (about 1km, I believe), but 802.11b has this problem, too.
  • ...because, realistically, nobody's interested in handheld videophones or watching movies on their mobile phones.

    It's obvious that doing the last mile wireless is going to be cheaper than via copper. What baffles me though, is why making calls on my mobile is so much more expensive than a landline when the implementation/maintenance of wireless networks is so much cheaper than copper or fibre. It costs far less to stick a mast up than to start digging the road up.

  • I would settle for them just getting enough bloody ADSL ports in my exchange. Telstra - Grrr....

    Zilch
  • by buzy buzy ( 594932 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @10:10AM (#4494987)
    bandwidth per cell is 388,800kbps

    resulting in connection speeds of

    2000 kbps for 194 subs
    384 kbps for 1013 subs
    144 kbps for 2700 subs
    64 kbps per 6075 subs

    Note cell size is > 1Km but I don't have a figure for max cell size.

    Source was from a industry report from an investment house.

    384Kbps would probably be the most cost efficient and marketable solution giving a similar user experience as ADSL. However cost per Kbs will be hard to get as low as the monthly connection charges and unlimited connection time we see in most ADSL contracts these days.

    Still, any to get money back into telco's cant be bad for the industry as a whole.
    • Also if you have a user at the edge of the cell who is having difficulty in being heard the bitrate of all the other users in the cell will also fall. (Near/Far Effect)
      Also as users move around the cell the cell radius also changes, so cell areas need to be very small in order to match the customers' expectation of coverage, which is more in the traditional mould of fixed cell sizes rather than today I have coverage, tomorrow I don't.
      Also if one power user requests all the bandwidth available it will bump off other users, or degrade everyone else down to accommodate this user, (dependant on the vendors' algorithm admittedly)
      Basically a very poor user experience all round, especially if they have to pay a high premium for a new handset that offsets all the handset vendors development costs.

      However, if you fix the mobiles in one place, and limit the bandwidth (ie take all the mobility out of it) 3G could be viable.

  • by Zeddicus_Z ( 214454 ) on Monday October 21, 2002 @10:28AM (#4495148) Homepage
    A little company by the name of ArrayComm is currently testing a technology they call I-Burst here in Sydney. Basically, it (should) offer pervasive, roaming wireless internet access across every major city in the country, at 1Mbps per user.

    What does this mean? Well, it means that if you've got I-Burst capable NIC's, you'll have a 1Mbps Internet connection at any point across all our major cities (as long as you're not moving too fast) on your laptop, PDA or even your phone (assuming there is phones to take advantage of the tech - doubtful perhaps).

    This is beyond what any of the 3G's (W-CDMA, CDMA2000 etc) can offer. The only reason Australian telco's are pimping 3G is because they all spent small fortunes purchasing spectrum to run it on. Considering that these 3G solutions are a long way off, and that we should have a working commercial I-Burst service here in Oz sometime next year, 3G may just die a very quick death.

    We conducted an in-depth breakdown of the technology behind I-Burst, including the special directional antennas that make it possible. You can check it out here [atomicmpc.com.au] if you're interested.
  • I remember first seeing the new G3s at a CompUSA several years ago. The blue and white boxes with the easy-opening side door... loved 'em.
  • why setup tens of thousands, if not hundreds, when you can get broadband internet via satellite today? With such short range 3G repeaters, its senseless to do such a thing. no?

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Working...