dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Clearwire: We'll Hit 80 Markets In 18 Months
May, may not look to government stimulus...
by Karl Bode 09:10AM Friday Jul 03 2009
Clearwire needs to maximize the limited deployment funds they have -- so they've focused their deployments on major cities. But does the broadband upstart plan to explore government stimulus to reach less-serviced areas? Unclear, says the magic telecom eight ball. "We remain focused on completing our national rollout of 80 markets over the next 18 months, and our existing build plan isn't predicated on our ability to secure this funding," the carrier tells Unstrung. With only nine markets planned for 2009 (only three of which are currently live), that means Clearwire needs to seriously pick up the pace in 2010.

view:
topics flat nest 

Ben
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL

If Clearwire Wants To Succeed...

...then instead of deploying to areas that already have lots of broadband options, they should deploy to areas with one, or even no options at all. Rural areas is what comes to mind here.

So perhaps such areas would have fewer people per square mile, and fewer potential customers. But so what? More of these "fewer potential customers" would no doubt sign up in a heartbeat, and they would be less likely to cancel.

What I describe, is in effect the only way that HughesNet remains in business. I can't think of a single HughesNet customer who'd keep the service if even DSL, or even a WISP became available to them.
dcdeadbeat5

join:2008-10-07
Washington, DC

Re: If Clearwire Wants To Succeed...

The problem is that rural markets are not profitable and Clear is a for-profit company. If they do roll out to rural markets the price they will need to charge will be high and then people will complain that they need government subsidies.

This rural versus urban argument has been played out over and over on this forum. The real answer is that they are a telcom that must make money in order to survive. This means going where the most money can be made.

I am just curious why D.C. was left off the list from the original planed rollout. The network is live here so why not go ahead and open it up.

MoJeeper
The Stig in 2012
Premium
join:2000-10-20
Springfield, MO

Re: If Clearwire Wants To Succeed...

They will never amount to anything.

You have At&t with 3g with their deep pockets and Verizon-Alltel pushing their new service

Wildblue and Hughesnet just plain suck.

We have a Motorola Canopy WISP but they are so overpriced compared to the already pricey 3g wireless from At&t, Verizon-Alltel. »www.tahighspeed.com/index.html

At&t was out here a few months ago checking the copper getting ready for Uverse.

I will stick with Alltel until At&t lights off the Uverse.

Good Luck Clearwire
--
Semper Fidelis. 233 Years Strong.
»www.pleasant-viewfire.org

Ben
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL

Re: If Clearwire Wants To Succeed...

said by MoJeeper:

We have a Motorola Canopy WISP but they are so overpriced compared to the already pricey 3g wireless from At&t, Verizon-Alltel. »www.tahighspeed.com/index.html
Dang, those prices do indeed seem a bit stiff. They seem like prices that I'd pay only if it was really the best option.

What I'd wonder though, is this:

- Caps?
- Restrictions (P2P, can run servers, etc.)?
- Static IP?

The fact that AT&T 3G has a 5GB cap (and a high price for only 5GB) is enough reason to keep me from wanting to ever use it as a primary connection, since that amount is truly just way too low.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: If Clearwire Wants To Succeed...

Many of those areas are already rural. Branson? LOL its a tourist town. That's it. Of course you're going to pay more.

hdman
Flt Rider
Premium
join:2003-11-25
Appleton, WI
Reviews:
·exede by ViaSat
I agree....however....there should be NO stimulus money given to ANY ISP who is deploying to an area already served by broadband. Obummer better make sure that ANY stimulus money for expansion of broadband goes to companies who are expanding into unserved areas....period.

They also need to stop allowing large companies like AT&T get away with using sat. based service to say that they cover the rural markets. That is load of crap...that is NOT broadband...and I don't care how you define it. If you've ever had sat based service, you will know what I mean....
--
The proper way to break in a Harley: Grab a fist full of throttle, and ride it like you stole it!!!
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: If Clearwire Wants To Succeed...

I had wild blue, so I know what you mean.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
They may need to charge more if they go to a more rural business, but it beat going under.

kieranmullen
Premium
join:2005-12-12
Portland, OR
Agreed. They seem to pushing strongly in Portland Oregon. Al the small cell phone shops are also selling clear as well. We have qwest, verizon,(fios and dsl) comcast plus cell operators. Overall Portland is pretty wired. Perhaps it is becuase Intel has a base here?
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
I think they should move to areas where ATT and TW are testing caps ASAP, they don't have a cap according to their site. I know uverse does 18/15 and IDK what TW offers(I think it is about 17m though) but 40/100GB caps + $1 overages with TW or 150GB cap with att VS. no cap from clear. if you lived in an area with TW and a 3m or less DSL and clear moved into town which would you take? Areas where TW/ATT have monopolies VS clear? Or worst of all, areas where TW and ATT are the DUOpolies! If clear moved into any of those areas with wimax and kept their uncapped, who would get the most subscribers?

hahah

@rcn.com

buh bye

they will be out of business before 10 markets are rolled out
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

WiMAX is dead

So much for WiMAX having any end user difference between 3G and WiMAX. LTE will slaughter WiMAX when it comes out in 2010. WiMAX will be laughed at as Verizon/Sprint's CDMA is now for being a crazy proprietary USA invention.

LTE has set frequency bands, WiMAX doesn't, so every WiMAX carrier can make their own permanently locked adapter by just including only the frequency bands it licenses. Each country has different frequency bands too, so you can't even take your carrier provided WiMAX card out of the country.

If Sprint never wired the rural/new suburban areas of the USA (leaving it looking like hub and spoke, with the spokes being interstates between major cities), why would Clear put coverage up in more areas than Sprint? Why would Clear have more coverage than Sprint in the next 4 years?
bcltoys

join:2008-07-21
Lost today

Re: WiMAX is dead

Will they at least cover there 3g footprint.

BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
said by patcat88:

So much for WiMAX having any end user difference between 3G and WiMAX. LTE will slaughter WiMAX when it comes out in 2010. WiMAX will be laughed at as Verizon/Sprint's CDMA is now for being a crazy proprietary USA invention.
What are they laughing at, CDMA2000 (IS-2000) or CDMA as in code division multiple access?
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

Re: WiMAX is dead

said by BillRoland:

said by patcat88:

So much for WiMAX having any end user difference between 3G and WiMAX. LTE will slaughter WiMAX when it comes out in 2010. WiMAX will be laughed at as Verizon/Sprint's CDMA is now for being a crazy proprietary USA invention.
What are they laughing at, CDMA2000 (IS-2000) or CDMA as in code division multiple access?
CDMA2000, I should have been specific, but everyone knows in the context of cellphone networks, CDMA=CDMA2000. There is nothing else known by CDMA. Nobody refers to WCDMA as CDMA.
jay_rm

join:2002-04-12
Netville
said by patcat88:

So much for WiMAX having any end user difference between 3G and WiMAX. LTE will slaughter WiMAX when it comes out in 2010. WiMAX will be laughed at as Verizon/Sprint's CDMA is now for being a crazy proprietary USA invention.
Bit of a Euro-centric GSM booster, aren't you...
--
3500/512 5.7 GHz Motorola Canopy Wireless; FoxValley.net
'It looks just like a Telefunken U47 !'
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
It may look dead right now, but we never know if the future some1 may revive wimax and make it the new 'best' thing. Granted by then there may be something new, so even LTE by then may be out classed.
Samsonian

join:2007-06-15
Man that's a lot of FUD.

The WiMAX Forum has defined 3 spectrum profiles: 2.3, 2.5, and 3.5 GHz, and will certainly create more in the future.

WiMAX CPE isn't locked to anything.

Right now every device is tested against the operator's network for reliability reasons, just like many cell carriers do now. But, it's an expensive and time consuming process. Interoperability testing (IOT) by the WiMAX Forum is in full swing now, so an IOT certified device for a particular profile, will work on any network in that profile. No other testing or permissions will be needed.

Country specific band plans are irrelevant for this topic. WiMAX providers will only deploy in approved spectrum profiles. CPE should work across networks that support that band. Successful roaming tests have been done between different networks, including networks of different spectrum bands.

Current hardware typically only supports 1 band because that's what's practical for early versions of hardware (cost, performance, and power consumption factors). That won't be the case for future hardware, like Intel's next gen wireless chipset, code-named Evans Peak, coming late 2009/early 2010. It'll support WiMAX (2.3, 2.5, 3.5 GHz), WiFi a/b/g/n (2.4, 5 GHz), Bluetooth, and GPS. It also allows for 3rd party vendors to add in 3G and Mobile TV chips as well, and/or Intel could add a 3G chip themselves (as the recent Intel-Nokia deal allows them to).

Intel makes no secret they want to do for WiMAX in notebooks/netbooks and other devices what they did for WiFi (recall Centrino), and other standards like USB. Given who Intel is, and their history, I wouldn't bet against them.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

Re: WiMAX is dead

said by Samsonian:

Man that's a lot of FUD.

The WiMAX Forum has defined 3 spectrum profiles: 2.3, 2.5, and 3.5 GHz, and will certainly create more in the future.
I see bands outside that list.

»www.wimax.com/commentary/spotlig···-2006mw1

What about a carrier who wants to run it on a 700-800 or 400 mhz network for rural coverage?

»www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtm···93001507

Or companies and manufacturers who choose to not get WiMAX Forum certification? Then what? Its still called WiMAX.
»news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/537525

Country specific band plans are irrelevant for this topic. WiMAX providers will only deploy in approved spectrum profiles.
You think? If the license is cheaper or someone gets a license and the govt has no others, sure as hell a carrier will order a wimax chip from China for that band, and no other bands.

WiMAX is touted as operating even on unlicensed spectrum.

»www.networkevolutionvision.com/n···17539150

Current hardware typically only supports 1 band because that's what's practical for early versions of hardware (cost, performance, and power consumption factors).
We can say dialup is "practical" for rural broadband in the USA with your argument.
That won't be the case for future hardware, like Intel's next gen wireless chipset, code-named Evans Peak, coming late 2009/early 2010. It'll support WiMAX (2.3, 2.5, 3.5 GHz), WiFi a/b/g/n (2.4, 5 GHz), Bluetooth, and GPS. It also allows for 3rd party vendors to add in 3G and Mobile TV chips as well, and/or Intel could add a 3G chip themselves (as the recent Intel-Nokia deal allows them to).
Um, why is it a "next generation" chip, yet it has the same bands? Astroturfing?
Samsonian

join:2007-06-15

Re: WiMAX is dead

said by patcat88:

I see bands outside that list.

www.wimax.com/commentary/spotlig···-2006mw1'
That seems just be talking about the potential for WiMAX in various bands.

What about a carrier who wants to run it on a 700-800 or 400 mhz network for rural coverage?

»www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtm···93001507
There's a 700 MHz Mobile WiMAX profile under development, in both FDD and TDD.

While it'd be nice if there was a profile for every conceivable band, it takes time and money to create one. Development of a profile is, like anything else, based on market demand. India is a good example; they made spectrum available, and profiles were developed because the market potential is enormous. More and more profiles will be developed in time. The same holds true for LTE.

Info on WiMAX Profiles:
www.conniq.com/WiMAX/system-profiles.htm'
www.wimaxforum.org/regulators/profiles'

Or companies and manufacturers who choose to not get WiMAX Forum certification? Then what? Its still called WiMAX.
»news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/537525
You think? If the license is cheaper or someone gets a license and the govt has no others, sure as hell a carrier will order a wimax chip from China for that band, and no other bands.
I stand by what I said earlier: WiMAX providers will only deploy certified equipment (in the approved bands). And I've seen no evidence to the contrary yet.

There's little to be gained, and lot to be lost by not doing it the approved way. Any vendor or provider offering uncertified products/services and calling it WiMAX can be sued for trademark infringement, in addition to breaking compatibility with the rest of the ecosystem.

If a provider acquires or has spectrum in a band that doesn't have a profile, but is otherwise usable for WiMAX, a profile can be created. Assuming it's worthwhile. The same holds true for LTE.

WiMAX is touted as operating even on unlicensed spectrum.

»www.networkevolutionvision.com/n···17539150
That appears to be talking about Fixed WiMAX (802.16d) in the 5 GHz band, which is an approved profile. We're talking about Mobile WiMAX (802.16e and future 802.16m)

Current hardware typically only supports 1 band because that's what's practical for early versions of hardware (cost, performance, and power consumption factors).
We can say dialup is "practical" for rural broadband in the USA with your argument.
Talk to anyone who works in product development in any industry. You'll never get to include everything you want the first time around. You have to a whole bunch of requirements to juggle, and comprises have to be made. Improvements are incorporated in later versions. This is especially true in the high tech industry.

That won't be the case for future hardware, like Intel's next gen wireless chipset, code-named Evans Peak, coming late 2009/early 2010. It'll support WiMAX (2.3, 2.5, 3.5 GHz), WiFi a/b/g/n (2.4, 5 GHz), Bluetooth, and GPS. It also allows for 3rd party vendors to add in 3G and Mobile TV chips as well, and/or Intel could add a 3G chip themselves (as the recent Intel-Nokia deal allows them to).
Um, why is it a "next generation" chip, yet it has the same bands? Astroturfing?
It's "next gen" because it's coming out in about 6 months and it supports 3 Mobile WiMAX profiles (2.3, 2.5, 3.5), as well WiFi, BT, GPS, and add-ins. The current Echo Peak module only supports Mobile WiMAX in 2.5GHz and WiFi.
JJV
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Seattle, WA

Any updates on Seattle.


I keep asking around about the status of Seattle.
The clearwire people here dont seem to know anything.
jarschmi

join:2007-07-18
Milwaukee, WI

Re: Clear

There are huge pockets of monopolized broadband regions in every market that Clear/Sprint is planning deployment (CHI, DFW, Atlanta, DC...). I look forward to having a legitimate competitor to force the monopolies to provide better or less costly service options.

They've been hiring sales associates in DFW for several weeks now, and I'm very curious about their plans for the area. I'm definitely a potential customer...3G is waaay too expensive for a primary connection, Charter is awful (and not even available to me), ATT refuses to upgrade huge areas of DSL territory to UVerse, and Verizon is deploying FIOS very slowly.

Give me some options!!!
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

Re: Clear

said by jarschmi:

There are huge pockets of monopolized broadband regions in every market that Clear/Sprint is planning deployment (CHI, DFW, Atlanta, DC...). I look forward to having a legitimate competitor to force the monopolies to provide better or less costly service options.
Chicago, ATT, TM, VZ, Sprint 3g.

Comcast AND RCN AND WOW. 3 cable companies, at minimum 2 overlap.

Chicago's burbs have Uverse »/gmaps/uverse (but its spotty in general).

SLAed fixed wireless also.
»www.bobbroadband.com/about_us.php
»www.xchangemag.com/hotnews/44h6205049.html

Hmm, rural residential fixed wireless too.

»foxvalley.net/www/Broadband
»www.telesti.com/coveragearea.htm
»www.air-wans.com/Maps/Air-WansMap.htm

I sure would like WISPs like that near my relatives place in upstate NY.

So how is Chicago a monopoly over any other city?

Because of the 2 cable overbuilders, it would be one of the lowest on the list.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Clear

WOW isn't an overbuilder. They're a system purchaser. They didn't really build anything except maybe update the network from AmeriCast to what it is today.

You can thank Ameritech for building out the actual orginal network that WOW has and still uses.

phoneboy3

@shawcable.net

blah blah LTE blah blah yada yada

blah blah LTE blah blah. Look. LTE and WiMAX are very similar despite what nonsense the telcos tell you. They got a propaganda war going on to slow the adoption of WiMAX because it kills their inferior 3G business that they spent massive $'s building.

As far as LTE being just around the corner....forget it! It is at least 5 years away from wide scale availability. The telcos just finished spending huge money on 3G. Do you seriously think they are ready to spend more huge dollars on LTE....which isn't even ready to go yet btw.

So to summarize, WiMAX is much farther ahead right now. Chances are it will coexist with LTE and there will probably be devices that do both.

WiMAX has the edge because it is here now and won't have any of the licensing fees and limitations etc. the Telco's will have on LTE. Oh a BIG part of equation is spectrum. Clearwire owns a lot of WiMAX spectrum. Much more so than the Telco's and spectrum is everything.
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: blah blah LTE blah blah yada yada

"They got a propaganda war going on to slow the adoption of WiMAX because it kills their inferior 3G business that they spent massive $'s building."

3g could still work it they took off the cap.

"As far as LTE being just around the corner....forget it! It is at least 5 years away from wide scale availability. The telcos just finished spending huge money on 3G. Do you seriously think they are ready to spend more huge dollars on LTE....which isn't even ready to go yet btw."

No I do not think they are ready.

"Chances are it will coexist with LTE and there will probably be devices that do both."

I hope so.

one1337hax0r

@rose.net

1 edit

Re: blah blah LTE blah blah yada yada

Ha.. I love those that have not a clue about what they are talking about..

Verizon has been successfully testing LTE in the 700mhz band as of 12:01am June 17th... And, they are looking at having 20-30 LTE markets live by the 2nd half of 2010 (thats only 12 short months folks).. »www.fiercewireless.com/story/dtv···09-06-12

Also, we have an LTE system in 2.5Ghz on a tower working right this minute.. We have 3 more going up by the end of August and a 700mhz test soon thereafter.

This "LTE is so far away" mindset is complete readfail. It is out there, it exists, and it will be here before you know it.

On the other hand, Wimax has been in beta for nearly a decade.. I've deployed and tested 5x different Wimax systems and everyone of them have issues specifically with user provisioning and operation on a large scale.

LTE is making exponential progress while Wimax fanboys argue over the standard..

Do some research and you will see.. IPWireless and ZTE both have working LTE products. Solectek is soon to follow.

And for the record... Clearwire = Failwire... have any of you people actually used it? It is WAY over-promised and under-delivers all the time. Some day, when they have THOUSANDS of towers, they may have a decent network...but that is a long way off..

Google, have you heard of it!!??

anjorusso

@speakeasy.net

lte prices?

i've heard lte will be a lot more expensive than wimax though
and there will be caps....