Sidecut Reports

Without having seen any full report, it’s perhaps not fair to take a shot at the analysts at Frost & Sullivan for having what looks like some weak takes on the WiMax market. But there are certainly some questions folks should be asking about the press release put out Wednesday by F&S that all but predicts Mobile WiMax’s death before the technology’s even out of the cradle.

Since we have just completed a rather thorough look at the U.S. WiMax market ourselves, we are wondering why the F&S press release got such wide play across the techno-newsosphere without too much questioning along the way. (At least our good pal Loring Wirbel over at EE Times did find some time to wonder if there was another viewpoint on the matter, and kudos to dailywireless.org for poking some holes.) Actually, we’re not wondering why the release got so much play, and we’ll explain why later. But first some questions for Frost & Sullivan “Programme Manager” Luke Thomas, who is quoted at length in the release as being the guy ready to stick a knife in WiMax:

1. Why do you think it makes sense to compare WiMax to Wi-Fi as an operator choice for metro networks? When you say that “In terms of indoor wireless broadband, Wi-Fi fits well in this space and with the emergence of 802.11n, which includes MIMO, throughputs would be far better than what Mobile WiMAX can deliver,” are you proposing that service providers will install wireless access points in buildings all across metro areas, providing for broadband backhaul to each spot, and then guarantee service in the unlicensed bands that Wi-Fi operates in? And that this is a better metro delivery choice than licensed-spectrum WiMax?

2. In terms of handing off to cellular networks when WiMax coverage isn’t complete, you argue that “With respect to outdoor mobile broadband environments, users would expect Mobile WiMAX to seamlessly hand off to cellular networks in the absence of WiMAX reception. In reality this is not possible as Mobile WiMAX is not backward compatible with existing cellular technologies.” Hmm, then why is Sprint already talking about a combined WiMax/3G phone (due out Q4)?

3. When you say that “any operator looking at Mobile WiMAX has to consider the current environment in which 97% of laptops are shipped with Wi-Fi technology,” are you at all aware that Intel — WiMax’s biggest backer and supplier of many core chips to those same laptops — will essentially be giving away WiMax connectivity with its planned WiMax/Wi-Fi chipset due out later this year? What do you say to operators when those chips start shipping?

4. Do you really believe the LTE assertions in your press release, which state: “LTE is expected to be a fully ratified standard by the end of 2008 or beginning of 2009 with deployments slated to occur in late 2009 or first months of 2010 offering peak data rates of up to 170Mbps.” And can we bet a pint or two on whether or not there is an operational, commercial 170 Mbps LTE network running by 2010? (You can guess which side of the wager we might take.)

To be fair, the Frost & Sullivan press release did state that “the work carried out on Mobile WiMAX has the potential to spur new ventures, which could potentially lead Mobile WiMAX to merge with 3G LTE.” But this info was in the second paragraph, buried beneath the linkbait headline of “Mobile WiMAX on the Way Out?” and the lead-graf conclusion that “the technology is facing a range of challenges that are likely to make it unfeasible as a mobile ‘access’ technology.”

In this day of short tech staffs and the pressure on bloggers and reporters to blindly turn copy around, it’s no surprise that such a powerful take from a known entity like F&S would be quickly turned into a Analysts Predict WiMax Death post or report. While some of the challenges F&S assert are certainly hurdles WiMax needs to overcome, the incompleteness and oranges-to-apples comparisons noted by our questions above should have raised more red flags than it apparently has.

(We do have a request in to Frost & Sullivan to see any full WiMax reports they have written; more as we hear more from them. UPDATE: Well, we did get to read through the full “report” from Frost & Sullivan, and it’s not much more than the press release and only raises more questions than it answers — for instance, why does the report not talk about the May 7 “new” Clearwire deal but instead state as fact that Sprint has “terminated its partnership with Clearwire”? Sounds like recycled hash to me. In the meantime, if you would like a 37-page deep look at the state of the WiMax market in the U.S., with complete analysis of the “new” Clearwire deal (based on real interviews and not outdated opinion), please order our report, available for instant download.)

Back in February, we reported how frustrated FCC commish Jonathan Adelstein was at the pace of broadband deployment in the U.S. While we liked his idea of national broadband summits, at the time it seemed like a good idea without much behind it.

Tuesday, Google and a few of its friends got behind the idea in a big way, launching something called Internetforeveryone.org, which is clearly a place for Google and others to promote their ideas for open, more-available Internet to the masses.

Google, which explains the new endeavor on its public policy blog, is continuing its all-in push into public policy by backing the Adelstein/Lessig/Free Press idea. By holding the as yet-unscheduled summits, Google and its partners can also produce dialogue that with any luck won’t be as scripted or stilted as the FCC hearings that pass for the best discourse on public policy and broadband matters.

Since our next report (due out soon) is about network neutrality, we couldn’t agree more that the level of debate on broadband policy needs to be increased. No better time than now.

Maybe I should have added a “fourth problem” to my previous post on GigaOM about the challenges facing Google’s Android open-source mobile OS: The inherent slowness of anything that touches the mobile carrier marketplace, a theory Om spells out in no uncertain terms with his post today about new delays for the launch of Android-based devices.

Since Sprint is mentioned in the WSJ story as one of the carriers asking for more features, it might mean that devices taking advantage of the new Clearwire WiMax network will be delayed as well. Readers of our WiMax report, of course, were already expecting this lag since our analysis of the situation sees the big-scale marketing push for WiMax taking place early in 2009, most likely with kickoffs at the CES show in Vegas.

So are Android slowdowns a minus for WiMax? Maybe, but with multiple delays in other parts of the infrastructure, it seems like Google and Android interfaces should arrive at pretty much the same time as other mobile devices being tailored for the Clearwire WiMax launch. We are hearing noise about a big, big, big marketing campaign fueled by more Intel dollars, so stay tuned for more on Android, WiMax and mobile broadband.

Need to know more about WiMax? Order our recently updated WiMax report, with full analysis of the “new” Clearwire deal and the motivations for investors Comcast, Google, Intel and others.

Maybe it’s a tussle that only telecom policy wonks could love, but if you are at all involved in the regulatory sphere you’ve just got to love that the battle of the corporate titans has now moved, Web 2.0 style, into the blogosphere, with Verizon and the Cable companies now using blogs to take pokes at each other.

The issue at stake is a complaint filed by some cablecos, who argued that Verizon’s practice of calling departing customers with last-ditch offers was inappropriate use of private data. Putting aside the whole kettle-calling-the-pot-black part of this argument, it’s neat to see that Verizon’s top policy dawg Tom Tauke used Verizon’s blog to criticize the pending decision. Who knew former Congressmen could learn WordPress or something similar?

Not to be outdone, Kyle McSlarrow, the leader of the cable lobbying association, takes a swing back at Tauke on the NCTA’s own blog, showing good blogging practices by linking back to Tauke — who then responded with a comment on the cable blog!

If you are really interested in the argument, follow the links and join the conversation. We are going to spend the rest of the day worrying whether or not direct competitor blogging means that pundits are out of a job — again!

UPDATE: Cynthia Brumfield at the wonderful IP Democracy site has more details.

Well, we said it was Game On, WiMax, and now we know the when: According to Sprint/Clearwire WiMax guru Barry West, the “new” Clearwire network will officially launch this September in Baltimore, followed by Chicago and Washington D.C. in the fourth quarter.

As I told a reporter here at the NXTcomm show, nothing beats proof of concept and the sooner the better for the New Clearwire as its battle against the still-under-development technology LTE gets underway. More thoughts on WiMax when we get back from Viva Las Vegas and the resurgent NXTcomm show, which by all show-floor accounts was much more vibrant than last year’s event in Chicago.

Was it really two years ago that I asked why couldn’t Google build a Desktop Bandwidth detector? In a post from my old blog on the Pulvermedia network, I wrote:

One idea I kicked around a bit at this past weekend’s Vloggercon (in no small agreement with fellow blogger Matt Sherman, who is about 179 degrees away from me on most net neutrality matters) was the idea of Google (or Microsoft, anyone with buckets of folding money and a desire to get into online apps) buying or building an online application that would show anyone who wants to use it exactly what’s happening to their packets as they course to and fro.

Sure, that’s a simplistic view but it’s the consumer version of what all the self-proclaimed net wizards are talking about when they tell you how to “ping” a server. Why not use some of that Google cash, some of the otherwise wasted programming talent chasing Web 2.0 dreams (how many social network/hookup/map mashups do we need, anyway?) and build something we’d all like to see — a desktop dashboard that could flash red when an ISP tries to block or degrade service, or starts narrowing the pipe for Skype?

And now, apparently, that’s just what Google plans to do, according to their top policy exec Rick Whitt, in a report from Hot Hardware:

“We’re trying to develop tools, software tools…that allow people to detect what’s happening with their broadband connections, so they can let [ISPs] know that they’re not happy with what they’re getting — that they think certain services are being tampered with,” Google senior policy director Richard Whitt said this morning during a panel discussion at Santa Clara University.

Maybe I should have trademarked the idea? From my old post:

I’ve seen all the flashy demos from the equipment providers who are mining enterprise dollars in this territory, so I know it’s possible. Maybe not easy, but one little app — call it the Google Desktop Bandwidth Detector ™ — could go a long way to keeping Big Ed and his pipes honest and open.

Stay tuned for our upcoming Sidecut Report on Network Neutrality, featuring in-depth interviews with Google’s Whitt and a host of other execs on the policy and technology front lines. In the meantime, you can order our WiMax report on the state of WiMax deployment in the U.S., with the first analysis of the “new” Clearwire deal.

After a week of all 3G iPhone all the time, it’s pretty clear that the performance hurdle is being set for the “new” Clearwire and its planned nationwide WiMax network: Devices will need to look and perform reasonably like an iPhone, at as-fast or faster speeds, for lower prices, to get any traction at all. Luckily for Clearwire and its partners, those barriers aren’t insurmountable, but there’s also not a lot of time or chances to get things right. As we say in our most recent revision of our WiMax report, it’s still Game On, WiMax. But Clearwire better hurry, before Apple and AT&T run the table.

On the device look-and-feel front, it seems like Clearwire should be safe — WiMax partner Samsung is already showing a touchscreen iPhoneClone, and Google’s Android interface looks sufficiently iPhone-enough to compete, should it arrive as scheduled. On the speeds front, Clearwire should be able to make the 3G iPhone look pokey, if the company actually delivers its promised speeds of between 2 and 6 Mbps on the download side. Since Clearwire claims in its official merger filing with the FCC that its networks will support mobile two-way video, it appears that the folks on the networking side are pretty confident. That leaves us with pricing plans as the place where Clearwire might stumble in its bid to unseat the iPhone.

With an upfront cost of $199 and monthly plans of $60-70 for voice and data, the 3G iPhone isn’t cheap, so Clearwire seems to have some breathing room, especially since Clearwire service plans are likely to include a bundle of home and mobile Internet service for the same customer. But since Clearwire doesn’t plan to subsidize device costs, it will have to do a lot of marketing to convince customers that it may be cheaper in the long run to buy a more-expensive device and pay less per month; it will then have to turn around and sell an opposite story to Wall Street, claiming it can make more in revenues by signing more customers to cheaper contracts, including those for ad hoc or daily use.

Hmmm.

Clearwire may get an additional break or boost if AT&T and Apple run into network congestion problems following the July 11 availability date for the 3G iPhone. (Wonder if we can get odds on the downtime next week at NXTcomm in Vegas?) Ideally, Clearwire would start some limited public tests as soon as possible to give users a taste of what a 4G device could look and feel like. Until then, all we’re likely to hear is how much the fanboys love their 3G iPhones. The louder that chorus gets, the harder it will be for Clearwire’s song to be heard.

Need to know more about WiMax? Order our recently updated WiMax report, with full analysis of the “new” Clearwire deal and the motivations for investors Comcast, Google, Intel and others.

According to Don Clark of the Wall Street Journal, Monday’s big WiMax announcement is going to be about a “patent pool” spearheaded by Cisco, Intel, Samsung and others, aimed at reducing the amounts developers (especially device developers) might have to pay for WiMax-related patents.

For Clearwire, Sprint and other service providers, having a group with Cisco and Alcatel/Lucent in it can’t hurt, since both those companies can probably bring big patent portfolios to bear. But until the real heavyweights of the wireless world sign up — as Clark notes in his story, neither Qualcomm nor Motorola is part of Monday’s pool party — the patent pool is somewhat on the shallow side.

Why is a patent pool important to WiMax’s development? While the “openness” of the planned Clearwire WiMax network may be attractive to independent device developers, the patent problem could be a bigger deterrent. Sure, it sounds great to think that you could build a device, and as long as it meets WiMax standards, you can sell it at Best Buy and customers could instantly connect to the Clearwire network. Sounds good.

But since that device isn’t subsidized or supported by Clearwire, don’t expect them to help out a lot should Qualcomm or say, Verizon’s lawyers come calling, asking for a piece of your profits should your device suddenly turn successful. Ask Jeff Citron how those battles end up.

Of course, Sprint is not shy when it comes to filing patent lawsuits, so at least the WiMax pool party will have someone around who knows how this game is played.

UPDATE: Cisco and Intel hosted a very disjointed press conference/webcast, with some speakers live in studio, some on the phone and some on webcast. Questions had to be submitted to a moderator, which meant that execs on the conference could dodge questions without complaint. (I asked the panel about what would happen if a non-alliance member sued an alliance member, and whether the alliance would help fight the lawsuit, and got a non-answer answer. Press release on the alliance is here on the Cisco site.)

Need to know more about WiMax? Order our recently updated WiMax report, with full analysis of the “new” Clearwire deal and the motivations for investors Comcast, Google, Intel and others.

Is networking hardware giant Cisco ready to throw its hat a bit deeper into the U.S. WiMax market ring? Looks that way from the press conference invite that just landed in our in-box, inviting us to a webcast on Monday, June 9, that will discuss “a new initiative by industry leaders in mobility to stimulate more innovation and new entrants into the WiMAX ecosystem.” The roster of attendees includes Cisco, Clearwire, Alcatel-Lucent, Intel, Samsung and Sprint.

While Cisco and Alcatel-Lucent already have existing WiMax businesses — Cisco bought gear supplier startup Navini last fall, and AlcaLu is behind some smaller operations in the U.S. — both were significantly absent from any previous association with the old Clearwire, the old Sprint Xohm plan, or the new Clearwire WiMax announcements. Cisco CEO John Chambers has previously said that Navini was purchased with overseas customers in mind, but that may be changing due to the new ambitious plans of the new Clearwire and its deep-pocket investors Google and Comcast. Intel and Samsung are already neck-deep in Clearwire partnering, with Intel supplying $1.62 billion in investment cash and Samsung building network infrastructure along the East Coast.

Our best guess is that this new group is forming to do some sort of clearinghouse or testing/certification for Mobile WiMax back-end gear and devices, the kind of activity that is necessary to “stimulate innovation and new entrants” by making it easier to assure customers that it will all work together. More as we learn more!

It was interesting to read last week that one of the things that convinced Comcast CEO Brian Roberts of WiMax’s viability was a demonstration of how well mobile WiMax can work, even at 50 mph.

In a report last week from Light Reading’s cable guy Jeff Baumgartner, Roberts (whose company poured just north of a billion bucks into the New Clearwire WiMax deal) said “he became a believer partly due to a Clearwire WiMax demo that served up video as he and his test group zipped down the road at 50 miles per hour.”

While we’re not sure where Roberts’ demo took place (guessing Portland, Ore.), we were similarly impressed by the Motorola-Intel mobile WiMax demo at CES way back in January. From our most recent WiMax report, here is a small snippet about the WiMax drive-by (which one of our guest editors said should have been the first part of the report, because he liked the tale so much). Remember, you can order the report and get the whole story via immediate download. But here’s the excerpt, anyway:

When it comes to Internet use, watching a streaming YouTube video clip is a pretty mundane thing these days. But when you add in a significant degree of difficulty — say, watching YouTube without interruption inside a sport-utility vehicle driving around Las Vegas at 35 mph — then you start to realize the power and potential of Mobile WiMax in a very simple and understandable way.

The aforementioned experience was facilitated this past January by Intel and Motorola, who earned no small bit of publicity at the CES show by equipping a small fleet of SUVs with internal Internet connectivity powered by Mobile WiMax. The completely un-canned demo — reporters riding in the vehicles were allowed to use the connectivity in any fashion they desired on a range of devices — showed a high degree of confidence from Motorola and Intel that even a small, hastily constructed Mobile WiMax network would perform sufficiently well.

The report goes on to describe what you might find if you drove one of those trucks about an hour away… to a small town where a big telco is quietly running a commercial WiMax network of its own… if you want the details, you know where to find ‘em.