Nearly two million mobile WiMAX subscribers worldwide by year's end, most eyeing LTE suspiciously
By Paul Miller 
posted December 4th 2009 11:11AM
posted December 4th 2009 11:11AM
The folks at ABI Research have done up a nice summary of the status of mobile WiMAX globally, saying that they expect the total number of subscribers to be at around two million come January. Overall it's not the most optimistic picture, with many service rollouts falling short of their projected aims both in availability and in subscribers, South Korea's numbers "stagnant," and LTE breathing down everybody's necks -- particularly in the US and Japan. Still, there are some notable bright spots, most particularly Russia's Yota service, which broke 200,000 subscribers last month after five months of commercial operation, and which is also flirting with profitability at this early stage. Clearwire is the other main shining light, with "more-than-adequate funding" allowing for an increased pace of deployment. It's hard to say just exactly what sort of market share we should expect from WiMAX in the long run, but after the painful eons of CDMA vs. GSM, we really are rooting for one of these 4G technologies win decisively over the other.
I'd love to get CLEAR but in Dallas they decided that if you are just south of Dallas then you don't matter.
I'm not sure if this helps at all... http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/2700014/
I really wish they would just set a global standard. I'm tired of having to choose a specific carrier for a specific phone.
Make it so.
@(Unverified) I agree with you. There should be a single 4G standard. It works out best in the long run for the consumer and manufacturers. It would be easier to move cellphones between carriers increasing choice to consumers. It also leads to less confusion on the part of the consumer. I would like a future where I could just buy a phone online or in a store, pick any carrier I choose to use the phone, and choose from a menu of services provided by that carrier which fit my needs. Carriers would then compete on providing unique services (such as video conference calls, live TV, videomail instead of voicemail, etc) at competitive prices. Multiple standards make that hard to do. Part of the reason the iPhone is such a big hit is that from v1 to 3GS the hardware remains relatively unchanged and standardized, the OS is backwardly compatible and easy to update, and you only have 1 carrier choice. This makes it a very simple equation for the average consumer.
GSM clearly won. America's pretty much the only place CMDA is used.
@(Unverified) But CDMA works a lot better here than GSM, so in the US, I would say CDMA won. But of course, it is ridiculous to have companies building out different networks, what a waste of resources.
@(Unverified) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CDMA2000_networks
The internet disagrees. Just because it's not popular in western Europe doesn't mean that CDMA lost.
@(Unverified)
Yea except China, Brazil and India...but no one lives there.
According to wikipedia (which you cite), GSM has 80% of the global subscriber market, to CDMA's 17%. A fairly convincing win I'd say:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2G
@(Unverified) fyi ALL 3G standards are based on CDMA....just a thought.
@(Unverified)
But those 17% numbers fail to show that several of the CDMA markets outside the US are just beginning to enter their growth curves (i.e. as I said, China and India).
It would be better if we considered population covered, not active users as active users will always tilt in favor of markets that have maxed out their growth vs. emerging ones.
The CDMA versus GSM war is going to continue, unfortunately. Verizon plans on using CDMA for voice even after LTE is deployed for data.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/05/08/verizon-wireless-to-accelerate-lte-keep-cdma-and-lower-data-prices/
I know GSM is far much superior to CDMA.
GSM is based on inferior TDMA technology.
Thankfully I live in the US and have access to the first and largest 3G network in the world, CDMA.
@(Unverified) Then why is GSM 3G so much faster?
@MRCUR
It's not.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/08/21/carrier-wars-t-mobile-results-wrap-up/
@COCOViper What he said.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: get 3G out there before we start taking 4G seriously. Every network could use an availability and reliability boost. Even Verizon. The fact that I still switch off to 1xRTT from time to time and have to deal with shitty call quality and slow messaging is ridiculous. I should have 3.1Mbps EV-DO Rev A wherever I go, and AT&T should have 1.8 and 3.6Mbps HSPA in much more places with a more reliable connection.
Seriously. Fuck HSPA+, LTE, and WiMax. How about we get our 3G technology down properly and get the country off of 1xRTT, GPRS, and EDGE?
@kenny goo Faster bandwidth in existing places is how you unload the network so that it works better. Less airtime to move the same bits means more open airtime for other users. Carriers have to deploy base technology upgrades to make better use of available spectrum, they can't make more spectrum. They can only add so many more towers before the towers interfere with each other.
Couple corrections about Yota. First, with a $300 million investment in ifrastructure, $60 base modem price and $30 a month for unlimited service, it is nowhere near profitability. In fact, profitability does not seem to be one of it's goal with a 25.1% of the company owned by a government structure which received a huge grant for development of broadband mobile internet in the regions (and that's what we call everything besides Moscow and St. Petersburg pretty much). Second, Yota is currently facing a serious network capacity pricing - over the past 2 months cities with commercial operation (and thus open subscriptions) have seen daily service outages, congested base stations and speeds of nowhere above 100 kbits/d. So unfortunately as of this moment, Yota really isn't much of a bright spot. Instead, it is a great example of how promising the government to have a certain number of subscribers by 2010 works out for customers. Here's a collection of customer satisfaction reports for november: http://habrahabr.ru/blogs/WiMAX/77205/ (russian). Filter out Sochi and Krasnodar (test operation with limited number of subscribers that translates into a very usable network) and you'll get the picture.
@swissglide
Well, only 25% of Yota (Skartel that is) belongs to a government corporation (Rostelecom). The rest is a private capital. So I would say it's a government sponsored body. I'm not sure where reports about profitability are coming from. I did not find any financial reports after quick search on google. But honestly believe they may be profitable with 150K confirmed subsribers ($30/month at least).
They cover more than 60% of Russian market, i.e. Moscow, St Petersburg, Ufa, Sochi and Krasnodar, so it's definitely a serious competitor to cell operators and ISP's.
People are always complaining about something. Congestion and coverage have been and will be popular subjects for whiners and trolls. Verizon discovered that few years ago and uses it to its benefits since then.
Most of complaints from the link you mentioned in your post are about people who unable to use torrents and on-line FPS games... C'mon! :)
WiMax may be not the best substitution for regular wired ISP's, but that's a good and affordable option to cell providers. No wonder big 3 in America heavily lobby against WiMax
@alex904 If you would re-read my post, you'd see that each and every issue you mention is addressed there. And I am not sure what to take out of your statement that 'network congestion is a popular subject with trolls', but I do use yota a few times a year when I go to St. petersburg to visit my family and I can testify that the network quality has reduced to virtually unusable over the past 2 months, Specificall, multiple disconnects and a session length of nowhere near an hour bug a lot of streamin video and on-line game users, and speeds of 100 kbit/s (far, far away from wildly advertised 10 mbits and in fact below the 3G speeds offered by Megafon and MTS) are frustrating for everyone.
I'm eying the Lenovo in the picture. Can't quite make out what model it is. Looks like a T61, but the USB ports aren't right. Could be a T400 or T500 but the modem should be on the back and their should be a display port next to the VGA.
CDMA is alive, but GSM beat them in subscribers volume long time ago... and the countries which still have it are either moving to GSM/WCDMA, or directly to LTE. WiMAX ensure that the american market stays behind the rest of the world in terms of quality of service and standarization. Of course it can survive by itself for being a huge market, but will suffer of the same problems in terms of high end devices availability, global roaming and free market. Telecom colleagues in USA comment that Clearwire and Sprint are considering TD-LTE trials, so I guess they are aware that WiMAX was an error.
It's not GSM vs CDMA, that war is over. Look at the gobi product from Qualcomm, it fuses both GSM & CDMA into one product. Netbook and laptop manufacturers need to move toward a unified product like gobi. Offer your customers the option to move between carriers and not have to upgrade hardware.
This battle is already over. WiMax is a punch line. LTE declared victory, or haven't you heard?
@Roark123 I must have missed that memo when Clear rolled out into Oahu, Maui & Lanai HI. Charlotte, Greensboro & Raleigh NC. Dallas/Ft. Worth, San Antonio and Austin, Tx. Entire Puget Sound area (Seattle and King County, Pierce County, Kitsap County, and Snohomish County), not to mention a green light to hop on the 4G superhighway in the Chicago.
@(Unverified) LTE wins because WiMax is an inferior technology. They HAVE to force a roll out now because tomorrow it will be to late. Intel can throw as much money at a WiMax roll out as they like, LTE is the future...
@Roark123
How can LTE declare victory when it's still in the lab?
It was only last month that they completed the first data call on a live test network. There are no trial LTE deployments available to say nothing of definitive timetables for commercial use. LTE is where Wimax was in 2006/07 at best.
Will LTE be successful- of course. But you need to step back and look at the history of telecom deployments (Wimax, 3G CDMA, 3G GSM, etc) and compare the times when carriers said the technology was working and ready vs. when it actually showed up for commercial use. Remember EVDO was developed by Qualcomm in 1999. Verizon completed their around 2004. Take some time to think for yourself vs. what Verizon tells you to think.
Sources: http://mobile.engadget.com/2009/08/25/lg-and-nortel-complete-first-lte-cdma-handover-verizon-swoons/
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/alcatel-lucent-completes-the-worlds-first-data-call-on-a-live-lte-network-in-the-800-mhz-european-digital-dividend-spectrum-band-70510452.html
@Roark123
Please don't talk about LTE winning. Wimax and LTE are basically the same thing.It will take at least 3 to 4 years before LTE has anything to show and Wimax is here now.
@COCOViper Does Verizon tell me what to think about Wimax? I thought all those "there's a map for that" commercials were diggin on at&t's HSPA (or lack there of). They were actually talking about Wimax?? Thanks for the insight!
But back to the question at hand, Wimax vs LTE, who wins? Thank you for taking me to school on the ever so complex pedagogy of putting up towers, I got it. Wimax will be out first.
The FACT is Wimax will always have a small (very) niche in some markets, and only because of the deep pockets (Intel, Google, Etc.) that are backing it. LTE will be the dominate global-ish standard going forward, due to OFDMA superiority, and to me, that is winning. Does VHS win over Blu Ray because it was first to market? Did Sprint win when THEY were first to market with CDMA? So maybe you should stop thinking what Sprint tells you to think, and focus on the big picture.
@Roark123
Wimax also uses OFDMA.
@Roark123
Haha the point was Verizon has been spreading a lot of LTE to Wimax FUD about the readiness of the tech. I never said they told you what to say via their Att attack ads.
Wimax will not be as niche as you think due to the large scale deployments occuring both in the US and throughout the rest of the world. Also the fact that Intel is the main pusher and their intent to open the technology for anyone that wants to embed it + mass produce it in all their chipsets means Wimax will be much more GSM-like in it's business model vs. LTE which despite being the technical evolution of GSM, is Qualcomm's baby at this point. And Qualcomm is the reason CDMA has been such a problem (cost, difficulty to secure patent rights without payment to them, etc).
Time will tell but as someone that works in the telecom industry, Wimax has been written off from people outside the industry not based on any technical reason, or even active deployments, but simply well Att and Verizon are going LTE so thus LTE wins! Again LTE will be successful due to it's large backers, but there is no reason (technical, cost, or deployments) to suggest that Wimax is "dead".
We'll see...
I agree with you Unverified. There should be a single 4G standard. It works out best in the long run for the consumer and manufacturers. It would be easier to move cellphones between carriers increasing choice to consumers. It also leads to less confusion on the part of the consumer. I would like a future where I could just buy a phone online or in a store, pick any carrier I choose to use the phone, and choose from a menu of services provided by that carrier which fit my needs. Carriers would then compete on providing unique services (such as video conference calls, live TV, videomail instead of voicemail, etc) at competitive prices. Multiple standards make that hard to do. Part of the reason the iPhone is such a big hit is that from v1 to 3GS the hardware remains relatively unchanged and standardized, the OS is backwardly compatible and easy to update, and you only have 1 carrier choice. This makes it a very simple equation for the average consumer.
@CESkins
" It works out best in the long run for the consumer and manufacturers"
And this is why carriers would never agree to a standard. It's in the best interest of the carriers to limit consumer choice and manufacturer choice. This is how they 'funnel' profits their way.
4g cell tech is useless if it is going to have the same lame 5gb cap from the cell carriers.
@(Unverified)
Sprint's 4G plans are completely uncapped man, only the 3G portion has the 5GB cap.
Wow, looking at the coverage maps, Clearwire is available NATIONWIDE and COAST TO COAST!!!! What, you can only actually get it in 8 states? Well, one of those states is on the east coast and one is on the west coast, so it IS available NATIONWIDE and COAST TO COAST! This little rant courtesy of the marketing-speak of your friendly neighborhood cellphone company.
@(Unverified)
It's the same thing that happened when the 3G build out happened. As soon as it's available in the top 20-30 markets, it's considered a nationwide network.
The point is Sprint's 4G network still allows for dropping back to 3G which IS a nationwide network.