RSSQualcomm's WiFi Joins with Airgo to Battle Intel's WiMAX
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published December 5, 2006, 12:50 PM
Last Sunday, network equipment giant Qualcomm made an announcement with a one-two punch: It's acquiring leading WiFi engineering firm Airgo Networks, and it will be marketing Airgo's upcoming "802.11n Draft 2.0-compliant" chipset. Airgo was striking out on its own; now it has a huge backer behind it, in what promises to be a fierce battle with Intel for the mobile wireless broadband platform turf.
It's still a month before CES 2007, but a fresh set of battle lines is already being drawn in the critical high-speed wireless networking market. With Qualcomm's announcement on Sunday that it's acquiring Airgo Networks, perhaps the earliest producer of MIMO multiple-antenna 802.11g equipment in the business, it's positioning itself squarely against Intel, the lead architect and champion of WiMAX technology, in a showdown that could determine which will hold title to the mobile connectivity platform that succeeds today's Centrino.
What the Airgo acquisition gives Qualcomm now that it didn't have before was an active production line for the fastest throughput equipment that purports to follow the latest 802.11n 2.0 draft proposal put forth before the IEEE standards body.
The "11n" standard has been in developmental limbo for the better part of this year, due in large part, according to industry observers, to technical incompatibilities between the 11n 1.0 draft -- which overwhelmingly failed an IEEE vote last May -- and both the specifications and the spectrum of 802.11b and 11g.
Currently, 802.11g compliant WiFi products are capable of delivering maximum throughput of 54 megabits per second (Mbps). The first 802.11n networking gear was expected to initially double that maximum rate to 108 Mbps, with successive doublings to follow as its integrated MIMO technology became further exploited.
Meanwhile, WiMAX proponents state its theoretical maximum throughput is about 75 Mbps. However, independent observers of both technologies state that their real-world sustained throughput rates will likely be 45 Mbps, in practice.
So are we looking at another Blu-ray vs. HD DVD-style battle, this time in the high-speed wireless networking space, where many consumers can't really tell a difference between the two players except for their brands and the quantity of their respective supporters?
Probably not, due particularly to Airgo's colorful recent history, and the moves it has forced its competitors to make. Last March, Airgo put forth a prospective 11n standard, which network engineers discovered to have two fatal flaws: First, it broke downward compatibility with existing 11b and 11g equipment. Second, simply deploying 11n could step on portions of the spectrum used by 11g, forcing existing networking equipment in the vicinity of 11n to work more slowly, if not go dark altogether.
A majority of engineers voted against the proposed 1.0 draft in May, and the result drove Airgo to proceed with "True MIMO" technology on its own. Meanwhile, Airgo competitors D-Link, Netgear, and the Linksys division of networking giant Cisco forked off on a different path, producing "pre-11n" routers that boast of being faster than 11g, but which won't necessarily meet with the final 802.11n specifications when -- or if -- it's finally approved.
Now, Airgo is going forth with its next step of the plan: the introduction of a new line of WiFi chipsets that claim to follow the 11n Draft 2.0 specifications, which IEEE members will only get their first chance to vote on in March. This time, the company is promising both downward compatibility with 11a, 11b, and 11g, and "neighbor-friendly" relationships with existing WiFi equipment within its service range.
But this time, it will be Qualcomm's logo that will accompany Airgo's; and in certain circles, 800 pounds isn't exactly a proper weight estimate for that particular gorilla. What's now being called "True MIMO Gen-N" technology now has its best chance for success yet, though it still needs a 75% super-majority among IEEE engineers for it to be adopted as the 802.11n Draft 2.0 standard.
This means, as the first Gen-N equipment premieres at CES 2007 in Las Vegas, as Qualcomm now promises, it has to win over hearts and minds from the WiMAX camp, and not just by a nose.
It will not be an easy sell. As an industry player, Qualcomm is respected in the same way Jim Croce once advised you don't mess around with Big Jim. As Qualcomm's ongoing fearless patent battle with Broadcom makes clear, it can do battle in the marketplace, or if that doesn't work, it can do battle just as hard in the courtroom. That said, IEEE ballots are anonymous, which could put Qualcomm in the position of the player most eligible for being voted off the island.
Couple that with the fact, as veteran networking industry observer Glenn Fleischman pointed out, it'll be hard to convince potential partners that the new Airgo chipset is Draft 2.0-compliant, when everyone knows Draft 2.0 is hardly complete. At present, writes Fleischman, there are no fewer than 370 technical comments - with more certain to come - for the IEEE to address, before the matter can even come to a vote. Qualcomm certainly has partners; the question for next month at CES is, will it have friends?
"So I have to ask - what kind of crack is Airgo/Qualcomm smoking, and how do I get me some?" wrote Fleischman. "I'd love to be able to exist simultaneously four months in the future and today; it would make investing much easier."
Four months from now, though, conceivably Qualcomm and Airgo may not be much further along than they are today, if they're truly planning to abide by the promise of following what they believe or hope to be the final 11n standard - whose fulfillment Fleischman believes is entirely impossible, no matter the outcome. Network vendors and suppliers attending CES next month may agree, but would they be willing to say that to Qualcomm's face?
The outcome is nowhere near certain. Remember, the opposition here is Intel, not Broadcom. And we may all be singing a different kind of story -- maybe on a different frequency -- if Big Jim hits the floor.
I don't believe that these are competing technologies. Sprint plans to use WiMax in the next gen phones from what I have been reading. 802.11n will not be able to do this. If I personally want to set up a home wireless network, I do not want to use a WiMax so that I can cover a 3 mile radius. I am going to use 802.11n.
Score: 0
|Maybe I am missing the point of this article. But I thought WiMAX and 802.11n were targeting two very different markets. WiMAX goes the distance (last mile replacement) and 802.11n will be the official speed king. So what has changed?
Here in S.Florida, we really could use both. WiMAX to help establish a reliable category-3 broadband connection that is resilent to hurricane's toppling trees and wired infrastructure. 802.11n for on-premises high speed connectivity.
Score: 0
|Very valid question. Indeed, WiFi (802.11x) and WiMAX (802.16) technologies were designed to serve very different purposes. An 802.11 router was originally presumed to be on a small local network, while an 802.16 transmitter was presumed to be a municipal broadband service provider.
But as all networking moves to broadband speeds, the question becomes, which of these two technologies gets us there - the one that's being pushed to evolve in a broadband direction, or the one intended for it to start with? That decision impacts what broadband technology will be at the hub of next-generation connectivity platforms in laptops; and if it's WiMAX, conceivably it could double up with an 802.11g WiFi wireless access chipset for short-range reception. But it'll be the broadband card that drives the platform, for one reason, because wireless access points across the country (hotels, airports, restaurants, municipalities) will most likely be branded, and branding requires marketing, so whichever brand gets the biggest marketing push will be the one that manufacturers decide has "won."
True SF Gen-3 (MAX)
Score: 0
|You fellows are quite correct, as as the article cites no quotes from either camp identifying the other. I am wondering if the author of this article understands the nature of the two differing standards and their application!
They fill two quite different purposes and niches, although 802.16 Wimax can conceivable serve as a 'long distance' wireless effectively replacing the need for 802.11n in the home for all of your communications uses (phone/data network, etc.). WiMax has the potential to be a very disruptive technology for the entire cell phone industry as well as for the land based Telecom industry who could conceivably leverage their fiber based trunks - thus replacing the expensive last mile solutions such as Verizon is planning with their need to perform a labor and hardware intensive system overbuild with long range tranceivers and wireless, as it caneffectively (potentially) radically reduce the required density of transceivers (towers) an thus radically reduce costs - much as satellite did to land based cable.
802.11n does nothing but replace the current Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g routers with MIMO and higher throughput.
I fear that this article is very confused, and attempts to compare two technologies that are not in direct competition, unless one wants to simply compare WiFi with WiMax - and in this instance, except for the fact that WiMax will utilize licensed spectrum ( but not necessarily as it does occupy a non-licensed band as well), there is little basis for comparison.
This article is a non-starter!
Score: 0
|You do realize you were replying to the author of the article, don't you?
Well, in any event, the two technologies are going head-to-head because only one of them has a place in the next-generation mobile connectivity platform. Yes, you're right in that they were intended to fulfill different purposes and address different niches. But they're converging in an unavoidable way. And if you study 11n a bit, and listen to the point of view of Cisco and others, 11n doesn't and won't replace 11g.
Now, if you hang around long enough, I just may post a reply to myself and start an argument with myself in the process.
SF "Disruptive Technology" 3
Score: 0
|"You do realize you were replying to the author of the article, don't you?"
Maybe that is why I began with:
"You fellows are quite correct, as as the article cites no quotes from either camp identifying the other. I am wondering if the author of this article understands the nature of the two differing standards and their application!"
And WiMax and 802.11n do NOT serve the same purpose! One has a range of a few hundred feet and the other a conceptual range of ~15mile radius! Additionally 802.16 now also has a mobile handoff protocol for mobile roaming.
WiMax can conceiveably replace 802.11n (albeit on licensed spectrum) but 802.11n cannot replace WiMax. 802.11a/b/g/n doesn't have the range or a mobile handoff mechanism.
And the point that 802.11n won't replace 802.11a/b/ or g is non sequitar...Especially with the security challenges they all offer, even If 802.11i-AES is fully implimented - which is too awkward to do on a widespread basis!
Cisco isn't driving this market. And Airgo seems to be the only chip manufacturer who seems to be able to make the MIMO technology work effectively. Just look at the 802.11n herd of cats stardards fiasco progression which is as much a battle over who's implimentation will dominate as it is about if they can get any of the MIMO versions to actually work! ;-)
And WiMax provides a feasible disruptive alternative to current cell technology - 802.11n certainly does not!
Score: 0
|I believe terminology might be the cause of confusion. If the article is focused on which will be the defacto standard built-in into everyday laptops then sure, I agree 802.11n will be king. And yes, Intel has indicated they want to embed WiMax in every laptop as part of their Centrino initiative. But from what I have read, Intel is also embracing 802.11n. So in the end, Centrino will have 802.11n perhaps both. There is some debate about whos 802.11n might become the defacto standard. And in that, their might be some truth that Intel is lagging.
Lets be clear WiMAX competition is not from 802x but from cellular technologies like CDMA. As a consumer, I'm looking forward to the benefits of this competition.
Score: 0
|Many companies, including Intel are developing chipsets that support both WiMAX and Wi-Fi. WiMAX requires exclusively licensed spectrum, Wi-Fi does not. What spectrum does a coffeeshop own?
The users will choose, band-by-band and service-by-service which to use. My Policy.
Score: 0
|