The announcement follows launches earlier this year in Portland, Oregon and Atlanta, Georgia.  Other markets including Chicago, Charlotte, N.C., Dallas-Fort Worth, Honolulu, Philadelphia and Seattle are planned for later this year.

CLEAR, the brand which Clearwire markets its mobile WiMAX services, plans to celebrate the launch with a consumer event on July 21st at Town Square Mall on Las Vegas Boulevard where they will showcase WiMAX products and services.

The network is extensive and covers the entire Las Vegas metro area based on coverage maps provided by CLEAR.
 

Clear WiMAX Las Vegas coverage map

The Las Vegas launch is another milestone and puts Clearwire on track to deliver on its launch promises made earlier this year.  With the launch, I suspect we may start to see more devices certified on the CLEAR WiMAX network.


 

Wireless Broadband Perspectives - WiMAX.com Weekly Series Sponsored By: Featured perspectives from leading thought leaders in the WiMAX & wireless broadband industry.

In his keynote presentation at the WiMAX Forum Global Congress event held in Amsterdam last month, Barry West, who now heads up the international interests of Clearwire, said one of his priorities in the coming months was to persuade operators to adopt WiMAX Profile C.

At first glance, the need to do so might seem strange.  Why would any operator not want to choose Profile C, which stipulates an open and non-proprietary interface standard (R6) between the BTS and the ASN Gateway?  As Profile C operators are not tied into one vendor for BTS and ASN Gateway equipment, they can force prices down through playing off different suppliers against each other.  They can also choose the suppliers that can best support the functionality and services they want to offer over their network rather than being tied to one vendor that might not be up to the job.

But, as West implies, the case for Profile C is not clear cut; if it were, he would not need to campaign for its adoption.  Despite the apparent advantages of Profile C, some 'turnkey' vendors are still successfully tempting operators with the two other Profiles available between the BTS and ASN Gateway: Profile A and Profile B.  As both Profiles can create vendor lock-ins, they stand in the way of WiMAX interoperability progress between multiple vendors and, potentially, lower equipment prices.

In some cases, though, there are strong arguments not to use Profile C, particularly if operators can avoid the expense of a large ASN Gateway.  While Cisco believes that Profile C is the better choice for WiMAX operators offering mobility services, not least because it centralizes the decision-making for call handoffs between different BTSs - which then makes it easier for the operator to control RAN traffic and offer QoS - this functionality is clearly not necessary for a WiMAX operator focused on fixed and portable services only.  "Where handoff is not required, Profile B can be adequate," says Paul Sergeant, Mobile WiMAX Solutions Manager at Cisco.  "Profile C still has some advantages, even in this case - such as QoS - but it may not justify the extra cost."

Profile B does not define any interface between the BTS and the ASN Gateway, so it is possible for Profile B vendors to pursue proprietary solutions and lock in their customers.  Due to increased customer demand, however, many of the big WiMAX suppliers that started out by supplying profile B equipment, including Cisco (through its acquisition of Navini Networks) are now shifting to Profile C.  According to Sergeant, nearly all of Cisco's 20-plus commercially deployed WiMAX operator customers are moving from Profile B to Profile C.  This is an encouraging sign for Barry West and all those in the WiMAX community campaigning for open network architectures, particularly if R6 interfaces can be fairly easily software-installed on Profile B kit as Sergeant indicates.

Profile C Stumbling Blocks

One potential fly in the WiMAX interoperability ointment is Motorola, which has long been a Profile B supporter.  Although Motorola's WiMAX literature points out that its wi4 equipment is 'functionally aligned with Profile C' - no doubt largely due to intense pressure from Clearwire to which it supplies 802.16e kit - there is a feeling in the WiMAX community that Motorola will not be able to make the transition from Profile B to Profile C as easily as others.  One senior executive of an independent ASN Gateway supplier, who wished to remain anonymous, told Wimax.com: "Some companies have hardware pieces which are very difficult to change to Profile C and Motorola is one of those companies.  They may have a hard time making the change [to Profile C]."

One person willing to go on record about Motorola is Peter Ziegelwanger, CTO at Wimax Telecom, a small operator with a network presence in Austria, Slovakia and Croatia.  "[Profile C] is a complete change in Motorola's core network architecture and has a lot of impact on its existing networks," he says.  Wimax.com was not able to get a response from Motorola regarding how many of its customers it has moved from Profile B to Profile C, or to get an update on how many interoperability partners it has (or is in interoperability testing) for its BTS and ASN Gateway equipment.  However, with at least 19 WiMAX contracts to its name, as well as what it says is more than 75 WiMAX 'engagements' in 44 countries worldwide, Motorola is a major WiMAX player.  The speed that Motorola moves to Profile C will play a big part in how far the R6 interface is made available in different parts of the world. 

Another big Profile C stumbling block is Alcatel-Lucent, which is a keen advocate of Profile A and has no plans to develop Profile C WiMAX equipment.  While the R6 interface is used between the BTS and the ASN Gateway under Profile A, the RRM (Radio Resource Management) is split between the BTS and the ASN Gateway: the RRA (Radio Resource Agent) resides in the BTS while the RRC (Radio Resource Controller) is placed in the ASN Gateway.  The upshot is that operators using Profile A must have the same supplier for the BTS and the ASN Gateway.  And for some operators, if the price and performance is right, Profile A is a reasonable (if not ideal) solution.  Wimax Telecom, for example, selected Profile A equipment from Alcatel-Lucent to roll an 802.16e network in Croatia. 

"We do not support an open R6 interface as there has been no market request for it so far, at least in the 'enhanced wireless DSL' market segment that we are targeting, and where we have seen the bulk of market activity in terms of WiMAX deployments," an Alcatel-Lucent spokesperson told Wimax.com.  "Additionally, the vast majority of WiMAX deployments are single RAN supplier deployments, and even in those cases where there are networks supplied by several RAN vendors they are typically split into different areas/cities, each of them being supported by one RAN manufacturer."

Like Motorola, Alcatel-Lucent has a big 802.16e presence around the world.  As of the beginning of 2Q 2009, the French-US supplier was supplying 802.16e kit for 15 commercial networks worldwide, with a total of 36 Mobile WiMAX contracts under its belt.  Alcatel-Lucent's resistance to Profile C is and will be a big restraining factor on the spread of R6.

Profile C Momentum

The Profile C question marks hanging over Motorola, plus the outright Profile C defiance from Alcatel-Lucent, shouldn't detract from the significant amount of interoperability progress that has been made on IOT and partnership-forming between different BTS and ASN Gateway vendors via the open R6 standard and Profile C.  Much of the groundwork on this has been done - through necessity - by the smaller standalone BTS vendors that don't have the resources to develop ASN Gateways, such as Alvarion, WiNetworks, Aperto and Airspan.  They need Profile C to get a foothold into the market. 

The WiMAX Forum is also embarking on a NWIOT (Network Interoperability Testing) certification program that will only rubber-stamp equipment using R6 as part of Profile C.  The WiMAX Forum had previously taken the position of letting the market decide between Profile B and Profile C - it had earlier dropped its support of Profile A - much to the annoyance of the smaller, independent WiMAX kit suppliers.

The WiMAX Forum's unequivocal backing of Profile C is warmly welcomed by the likes of WiChorus, a standalone supplier of ASN Gateways and Home Agents that has been active in promoting Profile C through its own IOT initiative, the One Open WiMAX program.  "We have reached the tipping point for Profile C," says Rehan Jalil, WiChorus' CEO, "but still a lot of work needs to be done." Part of that WiChorus work, says Jalil, is supporting base station vendors even if they are not yet fully Profile C compliant.

In the past, turnkey WiMAX kit suppliers would typically say to their prospective operator customers that Profile A or Profile B was the way to go unless they wanted to get embroiled in time-consuming IOT with multiple vendors with little chance of a satisfactory outcome.  That argument is much less convincing now, particularly as Clearwire has been a staunch Profile C supporter from the beginning.  Barry West, when persuading operators to go down the Profile C route, can also say as part of his sales pitch that they don't need to do any IOT on vendors' kit that has already been tested on Clearwire's network.

Profile C looks the way to go for most operators going forward but it may take a bit of time yet before it becomes what the open architecture proponents crave - a de facto standard.



Ken Wieland has been reporting and commentating on the telecom industry for 15 years. He has held various senior editorial positions, including most recently as Editor of WiMAX Vision magazine at Informa Telecoms & Media. Now working as a freelance telecoms writer, Ken contributes analysis and opinion pieces to a number of websites, including the EIU (Economist Intelligence Unit).  He can be contacted at ken2wieland@yahoo.co.uk.

 

________________________________


(1) - Sending small messages, which are broadcast to the people following the sender.  This is how Twitter and other social networking tracking sites work.

(2) - This author believes Cisco's primary WiMAX initiative is to sell "Greenfield" network operators a complete "Core IP NGN" system, which may or may not include WiMAX RAN equipment.





 

Wireless Broadband Perspectives - WiMAX.com Weekly Series Sponsored By: For the next few months, WiMAX.com and Cisco will be featuring weekly perspectives from leading thought leaders in the WiMAX & wireless broadband industry.

Jose Puthenkulam, Intel's WiMAX Standards Director, is a telecommunications renaissance man.  In addition to driving standards development and building consensus with the progression of the IEEE 802.16 family of standards (as Vice Chair of the IEEE 802.16 Working Group), Jose is also an active user of Clearwire's Mobile WiMAX service in Portland, and a very knowledgeable technologist in the emerging 4G eco-system.  He is a standards expert - having worked in IEEE, IETF, 3GPP, WiMAX Forum and GSM Association.  He is also involved in social networking, Internet telephony, video games, mobile devices, and keeps tabs on the latest wireless gizmos and gadgets.  Jose regularly contributes to www.wimax360 and IEEE ComSoc-SCV discussions (open to all IEEE members).  More about Jose at the end of this article.

Backgrounder:

The IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access Standards is responsible for developing the IEEE 802.16 WirelessMAN® Standards for Wireless Metropolitan Area Networks.  In September 2003, a revision project called 802.16Rev-d commenced aiming to align the standard with aspects of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) HIPERMAN standard and to define conformance and test specifications.  This project concluded in 2004 with the release of 802.16-2004 (see list of IEEE 802.16 Standards below), which superseded the earlier 802.16 documents, including the a/b/c amendments.  802.16-2009 is now the new base standard.  For more information, see the list below and http://wirelessman.org/ or http://ieee802.org/16/.

WiMAX, an acronym for Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access, provides wireless transmission of data using a variety of transmission modes, from point-to-multipoint links to portable and fully mobile internet access.  The WiMAX Forum, a non profit organization formed to promote the adoption of WiMAX compatible products and services, is "chartered to establish certification processes that achieve interoperability, publish technical specifications based on recognized standards, promote the technology and pursue a favorable regulatory environment."

A Brief History of the "Mobile WiMAX" Standard, Profiles and Certification

The objective of the IEEE 802.16e "Mobile WiMAX" standard was to provide mobility as well as fixed broadband wireless access with high data rates and a relatively long- range coverage area, much like cellular technologies today.  The mobile broadband access system also had to include functions to enable handoff between base stations as a mobile subscriber moved between cells.  An important objective was to significantly reduce the cost of WiMAX infrastructure per unit data rate by significantly increasing the system capacity compared to current 3G cellular systems. 

The MAC sub-layer from 802.16-2004 was to be retained in parts, in order to carry "IP packets." However, the MAC was significantly enhanced to support mobility features like Handover, Sleep and Idle mode power management.  The security features were also improved in 802.16e.

With strong interest from Intel and the KT/ WiBro community, work on the IEEE 802.16e-2005 (AKA Mobile WiMAX) standard commenced in December 2002, when the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved an initial Project Authorization Request (PAR) for "Mobile WiMAX." That was well before the IEEE 802.16d-2004 (Fixed WiMAX) standard was completed.  Note that IEEE 802.16e is not compatible with 802.16d-2004, because it's PHY layer has to support both mobile and fixed wireless access (the MAC layer has some commonality between the two standards).

By November of 2003 - almost one year after the 802.16e Task Force (TF) was created -interest was muted and progress slow due to the perceived competition from the (Qualcomm led) IEEE 802.20 standards effort (AKA Mobile Broadband Wireless Access).  Having established very well respected standards credentials in the IETF and 3GPP, Jose was selected to lead the Intel team that was developing the IEEE 802.16e standard. 

In late 2003, Jose started to contact interested parties to encourage them to move forward at a more rapid pace.  His goal was to make 802.16e a very robust and efficient broadband wireless technology when implemented according to the standard.  Jose met with several companies seeking their effort and support of the newly authorized 802.  16e "Mobile WiMAX" standards project.  Samsung, Alvarion, Runcom, Motorola, Nortel, Alcatel and Siemens were a few of those companies.  At the time, there was already a very similar standards effort ongoing in South Korea.  It was known as "High Speed Portable Internet" and was spearheaded by ETRI, Samsung and KT.  The challenge was to harmonize the functions and features of the Korean effort with those proposed to the 802.16e Task Group.

In early 2004 a Scalable OFDMA (Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access) proposal was drafted, which found broad support at the March 2004 IEEE 802.16 meeting.  Consensus was starting to build.  The 802.16e PAR was modified, amended, and approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board in September 2004.  The main purpose was to include new PHY layer capabilities based on OFDMA, which was documented by several very supportive statements from the industry.

In late 2004 to early 2005, Jose and several of his Intel team members drove the effort to include a state of the art security feature in the emerging standard, while contributing to the specifications for beam forming and MIMO (Multiple Input Multiple Output).  Those capabilities were included in the IEEE 802.16e final draft that was completed in October 2005.  The 802.16e standards work was iterated through twelve drafts, based on thousands of comments and hundreds of contributed documents.  IEEE Std 802.16e-2005 was approved in December 2005, setting the stage for commercialization of the technology.

"The IEEE 802.16e standard gives service operators the ability to provide a wide range of new and revolutionary high-speed, mobile wireless applications and services that will greatly improve people's way of life," said Brian Kiernan, Chair of the IEEE 802.16e Task Group at the time.

In late 2004 to early 2005, the WiMAX Forum started "Mobile WiMAX" profile specifications, based on the soon to be completed IEEE 802.16e standard.  The profiles were targeted at certification and inter-operability testing.  There were two types of profiles that were developed in two stages:

- Wave 1:  SISO configuration Primarily for WiBro (South Korea) in 2.3 GHz
- Wave 2:  MIMO based profile for global deployment in 2.5, 2.3 and 3.5 GHz bands

By June 2008, approximately 2 ? years after the 802.16e-2005 standard was ratified, the WiMAX Forum certified the first Wave 2  products for 2.5GHZ bands.


IEEE 802.16e-2005 Scope:  Fixed and Mobile Broadband Wireless Access

The PHY layer of this standard incorporates several advanced radio transmission technologies, such as OFDMA, MIMO, adaptive modulation and coding, and adaptive forward error correction (FEC), is designed to provide broadband wireless capability using a well-defined quality-of-service (QoS) framework.  The standard is restricted to the access network and is not an end-to-end network architecture, as some people falsely believe.

The standard also provides enhancements to IEEE Std 802.16-2004 to support subscriber stations moving at vehicular speeds and thereby specifies a system for combined fixed and mobile broadband wireless access.

Functions to support higher layer handover between base stations or sectors are specified.  Operation is limited to licensed bands suitable for mobility below 6 GHz.  Fixed IEEE 802.16 subscriber capabilities are not compromised.  In addition to mobility enhancements, this document contains substantive corrections to IEEE 802.16-2004 regarding fixed operation."

Graceful degradation and return to normal speed are important attributes of the adaptive modulation process specified in IEEE 802.16e.  When the detected signal strength weakens, the transmitter will incrementally reduce the modulation (symbol) rate while maintaining the connection.  When the detected signal strength increases, the transmitter will bump up the symbol rate accordingly, thereby facilitating a graceful return to normal speed operation.  This attribute is quite important for truly mobile subscribers, as the radio signal conditions will change while the subscriber is moving (within a cell or to an adjacent cell).  Adaptive modulation works in each direction of transmission (i.e.  upstream and downstream).

A Network Reference Model is described in 802.16e-2005 Annex G (Informative- not Normative).  It includes "groups of BS units providing network service (not necessarily contiguous) to authorized Mobile Stations in a geographic region.  A group of BS units that share administrative affiliation, and are connected by a backbone (wired or unwired) are referred to as a provider network.  Multiple provider networks of varying design, performance, and ownership/administration may coexist in the same region.  Provider networks may employ specialized servers for AAA (Authorization, Authentication and Accounting), management, provisioning, and other functions.  These servers responsible are collectively termed Authentication and Service Authorization Servers (ASA-servers) this specification.  A provider may deploy single or multiple ASA-servers, and may do so in a centralized or distributed manner."

List of Important IEEE 802.16 Standards

- IEEE 802.16-2004 IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems

- IEEE 802.16e-2005 IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed and Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems Amendment for Physical and Medium Access Control Layers for Combined Fixed and Mobile Operation in Licensed Bands.

- IEEE 802.16f-2005 IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems--Amendment 1--Management Information Base (MIB)

- IEEE 802.16g-2007 IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed and Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems - Amendment 3: Management Plane Procedures and Services

- IEEE 802.16k-2007 IEEE Standard for Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges Amendment 2: Bridging of IEEE 802.16

- IEEE 802.16j-2009 Air Interface for Fixed and Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems - Multi-hop Relay Specification.  Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board on 2009-05-13 as an amendment to IEEE Standard 802.16-2009. 

- IEEE 802.16-2009 (Revision of IEEE Std 802.16-2004 is the new base standard, developed by Maintenance Task Group under the draft title "P802.16Rev2").  This work resulted in the second revision of IEEE Standard 802.16, following IEEE 802.16-2001 and IEEE Std 802.16-2004.  It consolidates IEEE Standards 802.16-2004, 802.16e-2005 and 802.16-2004/Cor1-2005, 802.16f-2005, and 802.16g-2007. 

IEEE 802.16 Standards In Progress:

- IEEE 802.16m: Advanced Air Interface development of the P802.16m project to amend the IEEE 802.16 WirelessMAN-OFDMA specification so that, while offering continuing support for legacy equipment, it will meet the requirements of IMT-Advanced next generation mobile networks.

- IEEE 802.16's License-Exempt (LE) Task Group is developing a draft under the P802.16h PAR, which was approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board on 2004-12-08 and extended on 2008-09-26 until the end of 2009.  The subject is "Improved Coexistence Mechanisms for License-Exempt Operation."



Jose Puthenkulam
Vice Chair, IEEE 802.16
Wireless Standards and Technology,
Mobility Group, Intel

Jose Puthenkulam is the Director of WiMAX Standards in the Mobile Wireless Group, Mobility Group in Intel Corporation.  He also presently serves as Vice Chair of the IEEE 802.16 Working Group developing Broadband Wireless Standards.  He was the Intel technical and standardization lead for the 802.16e standard and significantly instrumental in engaging the ecosystem for completing the standard on time. 

Presently he is leading the standardization efforts in the 802.16m project targeting IMT-Advanced.  He was also the editor of the initial ITU-R IMT-2000 contribution for inclusion of WiMAX in IMT-2000 family.  He has been at Intel since 1996, and has worked on wireless communications, security, video conferencing, information management protocols and related technologies.  He has also been active in promoting 802.16 standards internationally for Broadband Wireless applications.


Author's Note:  From personal observations at IEEE 802.16 standards meetings, I can attest that Jose has been the "behind the scenes" leader of the 802.16 standards effort.  He has been successful in building consensus amongst industry participants, which has enabled the 802.16 standards projects to rapidly progress and be accepted by many companies (as opposed to ratified standards that become "paper tigers").  This collaborative process has fostered the growth of the Mobile WiMAX ecosystem, which is evidenced in the new WiMAX deployments and build outs that we read about every day.

Alan Weissberger 

Part II of this interview will be on Jose's view of the emerging 4G Ecosystem.





 

But it was very difficult to extract any tangible take always from the press conference announcing the partnership.  That's because no specific products were identified and no time frames were given to see the results of this highly acclaimed collaboration.

To a large extent, the press conference was a lot of hand waving and gesturing, without providing anything of substance that we might expect from such an important strategic relationship.  This is the third time in the last decade that Intel and Nokia have announced a partnership, with the previous two attempts not producing much if anything at all.  So the industry might have a right to be skeptical this time.  Nonetheless, it certainly sounded exciting. 

Anand Chandrasekher, Sr VP and GM of Intel's Ultra Mobility Group stated, "The leaders in both computing and communications are coming together to accelerate innovation while driving exciting new revenue opportunities.  Intel and Nokia are joining forces to announce a long term strategic relationship that will align and shape the next generation of mobile computing."

We are all aware that smart phones and intelligent hand held devices contain powerful processors and need mobile broadband capability to unleash "the tremendous power and potential to reshape our lives." With many different wireless communications options, most of us expect that "the future will bring even more ways to be connected- a future full of different possibilities." Yet that kind of talk dominated the prepared remarks of Intel and Nokia during the conference. 

Nokia told us more of what we already know:  "The Internet continues to evolve and touch every aspect of our daily lives.  Today, there are more Internet users (at 1.6B) than there are fixed phone lines (at 1.3B).  New applications will drive the need for more powerful compute engines and faster (mobile) broadband wireless access, Consumers looking for mobile devices to do more, e.g.  sensors, new apps, new materials, new device design and form factors (e.g.  netbooks MIDs).  We need to extend computing platforms, build on common open platforms and explore new architectures."

Anand told us that Intel would continue to "relentlessly focus on driving down the cost and power requirements (of new devices), while delivering continuing performance improvements." Should we have expected something different? We were also told more of the obvious, "Mobile devices require high bandwidth- mobile broadband communications and ubiquitous Internet connectivity at a reasonable cost.  Users should expect a rich experience, any time, anywhere.  New and exciting services across a range of devices, including new ones the companies will be defining together."

So what's really new? There are three aspects of the partnership, which is not limited to just hardware and R&D:

1. Intel and Nokia will collaborate on several open source initiatives, most importantly Mobile Linux.  Nokia pointed out that "Hardware and software are decoupled these days.  Mobile Linux is an important part of the new converged mobile computing world." We would expect Intel and Nokia joint software development to be centered on two open source projects:
   • Moblin, originally an Intel project but now run by the Linux Foundation.
   • Maemo, a Nokia implementation created for an Internet tablet. 
2. Intel is licensing 3G HSPA modem technology from Nokia, complementing its own WiFi and WiMAX silicon.  (Note that two years ago, Intel licensed an HSPA module from Nokia for use in notebooks.  This technology transfer is intended for Intel to offer HSPA silicon for mobile hand held devices).
3. Intel and Nokia have entered into "a long term strategic partnership to develop a new class of mobile computing devices." Those future mobile computing devices will be based on Intel architecture defined chip sets and will "leverage each company's expertise."

And what about Mobile WiMAX? Don't expect anything from the partnership.  In response to a question on further WiMAX co-development, Anand replied, " This announcement has no effect on WiMAX one way or another.  We are still committed to it.  In this announcement, we are expanding our wireless portfolio to be able to implement Nonie's 3G HSPA technology."
This implies that Intel will no longer debunk HSPA technology in favor of Mobile WiMAX and suggest that network operators leapfrog 3G and move to Mobile WiMAX instead.

When a questioner pointed out that Nokia now had licensed 3G-HSPA to five different companies, Intel and Nokia responded as follows:

Intel: "3G HSPA technology has been licensed to build into future mobile offerings.  No comments on products or timing.  Nokia and Intel's vision is very similar- bringing communications and computing together.  This is not an exclusive agreement."

Nokia: "3G HSPA is what's on the market today (implying Mobile Wimax is NOT really on the market).  Nokia is licensing its 3G-HSPA-modem technology as widely as possible within the industry."

When asked if Intel had made any other inroads in the mobile phone business (which the company has tried to crack for years, but has not succeeded), Anand replied, "Intel is not public on any wins in the mobile phone arena except for LG." Then when asked what type of LG device would be forthcoming, Anand would not comment on the specific LG device that will have "Intel inside." This despite Intel having previously touted the LG MID (with Ericsson HSPA) as the highlight of this year's Barcelona MWC.

The stonewalling continued in response to other very reasonable questions about partnership deliverables:

Question from Bloomberg News: "There have been a lot of announcements about visions of the future.  Intel has tried to get into the mobile communication business for a number of years, yet they have not succeeded.  There's still a degree of skepticism until we know when the first Intel powered mobile device will be out there.  Can you tell us?"

Intel: "We will work together on strategic technology collaboration which spans three areas: Intel Architecture defined chip sets for future mobile computing devices, mobile and MIMO collaboration to deliver a very rich software environment for applications and user experience, Intel licensing of Nokia's 3G HSPA technology No products announcements at this time- not for today's discussion."

Question: "Do you expect the Atom family (Intel's lower power micro-processors) or x86 family to be embedded in future mobile computing devices?"

Intel: "No comment on brands or usage."
Nokia: "Premature to say how we will apply the technology at this stage."

How will the Mobile Computing Industry be effected as a result of this partnership?

1. Could these mobile devices, with open source operating systems like mobile Linux, cause MSFT to lose its software domination of the computing world? Mobile Linux - one of the three focus areas for the Intel-Nokia partnership - is a direct competitor of MSFT's Windows Mobile.  As people increasingly use mobile computing devices to do things that would have required a PC a few years ago, MSFT is likely to lose ground.  Mobile computing devices, e.g.  smart phones, MIDs, all-in-one gadgets, etc are already replacing a lot of things we do today on PCs.  This trend will likely accelerate as mobile computing replaces desktop computing.
2. Does this announcement negatively impact Mobile WiMAX, which already has been severely criticized for the lack of mobile devices with native mode air interfaces? After all the about WiMAX MIDs, we are still waiting for those devices to hit the market in a big way.  Will "the Internet in your pocket," be based on 3G-HSPA, rather than Mobile WiMAX?
   An anonymous Intel employee, provided his own read on the partnership:
   "This announcement does not change any of Intel's plans on WiMAX which are solid going forward.  Intel has not been a major player in Smart Phones/MIDs and we want to get into that space with the Intel AtomÃ?® Processor so this one part of this strategy.  Also most smart phones shipping today at least have 2G/2.5G and many also 3G.  So this licensing deal help fill a gap in our wireless technology portfolio. 
   It also allows us to provide WiMAX solutions to Nokia once more networks get deployed and they want their mobile devices to have WiMAX support as well.  So by no means does this negatively affect our WiMAX strategy.  It only opens new doors for us with a large customer like Nokia."
3. When will the new mobile computing devices hit the market? They will need to come quickly, if they are to compete with all the new smart phones from Apple, RIM, and Palm.  We hear there will also be MIDs coming soon from Samsung and various Taiwanese companies.  Previous Intel - Nokia partnerships, e.g.  HSPA modules for notebooks, have not been successful so the industry is skeptical that this one will succeed.  We would expect to see Intel-Nokia mobile computing devices on the market in less than one year and perhaps as early as this December.

References:
Intel and Nokia Announce Strategic Relationship to Shape Next Era of Mobile Computing Innovation
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20090623corp_b.htm?iid=pr1_releasepri_20090623rb

Intel makes stab in the dark with Nokia deal
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/42977/118/
 

Wireless Broadband Perspectives - WiMAX.com Weekly Series Sponsored By: For the next few months, WiMAX.com and Cisco will be featuring weekly perspectives from leading thought leaders in the WiMAX & wireless broadband industry.

The WiMAX industry reached another milestone this week with regards to the handling of patents and intellectual property rights (IPR) among WiMAX companies. On Monday, the Open Patent Alliance (OPA) issued a formal call for patents - asking companies with relevant IPR to submit them to the independent board for review.

The Open Patent Alliance (OPA) is an industry-led group that supports the development and widespread adoption of WiMAX technology by establishing a structure to create fair and transparent licensing of 4G IP-based technologies.

In some sense, the announcement may seem somewhat anti-climactic given that much of the heavy lifting had already been accomplished by getting the buy-in of many of the existing companies that have WiMAX IPR. Current participating OPA members include Acer, Alcatel-Lucent, Alvarion, Cisco, Clearwire, Huawei Technologies, Intel Corporation, and Samsung Electronics, as well as newly announced associate members Beceem, GCT Semiconductor, Sequans, and UQ Communications. Participating organizations range from semi-conductor companies, device and infrastructure manufactures to service providers.

Also this week, the OPA announced that it has selected Via Licensing Corporation to facilitate the formation and administration of the license pool. The company, an independent organization with access to technology resources, will act as a "patent referee" evaluating the claims submitted by WiMAX patent holders.

The WiMAX patent pool is similar to models used with other technologies such as MPEG. Once a call for patents is issued, companies may confidentially submit their claims to a patent administrator who will test for "essentiality." Companies that are deemed to have relevant IPR by the administrator are invited to participate in the process, during which negotiations will occur. The end result is consensus and licensing rules for those participating in the pool, a process that typically takes 12-18 months from the first call for patents.

"The advantages of a patent pool is that is provides transparency among intellectual property rights (IPR) for across the ecosystem," says OPA President Yung Hahn. "It reduces overall risk for those looking to develop WiMAX products and devices by making it more predictable and transparent."

But what about companies that choose not to participate? Two notable exceptions - Motorola and ZTE, both with significant WiMAX activity, are conspicuously absent from the group.

"A lot of people think that you have to achieve consensus before you can form the pool," says Hahn. "That is actually not the case. The only requirement is that each of these companies get a say and get to express their view on the various positions."

Companies that choose not to participate in the pool would likely seek to form separate bi-lateral license agreements with other companies. These agreements, however, can slow innovation and adoption by driving up the cost of licensing and increasing the overall licensing process. Details of the agreements are also confidential and covered by NDAs.

"We are not trying to replace the bi-lateral agreements - we believe they have a place and support that. But we believe if you use bi-lateral in conjunction with patent pools, you get them done quicker with broader coverage and less effort."

Another advantage of a patent pool is that it provides a market indicator of reasonable licensee fees. If participation is strong and a significant amount of IP is collected, the pool can become a basis for disputes and litigation. "One of the things that we are trying to achieve is to create a market reference point for what is a fair and reasonable IPR framework," says Hahn. "If you create a pool and have a significant portion of IP in the pool, when you have disputes about what is fair and reasonable, the pool becomes a very credible market reference point."

Another question that often comes up is how the WiMAX licensing process will compare to other technologies such as LTE. The general consensus is that WiMAX IPR is more broadly held than LTE and therefore easier to form a pool when you have a larger number of owners, than when it is more concentrated. Further complicating things, a number of organizations on the LTE side have separately begun to make separate calls for patents.

"There are several different ways to do this," says Hahn. "In LTE, 3 separate groups have conducted patent calls without necessarily getting the backing of key companies and are going to use that process to secure the comments. We have done it the other way around - we went and secured commitments from 8 companies, plus we just announced 4 associate members for a total of 12. For us the patent call is the end of the process rather than the beginning of the process."

"It's kind of like the Tortoise and the Hare analogy," say Hahn. " It's not so important how you start, but how you finish."