Commentary

Stephen Wellman
 

Does The GSMA's Endorsement Of LTE Mean WiMax Is Dead?

It's now official, the GSM Association has given its approval to 3GPP Long-Term Evolution (LTE) as the fourth-generation (4G) technology for GSM. Is this a sign that WiMax is toast?

It's now official, the GSM Association has given its approval to 3GPP Long-Term Evolution (LTE) as the fourth-generation (4G) technology for GSM. Is this a sign that WiMax is toast?There is a growing perception that WiMax is in big trouble. Much of this WiMax skepticism was fueled by the dissolution of Sprint's WiMax marriage with Clearwire last week. As my colleague Rob Preston pointed out, this can't be good for WiMax's future.

I remember attending wireless trade shows two years ago where everyone claimed that WiMax would be 4G. At the time, it seemed almost certain. Intel had put together a formidable-looking global ecosystem and carriers were seriously eyeing the technology. Then, Sprint, a major U.S. telecom, signed up for the WiMax party, and things looked almost inevitable.


More Mobility Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

Flashforward two years latter, those predictions look increasingly irrelevant. Sprint is now crouching its committments to WiMax in vague "legalese" and Clearwire is out in the cold. And what about the rest of those carriers who looked so hot to trot for mobile WiMax Where are they now?

As I pointed out last week, WiMax may need Google's help if its going to survive. But that would mean that Google would have to get into the service provider game.

Despite the analysts and industry insiders who claim Google will not become a carrier, Google will likely participate in the upcoming spectrum auction, so who knows, maybe Google will save WiMax.

What do you think? Is WiMax now dead? Or does it still have a fighting chance, even as rival technologies like LTE emerge as legitimate paths for 4G?


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links