I think a year from now is overly optimistic for removing CDMA support from new VZW devices. Verizon's network will be LTE everywhere; but there are still a number of holes where they're dependent on roaming deals with other carriers because they don't have any 800 mhz (voice) spectrum in the area.
At least in the one relatively near to me (western Maryland, eastern West Virginia, western Virginia), where they're dependent on roaming access to US Cellular's network for voice they never built a 3g data network despite several major interstates (I68, 79, and 81) running through the area.
So far I haven't heard anything about them planning to build LTE only networks into those areas. Unless there's a major change in policy and they offer roaming access to their LTE network I don't see 3rd party carriers letting them install VZW-LTE hardware on their towers, and getting planning approval to build that many new towers is certain to run into snags in some places.
The problem isn't that there will be holes. It'll be that Verizon thinks they can do whatever they want and people'll just deal. The problem is in the fact they're mostly right. Our government protects companies like these from having to really compete and so they feel they're too big to fail.
Not only because of government setups that protect wireless companies, prevent buyouts/mergers, protect ISP's from having to lower prices against competition even against municipal-based ISP's, but also because our government has proven once you get big enough, influential enough, "too big to fail," they can and will ignore anything you do including funding terrorism and Mexican drug trade.
The new goalpost for every business is going to be, "Become so big you can do anything and not get arrested for it because your collapse would imperil the market." Once they get there, they can try anything and if they get caught, well, they're too big to fail. Here's a fine for a week's worth of profits for trying, try better next time and don't get caught.
VZW would love to do what you're suggesting since even a free smartphone requires a dataplan.
When the 2/3g CDMA networks go dark I expect VoLTE to have trickled down to bottom end phones for at least a few years; just as 3g voice has been present on most GSM based feature phones for years despite starting out only on the proto-smartphones of the era. When the plug finally gets pulled FCC regulations will require VZW to give any upgrade holdouts a new free phone without a new contract. In the near future Sprint will be doing this for iDen holdouts.
I totally agree. My phone regularly has issues with 4G, and reverts to 3G all the time. CDMA not so much, but I imagine that where I used to live out in the country would still be tapping into the old 1X connection now and then. I could barely get 3G there and I'm sure 4G is a pipe dream still.
For that to happen Verizon Wireless would have to do to there network what Sprint is doing now. A total rebuild of there nationwide network. Just putting LTE up on 700 mhz band was just a stop gap.
Sprint's not doing a total rebuild all at once either. They're building LTE on free 1900mhz spectrum they have now and will be doing additional deployment at 850 mhz once they shut down the iDen network later this year; but they're not talking about killing their 2/3g CDMA networks yet. Until or unless they're able to get roaming access on VZW's LTE network they can't remove 2/3 support at all; since in rural areas/highways they're dependent on roaming, mostly with VZW for coverage.
Well who will be using it? Early 2014 is a year from now. WTR1605 and MDM9x25 are experted this summer. So saying it is going to be 35% smaller then a product coming out half a year easier doesn't make sense. ( Assuming they are comparing to Qualcomm )
Then there is the GNSS, The Transceiver was packaged in which means less space, but then you required a separated GNSS/GPS which still makes it a two chip solution like WTR1605 and MDM9x25. And to make it worse they decide not to include it in their WiFi Combos.
Those using Snapdragon will have no need for this, and if they are having other phone model not using Snapdragon and require a separate baseband like the Broadcom is offering, my guess is that buying Snapdragon along with its Baseband and Wifi Combo will be cheaper.
So why not go after the single biggest handset manufacture that doesn't have its own Mobile Cellular Stack; aka. Apple.
Well; three chip solution, early 2014 doesn't convince me much.
So I have no idea what the heck Broadcom is trying to do to complete with Qualcomm.
(a) The plan is to compete on price for the lowest-end market. No-one wants to broadcast that as their strategy, but maybe that's what it is.
(b) This is not meant to be a chip that actually makes money. Rather, Broadcom could see that Qualcomm was likely headed into their business (WiFi and Bluetooth), and the only way to retain that business was to have offerings as integrated as Qualcomm. This is merely the first product of that generation, meant primarily to hear the complains, bug reports, and feature requests from would-be buyers.
(c) The real money maker plan is not to sell this chip, but to sell Apple (or Samsung?) the relevant IP so that Apple can design their own cellular stack, tailored exactly to their needs. Apple seems a better target for this --- Samsung seems too undisciplined to engage in designing their own cellular stack, with different groups, all with different demands for what they want all mutually sabotaging each other.
Selling their IP? I am totally a noob in this Mobile 4G Stack but i have yet heard of a single 4G IP vendor ( There is CEVA but i dont know they are being used at all? Most phone seems to center around Qualcomm or Tegra 4 these days ).. Please Correct me if i am wrong
And Qualcomm has already step into WiFi long ago with Atheros, which Apple is already using in their Macbook and Airport Station.
And Samsung has their own Stack already. Even though they are using Baseband from different vendor as well.
What part of this chip is LTE-A? Cat 4 is plain "old" Release 8 (!) LTE, basically the same as the widespread Cat 3 devices, with the restriction to "Maximum number of DL-SCH transport block bits received within a TTI" (aka max bitrate) lifted. Even Cat 5 with 300 Mbps is Rel 8 LTE...
It probably supports only some non-physical layer extensions from Rel10, but I would not call anything under Cat 6 LTE-A. This is the similar issue as with Rel7 HSPA that supports only 14.4 Mbps - that is Cat 10, defined in Rel 5, but it supports some other feature, like for instance fast call setup.
I've seen a number of comments by phoneco talking heads that the industry's moving towards an everything is data model which would mean there'd be no separate charges for voice/messaging any more.
In an ideal world this would either mean a drop in base plan prices since voice/message traffic is charged against your existing data cap. In practice I suspect the best case scenario for the US market will look a lot like VZW's current share plans where the per device fee was jacked up to cover the loss of the larger voice/messaging plans they can no longer charge for separately; while not counting against data limits. More likely I think will be them being counted against data, but the change being packaged with an incremental drop in the per GB rate as PR cover to reduce the amount of bill shock.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
17 Comments
Back to Article
DanNeely - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
I think a year from now is overly optimistic for removing CDMA support from new VZW devices. Verizon's network will be LTE everywhere; but there are still a number of holes where they're dependent on roaming deals with other carriers because they don't have any 800 mhz (voice) spectrum in the area.At least in the one relatively near to me (western Maryland, eastern West Virginia, western Virginia), where they're dependent on roaming access to US Cellular's network for voice they never built a 3g data network despite several major interstates (I68, 79, and 81) running through the area.
So far I haven't heard anything about them planning to build LTE only networks into those areas. Unless there's a major change in policy and they offer roaming access to their LTE network I don't see 3rd party carriers letting them install VZW-LTE hardware on their towers, and getting planning approval to build that many new towers is certain to run into snags in some places.
HisDivineOrder - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
The problem isn't that there will be holes. It'll be that Verizon thinks they can do whatever they want and people'll just deal. The problem is in the fact they're mostly right. Our government protects companies like these from having to really compete and so they feel they're too big to fail.Not only because of government setups that protect wireless companies, prevent buyouts/mergers, protect ISP's from having to lower prices against competition even against municipal-based ISP's, but also because our government has proven once you get big enough, influential enough, "too big to fail," they can and will ignore anything you do including funding terrorism and Mexican drug trade.
The new goalpost for every business is going to be, "Become so big you can do anything and not get arrested for it because your collapse would imperil the market." Once they get there, they can try anything and if they get caught, well, they're too big to fail. Here's a fine for a week's worth of profits for trying, try better next time and don't get caught.
name99 - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
What is your complaint? You want VZW to support voice CDMA forever? Even if that means worse service for everyone else?Would you be happy if VZW GAVE you a low-end smartphone to replace whatever crappy 10 year-old phone you've been hanging onto?
DanNeely - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
VZW would love to do what you're suggesting since even a free smartphone requires a dataplan.When the 2/3g CDMA networks go dark I expect VoLTE to have trickled down to bottom end phones for at least a few years; just as 3g voice has been present on most GSM based feature phones for years despite starting out only on the proto-smartphones of the era. When the plug finally gets pulled FCC regulations will require VZW to give any upgrade holdouts a new free phone without a new contract. In the near future Sprint will be doing this for iDen holdouts.
JonnyDough - Sunday, February 17, 2013 - link
I totally agree. My phone regularly has issues with 4G, and reverts to 3G all the time. CDMA not so much, but I imagine that where I used to live out in the country would still be tapping into the old 1X connection now and then. I could barely get 3G there and I'm sure 4G is a pipe dream still.kg4icg - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
For that to happen Verizon Wireless would have to do to there network what Sprint is doing now. A total rebuild of there nationwide network. Just putting LTE up on 700 mhz band was just a stop gap.DanNeely - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
Sprint's not doing a total rebuild all at once either. They're building LTE on free 1900mhz spectrum they have now and will be doing additional deployment at 850 mhz once they shut down the iDen network later this year; but they're not talking about killing their 2/3g CDMA networks yet. Until or unless they're able to get roaming access on VZW's LTE network they can't remove 2/3 support at all; since in rural areas/highways they're dependent on roaming, mostly with VZW for coverage.iwod - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
" In addition Broadcom claims they have enough performance to run an operator's IMS stack entirely on their baseband. "What does that mean?
DanNeely - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
IMS consists of moving voice/multimedia messages to an IP based system.http://www.phonescoop.com/glossary/term.php?gid=22...
iwod - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
Well who will be using it? Early 2014 is a year from now. WTR1605 and MDM9x25 are experted this summer. So saying it is going to be 35% smaller then a product coming out half a year easier doesn't make sense. ( Assuming they are comparing to Qualcomm )Then there is the GNSS, The Transceiver was packaged in which means less space, but then you required a separated GNSS/GPS which still makes it a two chip solution like WTR1605 and MDM9x25. And to make it worse they decide not to include it in their WiFi Combos.
Those using Snapdragon will have no need for this, and if they are having other phone model not using Snapdragon and require a separate baseband like the Broadcom is offering, my guess is that buying Snapdragon along with its Baseband and Wifi Combo will be cheaper.
So why not go after the single biggest handset manufacture that doesn't have its own Mobile Cellular Stack; aka. Apple.
Well; three chip solution, early 2014 doesn't convince me much.
So I have no idea what the heck Broadcom is trying to do to complete with Qualcomm.
name99 - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
Some possibilities:(a) The plan is to compete on price for the lowest-end market. No-one wants to broadcast that as their strategy, but maybe that's what it is.
(b) This is not meant to be a chip that actually makes money. Rather, Broadcom could see that Qualcomm was likely headed into their business (WiFi and Bluetooth), and the only way to retain that business was to have offerings as integrated as Qualcomm. This is merely the first product of that generation, meant primarily to hear the complains, bug reports, and feature requests from would-be buyers.
(c) The real money maker plan is not to sell this chip, but to sell Apple (or Samsung?) the relevant IP so that Apple can design their own cellular stack, tailored exactly to their needs.
Apple seems a better target for this --- Samsung seems too undisciplined to engage in designing their own cellular stack, with different groups, all with different demands for what they want all mutually sabotaging each other.
iwod - Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - link
Selling their IP? I am totally a noob in this Mobile 4G Stack but i have yet heard of a single 4G IP vendor ( There is CEVA but i dont know they are being used at all? Most phone seems to center around Qualcomm or Tegra 4 these days ).. Please Correct me if i am wrongAnd Qualcomm has already step into WiFi long ago with Atheros, which Apple is already using in their Macbook and Airport Station.
And Samsung has their own Stack already. Even though they are using Baseband from different vendor as well.
phoenix_rizzen - Monday, February 18, 2013 - link
Considering there isn't a single Tegra4 phone on the market, or even planned as yet, I would consider you to be wrong. :)xdrol - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
What part of this chip is LTE-A? Cat 4 is plain "old" Release 8 (!) LTE, basically the same as the widespread Cat 3 devices, with the restriction to "Maximum number of DL-SCH transport block bits received within a TTI" (aka max bitrate) lifted. Even Cat 5 with 300 Mbps is Rel 8 LTE...It probably supports only some non-physical layer extensions from Rel10, but I would not call anything under Cat 6 LTE-A. This is the similar issue as with Rel7 HSPA that supports only 14.4 Mbps - that is Cat 10, defined in Rel 5, but it supports some other feature, like for instance fast call setup.
jmcb - Tuesday, February 12, 2013 - link
When VoLTE comes out.....what about ppl on tiered data plans? How does VoLTE effect ppl's data plans?DanNeely - Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - link
I've seen a number of comments by phoneco talking heads that the industry's moving towards an everything is data model which would mean there'd be no separate charges for voice/messaging any more.In an ideal world this would either mean a drop in base plan prices since voice/message traffic is charged against your existing data cap. In practice I suspect the best case scenario for the US market will look a lot like VZW's current share plans where the per device fee was jacked up to cover the loss of the larger voice/messaging plans they can no longer charge for separately; while not counting against data limits. More likely I think will be them being counted against data, but the change being packaged with an incremental drop in the per GB rate as PR cover to reduce the amount of bill shock.
SilenceDogwood - Saturday, August 17, 2013 - link
21892. Like bringing boxing gloves to a gun fight.