Intel: WiMax doesn't have to win
 |
| Intel has begun building platforms that combine its microprocessors with WiMax wireless technology. Image: Intel |
About a year ago, Intel talked about WiMax as if it’s the technology that will wirelessly connect the world’s gadgets for high-speed Internet surfing. After all, that’s why Intel has shepherded the standard along for the past several years, backing it with expensive research and building it into the Centrino 2 mobile platform, code-named Montevina, that it plans to announce this year.
But mention WiMax these days and Intel’s (INTC) likely to wax philosophical. Yes, the company still backs the technology with its products and cash – just last month Intel pumped another $1 billion into Clearwire (CLWR), a struggling company working with Sprint Nextel (S) to build a U.S. WiMax network. But lately alternative high-speed technologies such as Long Term Evolution have gained steam – Nortel (NT) yesterday announced that like AT&T (T) and Verizon (VZ), it’s betting on LTE – and Intel is now talking about WiMax as just one of many great high-speed options.
“There doesn’t have to be one solution to this problem,” Intel Chief Technology Officer Justin Rattner told me on Wednesday. “We have cable and DSL, and we don’t care how you get the bits into your house. We just know that having the bits there drives the consumption of our silicon products.”
Intel sales and marketing chief Sean Maloney last week made similarly neutral statements about the future of wireless. Information Week quoted Maloney saying that WiMax “ought to be harmonized” with LTE, so that customers aren’t confused. Those don’t sound like battle cries from a company fighting to the death for a mobile standard.
While it’s true that any kind of widely available wireless broadband would help Intel sell more chips, a WiMax win would be better for Intel’s business. Why? Since Intel has been working on the technology for so long, it stands to profit if there’s a surge in demand for WiMax-related gear.
After all, that was the point of building WiMax technology into its Montevina platforms. Will Intel execs be happy if we get wireless broadband soon, no matter what it’s called? Sure. But despite the new tone, you can bet they’ll be happier if it’s WiMax.
@Trey
“Why not go with the one that has the headstart?”
Well, some (ClearW re) IS going with that one. As to the rest, they are not going with it because they know that if they tap into the GSM/UMTS global volume of 2.5b today, they can’t go wrong. Billions of chipsets are cheaper than millions of chipsets. Simple as that
LTE will dominate, WiMax will be a niche play that serves a few in the right constellation very nicely. It’s GSM vs. CDMA all over again….
Wimax Mobile is a reality, LTE a project. It seems that with wimax>> that is the reasons why we should be confident on wimax success> i am actually a wimax user (onemax) and it is a reality in my country (dominican republic)
Seems to me that, despite a stronger backing, the lack of definition around LTE is a serious issue. WiMAX not only has a standard, but physical equipment in production.
Not saying it means the end of LTE, but definitely an advantage.
If you need to find a free wifi I use http://localwifisearch.com
The author fails to mention that mobile WiMAX has a strong headstart in time-to-market over LTE and that the two don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Why not go with the one with the clear headstart to begin with?
@bms
Except that most of the current phones don’t even support 3G, let alone LTE. That means you have a choice of building a handset with either LTE, WiMAX or both. Of the two, there are only WiMAX handsets currently in production.
The big problem that gets overlooked isn’t technology – it’s how the providers want to sell you Internet access. WiMAX is analoguous to WiFi and flat rate is the norm for the ISPs (typically cablecos). LTE is analoguous to 3G and per-kb is the norm because that’s how telcos/cellcos think.
The other huge difference is that WiMAX is cheap enough that lowend but compatible networks can be built by small companies and even by home users – you can’t do that with LTE. That means that a much larger network can be assembled using WiMAX more quickly and more cheaply.
Finally, and this is a point missed by almost all American journalists: WiMAX networks are already in use around the world. Korea has had WiMAX and WiBRO (mobile WiMAX) for a few years now. Canada has two national pre-WiMAX networks. Australia has several.
LTE is the phone company’s desperate attempt to try to hold onto a market they see slipping out of their fingers. When WiMAX is widely deployed, who needs cellcos or classic cellphones using GSM or CDMA anymore?