Amazon is taking pre-orders for the ultra-slick N810w!

http://www.amazon.com/Nokia-02700T6-...7646931&sr=1-1
(source)

If there was an affordable 802.16e (mobile wimax) deployment in Southern Ontario, Canada, I would be very interested in this purchase. Even with heavy bandwidth caps this would still be attractive, as the N810w is supposed to be able to switch between wifi and WiMax seamlessly.

And here I was thinking that it'd never come out.


}:^)~
YARR!

Capt'n Yo-ho-ho

I think I'll wait for the next next tablet
I'm moving to rural Missouri soon. No WiMax there I'm sure.

Me too. I think by the time wimax companies really make an impact, the N900 will be out.

I'm actually half expecting that most members of the forum will respond in the same level of enthusiasm for a few reasons:

1) They already have N800s/N810s and are quite satisfied without a Wimax radio; put another way, the upgrade isn't significant enough.
2) The marketing/pr campaign for the device has so far has been abysmal. Even when actively searching its hard to find any information to get excited over.
3) WiMax deployment still seems as though it's a wildcard. It's been talked about to death, with some known deployments peppered about North America, but is very far from being universal, and there are few assurances that it'll ever be (although I believe it will be, but this is from a hypothetical perspectives of the general public).

I think if Wimax deployment were a little farther along, this device would have increased appeal. Perhaps Nokia is waiting until Wimax is widely available before launching their ad campaign?

Time. Will. Tell.

}:^)~
YARR!

L.L. Capt'n C

I'm just still curious as to why Nokia seems to think Wi-Max is more important then wireless Gigabit/N especially since the draft is now off of N.

As many ppl have pointed out that Wi-Max starts off on shaky ground and only a select few markets whereas many ppl have or would or could upgrade to Gigabit.

Draft n hasnt finalized, and I would imagine adding 3+ antenni to the inside of the tiny package would probably be a bit more fdifficlt than a single 802.11e
at most they'd be able to say they are 802.11n draft compliant, and if they were to mass produce it, and the draft changes, they have a pile in their hands
but that's just my guess

sprint was blowing alot of smoke about xohm a few months back, and alot of that has proven to be as solid as smoke as well
so I completly understand trying for WiMax

11n doesn't necessarily mean 3 antennas. In fact all mobile 11n chipsets i've seen so far were 1x1 parts meaning they support only one antenna and thus achieve at most 150mbit/s.

I wonder what you want higher wlan speeds for, anyway. My n810 doesn't really keeps pace with the current 11g and e.g. web rendering is slower than the actual dcownload.

Also 11g alreday allows for audio- and low definition video. I doubt that it could render a hd stream.

So what's your use for 802.11n?

I think that Nokia is betting on Wimax. As a device manufacturer, they're concerned with selling hardware, not monthly subscriptions.

I doubt that the large North American telcos are eager to support this technology. As I understand it, Wimax is more 'open' than other types of networks; there can be more players involved. If this is the case then it opens the door for competition, which mean prices, and eventually revenues drop.

In other words, the idea of wireless internet access is great, but the incentive for the large players that would roll it out quickly is not. I anticipate that local businesses that have the ability to flood an area, would be much more likely to push this tech forcing the hand of the major telcos to respond competitively. Certainly there are some examples peppered about North America that have already done this.

IIRC, this pattern of behaviour is evident even with iPhone, as although there's an unlimited data plan, there has been collusion to prevent that data from being voice. While this would be a boon to the consumer, it certainly isn't marketed as one of the systems cost-saving advantages as it would likely mean losses of revenue for AT&T.

The constituents that advocate Wimax need to provide adequate incentive to those that would roll-out of the service for accelerated deployment. Perhaps that means advertising to local telcos specific ways that they can compete with their own Wimax deployment. Perhaps it means investing in the infrastructure beyond the radio (software, voip chipsets, etc).

Otherwise, this is looking more and more like a 'who killed the electric car' scenario.


}:^)~
YARR!

Corrupt.11g

Oh, and WirelessN seems really nice, but in this case it's less about throughput than range.


}:^)~
YARR!

www.Capt.Corrupt.com

WiMax can also be seen as a wireless extension of fixed broadband. In USA, AT&T is looking at WiMax to provide broadband access to remote areas, and in countries like India the operators are doing the same. In Developing countries there is a significant number of wiMax Deployments and it is also staring in East Europe, France, etc.).

What I find interesting in WiMax is the possibility that this technology may force Mobile operators to move from the cashcow model to a flat rate model, unlimited access that exists in most countries for fixed broadband. In the end, WiMax may lead to a radical change in Mobile market. Sprint has already indicated that they are planning to do something in these lines.

A interesting market to watch is Korea where a Wimax (Wibro) like network is changing the rules of the game.