WiMax and network stress

[pyroscott]

 

LTE and WiMAX are actually quite a bit closer tech-wise than' date=' say, CDMA and GSM, or even WCDMA and CDMA. However they aren't close enough, as far as I can tell, to allow for interoperability with any reasonable amount of effort.[/quote']

 

I agree, the technologies have been said to be converging, but it is a long way off.

 

Sent from my CM9 Toro using Forum Runner

[AcctDeleted_Raph]

I recently moved to Richmond, VA from an area that is a WIMAX protection site. My previous experience with WIMAX (even in WIMAX cities) are speeds of at least 3Mb/s down. There are areas of RVA where I won't be able to break 1Mb/s, and usually hang out around 0.5Mb/s (Two areas I have found thus far). I get ~8Mb/s consistently at the tower around my house, so I don't think there is anything wrong with my phone. I work long hours and haven't gotten time to notice trends in the slower tower areas.

 

What do you think is the cause for this? Could this be to network stress or towers that need maintenance? If stress, then I have good reason to be concerned about congestion with LTE. The towers are in heavily populated parts of the city, but certain areas, e.g. Short Pump, always have fast speeds... If more likely the tower needs maintenance, how can I report it?

 

FYI, been a long time follower of the forum. Appreciate all the hard work that goes into it.

[S4GRU]

I recently moved to Richmond, VA from an area that is a WIMAX protection site. My previous experience with WIMAX (even in WIMAX cities) are speeds of at least 3Mb/s down. There are areas of RVA where I won't be able to break 1Mb/s, and usually hang out around 0.5Mb/s (Two areas I have found thus far). I get ~8Mb/s consistently at the tower around my house, so I don't think there is anything wrong with my phone. I work long hours and haven't gotten time to notice trends in the slower tower areas.

 

What do you think is the cause for this? Could this be to network stress or towers that need maintenance? If stress, then I have good reason to be concerned about congestion with LTE. The towers are in heavily populated parts of the city, but certain areas, e.g. Short Pump, always have fast speeds... If more likely the tower needs maintenance, how can I report it?

 

FYI, been a long time follower of the forum. Appreciate all the hard work that goes into it.

 

WiMax sites that are really slow most likely have their carriers overburdened. Since Clearwire made the decision to go with LTE, they probably are not adding additional carriers at WiMax sites and just keeping them as is. You can call and complain, and it may help. Clearwire probably does have some additional carrier adds in it's contract with Ericsson, so your complaints may actually cause a ticket to be placed and a carrier added. However, if the problem is pretty uniform across the market, I doubt that Clearwire will add carriers all over.

 

It may slowly improve as people upgrade their WiMax devices for LTE devices. Every month from here forward there will be less and less WiMax customers until it is shut down in 2015.

 

The congestion that WiMax is receiving is in no way related to how the LTE network will perform. The LTE network is a ten year network, and WiMax is a dying network. Sprint and Clearwire have incentives to burn cash on their LTE networks, but not on WiMax. WiMax would still be running fine if Clearwire could spend the money for additional carriers (and possibly backhaul). Also, WiMax has a mature device ecosphere, with millions of devices out there. LTE will take years to build the same amount. Also, remember that Sprint shares WiMax with millions of Clear residential and business ISP customers who really suck down the bandwidth (more than 10x's the amount of smartphone users). This will not occur on Sprint's LTE network. The differences are night and day.

 

Robert

[Ascertion]

Wimax at my house pulls 1.3mbps (I have to mod the Wimax settings on my device to even connect to it) and at work I get 13mbps DL and obviously 1.5 UL.

[JonnygATL]

Wimax at my house pulls 1.3mbps (I have to mod the Wimax settings on my device to even connect to it) and at work I get 13mbps DL and obviously 1.5 UL.

 

Yeah where I work in Midtown Atlanta I get 10-14 mbps but, at home (just 3.5 miles away near Emory University), I get no wimax signal at all. But, the 3G is generally quite good and, at this moment of this message I am pulling 1.4 mbps but can get up to 1.8 or a bit higher at times.

[Paynefanbro]

Fastest I got here in Brooklyn NY was about 16 Mbps. It was consistant too. The lowest it dropped to was about 13 Mbps.

[4GHoward]

Fastest I got here in Brooklyn NY was about 16 Mbps. It was consistant too. The lowest it dropped to was about 13 Mbps.

 

What device were you using?

[Paynefanbro]

What device were you using?

 

The HTC EVO 4G. Test was done earlier this year. Unfortunately I don't have it anymore thanks to the Sprint Buyback program.

[dnwk]

I remember thinking I was awesome because I had a T1 line in my dorm...

 

That was in 1998 though

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

How much did you paid for that T1 in your dorm in 1998? $1000/month?

[dnwk]

Fastest I got here in Brooklyn NY was about 16 Mbps. It was consistant too. The lowest it dropped to was about 13 Mbps.

 

I think WiMax in NYC is owned by NYC Government.....And they are really fast.

[Rukin1]

I have heard this comment a lot. It seems to be more than anecdotal. It seems that in many places, Protection Sites are located in less than ideal locations. I have two theories...

• Tower rents are cheaper in the hood
• Population density is higher, so you can cover more POP's with less sites and get to the FCC requirement easier

Or maybe, it's both? Clearwire did not put up Protection Sites so they could be used and appreciated. They put them up for the sole purpose of keeping their license with the FCC. If anyone could actually use the signal, that was just a bonus for them. These were never seen as generating any revenue for Clearwire, quite the contrary. The Protection Sites are a huge financial drain on the company.

 

So, where they went was not strategic in any way for consumers or usability, only to maximize coverage area for purposes of FCC reporting.

 

Robert

 

 It's alot cheaper in the hood. I mean quarter or half price of in a decent area. And it's expensive as hell by housing additions.