Last year I had a great time reading ‘The Innovators’ by Walter Isaacson, a wonderful book that spans computing history from Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace to our days. There are a lot of stories inside the book and each can only be a short summary of events. That’s why I also enjoy reading books about particular parts of computing history, and ‘Dealers of Lightning’ by Michael Hiltzik on the history of personal computing at Xerox PARC is just one of those.
Recently, T-Mobile US has announced that they have switched on 4×4 MIMO support in their network and first smartphones are now supporting 4 simultaneous downlink streams. Quite an interesting announcement as most antennas and base station sites currently deployed by most operators do not yet support this. So let’s have a look at what has changed in recent years in base station technology.
Another NB-IoT number floating around is that very power efficient NB-IoT devices should be capable to be driven from a small battery for more than 10 years without needing a recharge. Again, I wondered where this number comes from and which assumptions were made to declare that this is possible.
There is an interesting number floating around in various whitepapers and articles on IoT: NB-IoT supports 50.000 devices per sector per cell. So where does that number come from and is it realistic?
Back in July, DNA/Elisa of Finland reported that their average user consumes 5 GB of data per month.
Personally I don’t do a lot of video streaming while I’m on LTE so my current data consumption on my smartphone is around 1.5 GB a month these days, so you can imagine how much streaming must be going on in Finland.
Over the past months, 3GPP was quite busy to ensure the NB-IoT made it into Release 13 before time ran out. So far, I’ve been looking into CRs and the Work Item description to get an idea of what is standardized because the Release 13 specification documents themselves did not yet contain NB-IoT content. Fortunately this has no changed in the latest edition of the documents and there and one company even pushed out a whitepaper to give an overview.
The EU commission has a lot of fun these days to find fair rules to abolish roaming fees from 2017. I’ve written down my thoughts here and here but actually, even if roaming fees go away, we are only halfway there. And that’s because there’s another thing that needs fixing: Rates for mobile calls between EU countries.
In part 1 I’ve given an overview of the the draft EU legislation on removing roaming charges in 2017. The draft has been quite heavily criticized in a number of online publications. Unfortunately, those articles gave no particular reasons for their attitude other that the proposal does not go far enough as there should be no roaming charges at all anymore no matter who long people are abroad. Yes, it’s mass media so why over complicate things? Anyway, this is not mass media so I thought I’d share with you my personal thoughts.
A couple of days ago the EU has published a first draft of how to go forward with removing roaming charges in the EU starting in mid-2017. A number of press reports quickly followed which were mostly negative and which all failed to analyze the issues the proposed compromise wants to address and resolve in an acceptable way for both consumers and network operators. So I thought I’ll fill that gap over here. In this post, I’ve put together an overview of what the draft regulation proposes in some detail. In a follow up post I’ll give you my opinion what the reasons are the different limitations are proposed, which ones I find acceptable, which ones I don’t find acceptable from a consumer point of view and what I think is missing. So here we go, this is how I interpret the draft: Continue reading EU Roaming Fees Phase Out News – September 2016 – Part 1
This is part 7 of my series on Cellular-Internet of Things (CIoT) and NB-IoT. So far I always thought things above layer 2 were simple. There’s IP and that’s it then. But recently I came across an interesting paper by Rhode & Schwarz that suggests that this might not necessarily be the case.