The "trouble" with WiMAX, I've maintained, has nothing to do with performance, or necessarily with network cost. The technology will work. The issue is how and where WiMAX fits in the business environment. In developed markets where lots of competition already exists, the issue is figuring out where WiMAX plays in the applications environment. As a fixed alternative to cable modem, fiber-to-customer or Digital Subscriber Line services, the issue is how big a market exists. As a mobile broadband platform, the issue is how it competes with 3G networks and Long Term Evolution, the GSM-based fourth generation network alternative.
There's less contention in rural areas or less-developed broadband environments. Where it is too expensive to deploy a terrestrial broadband network, WiMAX has a clear logic. Even there, though, there might be questions about how more-established mobile voice and 3G networks factor into the competitive equation. One certainly can argue that WiMAX will provide much more bandwidth than 3G, today. The issue is how long it will take to create robust revenue models for 3G services, let alone providing those services more effectively over a faster 4G network.
It is, in short, a business issue, not a technology issue. To be sure, one can argue that a new market for broadband-enabled devices other than mobile phones is coming to fruition. But the issue there remains whether WiMAX necessarily or primarily provides access to those devices in ways that 3G cannot, let alone 4G. One might argue that WiMAX has a shot at providing access to all kinds of consumer devices other than "phones." But one might also argue that such connectivity has to be much cheaper than anything we've seen so far.
WiMAX networks might be half as costly as a 3G network to build. But that's not enough. They also have to be less than half as costly to operate, or prices won't be low enough to entice users to pay for connections to cameras, music players, game or entertainment platforms, for example. Those functions also are enabled on 3G networks, in many cases, combining the text and voice functions with the very services WiMAX might enable.
WiMAX might not prove to have the market traction its supporters hope for, in other words, at least in developed broadband markets where there is robust competition from cable modem, DSL, fiber to home, 3G mobile, fixed wireless, Wi-Fi hotspot and satellite broadband alternatives. The difference could come if WiMAX becomes the mobile provider 4G platform or if mobile WiMAX access is priced well below current mobile rates, allowing customers to access enable more devices than they now do.
It is not unthinkable for users to consider simultaneous broadband subscriptions. But it does require a more-compelling value/price relationship. We can assume standard-issue mobile phones, increasingly of the "smart" variety and optimized for Web experiences. We also can assume greater penetration of wireless data cards to support notebook PC use in nomadic fashion. What is not yet clear is the potential demand for broadband-connected music players, cameras, game players, dedicated navigation devices or video players. How many different subscriptions are users willing to pay for?
There is some thinking that WiMAX will be used especially heavily by mobile PC customers, as WiMAX is seen as powering a good chunk of the access card business.
“In 2010, the forecasted WiMAX subscriptions in North America will represent two percent of that for mobile 2.5G/3G and 66 percent of the subscriptions for mobile data cards,” say Philip Marshall, Yankee Group vice president, and Tara Howard, Yankee Group analyst.
Yankee Group estimates the number of WiMAX subscribers will increase from 1.3 million to 7.8 million between 2006 and 2011 and that in 2011, 7 million subscribers will be using 802.16e technology. Some percentage of that use will be for fixed broadband access, of course.
Assume such forecasts are correct. The percentage of WiMAX subscribers relative to residential broadband subscribers in the North American market then will increase from 2.2 percent to 7.4 percent between 2006 and 2010. Whatever else one might say about this level of adoption, it certainly doesn’t represent some sort of full-blown challenge to cable modem, DSL or fiber-to-customer access technologies. In fact, WiMAX, if it is adopted as Yankee Group researchers now forecast, will be yet another ancillary or niche form of broadband access.
So in mature markets, the major upside opportunity for WiMAX is expected with mobile personal broadband services, with fixed and portable services gaining moderate early market traction. In some Asian markets, such as Korea, it is conceivable that WiMAX-based mobile broadband could succeed, despite the existence of robust 3G and mobile video alternatives.
Still, the ultimate role of WiMAX in the wireless market is debatable, says a recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development report. “Large supporters such as Intel have a vision that WiMAX will change the way we all access the Internet in a matter of years,” says the report.
“Detractors claim that the economics of large-scale WiMAX networks are simply not justified,” the OECD report suggests.
Mobile WiMAX technologies may have the most profound impact in some urban areas because they could fill a connectivity void between 3G data networks and Wi-Fi, though.
Ultimately, this will not be a matter of technology, but of commercial issues and creation of new niches. It's hard to see GSM mobile operators going with WiMAX as a full-blown replacement for 3G, when LTE is coming. And it isn't simply a matter of technical performance. Smooth migration paths are important for large carriers. WiMAX might be too abrupt a transition for many. That might not be the case in undeveloped broadband markets, where a fixed broadband capability is reason enough to deploy it. Mobile broadband is a tougher matter, though.
