Not at all, the saturation has come to invention of initial techniques but the development is still on a run :)

Hi Mohamed,

I think the complexity of these standards have caused this slow down.

At least this is one cause.

BR

A/

I think not saturation

|| now are developing gigawireless networks [(5g +){and start some basic tests} ||

|| and i think more about son=self organized networks, mixing access technologies, starting with lte, wlan and 3g. ||

|| now are very interesting developing on son, some commercial info at: http://son-conference.com/ ||

Thanks Beto

Not at all. Crisis did its part in focusing funding to commercially most successful technology but have in mind that all these new technologies are OFDM based. Thus they are all similar in certain parts. Focus for the future would in network intelligence since they require constant optimisation.

Hi Mohamed

i hope It's not like that.. five years before most of the people using wired connection for browsing or at most GPRS (data rates are very less) also they used to browse applications which require very less bandwidth.

But nowadays nobody is interested to use GPRS , EDGE etc.. everybody want to use high bandwidth applications like mobile TV etc. which require a high bandwidth connection . but the bandwidth available is less so we need to improve the capacity (bits/sec/Hz) and reduce the BER within the available resources. So we are going for MIMO , OFDM, SC-FDMA like that . Using MIMO we can improve capacity to great extent (upto 40bps/Hz) just by adding additional antennas.

Like this i hope more and more techniques will come to improve capacity and also to be used in high frequency spectrum such as millimeter frequencies

As mentioned before, most of these standards share similar technologies, so it is just a matter of the weight that each standardisation body has. The 3GPP group is very strong and active and has the backing of mobile operators and manufacturers.

Now that the standards are deployed, the focus is on optimising the existing technologies without breaking the standard.

With LTE-A we will reach the Shannon limit.... From that point on we could just play with topologies, tx power and cognitive systems ...

There's some new standards players utilizing open innovation approaches emerging - for example, WiGiT v0.2 open specifications will be available shortly. We introduced the new (Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed) specs and presented demos a few weeks ago at TM Forum Management World Americas in Orlando. Heterogeneous networks of cloud and edge services, or rather, wireless grids require new - virtual - wireless resource-sharing approaches. A new class of software, edgeware, is emerging. More to come in 2013 also from TM Forum's Enterprise Cloud Leadership Council's Workplace as a Service Catalyst Project; please stay tuned; and/or - pitch in! The ECLC's Workplace as a Service similarly assumes a new reference architecture; which may be further standardized by TM Forum. See http://wigit.ischool.sr.edu for WiGiT v0.1.

IMHO it is only marketing reasons and spin technology.

A bitter truth is that all current technologies are crammed in relatively narrow low microwave ranges that are traditionally divided in very different ways in various countries, thus providing a very limited service, quite below the proclaimed 4G speeds.

Such situation desperately depends on "technologies" for convincing people into believing in 4G, Santa Claus and Easter Bunny.

The wide initial success of LTE is capturing most of the headlines these days, but there are definitely efforts under way on what is beginning to be called 5G. Things to look at are in my opinion new waveforms, dynamic spectrum access, and small cells

In Nice, France today (May 14, 2013) at TM Forum Management World, Ed Nanno of Syracuse University iSchool WiGiT Lab (Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed) is participating in demos of the Single Sign On/Workplace as a Service Catalyst Project of the Enterprise Cloud Leadership Council, along with Ericsson, Deutsche Telekom, Portugal Telecom Innovacao, Framehawk, TOA Technologies, and UBS

In a Bring Your Own Device environment, the focus of most on simplistic network speed formulas, which in practice/delivered performance as others have noted, are never met, is misguided. (4G = marketing slogan; not -anywhere- actual delivered end user performance.) Cloud services composed dynamically across data centers is what folks should be thinking about, and what wireless network and edge device - typically security - issues they raise.

Ed is also releasing WiGiT v0.2 open specifications, along with a Workplace as a Service Use Case; WiGiT v0.2 may be downloaded now from http://wigit.ischool.syr.edu; WPaaS Use Case shortly. The future service creation and delivery challenges are all about delivery and composition of applications and user experience across heterogeneous devices and networks. WiGiT v0.2 is a step towards that direction; TM Forum's Frameworx standards are evolving to cover a wider array of cloud services as enterprise IT systems are transformed, and inevitably impinging on - management - of services across multiple frequencies, whether managed from the cloud or the edge.

Bottom line is that next gen applications and services must exist across networks and devices; and most regulators and wireless companies, even those talking 5G, are focusing in the wrong direction. Imho.

Check out the Workplace as a Service White Paper released this spring from TM Forum for more info, and my recent article with Tyson Brooks, attached.

Article Securing Wireless Grids: Architecture Designs for Secure WiG...

Latest update, from WiGiT, and now also TM Forum Enterprise Cloud Leadership Council/Collabworx standards/Data Center of Future/Richer Services, Richer Ecosystems/Workplace as a Service/Cloud Mobility Catalyst Projects.

Join us in San Jose next October 28-31 at our TM Forum Americas Catalyst demos to see quality services delivered taking advantage of - a wide array - of service performance-enhancing metrics, and cloud service mechanisms. http://www.tmforum.org/ConferencesEvents/734/home.html#TRCEvents/Link51580

Ultimately, what matters is way beyond a simple speed formula. For the user the question is about how the application/device/network (and now cloud) performance is integrated in concert, not any of them being stand-alone things capable of delivering end to end service and quality of experience. Join WiGiT, and/or TM Forum, and pitch in!

More at: www.tmforum.org and http://wigit.ischool.syr.edu

Instead of grooming a number of wireless technologies all of can globally contribute for one technology (LTE / LTE-A) and further we can work on different attributes..

Not at all, there is plenty of activity in standardisation if you just look around. 5G research is just starting to get to high gear even though the exact contents of what it will be are not locked in yet. In the IEEE forum, there are a lot of projects working on 802.11 improvements for security, smart grids, etc. Also the 802.15 Working group is working on mesh under routing, peer aware communications, key management protocols, ultra low power PHY, etc. Ad hoc LTE is a topic of significant interest as well as database based spectrum reuse. EC is regulating 700 MHz band for healthcare wireless applications that will acquire significant interest, for example ETSI SmartBan standardisation.

There is a definite difference between,n 3G and 4G, however consumers and stakeholders in general will need to see a compelling performance increase. The hardware can definitely handle he load but must be more standardized. The signal reception complication must be addressed accordingly.

The only difference between 3G and 4G is the marketing pitch. Everything else is the same, including speeds. Serious people do not lament 4G as something real. It is a broken promise and nothing else.

urrently WIFI offload covers about 80% od mobile data traffic. Until mobile operators implement unlimited flat rate tariffs on their data trasmission, people will probably prefer downloading of huge files by some other means.

Well 5G is on its way but still at preliminary stage. New techs such as massive mimo, use of millimeter waves and new waveforms can be used to increase the overall data rate and reduce interference. But definitely this would come at a cost becasue like the switch between 3G to 4G had a very high price due to a complete infrastructure change, 5G will also require to be very expensive.

In that case it is doomed.

Every successful technology so far was cheap and easy on batteries.

Every unsuccessful technology on the other hand was expensive and was hogging batteries, say Iridium for example.

Pitching 5G as a complicated technology means it will be energy inefficient, and expensive, thus doomed for failure.

Well Davor for 5G research is going on for Green technology. Take for example Spatial modulation techniques and small dense networks with low power base stations. So in my opinion 5G networks would be more energy efficient.

It could be so, but let's take a look at the options at hand.

To make any use of space diversity for improving link capacity, data stream must be divided into separate streams that have some sort of orthogonality. Frequency, code, polarisation ... anything. Supplying separate antennas with each such stream is going to work, yet in that case your system becomes more complex. In traditional wireless it is called "air combining".

Going for a complex modulation scheme is a miss because it simply can't get green. Complex modulations are a consequence of necessity in overcrowded low microwave bands, and they make perfectly no sense if you can play with many antennas.

So in effect, such system can be energy efficient, yet the antenna system will become complex.

High costs accompanied with complex antennas can be avoided in case antennas are integrated on the same PCB as everything else, and it requires mm waves.

Yeah, if designed very carefully, and if it is manufactured as a single and simple module at low price, and no "extras" are thrown in by marketing ... it could work.

I think that phenomena is related to technology life cycle, when there is a need for new technology different vendors try to suggest system and idea to be pioneer at the market, then things converge to objective solution. Similar phenomena we had when trying to transmit data over copper wire in the eights, different standards appeared to save the companies investment to subscriber copper, local loop. I think the phenomena depends on market rather on technology.

new technologies always generate the need for new standards. Without standards diffrent vendors will implements diffrent systems which will make compatibility problems for most of the end users. However, the OSI is the general platform and framework standard for all standards.