backtop

Gadgets China Goes 4G, Bypasses 3G
Nirav Sanghani (Blog) - January 30, 2007 9:00 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 49 comment(s) - last by hakone.. on Feb 2 at 11:29 PM
4G wireless technologies in test period in mainland China

China's mainland has completely bypassed the release of 3G communication devices and has moved right ahead to 4G.  China’s first 4th generation mobile phone was launched Sunday in Shanghai's Changning district.  Thanh Nien Daily reports that the release has come after a field test in October of 2006 and the rollout of the technology totals roughly 150 million yuan ($19.2 million USD). 

The new 4G system provides wireless transmission speeds of up to 100Mbps, which is much faster than current generation technologies, running at speeds that match optical fiber.  "It testifies that the technology we've developed is feasible and brings us one step closer to put it into commercial use," said You Xiaohu, a leading expert involved in the program.

The 4G research program was first initiated in 2001, dubbed the FuTURE Project (Future Technology for Universal Radio Environment), as part of China's high-tech development plan.  It is composed of 10 leading domestic institutions.  

According to Tech News World, the project has obtained more than 200 patents, positioning China as the frontrunner in 4G technologies research.  It has the goal to be put into trial commercial use between 2006 and 2010.  In that time, the project will also conduct field tests before its trial commercial launch. 

With this technology said to be the standard by 2010, the first licenses have not been issued yet, and China still has yet to sign agreements with any providers until the field tests are complete.

Samsung has already released 4G technologies in South Korea with the same capabilities and it seems that China is taking a big step to become a major player in communication technologies.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Is 4G necessary?
By BeastieBoy on 1/30/2007 9:24:35 AM , Rating: 2
Is this another one of those "here's some new tech, now try and find a use for it" product launches? I mean, is 100Mbps really necessary on a mobile phone?

Maybe it is and I'm just not putting mine to good use.

Cheers, Beastie.




RE: Is 4G necessary?
By bunnyfubbles on 1/30/2007 9:49:04 AM , Rating: 2
mobile video conference phones?


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By BeastieBoy on 1/30/2007 10:05:55 AM , Rating: 2
But 100Mbs.......?
How many people can you speak to at once. With modern compression codecs, and the tiny resolution that would be used for the video (due to screen size), you could conference in excess of 100 people. How could you fit that many on the screen?


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By FITCamaro on 1/30/2007 12:29:37 PM , Rating: 4
You need to be able to video conference on your cell phone? Hell even in Star Trek they just had audio. I don't know what people's fascination with being able to see who you're talking to on the phone is. What then you don't even have to go visit people to see them making humans even more antisocial?

I use my cell phone for phone calls. Yes I understand people who want a planner or basic email access (my uncle is a VP at Motorola and has the latest phones) but how much do you need to be able to do? And there's only so much you can do with a 2-3" screen.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By BladeVenom on 1/30/2007 12:33:54 PM , Rating: 5
Wait till you can feel them through your cell phone. Phone sex will really be big then.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By Axbattler on 1/30/2007 2:20:56 PM , Rating: 3
Well, I wouldn't be surprised if some people already found use of the vibrate mode ;)

More seriously, at FITCamaro comment: while I am not a video conferencing person, but I do not have a problem with it either. I am not convinced that video technology renders people less sociable. I reckon that truely unsociable people wouldn't make calls often in the first place, let alone bother with such tech. People who are highly sociable, and who enjoy face to face contacts (*) on the other hand probably wouldn't use voice calls or even video conferencing as substitute to face to face meetings. However, I can see some appreciating video calls over plain calls, over plain text.

* It's worth noting that I do not consider people who prefers to socialise online/via chat as unsociable either. It may suggest that they are shy and/or lack certain social skills, but the fact that they do seek friendly interactions, if via an alternative route to face to face contact, suggests to me that they are still sociable creatures. Whether it is better to strip those technology and force them to meet people is something I find debatable.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By fbxcore on 1/31/2007 6:15:16 PM , Rating: 2
hahahaha


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By cocoman on 1/31/2007 7:52:21 AM , Rating: 2
There is lots of use for this technology. A few I can imagine and that would be posible with todays technology would be:
1. Forget about your ISP. With this bandwith you would use your phone connected to the pc to surf the internet.
2. Forget about cable TV. You can watch TV, on the phone, on the laptop and on your TV set, at the same time. You just need about 4mbs for each channel. This is already posible with 3G but only on the phones screen because of the low bandwith.
3. File sharing and messaging at the speeds of your regular ISP.
Of course all this will depend on the price. But just give it a few years and prices will compete with wired communications and cable TV.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By jak3676 on 1/30/2007 10:02:28 AM , Rating: 5
I can't say I'd do much with my cell phone, but I'd love to get download speeds like that on my laptop and not have to worry about wi-fi ranges. If you can roll out an infastructure that supports lots of users like that you can effectivly deliver broadband everywhere without the wireing.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By BeastieBoy on 1/30/2007 10:08:07 AM , Rating: 2
I have to admit, that would be good :)


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By deeznuts on 1/30/2007 1:11:28 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah he beat me to it, when I was reading this I was thinking "f the phone, I want my laptop to be able to reach this"

Currently cingular edge and the sprint service are somewhat lacking in download speeds.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By bkiserx7 on 1/30/2007 10:30:52 AM , Rating: 2
Broadband?!? Heck, Verizon's FiOS only gives you like 30/5.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By BadKarma on 1/30/2007 5:46:48 PM , Rating: 2
Verizon FIOS isn't available every where.
I would love it to be available in my area. Right now, Comcast just blows.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By jmunjr on 1/30/2007 8:58:21 PM , Rating: 2
His point was that even FIOS sucks


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By Teezer on 1/30/2007 10:09:20 AM , Rating: 2
If you have billion$ of free money why not? But Only Shanghai could use all advantages presented by 4g tech. IMO

I am very interested there are any differences between phones for 3G and 4G?


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 1/30/2007 11:02:24 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
but Only Shanghai could use all advantages presented by 4g tech.


Or Shenzhen. Or Beijing. Or Hong Kong, Macau, Tianjin, Wuhan, Guangzhou, Xian, Nanjing.... and those are just the ones with free economic zones.



RE: Is 4G necessary?
By TimberJon on 1/30/2007 12:04:05 PM , Rating: 2
Reminds me of playing Front Mission 3..


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By desdemonia on 1/30/2007 10:58:14 AM , Rating: 2
Lets say a phone conversation requires a data rate of 2kbps, on todays wireless networks you could fit maybe 8 or so phone conversations per channel depending on the technology. With this new data rate of 100kbps you can fit many more.

So with the increase in data rate the capacity per channel of phone calls increases as well.


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By ThisSpaceForRent on 1/30/2007 11:30:40 AM , Rating: 2
The way it was explained to me by an engineer at Motorola is that the base stations can only handle so many calls period. They don't work like a hub, each call has it's own computer handling the call. The base stations that I worked on were modular, but could only handle a maximum of 32 calls per station. These were also stations designed for use in Asian markets only (transmission frequency and size was different from base stations in US markets).


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By oTAL (blog) on 1/30/2007 12:27:07 PM , Rating: 2
A station can be limited by bandwidth limited or processing power. Still, the article has nothing to do with phone calls anymore. Those are soooooo 20th century ;)
With this kind of bandwidth you could have over 500 CD-quality conversations at the same time, on the same phone.
This tech is about conversion. Imagine using your laptop anywhere constantly connected! Imagine seeing 10 different camera feeds from security cameras in your home or office, while you're on the other side of the planet. And you could even control their movements if they were enabled for that! Those are all possible with this kind of bandwidth.
Remote software becomes a possibility... remote gaming, remote everything....
Remote music learning (with VERY good audio equipment on both ends) is possible at these data rates. Several DVD quality video conferences... You name it... the applications are endless....


RE: Is 4G necessary?
By oTAL (blog) on 1/30/2007 12:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
Dude... you are soooooooooooo of target that I don't even know where to start...
You've written so many nonsense it's really hard to finger them all, but I'll try.
1. Have you ever heard an mp3 with 2kbps? A lot more is necessary... For good audio quality (music grade) at least 64kbps, but for voice communications 12kbps can suffice. Not sure on the boundaries of current audio compression technology but 2kbps is too low...
2. Today's wireless technologies are WAY better than 16kbps. With 3.5G you can get over 1mbps. That is widespread technology. EDGE
3. This new data rate is NOT 100kbps. It's 100mbps. Do you get the difference? 1000 times what you perceived...

Don't take this the wrong way as I don't want to offend you in any way... but if you are as clueless as you seem, you should read more and write less ;)
After some time investment in that, you'll be ready to provide a valuable opinion. When it is a worthless one, you might as well keep it for yourself.

Cheers,
Nuno