Is Verizon Feeling the WiMax Heat?

they are going to open their network in 2008 so a person can buy a
device in any store and then register it on the Verizon network.

dan@nospam.com wrote:
> they are going to open their network in 2008 so a person can buy a
> device in any store and then register it on the Verizon network.
Really?

http://news.vzw.com/news/2007/11/pr2007-11-27.html
"In early 2008, the company will publish the technical standards the
development community will need to design products to interface with the
Verizon Wireless network. Any device that meets the minimum technical
standard will be activated on the network. Devices will be tested and
approved in a $20 million state-of-the-art testing lab which received an
additional investment this year to gear up for the anticipated new demand"

For a start Verizon has a CDMA network and GSM phones will not work.

dan@nospam.com wrote:
> they are going to open their network in 2008 so a person can buy a
> device in any store and then register it on the Verizon network.

You saw what they wanted, now read their announcement for content. It is
megacorp marketing speak.

dan@nospam.com wrote:
> they are going to open their network in 2008 so a person can buy a
> device in any store and then register it on the Verizon network.

Only if said store sells a CDMA device. You won't be able to go into a
Cingular/AT&T or T-Mobile store and expect their GSM handsets to work on
Verizon's CDMA network.

DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> hath wroth:

>dan@nospam.com wrote:
>> they are going to open their network in 2008 so a person can buy a
>> device in any store and then register it on the Verizon network.
>
>Only if said store sells a CDMA device. You won't be able to go into a
>Cingular/AT&T or T-Mobile store and expect their GSM handsets to work on
>Verizon's CDMA network.

Did you notice the emphasis on the word "device"? I don't think they
mean handsets. My guess(tm) is that Verizon is targetting iPhone like
devices, as well as micro-cellular devices, cheaper GPS tracking
devices, and SCADA like devices. In other words, this is Verizon's
way of admitting that they blew it with the iPhone and is trying to
put a positive spin on the damage control.

I can't wait to see the price tag on the official Verizon standards
and certification.






--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

> Did you notice the emphasis on the word "device"? I don't think they
> mean handsets.

The new Amazon e-book reader uses EVDO. Interestingly without requiring the
user to have any sort of cellular contract. Must be handled at the Amazon
end.

> I can't wait to see the price tag on the official Verizon standards
> and certification.

That and the probable "activation" fee and monthly surcharges they'll try
charging the users for the privilege of that 'foreign' device.

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 21:03:57 -0500, "Bill Kearney"
<wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote:

>> Did you notice the emphasis on the word "device"? I don't think they
>> mean handsets.

>The new Amazon e-book reader uses EVDO. Interestingly without requiring the
>user to have any sort of cellular contract. Must be handled at the Amazon
>end.

Nice. I didn't know that. Wireless DRM in action.

>> I can't wait to see the price tag on the official Verizon standards
>> and certification.
>
>That and the probable "activation" fee and monthly surcharges they'll try
>charging the users for the privilege of that 'foreign' device.

Yep. Someone has to pay for the $20 million test laboratory. I
wonder if they'll also do the necessary FCC type certification tests?

It's also possible that Verizon will charge through the nose for
copies of the standard, and make it impossible for anyone to pass.
There's also no way that anyone can write an airtight functionality
standard and get it right the first time. It took several years to
shake out DOCSIS compliance testing. Fortunately, there are existing
WCDMA and CDMA2000 compliance test suites for Verizon to plagiarize.
However, my guess is that they'll throw in something disgusting, like
mandatory QoS and throttling of specific protocols in order to "insure
the integrity of the network". I can't wait to see the legal releases
required indemnifying Verizon for possible patent infringement.
Naturally, it will favor devices that are BREW based, and not Java. My
fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to screw
it up.

What does Verizon’s open-access network option mean for you?
<http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/112807-verizon-analysis.html>
Kinda looks like the pundits are as confused as I am.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

> My fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to screw
> it up.

Amend that to "deliberately screw it up".

"Bill Kearney" <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> hath wroth:

>> My fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to screw
>> it up.

>Amend that to "deliberately screw it up".

I don't think such things are ever done deliberately. The Ouija Board
that controls large corporations tends to produce output, even if
nobody appears to be deliberately moving things or is at the controls.
Perhaps the Verizon engineering department has taken over control of
the company? Dunno, but stranger things have happened to cause such a
dramatic reversal in company policy.

I've seen several companies go trough reversals in corporate policy
and methodology. Intel magically became more user friendly, stopped
suing AMD, and fired most of their legal staff, when the FDIV bug
demonstrated that they apparently had become more interested in
litigation, than in technical excellence. At the time, Intel was
spending about $10 million per year doing nothing more than suing AMD.
I've also seen such drastic reversals in other companies. It's
usually the result of the board looking at the financial statement
(before it's obfuscated for public consumption) and finding that much
of the bottom line is being consumed by litigation, politics, bribes,
and other forms of non-productive corporate behavior. In this case,
perhaps someone thought that $20 million might be better spent towards
dominating their equipment vendors, than in suing the FCC, or in
patent litigation. It's difficult to tell from here, but if Verizon
also announces major changes in their legal department, methinks my
guess(tm) is correct.

It's also interesting to note the change in company tag line. It was
"Can you hear me now" which implied that someone wasn't paying
attention or listening. Now, that's morphed into "It's the network"
which seems to imply that one shouldn't ask questions of the wizard
behind the curtain of the mysterious ways in which Verizon's network
operates. Now that Verizon has announced the open access is going to
be it's new thing, there will probably need to be a new tag line and
probably a new color. Blood red just isn't going to work. Something
like paisley for color, and "Whatever you want, no matter how weird"
might be suitable. Maybe Alice and "Through the LCD glass" into the
world of Oz.

Incidentally, as a Verizon Wireless customer, I just discovered what
is required to reset the message waiting indicator on my cell phone. 4
people, 4 failures, and 4 days. I finally had to hard reset the phone
to defaults, reinstall all my apps, and restore my data. By late last
night, I was seeing Verizon blood red. Lacking anyone else to blame,
"It's the network".


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> "Bill Kearney" <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> hath wroth:
>
>>> My fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to screw
>>> it up.
>
>> Amend that to "deliberately screw it up".
>
> I don't think such things are ever done deliberately. The Ouija Board
> that controls large corporations tends to produce output, even if
> nobody appears to be deliberately moving things or is at the controls.
> Perhaps the Verizon engineering department has taken over control of
> the company? Dunno, but stranger things have happened to cause such a
> dramatic reversal in company policy.
>
> I've seen several companies go trough reversals in corporate policy
> and methodology. Intel magically became more user friendly, stopped
> suing AMD, and fired most of their legal staff, when the FDIV bug
> demonstrated that they apparently had become more interested in
> litigation, than in technical excellence. At the time, Intel was
> spending about $10 million per year doing nothing more than suing AMD.
> I've also seen such drastic reversals in other companies. It's
> usually the result of the board looking at the financial statement
> (before it's obfuscated for public consumption) and finding that much
> of the bottom line is being consumed by litigation, politics, bribes,
> and other forms of non-productive corporate behavior. In this case,
> perhaps someone thought that $20 million might be better spent towards
> dominating their equipment vendors, than in suing the FCC, or in
> patent litigation. It's difficult to tell from here, but if Verizon
> also announces major changes in their legal department, methinks my
> guess(tm) is correct.
>
> It's also interesting to note the change in company tag line. It was
> "Can you hear me now" which implied that someone wasn't paying
> attention or listening. Now, that's morphed into "It's the network"
> which seems to imply that one shouldn't ask questions of the wizard
> behind the curtain of the mysterious ways in which Verizon's network
> operates. Now that Verizon has announced the open access is going to
> be it's new thing, there will probably need to be a new tag line and
> probably a new color. Blood red just isn't going to work. Something
> like paisley for color, and "Whatever you want, no matter how weird"
> might be suitable. Maybe Alice and "Through the LCD glass" into the
> world of Oz.
>
> Incidentally, as a Verizon Wireless customer, I just discovered what
> is required to reset the message waiting indicator on my cell phone. 4
> people, 4 failures, and 4 days. I finally had to hard reset the phone
> to defaults, reinstall all my apps, and restore my data. By late last
> night, I was seeing Verizon blood red. Lacking anyone else to blame,
> "It's the network".
>
>
I think someone in senior management has finally got fed up with the
incompatibility between the Verizon and Vodafone Networks and decided
they should have a common direction.

20th September
http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=134382
"Vodafone CEO Arun Sarin and Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ -
message board) CEO Ivan Seidenberg both told a Goldman Sachs & Co.
investor conference Wednesday that they are planning to use the same
technology in the next major evolution of their wireless networks, and
that the two companies are involved in LTE development work."

"Verizon Wireless currently has more than 62 million subscribers, while
Vodafone has more than 200 million customers around the world."


29th November
http://news.vzw.com/news/2007/11/pr2007-11-29.html
"The selection of LTE provides Verizon and Vodafone – joint owners of
U.S.-based Verizon Wireless – with a unique opportunity to adopt a
common access platform with true global scale and compatibility with
existing technologies of both companies."

Bill Kearney wrote:
>> My fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to screw
>> it up.
>
> Amend that to "deliberately screw it up".
>
>
When I was young and naive I used to think that big companies had all
sorts of smart people who knew what they were doing in charge. After I
worked for a few I realized that upper management typically consisted of
self centered ego centric people who had no clue if the company they
were running made fishing reels or space ships.

"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
news:a1tuk3la9t9k81gcv23ta1metl09he2b31@4ax.com...
| On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 21:03:57 -0500, "Bill Kearney"
| <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote:
|
| >> Did you notice the emphasis on the word "device"? I don't think they
| >> mean handsets.
|
| >The new Amazon e-book reader uses EVDO. Interestingly without requiring
the
| >user to have any sort of cellular contract. Must be handled at the
Amazon
| >end.
|
| Nice. I didn't know that. Wireless DRM in action.
|
| >> I can't wait to see the price tag on the official Verizon standards
| >> and certification.
| >
| >That and the probable "activation" fee and monthly surcharges they'll try
| >charging the users for the privilege of that 'foreign' device.
|
| Yep. Someone has to pay for the $20 million test laboratory. I
| wonder if they'll also do the necessary FCC type certification tests?
|
| It's also possible that Verizon will charge through the nose for
| copies of the standard, and make it impossible for anyone to pass.
| There's also no way that anyone can write an airtight functionality
| standard and get it right the first time. It took several years to
| shake out DOCSIS compliance testing. Fortunately, there are existing
| WCDMA and CDMA2000 compliance test suites for Verizon to plagiarize.
| However, my guess is that they'll throw in something disgusting, like
| mandatory QoS and throttling of specific protocols in order to "insure
| the integrity of the network". I can't wait to see the legal releases
| required indemnifying Verizon for possible patent infringement.
| Naturally, it will favor devices that are BREW based, and not Java. My
| fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to screw
| it up.
|
| What does Verizon's open-access network option mean for you?
| <http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/112807-verizon-analysis.html>
| Kinda looks like the pundits are as confused as I am.

It's been my experience that 'conformal testing' programs such as this
evolve to be profit centers to the sponsors. Good example is the CITA
Certification program for wireless phones. Despite hard assurances that the
test fees would be a function of the cost of testing the program quickly
evolved as a TAX to support other program completely unrelated to the
mission of the certification program.

"George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:c-qdnakCft3UMs3anZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@comcast.com...
| Bill Kearney wrote:
| >> My fertile imagination boggles at the possible ways for Verizon to
screw
| >> it up.
| >
| > Amend that to "deliberately screw it up".
| >
| >
| When I was young and naive I used to think that big companies had all
| sorts of smart people who knew what they were doing in charge. After I
| worked for a few I realized that upper management typically consisted of
| self centered ego centric people who had no clue if the company they
| were running made fishing reels or space ships.

It's the Monkey Tree management structure. Those on top look down and see
smiling faces. Those below look up and see A**H***s. (All too often
prefect A**H***s ... no hemorrhoids)

Having sat on both sides of the management table with VZN and it's
predecessors I can attest that the customer is not high on management's
list. Mostly viewed as a cash cow to be manipulated.

More troubling is the system seems to prevent those worker bees charged with
doing the job from doing the job they are paid to do.