• On TechRepublic: Windows 7 report card: Hits and misses
February 20, 2009 10:30 AM PST

Q&A: Verizon's CTO digs into 4G

by Marguerite Reardon
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 12 comments

BARCELONA--So what's a big CDMA operator like Verizon Wireless doing at a conference hosted by the GSM Association?

Well, it looks like the old technology wars that divided the wireless industry are being laid to rest as operators begin marching toward building the next-generation 4G networks. While there are still technology debates, most of the world's mobile operators, including nearly every GSM provider, are planning to use the same technology to build their 4G networks.

Dick Lynch,
Verizon CTO

(Credit: Verizon)

This is a very big deal for the wireless industry, which has suffered from infighting and technology incompatibilities over the years.

As one of the biggest CDMA operators now embraces the same technology path as the GSM community, there is finally hope for peace and seamless worldwide roaming.

As a result, Verizon Wireless, the largest carrier in the U.S. and one of the largest CDMA operators in the world, made its first official appearance at the 2009 GSMA Mobile World Congress here this week. Dick Lynch, chief technology officer at parent company Verizon Communications, gave a keynote speech and dished out the details on the company's soon-to-be-built 4G wireless network that uses a technology called Long Term Evolution, or LTE.

CNET News sat down with Lynch after his speech to get more details on the network's launch and to find out what's happening with Verizon's Open Development Initiative. Below is an edited version of the conversation.

Q: This is your first time at Mobile World Congress, right? Why hasn't Verizon been here before? It is the largest wireless show in the world, after all.
Lynch: For one, we were invited this time.

Really, that's why you hadn't come before? You weren't invited?
Lynch: Not really. I'm joking. But seriously the more important question is what do we see in Mobile World Congress now? And the answer is, if you go back some years, we went down a certain technology path, and it wasn't well represented here. But now we've reached a point--and other carriers around the world--are reaching a point where we have to make a decision about 4G. And we made the choice of LTE. It also happens to be the path for GSM carriers, so it's a logical time for us to come together.

Vittorio Colao, CEO of Vodafone, said during his keynote speech this week that growth in mobile data will soon put a significant strain on current 3G networks. How much headroom does Verizon Wireless have left in its 3G network?
Lynch: In terms of adding more capacity, there's still a lot we can do. There's cell splitting, for example. But we're in a better position than Vittorio is. He has different amounts of spectrum in different countries, and so he has different technologies allocated for different spectrum bands. He is more limited too because of regulatory issues--whereas we have a lot more options and are able to grow.

But Verizon is working on its 4G network. This might suggest that Verizon is running out of 3G capacity. How long before Verizon's 3G network is tapped out?
Lynch: We could go for years on our 3G architecture by adding capacity. And there are a lot of things you can do to add capacity. But they're all more costly than moving to 4G, and they offer the same performance people experience today. And eventually, we think customers will find that insufficient for what they want to do in the future.

We can continue to add capacity, but we think in the next two to three to four years that consumer expectations will outclass the 3G network. That's why we are moving so quickly. We want to be there when the first wave of customers feels like 3G is not really fast enough.

How are you planning to roll out the new networks? Will there be devices that handle both 3G and 4G?
Lynch: Yes, there will devices that do both. What is important to our customers is ubiquity even from year one. So where LTE is available initially in our top markets, people will use that. And where it's not yet available, they'll fall back to EV-DO.

There will likely be more 3G coverage in year one than by year five. We will follow a similar plan to how we rolled out our 3G network. So initially there will be some subset of the entire country with 4G coverage, and we will expand that coverage every year.

How quickly will you be able to get LTE rolled out?
Lynch: We're going to follow the model we used in rolling out EV-DO. And we'll be aggressive about the roll-out in 2010. So if you look at the rate we did with EV-DO, I'd say for year one, we could do 25 to 30 major markets. That is probably reasonable. Just like we did with EV-DO, we will initially offer the service for PC cards and dongle devices. That's the easiest form factor, and it's the customer subset that can most benefit from the much faster speeds right way. After that we will follow with handsets.

During your keynote at Mobile World Congress, you outlined a road map for deploying LTE. Will the current economic environment affect those plans?
Lynch: If by the current economic environment, you mean Verizon's current position relative to the rest of the world, then what we have announced (Wednesday) is consistent with what we hope we can do in 2010. But I reserve the right to adjust that if things for Verizon get worse. If that were to happen, we may choose to adjust. But we are fairly bullish on our ability to do this.

Verizon announced the Open Device Initiative in late 2007, and you said during your keynote here that you think it's been a success. But I haven't seen any handsets announced, nor have I heard of any pricing plan for the service. So what's going on?
Lynch: Most of the early devices on ODI have been unique devices that are focused on specific applications. There are a couple that are using the network for telemetry in unusual places, and some other specific devices such as specialized laptops.

What about the handsets? I think that when this initiative was announced most people thought that Verizon was creating an environment where users could bring any handset to the Verizon network.
Lynch: Well, it typically takes about 18 to 24 months to develop and take to market a new handset. So if you're looking for phones, it's too soon. The fact that there aren't many handset manufacturers that have gone through the ODI certification process is more a result of how much time it takes to deliver that product than it has to do with us.

Also, we really look at ODI as a nontraditional catalyst for developing new products and applications (rather) than another way of offering phone service. That will be part of it, but there will also be devices like blood-pressure monitors that use the network.

I think you're starting from the premise that ODI is all about the consumer handset market, and I'm starting at the point of looking at it as the future vision of wireless connectivity. Consumers might not yet be aware of devices that could connect to this network.

You have explained that both on the Open Development network as well as on the new 4G LTE network you envision all kinds of devices being used instead of just handsets. How is that going to change your business model? You'll have to change or adapt the service plans, won't you?
Lynch: I think in the future we will see data pricing based on usage. We don't expect customers who have a device that works once a week and pushes 50 bytes across the network to pay the same as a customer using 50MB a day. So the rate will be variable based upon usage. There will be a variety of pricing arrangements to allow for aggregation.

So you don't see wireless broadband services being offered like traditional broadband? For example, at home I pay for a single broadband connection and I can attach any device to it. And I can use as many devices as I want on my network.
Lynch: No, I don't. The wireless network unlike our fiber network, Fios, has a capacity issue. On fiber, the bandwidth is yours and you pay for it. But in wireless you have resource scarcity. So someone using 50 times more bandwidth than everyone is using should be expected to pay more. That's why I think there will be usage-based plans. But that doesn't mean we can't package services to get a single price for different devices. We're still working on the pricing.

Marguerite Reardon has been a CNET News reporter since 2004, covering cell phone services, broadband, citywide Wi-Fi, the Net neutrality debate, as well as the ongoing consolidation of the phone companies. E-mail Maggie.
Recent posts from 3GSM blog
Adios, Barcelona: GSMA 2009 wrap-up
Photos: Windows Mobile smartphones you can't have
Q&A: Verizon's CTO digs into 4G
Finally...something interesting in Skymall
GSMA: Sights from the show floor
Android skips Barcelona's mobile-phone party
Nokia 5630 Xpress Music on video
Google shows Web-based offline Gmail on iPhone
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (12 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by paradym February 20, 2009 11:02 AM PST
i'm getting really frustrated with these companies. i don't understand why it's so hard for them to offer services based on usage, without committing to a contract. i'd happily pay a monthly base fee, say $10, then be charged for what i use. for example, i rarely use phone service. my plan is the minimum 450 minutes per month, with rollover for unused. right now i have over 3000 rollover minutes. i might use 120 minutes in a busy month, at best. but i text all the time, and i access the web often. really irritating.
Reply to this comment
by kevron75 February 21, 2009 9:41 AM PST
Can you say prepaid?!
by tyler_rocks_09 February 21, 2009 3:34 PM PST
Verizon DOES have something like this.

You get unlimited text, and web browsing for a low price.
by dracoaffectus February 24, 2009 12:15 AM PST
I think the basic reason for the contract is that the company usually subsidizes your phone. For example an iPhone actually costs about $600. But when you go to AT&T to buy your iPhone, you only pay $200 because AT&T pays the other $400 for you. In exchange for this subsidy, they want a guarantee that you're going to use their service for a certain length of time, which I feel is completely legitimate.

I do also see the point in not having contracts since it allows consumers to feel free to change service providers, so I think the wireless providers should have an option to allow consumers to pay full price for a phone and then be billed month-to-month, rather than being locked into a 2 year contract. Meaning you'd pay full price for the phone, and then get a bill every month for the service you signed up for, until you cancel. And you should be able to sign up for the same plans that contract-customers get, I just checked a few prepaid plans and some of them (read: Verizon) suck. (http://www.prepaidreviews.com/verizon.html) Hmm, I think the pricing details would have to be worked out, but I feel my idea is still good.
by rmarsolek June 3, 2009 1:07 PM PDT
Can you say... Whiner!!!
by another_cissp February 20, 2009 11:11 AM PST
I think Verizons so called 3G network is already maxed out. I live and work in down town Tampa and my phone spends half of the time in 1X mode now. I assume this is because the EV-DO network is maxed out here and not because I am too far from a Verizon cell tower. I have lived and worked in the same area and have watched the Verizon network slowed to a crawl over the last 2 years. I even had to abandon my sling box mobile last year.
Reply to this comment
by superswiss February 20, 2009 12:08 PM PST
"We want to be there when the first wave of customers feels like 3G is not really fast enough."

I'm here... Can you hear me now? Ok, I'm currently not a Verizon customer, but 3G has never really been fast enough.
Reply to this comment
by kevron75 February 21, 2009 9:43 AM PST
Verizon's 3G may be faster than what your current company is. I run a Verizon aircard and consistently get 1.0 to 1.2 Mbps. I'd say that's pretty darn good for almost no signal!
by superswiss February 21, 2009 12:19 PM PST
I wouldn't be surprised if Verizon is better, but I get around those speeds as well. 1.0 Mbps is fine if you just browse the web, but try streaming video at a decent resolution. The bigger problem with this networks is latency. I'd be interested to find out how well sites like hulu.com work over your aircard.
by James5mith February 23, 2009 3:40 AM PST
All that talk about usage models and a pay per usage architecture, and no one asked him about the difference between $.002 and .002¢ ??

Rolling out 4G won't help if they can't decide what exactly the are going to advertise and charge for the service.
Reply to this comment
by rmarsolek June 3, 2009 1:12 PM PDT
4G in being tested in Baltimore and working great... they should move the technology... first... to the cities with bigger bases... this is usually done last... but needs to be worked on. And I'm in Philly... knowing... that 4G will get everywhere else but here... first... very annoying... you get me VERIZON here... at 4G and you got a new client for life.
by aparish21 July 18, 2009 7:07 PM PDT
@rmarsolek
- Clearwire is expected to light up Philly by the end of this year with it's Clear 4G WiMAX network. Give it a shot.
Reply to this comment
(12 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

About 3GSM blog

The GSMA 3GSM World Congress show highlights the latest in hot cell phones, accessories, services, and industry trends. CNET brings you the top wireless news from the conference.

Add this feed to your online news reader

3GSM blog topics