Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

New Mobile Network Technology at 2.5 GB/Second? 21

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the yet-another-claim-and-i-keep-hoping dept.
craig.hathaway writes to tell us that Japan's NTT DoCoMo claims to have a prototype wireless network capable of speeds up to 2.5 GB per second. From the article: "MIMO (multiple input, multiple output) uses multiple antennas to send and receive data, as well as specific coding that scrambles and unscrambles the signals produced by those antennas (see "Faster, Farther Wi-Fi"). A base station that uses MIMO technology has multiple antennas that simultaneously receive and send data to and from wireless devices. Unlike base stations with a single antenna, those with MIMO use the multiple antennas to create a number of intertwining channels through which data moves. The jumbled signals are untangled by a 'signal processing' that sorts through the bits."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Mobile Network Technology at 2.5 GB/Second?

Comments Filter:
  • Hash checking?? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jakob777 (322558) on Tuesday June 20, 2006 @06:26AM (#15567696)
    I see this as a bigger scale form of a bit torrent, wouldent you receive several of the same package for different channels?

    I could see this making mobile computing something more then it is, I know in the high end range of phones there are small computers basically in the users pocket, but this might allow it to become more of a standard and the phones we see as high priced will one day become the one we get free at sign up. Good luck to them I say
  • so in other words a beowulf cluster of antennas (and I am assuming here separate transmitters)...doesnt seem groundbreaking to me...can someone enlighten me as to whats so special??
    • Re:cluster? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Vo0k (760020)
      The clustering itself - splitting the signal into multiple paralell streams, not such a simple deal (though certainly in use already) plus availablity, this is WiFi, for home and office, not intercontinental WAN. This technology hasn't been applied to WiFi until now yet.

      Of course the review being written by a retard for retards is a different matter.
    • Why bother fractal antennas can broadcast and recive on multipule wavelengthsin one antenna right now. All the benfits of a whip and a phased array in one device.

      http://www.fractenna.com/ [fractenna.com]
  • So? (Score:4, Informative)

    by emkman (467368) on Tuesday June 20, 2006 @06:30AM (#15567712)
    802.11(pre)N and Super Duper Ultra G routers have had MIMO for some time now. I guess this is new because it was rolled out on a larger scale?
  • by Vo0k (760020) on Tuesday June 20, 2006 @07:03AM (#15567803) Journal
    ...but the review sounds like written by a complete clueless moron.

    "The new computer has more gigabytes than the old computer and thanks to these all additional megabytes it's faster. The bits get computered in the additional gigabytes and each gigabyte can work separately so more bits can be computered at the same time resulting in faster computering by the computer."
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Seriously. I've been using several MIMO devices for months now trying to find the right one. And then they post an article where the larger of the only two paragraphs is dedicated to explaining MIMO as if it's brand new.
  • by damburger (981828) on Tuesday June 20, 2006 @07:24AM (#15567854)

    "fast enough to download a DVD movie in between 7.5 and 10 seconds -- to a mobile device traveling at 20 kilometers per hour."

    Hopefully, at some point they will develop a technology that will let you download movies without running 50 metres.

  • Serial vs. Parallel (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mikeage (119105) <slashdot&mikeage,net> on Tuesday June 20, 2006 @07:37AM (#15567890) Homepage
    Excuse my ignorance, but isn't this simply a case of converting what used to be a serial protocol into a parallel version?

    Are we going to see a serial version come back in 5 years, which will be much faster due to the lack of syncronization overhead required?
  • The slashdot headline and summary both say GB, while the article clearly states gigabits. It's annoying enough when adverts, stores, etc mix up g/G, m/M, b/B, etc, but it's verging on unforgivable when slashdot mixes up bits and Bytes...
  • IEEE Spectrum (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Eh, I've seen this reported [ieee.org] in the IEEE Spectrum.

    Nothing interesting here -- they say that currently they use fridge-sized receiver; the technology is
    not quite there yet.
  • Uselss (Score:3, Insightful)

    by VincenzoRomano (881055) on Tuesday June 20, 2006 @09:19AM (#15568422) Homepage Journal
    All these technologies risk to become useless because they need time to enter the market in a stable way and time to stabilise and cheapen the technology itself.
    Think about the notorious 3G [wikipedia.org] and 4G [wikipedia.org]: a lot of buzzing, but too far from the GSM (aka 2G [wikipedia.org]) and GPRS (aka 2,5G [wikipedia.org]) to be considered a real and useful techology advance,
    They should be bale to produce a mobile device able to operate and roam over three or four different network technologies (GSM/GPRS, UMTS, WiFi and 4G) with cost as low as a GSM phone. And it should be cheap enough to be adopted by more and more operators.
    This sounds more like a dream than an actual business plan!

  • I had a chance to play with this prototype a little while back. It was great to work with, but I noticed that the candy bars in my pocket kept melting and I haven't seen my dog in days...
  • And knowing DoCoMo they're going to still charge for that insane bitrate by the packet.

    Holy crap, in just three seconds I rang up half a year's salary worth of charges!

To understand a program you must become both the machine and the program.

Working...