Verizon

What's better than one Android tablet on Verizon? How about tablet(s). Big Red CEO Lowell McAdam said as much over the weekend at the Reuters Global Technology Summit in New York. But before we get to that, let's talk LTE -- Verizon's 4G network that it expects to have ready to rock in the first half of next year. McAdam said three to five LTE-capable phones will be ready by May 2011 (at least one of those has to be Android, right?), with Motorola, HTC, LG and RIM among the manufacturers.

Then there are the tablets. Yes, McAdam said "Android tablets," as in more than one, and Motorola, LG and Samsung were named as the birthers, which would launch late this year as 3G devices but would be upgradeable to LTE later on, most likely. [Reuters] Thanks to everyone who sent this in.

 

Reader comments

Verizon CEO says LTE Android tablets will debut next year

7 Comments

So much for those 25 to 30 markets Verizon said they would have by the end of 2010. This is clearly a sign (as some have touched on) Verizon is running into trouble with LTE. Verizons network is not compatible with the LTE 700Mhz spectrum they purchased, At&t has a compatible network, they will have a much easier time converting their network/towers. Oh, this should put to rest, the 4G iphone on Verizon. I suspect Verizon will go ahead with plan B, which is EVDO Rev-B. Verizon has too much pride to say: "Hey Sprint, can-I get some of that Wimax"?

@oneAwake how do you come to that conclusion? Do you have some sort of inside info? From what I gather from this news is that Verizon has a impressively optimistic outlook on the. future of their LTE network. The collection of manufacturers must believe in the power of Big Red too.

Unlike the LTE At&t and Verizon will deploy, Wimax is not built on top of existing infrastructure, LTE is from the GSM cloth. LTE will be built on existing infrastructure, At&t has the benefit of already being on a GSM network, less money spent for conversion, At&t will have less of a headache converting as well. Verizon coming from CDMA, has nothing compatible with the type of GSM needed. That coupled with, it will cost Verizon a lot more to convert than At&t. The problems At&t is experiencing with their piggybacked GSM network, will continue on LTE. Due the fact LTE will be piggybacked as well. Verizon will have a piggybacked network also. That is why CDMA has superior voice quality and less dropped calls than on GSM. CDMA is not piggybacked.

Actually both Verizon and AT&T are going to have some issues with 4G networks unless some revolutionary technology comes out to help them. This is what makes the Sprint Clearwire (of which Sprint owns 57% of) partnership so intriguing not to mention the backing of some really huge corporations like Google...Comcast...Time Warner...etc. They have some of the best Spectrum available and TONS of it. Looks like that Nextel purchase, the one that almost sank Sprint, may actually pay some dividends.

FYI, the spectrum Sprint has will be able to carry tons of data, 4 times the amount that V or T are expected to be using. The downside is the penetration (did I seriously just use that word) wont be as good but you can always build more towers to improve that. More towers wont help you spectrum carry more data...so I really think Sprint has a huge advantage here with the spectrum holdings they own.

Exactly, I am still puzzled as to why Verizon chose the type of LTE they did. LTE-Advanced would have been perfect. The only thing I can think of is, Verizon did not have the funding to raise new infrastructure, or they did not want to follow Sprint again, like they did with CDMA. For those wondering what the difference is between LTE and LTE-Advanced, look here: http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/lte.htm

I too would like to know why oneAwake thinks 700Mhz is a problem for LTE. There is nothing about the frequency range that is incompatible with LTE. LTE, like GSM, encompases a suite of things (not just radio frequency) and could be run over any frequency range.

700Mhz has greater range, and penetration than the 1900 and 2100 bands, but lower data rates. Lower data rates mean ONLY that fewer phones could be handled per channel, not that any given phone would see lower data rates. Great for more rural areas.

You can build multiple bands into a receiver, and an ideal phone would handle some bands ones as well as some high bands.

But nothing about that spectrum is incompatible with LTE. Further, since LTE supports scalable carrier bandwidths (variable width channels) it can adjust on the fly for the band being used.

Lowel McAdam is just announcing this to get hype off Sprint's 4G network. He knows his company, that makes 4 times the profit of Sprint, was beaten to a national 4G network, and he doesn't like it.

LTE is a GSM based technology, it will be extremely expensive for Verizon to switch to LTE.

See, the issue that ATT had with 3G deployment (and T-Mobile) is that their technologies were very difficult to upgrade to the kind of technology they needed for 3G. This is the reason why ATT and T-Mobile have such small 3G networks.

Verizon is going to make the same mistake. They are going to have a tough time expanding their 4G network, just as ATT has problems expanding their 3G network. The jump from 2G to 3G from a CDMA carrier is much easier and cost-effective. This is why Sprint and Verizon have the largest 3G networks.

Sprint used wimax for its 4G network, which is a different technology, yes, but they had another company (which they on a majority share of) build the network, thus, reducing their cost and increasing effectiveness. They did not have to build on top of the network they already had, they simply added to it. Verizon will build on its current infrastructure.

This means that you can say bye bye to the promises that McAdam said about 4G deployment in Verizon's network. I am 99% sure they will fall behind or incur extreme costs.