News & Analysis
Comment
Keith Day
Femtocell offers are improving as the device costs come down with volume ...
mogulman52
I just had my first experience with a Femtocell. My daughters college has ...
Femtocells lure embattled net operators
Junko Yoshida
9/20/2010 9:59 AM EDT
NEW YORK – Femtocells, small basestations originally designed for homes or small businesses to extend cellular networks’ indoor service coverage, are poised to enter the public access infrastructure market, posing a possible disruption to the traditional macro basestation industry.
Suggesting this possibility is serious interest in femtocells among network operators in recent months. Inquiries are increasing, according to Lisa Su, senior vice president and general manager of networking and multimedia at Freescale Semiconductor. “I get femtocell questions a lot these days.”
Among commercial femtocell launches on the way this year are AT&T in the United States, Softbank in Japan and Vodafone in the U.K., as networks begin looking to add “small cells” to boost capacity.
PicoChip (Bath, the U.K.) last week unveiled a new femtocell chip specifically designed to support metro, rural and public access systems. Calling it a “basestation on a chip,” Rupert Baines, vice president of marketing at PicoChip, told EE Times that the new SoC enables small basestations for urban hot-spots, city-centers or public access to be made and deployed “at a fraction of cost of a quarter of a million dollar traditional basestation.”
Femtocells strengthen mobile phone signals where they’re weak or they don’t exist, by connecting to service provider’s network via broadband such as cable or DSL.
Where current designs typically support four active mobile phones in a residential home and 16 active mobile phones in enterprise settings, Baines said that PicoChip’s new chip can support 32 active phones outdoors -- where otherwise access would be limited or non-existent.
Active femtocell technology suppliers are also growing in numbers. The femtocell market is no longer a niche segment dominated by startups. Although Freescale is yet to announce its own femtocell chips, Su told EE Times that her company is developing “an innovative, scalable solution.”
Among others, Qualcomm has also jumped. Last week, ip.access, a manufacturer of femtocell and picocell products, announced a femtocell deal with the San Diego company. Under the agreement, Qualcomm will let ip.access develop WCDMA residential and enterprise femtocell products based on Qualcomm's Femtocell Station Modem chipset platform.
While noting that Qualcomm is “admittedly late to market,” Peter Jarich, who is responsible for service provider infrastructure at the market research firm Current Analysis, said, “So far they’ve got major deals with ZTE and Airwalk (for CDMA2000) and ip.access for WCDMA.” Jarich, however, also cautioned: “Take the ip.access deal. It doesn’t actually call for commercial development; it just gives ip.access an ability to develop with Qualcomm silicon.”
Near-term drivers for femtocells
Current Analysis’ Jarich, noted in his recent report, “Like any young market, the first commercial service launches take on a new significance. They provide insights into potential business models…They help to build ecosystem scale.” Jarich explained, “AT&T will deliver an example of broad-scale service deployment with complex spectrum planning. Softbank will be watched for insights into the ‘free’ model. Vodafone, as it builds on its services in the UK, will be watched for potential market-to-market synergies.”
According to an ABI Research note published in August, at least a million femtocells are expected to ship by the end of 2010. PicoChip’s Baines claims that a majority of such femtocells are using PicoChip’s SoC. The market research firm is now predicting more than 54 million femtocell shipments for 2015.
Pitching residential femtocells to consumers and operators should be straightforward. Consumers suffering from bad cell phone signal coverage indoors at home would love them; and operators – in theory – could enhance customer retention by offering unhappy clients a femtocell.
But in reality, some operators are struggling with the role of Wi-Fi in the home. If they can’t define a business model – how best to leverage broadband signals at home for connecting to their cellular network -- it may still take more time before they start shipping femtocells to home.
Next: Operators' pain points
Suggesting this possibility is serious interest in femtocells among network operators in recent months. Inquiries are increasing, according to Lisa Su, senior vice president and general manager of networking and multimedia at Freescale Semiconductor. “I get femtocell questions a lot these days.”
Among commercial femtocell launches on the way this year are AT&T in the United States, Softbank in Japan and Vodafone in the U.K., as networks begin looking to add “small cells” to boost capacity.
PicoChip (Bath, the U.K.) last week unveiled a new femtocell chip specifically designed to support metro, rural and public access systems. Calling it a “basestation on a chip,” Rupert Baines, vice president of marketing at PicoChip, told EE Times that the new SoC enables small basestations for urban hot-spots, city-centers or public access to be made and deployed “at a fraction of cost of a quarter of a million dollar traditional basestation.”
Femtocells strengthen mobile phone signals where they’re weak or they don’t exist, by connecting to service provider’s network via broadband such as cable or DSL.
Where current designs typically support four active mobile phones in a residential home and 16 active mobile phones in enterprise settings, Baines said that PicoChip’s new chip can support 32 active phones outdoors -- where otherwise access would be limited or non-existent.
Active femtocell technology suppliers are also growing in numbers. The femtocell market is no longer a niche segment dominated by startups. Although Freescale is yet to announce its own femtocell chips, Su told EE Times that her company is developing “an innovative, scalable solution.”
Among others, Qualcomm has also jumped. Last week, ip.access, a manufacturer of femtocell and picocell products, announced a femtocell deal with the San Diego company. Under the agreement, Qualcomm will let ip.access develop WCDMA residential and enterprise femtocell products based on Qualcomm's Femtocell Station Modem chipset platform.
While noting that Qualcomm is “admittedly late to market,” Peter Jarich, who is responsible for service provider infrastructure at the market research firm Current Analysis, said, “So far they’ve got major deals with ZTE and Airwalk (for CDMA2000) and ip.access for WCDMA.” Jarich, however, also cautioned: “Take the ip.access deal. It doesn’t actually call for commercial development; it just gives ip.access an ability to develop with Qualcomm silicon.”
Near-term drivers for femtocells
Current Analysis’ Jarich, noted in his recent report, “Like any young market, the first commercial service launches take on a new significance. They provide insights into potential business models…They help to build ecosystem scale.” Jarich explained, “AT&T will deliver an example of broad-scale service deployment with complex spectrum planning. Softbank will be watched for insights into the ‘free’ model. Vodafone, as it builds on its services in the UK, will be watched for potential market-to-market synergies.”
According to an ABI Research note published in August, at least a million femtocells are expected to ship by the end of 2010. PicoChip’s Baines claims that a majority of such femtocells are using PicoChip’s SoC. The market research firm is now predicting more than 54 million femtocell shipments for 2015.
Pitching residential femtocells to consumers and operators should be straightforward. Consumers suffering from bad cell phone signal coverage indoors at home would love them; and operators – in theory – could enhance customer retention by offering unhappy clients a femtocell.
But in reality, some operators are struggling with the role of Wi-Fi in the home. If they can’t define a business model – how best to leverage broadband signals at home for connecting to their cellular network -- it may still take more time before they start shipping femtocells to home.
Next: Operators' pain points
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
Dave.Dykstra
9/20/2010 7:04 PM EDT
Very interesting. This needs to be investigated carefully and quickly by the operators since anything that helps alleviate some of the system overload without negatively impacting the system somehow would be of great benefit, not only to the operators but to the customer as well. If the cost is also nearly negligible, as it appears to be here, then that is also a very important positive factor. Another obvious and very important benefit to both operators and customers is that this also appears to have the potential to provide relatively inexpensive coverage extension to low/no signal coverage areas.
Sign in to Reply
chanj
9/21/2010 2:38 AM EDT
In any city, the roof area, which is used to "host" antenna, is worth a million dollars. With femtocell, mobile network operator can have "virtual" host service. In addition, they gain a happy customer because of the substantial improvement in indoor coverage. It sounds like a win-win situation, doesn't it?
Sign in to Reply
junko.yoshida
9/21/2010 10:57 AM EDT
For consumers suffering from weak cellular phone signals, femtocells should be a relatively easy sell – in theory. On the other hand, the issues cellular network operators are faced with are: a) business model; b) cost; and c) how well the technology actually works in signal handover.
What was unimaginable, even a few years ago, though, was that more and more consumers – particularly in the U.S market – start heavily using smartphones and iPads, etc., thus prompting network operators to genuinely worry about their limited network capacity.
Sure, that will certainly push operators to move to LTE. But as PicoChip’s Baines would say, “LTE isn’t a panacea.” Operators need cost effective solutions to boost their capacity -- pronto.
If not femtocells, what other options do network operators have to cater to their subscribers’ data needs?
Sign in to Reply
Frank Eory
9/21/2010 6:08 PM EDT
The benefits of femtocells to the carriers is clear, but I don't see how femtocells are an easy sell to consumers.
If Provider A has poor coverage at my house and Provider V has excellent coverage at my house, why would I spend extra money on a piece of hardware to help Provider A fill that hole in his network infrastructure? Why not just switch to Provider V and enjoy the superior network?
Unless of course Provider A offers a particular smartphone that only works on his network, and I am so in love with that phone I will even spend my own money to help build Provider A's network?
Sign in to Reply
junko.yoshida
9/21/2010 6:26 PM EDT
Well, actually, what is beginning to happen is, if you complain to Provider A, they may send a free femtocell to your home -- especially if you are already a good customer to them.
It's in the Provider A's best interest to keep you as their customer. And the femtocell shouldn't be that expensive...perhpas as low as $50...
Sign in to Reply
raghuns
9/22/2010 7:41 AM EDT
The Operator would charge less money if your Mobile is connected through Broadband(Femto Cell) as the Basestation Overload decreases and the Base-station can support more users thus enabling the operator to reduce its cost for base-station Inrastructure.
Sign in to Reply
t.alex
9/21/2010 11:14 AM EDT
I have seen some products based on femtocell technology. One such product is a femtocell basestation with USB - just plug into your desktop/laptop and you can you your mobile phone to make calls (via VOIP of course). This will indirectly have impact on mobile operators in the future as well?
Sign in to Reply
LarryM99
9/21/2010 12:07 PM EDT
Right now femtocells are an enabling technology for the cellular carriers, but I can see a day coming when they may be their worst enemy. Assuming that the FCC approves access to white space then it should be straightforward to switch femtocells into those bands rather than the cellular-controlled ones. Add in smartphones with VoIP clients and appropriate handoff protocol standards and suddenly cellular service is looking like an infrastructure-laden dinosaur...
Larry M.
Sign in to Reply
vivekv80
9/21/2010 4:24 PM EDT
i have a AT&T micro-cell and I am very happy that I am able to make calls using this technology. Hopefully the cost of owning a micro-cell will go down with time.
Sign in to Reply
IqbalSingh.Josan
9/21/2010 5:13 PM EDT
Femto cells will sure fulfill the market need for indoor coverage or where cellular signals are weak. The challenge seems to be integration with ubiquitous WiFi. As mentioned in the article, cellular protocol stacks will need to be implemented side by side, inside WiFi gateways, which have a large installed base, to enable penetration in the home and small business market.
In this respect, it will be worhwhile to reconsider almost forgotten technology, Unlicensed Mobile Access (UMA), that allows cellular GSM calls to handover to WiFi, whenever, the handset senses a WiFi hot spot, at the discretion of the user. The benefit to user is a free call over WiFi, to the operator, it offloads the cellular radio network. T-mobile has been providing this service in US for last few years, but it seems the glitter of smartphones has eclipsed this technology. Now with femto cells coming, it will be worthwhile to consider the approach of UMA, that could save the cost of implementing cellular stacks on WiFi gateways.
Visit us at uspurtek.com
Sign in to Reply
dcu
9/22/2010 7:25 AM EDT
Is the current need for femtocell driven by the fact that 3G works at 2100 MHz, thus offering poor indoor coverage?
Would the need still be there if GSM refarming takes place (offering better RF waves penetration into walls and obstacles)?
Sign in to Reply
mogulman52
9/22/2010 10:08 AM EDT
I just had my first experience with a Femtocell. My daughters college has terrible cell coverage for our provider. We have been a good customer for over 10 years so they sent a Femtocell at no cost. It is recommended to connect it between the modem and router. This was the first problem since the college dorm only provides wireless access. Her roommate had to have cable internet specially installed so she offered to let her connect it to her setup. Second problem it requires GPS and comes with an internal antenna and option 10' wired antenna. Problem is her roommates bedroom has no windows and no GPS signal gets in. I am going to try a Wireless-N Ethernet Bridge. In summary, there are some needed capabilities that do not exist. I would recommend a USB socket that can host a wireless USB adapter.
Sign in to Reply
Keith Day
12/3/2010 12:19 PM EST
Femtocell offers are improving as the device costs come down with volume production. In Japan, for example, they are being offered for free to all customers at SoftBank.
They are also being used for enterprise, where they make indoor coverage affordable and enable new mobile centrex solutions.
Do you agree? Read more at the Femtocell Blog http://ubiquisys.com/femtocell-blog/what-is-an-enterprise-femtocell-2/
Sign in to Reply