In the communications field, technology is beginning to live up to the dreams of yesteryear. While all communication technologies are making rapid advances, nowhere are the advances occurring more rapidly than in wireless communications.

It seems every year a new wireless technology marked by a new acronym arrives with the promise to “revolutionize” our daily lives. Time will tell which of these technologies truly address a market need and have the strength to survive, but in the meantime, the end-user and the enterprise are left with a bewildering array of wireless communications options to choose from.

Broadband wireless, in particular, is experiencing a tremendous explosion in new technologies primarily differentiated by range. From Ultra Wideband (UWB) and Bluetooth (BT) in the Personal Area Network (PAN) connecting devices at short ranges up to 10m, to the 802.11/WiFi wireless local area network (WLAN) series of protocols with a range of 100m, to the recently emerged 802.16/WiMAX in the Wide Area Network (WAN) that reaches up to 5km, this mix of radio designs with varying distances and throughputs promise to overwhelm the end user with wireless choices (see Figure 1).

In many instances, when to use which of these wireless technologies is clearly understood. For instance, no one expects UWB to provide last mile access or WiMAX to act as cable replacement. However, where two wireless access technologies abut, there is often overlap in the applications such that it is not always clear which technology to use. Hotspots and citywide networks, as well as end-user devices such as laptops and PDAs, are all examples of applications and devices that may overlap in the WLAN and WWAN (see Figure 2).

Figure 1: Broadband Technologies

Figure 2: WiMAX in Relation to Other Technologies

In order to serve such applications, end-user devices would need to support multiple wireless access technologies. Today, that would require such products to include multiple wireless access technology chips, forcing re-designs and increasing size and costs for these devices. It would also increase complexity for the end-user as it would require an understanding of which technologies are required for each application when purchasing devices.

To avoid the need to incorporate multiple chips into devices that support such applications, the ideal answer is to provide multi-protocol chip solutions where these overlaps exist. Just as with cell phones, the end-user simply wants dial tone and does not know or care whether the cellular network they are connecting to is CDMA or GSM. For emerging broadband wireless devices, the same holds true--UWB or Bluetooth, WLAN or WiMAX, the end-user just wants to be simply connected to their service seamlessly regardless of the required wireless access technology in a particular area of service.

The logical extension of this approach is to have a single modem that supports all protocols from UWB to 802.16. However, this is not a practical solution given the different requirements from each set of target applications in terms of size, power consumption and more, and the vastly different technical attributes of the core technologies involved.

The concept of a multi-protocol solution makes sense wherever there may be overlap in applications. For short range communications, the case could be made that a UWB + Bluetooth or WLAN + Bluetooth type of ASIC would address market needs. In the longer range applications, those covering from 100m to a few kilometers, it is clear that it is the WLAN 802.11 and the WWAN 802.16 protocols that overlap.

With WiMAX driving beyond last mile access into laptops, PDAs and eventually cell phones, one can see the inevitable application overlap and potential for confusion for the end-user. When entering a coffee shop, which network will be there? Will it be WiFi? Will it be WiMAX? Does my device support the appropriate network? Does my service provider? When moving around a city, most times a WiMAX network may be available, but is it the cheapest connection available? Is there a free hot spot nearby instead?

For these reasons, a multi-protocol 802.11/802.16 solution can solve these dilemmas. With such a modem inside a laptop or PDA, the end-user does not know or care which network is nearby, the system simply connects. With similar power requirements, similar modulation techniques, both being all IP based and the applications overlap, these two technologies represent an ideal case for a multi-protocol chip solution.

Multi-protocol chip solutions, however, are not easy to develop, and delivering on the promise while keeping the additional costs to a minimum requires experience and technical expertise. A company which has this expertise and can deliver such a solution covering WiMAX fixed, WiMAX mobile and WiFi in a single ASIC, will meet the end-user’s demand to be simply connected throughout their day as they move from place to place anywhere, at anytime, regardless of the specific wireless network access protocols used in an area of service.

With the recent explosion of wireless technologies crowding the market, it is inevitable that some technologies will survive and others will settle into the markets and applications they best fit. In many cases, the line between which wireless access technology is best at a given time and place is not always clear.

Because of the blurry middle ground and similar deployments in the WLAN and WWAN markets, overlapping WiFi and WiMAX networks will be the predominant choice for broadband wireless in the future. End-users will demand, and they should expect, to be shielded from this bewildering array of technology and alphanumeric soup. In these instances, the multi-protocol product powered by the multi-protocol chip or ASIC is the answer, merging the WLAN and the WWAN and enabling end-users to be simply connected.

David Sumi is Vice President of Marketing at TeleCIS Wireless.

Visit TeleCIS Wireless online.