3G LTE will open up a whole set of applications

In a free-wheeling interview with TIMES GLOBAL JOURNAL, Sandeep Chennakeshu holds forth on the roadmap for 3G LTE, the operational challenges, the emergent set of exciting applications and the standards approach that should be adopted…

With industry observers confident about the galvanizing and technical capabilities of 3G LTE, what are some of the important challenges that you foresee?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: When you have largely high-speed connection, then Voice-over-IP (VoIP) may come. When you take VoIP and put it on a 100 kbps line, it doesn't work too well. As against circuit switched data which has to go through a dedicated line with fixed speeds, VoIP on a packet data system is a little different.. When you get very good bandwidth, VoIP works good. It is more reliable and the quality of service improves. LTE can enable some of those things. But the challenges on LTE are many, especially when you have very high data rates. Speaking purely from a handset perspective, (which is addressing only a small part of the problem) firstly, the standards have to be set. Then, the relevant players need to get the infrastructure out and need to be able to merge it. And once you look at factors like power consumption, size and cost, then there are barriers to entry. So it's really very important that you get this high data rate application linked in terms of the following: how do you make sure that the power consumption is low, how do you make sure that the size is small, how do you make sure that you have a very compact design; is it cost-effective? If it isn't, then the uptake will be very slow. For example, if it's a $ 500 data card, who is going to buy it? But if it's a $50 data card, it changes the complete equation. Everyone will put it in the laptop. To put it succinctly, there is a direct co-relation between price point and size; it cannot be cheap and big.

3G LTE is expected to adopt key features of alternative wireless systems to enable new service opportunities in mobile TV & radio, broadband Internet access and VoIP for mobile operators?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: It will happen, but unfortunately, at the high level. Let's take WiMAX and Wireless LAN and LTE. On a very high level, they have the OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division Modulation). Purportedly, they all use it but there are different flavors to it and they are not exactly the same. So adopting techniques from other fields doesn't necessarily mean that it becomes easier. At a very high level, WiMAX and LTE have very similar blocks, but when you open it at the next level, it is like peeling the layers of ice-cream. As you go deeper and deeper, you realize that the levels are very different. Thus, it makes sense to learn from other fields. But there are very different problems that you need to solve in each particular application. So whatever you do in WiMAX, LTE, Wireless LAN, or DVB-H (Digital Video Broadcast - Handheld) for that matter, they are all different.

With the limitations of HSPA and Multimedia Broadcast and Multicast Service (MBMS) in supporting certain services, will 3G be catalyzed to raise performance capabilities to remain competitive in the long run and provide major capability improvements?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: Absolutely, that's what happens. When you look at the firstgeneration 3G chipsets, the PCB area was 2,000 sq mm. This was when GSM was 1,000 sq mm, (3G was introduced with a combination of 3G and 2G because you cannot just introduce 3G alone, except for Greenfield operators. You need to have backward compatibility with 2G). So the board area was 2,000 sq. mm. It was almost double. Now the premium is less than 20%. So, with time, there is more and more integration of the architecture. And that is where we spend hundreds of millions of dollars. It comes back to looking at how we design the process. It is very meticulously done, layerby- layer. Next, there will be even more shrinking. I have a slightly different philosophy on this than the others in the industry. For instance; you can put the RF and the digital together. In fact, I am doing this in several technologies. The problem is that these chips become very complex. When you go to these very small processes with high density, it takes a very long time. So just to go through the production takes three months. It's a long lead-time. It may take 70- 80 days to test it, etc. They don't do one chip at a time but do the whole batch. It doesn't matter as you can get one chip faster than the batch because they all come out together as you get it in a wafer. I don't believe that is happening in technologies that are evolving. I think there are smarter ways of getting the same size rather than just looking at integration. My strategy is that these different technologies must be packaged in a clever way. I have got a unique packaging technique that can be done at the wafer level through which I will get the same size benefit. But at the same time, I can use optimal technologies for each node and not try to mix everything. So I could to be faster to market, gain more flexibility without losing much on size.

Could you highlight the realistic capabilities of 3GLTE in terms of throughput, capacity and cost per megabyte and the services that it will support?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: I haven't really worked out that. This is because for the spectrum efficiency that they believe in, the standards have not been done yet. They believe in a spectrum efficiency of 3-4 times. Therefore, that would naturally bring the costs down, especially also because infrastructure will be an incremental cost. It is more an IP network. An IP network is not as complex as a guaranteed quality of service (QoS) type network. So I think that fundamentally from a cost perspective, the infrastructure will be cheaper. The cost per bit calculation depends on the operator's business model. What can be controlled is the cost of the end user equipment. So, let's say that the end user equipment is $300. But the consumer won't spend more than $100. So it is the operator who ends up bearing the cost. They will subsidize by $200 and get it back by subscription. So the actual rate will depend upon the subscriber acquisition cost, the service model, subscriber equipment cost, the infrastructure cost.

How will the evolution of 3G LTE impact key players in the ecosystem viz. equipment (wireless infrastructure and wireless handset) vendors, mobile operators and regulators? Will the potentialities and expected benefits appeal in a big way commercially to mobile operators or will performance in real network implementations by established players provide indications of early momentum towards commercial adoption?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: A number of problems will have to be solved before 3G LTE becomes successful. When 3G LTE is successful, the key thing is that it will open up a whole set of applications. I can give you a whole range of these applications. My vision of it is that it is like a SIM card. Suppose you have a modem which is like a SIM card. Every device I plug it in, it suddenly gets high-speed connectivity. For example, in my digital still camera, there is only that much I need to store on its memory stick. What will happen is that as soon as I take a certain number of pictures, I use this high-speed link and burst them to my personal website and store them there. And these have become the blogs of today. To cite another application; let's say I am real estate agent. People are moving in from out of town and are looking for houses. I go to a houses, take a picture and it goes on to my website. My client who is sitting in Gurgaon has opened up the website and has looked at the house rather than actually traveling to the site. If he likes the house, then he may actually come down and see it. So you can do a lot of activities where high-speed data will allow you to put high-quality resolution content.

Which among the current established players are well-placed or primed to take advantage of the opportunities provided by the evolution of 3G networks? Will collaborative alliances enable new players to stake a claim to the opportunities that are expected to emerge? How will this prove advantageous for markets such as India and China?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: Yes, I believe that the systems guys will solve it. Players like Ericsson, Nokia and Motorola would solve it. The reason that alliances are important is because all these developments such as R&D cost, doing the right RF, power management, the base band, lot of packaging technology, etc. calls for a lot of investments. You cannot invent everything yourself. So if people collaborate and have alliances, they can bring optimal technology out faster. Otherwise it takes time. And people who fall back on innovation will obviously be out. You cannot catch up in this game if you don't spend. This is state-of-the-art technology and hence it involves high spending. I always say that cell phones are in a different league because of three reasons: they probably have the latest technology in the world, they drive all the semiconductors and really small nodes, they represent the highest volume than any consumer business and they have got the highest cost pressure. So alliances are very important. In order to have alliances, you need to have people who can spend money though they need to bring some value addition in the alliance. I think that initial alliances won't happen with people who don't have IP. So, IP creation is super important. The second area that I believe strongly in is that the people who make the early investments will be winners. Look at the players who have been successful in wideband CDMA or 3G. These are the players who started investing in 1997 in anticipation of a 2005 launch. So it is important to see who is investing in critical technologies now. You must also have the understanding of what problems to solve. And you need to have the ideas on how to put these things together. In the end, you can develop all the greatest IPs in the world and a lot of start-ups do that. But how many of them are successful in integration in order to bring out a small product. Both India and China are growing economies. India is also heading to be a very large tech centre. If you want to basically be a productive tech centre, you need all these capabilities because you need to interface with your markets.

Are alliances happening as of now?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: Alliances of different kinds have already started happening. If you draw a picture, there is one type of alliance between the operator and the group of manufacturers to launch the technology. Another type of alliances is between manufacturers and their suppliers to create the technology. Then there is the third type of alliances that are between suppliers and their set of suppliers to create the IP. So you have to break it up into IP creation and that's done by the supply base. Then there is the product creation, which is done by the suppliers and the handset manufacturers. Thirdly, it is the launching of the service, which is between the operators and the handset manufacturers. These alliances are more common and will occur in the future too.

Do you expect a smooth infrastructure evolution path for operators in terms of 3G LTE in terms of implementation and rollout? Could you prognosticate the growth/evolution paths in mature markets of North America and Europe? Do you see any problems with respect to cost overruns or late adoption as a result of operators wanting to maximize the potential of 3G services first and extend the capabilities before moving onto 3G LTE?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: Regarding the scenario in developed markets, it is very difficult to predict. All I know is that high-speed data is getting increasingly important and there is real value. You can see the uptake on email; the fact that we cannot run our lives without it. So, being connected is really important. So is being able to have access to digital content. I think that when you have these wide area networks that have very high speeds, it brings new applications, more remote working possibilities and more collaborations. Now, with high-speed, you are effectively eliminating time values. You can do a lot more without traveling from one place to the other and your productivity can still be higher. I think that the adoption, when successful, is going to happen.

Do you think that alternative technologies such as WiMAX and DVB-H can steal the thunder, so to speak from 3G LTE due to its relative late rollout (2008-2010)?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: I look at it as a complimentary service and not as a replacement service. There is a lot being said that one will replace another. It normally doesn't happen. There is a reason that you move from one technology to other. You moved from analog to digital because it gave you more capacity. Digital could be encrypted and hence it was more secure. You moved from low-speed data to high-speed data because you wanted to access content that was richer. Therefore, LTE is not going to basically add but is going to give a lot of capacity for new applications. That doesn't mean it replaces 3G. It provides you a much wider scope of exchanging data. Take the case of wireless LAN today. There is a lot of uptake because it is really being driven by information access and email.

Will 3G LTE enable operators to compete with well-entrenched or enhanced DSL services and even IPTV services? What kind of cost and risk advantages does it offer?

Sandeep Chennakeshu: Not really because they are very different. DVB-H is a broadcast service. The mobile version of WiMAX and LTE do compete. But, to me, the earlier version WiMAX can also be used as a fixed wireless service. In some areas there may be trials where WiMAX comes before LTE. But in volume production, I am not sure that WiMAX is any earlier.