We have yet to hit the holiday shopping season, so you know there will still be plenty of gadget goodness before the year ends. However, there’s also some new behind-the-scenes tech to get excited about in 2009. Here are four enabling technologies to watch out for in the next four months. This tech may not be sexy, but it’s guaranteed to make those shiny gadget toys work better, smarter, faster.

NVIDIA ION Chipset

Since my netbook is clearly not cutting it for a lot of video playback, I’m psyched about new processors making their way into netbooks and small laptops in Q4. Most likely to actually hit the commercial market this year is the NVIDIA ION chipset, which is said to boost graphics power significantly in any Intel-Atom-powered device. According to Brad Linder over at Lilliputing (also heard as afternoon anchor on my local NPR station), two major manufacturers, Lenovo and Samsung, are planning to ship ION-powered laptops in the last few months of the year. And, Brad speculates that the upcoming Nokia netbook, the Booklet 3G, may also sport NVIDIA ION graphics. More info to come at Nokia World on September 2nd.

USB 3.0

If you’re into transferring a lot of media between devices, then the launch of USB 3.0 is right up your alley. Unlike USB 2.0, which transfers data at a rate of 480 Mbps, USB 3.0 boasts a whopping transfer speed of 4.8 Gbps. That’s not just good for moving HD video around, it’s also perfect for large back-up operations to an external hard drive. According to Stacey Higginbotham at GigaOM, USB 3.0 will start shipping to device-makers this year, with consumer availability soon to follow.

WiMAX

I know, I know, it’s cool to be down on WiMAX these days, but I’m still excited for it to spread to more cities (including my own Philadelphia) this year. Partly I’m excited about the higher speeds for mobile broadband, but partly I’m excited because of the different pricing options compared to existing 3G services. For example, my employer is unlikely to subsidize mobile broadband at $60 per month, but a $10 day pass is a good bet for reimbursement. Perfect for conferences, and other places where Wi-Fi tends to be lacking. Even an unlimited mobile contract is said to be only $50 per month. (See pricing coverage from Paul Kapustka at Sidecut Reports) That’s a better price and a faster connection.

Upstream Channel Bonding

And while we’re on the subject of broadband speeds, here’s an obscure one: upstream channel bonding. Channel bonding is what’s making it possible for cable operators to offer peak DOCSIS 3.0 speedsof 50-100 Mbps in some markets. To date we’ve only seen downstream channel bonding in the US, but upstream channel bonding is on its way. Karl Bode at Broadband Reports wrote earlier this month that Comcast is exploring upstream DOCSIS 3.0 trials this year, with upstream speeds maxing out at 120 Mbps.

Share/E-Mail

To entice customers to sign up for the service, the cable provider is offering a “Fast Pack Metro” bundle deal which offers the 2go service along with 12 MBps home Internet for $49.99 per month for a full year. At the end of that period, the rate jumps to $73/month, which is still quite competitive considering.

Better yet, where Clearwire does not have service yet, Comcast is allowing those subscribing to the 2go service to add mobile 3G data nationwide for an extra $20 month. This part of the service is offered through Sprint, which owns a portion of Clearwire.

Adding WiMAX service to its portfolio gives Comcast a stake in the ever-more-competitive mobile data industry. With speeds of between 5 to 10 MBps possible, it gives the standard a leg up on LTE, which is the mobile data standard that most cellular providers have chosen.

While LTE rollouts are expected to begin in force in 2010 and beyond, WiMAX is already available in several major metropolitan markets. It will be interesting to watch over the next one to two years whether or not WiMAX can continue to be one step ahead of its competitor.

Share/E-Mail

LTE’s promise of high-speed, two-way wireless data promises an “all-IP” mode of communications in which voice calls are handled via VoIP. It’s also designed to handle video well, and to permit roaming through multiple systems–from cellular to Wi-Fi and satellite.

LTE is considered by many to be the obvious successor to current-generation 3G technologies, based on WCDMA, HSDPA, HSUPA and HSPA, in part because it updates UMTS technology to provide significantly faster data rates for both uploading and downloading, while preserving backwards compatibility with existing handsets based on older standards. Verizon Wireless, has already said that it will support LTE as its 4G technology of choice, abandoning its current CDMA based network.

Speed, theoretically superior to WiMAX, would give LTE an edge for bandwidth-hungry applications such as live TV and video downloads. LTE handsets are also expected to embrace automatic roaming to non-cellular systems, such as Wi-Fi and satellite.

It’s true that WiMAX, unlike LTE, is available today–but it’s only in the early stages of rollout. (Sprint-backed Clearwire, the only company to roll out WiMAX in the U.. to date, offers service only in scattered areas in sixteen states.) Analysts express doubts that phone manufacturers, networking companies, app developers, operators,  and carriers will ever make WiMAX a popular replacement for 2G or 2.75G facilities and services.

Still, WiMAX may endure–Clearwire has vowed to build a nationwide network. But the leisurely pace of its rollout indicates extra caution about the necessary investments. And Clearwire is controlled by Sprint, widely considered the weakest of the major U.S wireless carriers.

Whether they bet on LTE, WiMAX, or some combination of the two, major carriers, hardware companies, and other telecommunications players cannot postpone decisions about their 4G plans–even though it’s not yet clear how the competing technologies will sort themselves out. Investing mammoth amounts of money on building out what may be a temporary technology is high risk–especially during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression–but they can’t leave the market open to their competitors.

The matter of superiority, WiMAX vs. LTE, is mind-boggling to industry observers, even if it might not be to a genius, or to electrical and wireless engineers. Innovation advocates might see LTE as a natural evolution of technology. Yet some technology writers have described it as unusual, in the logical sequence of technological advancement. At least, the adoption of LTE shows that the best decision, in the acceleration of wireless-connectivity technology, is not to wait for the economic recession to hit rock bottom or reverse.

The CTIA Wireless trade show in Las Vegas last month made the industry’s 4G road map a bit clearer. Most players, including Motorola and Verizon, said that they would go straight to LTE without touching WiMAX. Nokia, went further: According to a Financial Times report, Anssi Vanjoki, Nokia’s head of sales and manufacturing, compared WiMAX’s prospects to those of Betamax.

Worldwide, LTE’s prospects look promising. Some observers say that China will go directly to LTE, bypassing WiMAX. Major Chinese telecommunications players, including China Mobile and Huawei, are believed to be working hard to step up to LTE in a year or two.

My home, Pakistan, would also benefit from LTE. Currently, almost all the mobile operators, including the formerly state-owned landline monopoly Pakistan Telecommunication Company (PTCL), have flooded the consumer market with phones, cameras, music players, and USB modems that use a form of connectivity that’s similar to WiMAX but slower. These devices in Pakistan offer Internet connectivity of 300-kbs. Companies such as Wateen Telecom of the United Arab Emirates have tried to offer WiMAX, but without much success;  but hardly succeeded; PTCL has tried a package of cellular connectivity, satellite TV,  and broadband Internet that is also far from a success so far. China Mobile is one of the five major mobile operators in Pakistan, and other Chinese companies such as ZTE and Huawei are major players, so Pakistan’s 4G future will likely mirror that of China.

Countries such as Sweden and Finland, which are small but well-developed and technology-rich can benefit from this transitional period of wireless technologies, during which 3G, WiMAX, and LTE will coexists. Examples could be Sweden, with rich file-sharing experience, and Finland, with Nokia having early experimentation on real time interactive videos. Next in line are rapidly developing countries, including China, India, and Pakistan.

The U.S., a traditional leader in innovation and technological advancement, may struggle to adopt 4G as rapidly as other countries. Why? One reason is the difficulty of ramping up LTE during a period of recession. Another is the indecisiveness of U.S. industry heavyweights about next-generation standards. But even if the U.S.’s 4G future is somewhat murky, wireless connectivity is bound to evolve towards higher speed, great traffic capacity and more reliable connections.

Share/E-Mail

Dell adds Wimax to notebooks.

Free iPhone apps make money.

Will Pre multitasking work well?

An AT&T app for iPhone.

South Carolina goes after Craigslist.

The prehistory of today’s Internet.

Windows 7’s XP compatibility: incompatible!

Rock Band’s Lennon, Harrison guitars.

Swedish NASA hacker is indicted.

Share/E-Mail

Gizmodo tests WiMax, likes it.

Cisco flips for the Flip.

Hacker compromises Mac in seconds.

New features in Silverlight 3.

Sirius founder: Sirius is doomed.

New iPhone clues in beta?

Steve Ballmer’s still courting Yahoo.

Random rumor: OLED Macs, iPhones.

Dell’s Adamo notebook on sale.

iPhone tethering seems to work.

Sprint roadmap: Pre, other phones.

Mobile Firefox now in beta.

Share/E-Mail

Sprint owns 51 percent of Clearwire, a company commited to bringing near-nationwide WiMax access by 2010. However, its competitors have all decided that LTE is the way to go for next-generation data, leaving the company as the odd man out, so to speak.

The company is not denying that it is testing out LTE, explaning it as a method “to monitor and assess the competitive landscape and any potential impacts to Sprint’s plans.” But you have to think, being that its the only provider comitted to WiMax that maybe it may be having some second thoughts.

Add this to the fact that Clear’s WiMax equipment was built to be converted later to LTE, and one has to wonder.

Share/E-Mail

Sound familiar? That’s because we’ve been through this drill so many times before.

The clause in the company’s policy that’s getting the attention goes like this, edited for brevity:

To ensure a high-quality experience for its entire subscriber base, XOHM may use various tools and techniques designed to limit the bandwidth available for certain bandwidth intensive applications or protocols, such as file sharing.

It’s almost incomprehensible why Sprint would even attempt to pass this off on consumers, in,the light of the Comcast throttling fracas and T-Mobile’s attempt at bandwidth management with the G1 phone.

The FCC is beginning to notice the possible ramifications of throttling, and has already said in its broadband policy statement that internet access should be open and unfettered, meaning companies cannot intentionally slow down connections for specific types of applications. That’s exactly what’s happening here.

Free Press policy director Ben Scott spoke out on the subject Monday, saying the company must demonstrate why such a policy is necessary.

“We are very troubled by this development and the larger moves across the wireless industry to limit consumer access to the legal content and services of their choice. We hope that Sprint will quickly disclose exactly what tools and techniques it plans to use, and demonstrate why it is necessary to maintain a closed network when consumers demand an open Internet.”

I tend to agree here. I’ve said it before, companies deserve to have the right to manage their networks. However, there are other ways to handle it than just automatically throttling. For example, charging more is certainly an option. A user shouldn’t expect to pay the same for downloading tens of GBs, or more, when the average user is using far less. I’ve always been an advocate of a la carte, and maybe ending this one-size-fits-all business model for internet access might be a good idea.

Share/E-Mail