Comments on: 60 GHz Wireless Communications http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/ Your window into the Wireless Systems Innovation Laboratory Sun, 27 May 2012 13:11:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3 by: Robert Heath http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33405 Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:26:57 +0000 http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33405 Very nice introduction. I think there are still a tremendous number of challenges remaining in the 60GHz area. Very nice introduction. I think there are still a tremendous number of challenges remaining in the 60GHz area.

]]> by: Ali Y. Panah http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33260 Mon, 17 Mar 2008 02:05:54 +0000 http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33260 aah I see. thanks aah I see.
thanks

]]> by: Bob Daniels http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33255 Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:57:33 +0000 http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33255 That's a fair question. The consumer wireless market is driven by the spectrum that it has available. It just turns out that 60 GHz, although not by luck, has large quantities of free unlicensed spectrum available for virtually every "power player" in the wireless market (Japan, Korea, Europe, Australia, and North America). You have to realize that spectrum is mostly licensed for specific applications including radar, television broadcasts, and satellite communications. Other unlicensed millimeter-wave frequencies are available (for example 92-95 GHz in the United States). However, the international availability as well as the bandwidth magnitude available for 60 GHz carrier frequencies is quite unique when we consider all the "power players" together. So to answer your question, if the same amount of bandwidth was available at 30 GHz internationally (compared to 60 GHz), it would almost certainly be receiving more attention since it would observe less path loss and atmospheric absorption. That’s a fair question. The consumer wireless market is driven by the spectrum that it has available. It just turns out that 60 GHz, although not by luck, has large quantities of free unlicensed spectrum available for virtually every “power player” in the wireless market (Japan, Korea, Europe, Australia, and North America).

You have to realize that spectrum is mostly licensed for specific applications including radar, television broadcasts, and satellite communications. Other unlicensed millimeter-wave frequencies are available (for example 92-95 GHz in the United States). However, the international availability as well as the bandwidth magnitude available for 60 GHz carrier frequencies is quite unique when we consider all the “power players” together.

So to answer your question, if the same amount of bandwidth was available at 30 GHz internationally (compared to 60 GHz), it would almost certainly be receiving more attention since it would observe less path loss and atmospheric absorption.

]]> by: Ali Y. Panah http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33216 Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:08:38 +0000 http://windowsil.org/2008/03/13/60-ghz-wireless-communications/#comment-33216 This was excellent Bob. I have a not so smart question. why 60? why not something like 30GHz? This was excellent Bob.
I have a not so smart question. why 60? why not something like 30GHz?

]]>