* Enterprise- or carrier-deployed? Please weigh in
If you are looking to improve the coverage and capacity of your broadband mobile signal(s) indoors, do you prefer that your own IT staff (or integrator) buy and install the necessary equipment? Or would you prefer to have your mobile operator(s) do it on your behalf as part of a corporate network services plan?
Several approaches to bringing 3G (and, soon, 4G) coverage indoors exist and some new ones are emerging. Some are based on the model of distributed antenna systems (DAS) fed by an indoor signal source that must be supplied by your carrier. DASs have traditionally required a whole separate indoor network for attaching the antennas and connecting them to the signal source (such as picocell, femtocell or other 3G base station tuned to the carrier’s frequencies).
DEMO: How start-up gets TV to smartphone through 3G pipes
Newer solutions involve piggybacking cellular signals onto your internal Ethernet and outward-facing Internet connection. For example, DAS company MobileAccess recently announced availability of the MobileAccess VE in the U.S. MobileAccess VE is a DAS that basically makes use of your existing Ethernet cabling infrastructure to distribute signals around the building. It used to be called MobileAccess EnCOVER VE until Cisco entered the picture by teaming with MobileAccess in June to integrate its wireless LAN onto the system.
This is the type of solution you would likely procure and install yourself or turn to an integrator to put together. The integrator comes in handy because of the often difficult and time-consuming task of getting a mobile operator to agree to allow you to put a piece of their equipment on your site (and, with any luck, to pay for it, too).
A similar setup but with a different distribution model comes through the carrier channel. Companies such as SpiderCloud Wireless are working with the mobile operators with a controller-based cellular in-building system that also uses existing Ethernet and Internet to transport cellular signals indoors. The difference is that when you negotiate with a mobile operator for service, you would roll in-building coverage into the discussion. The carrier, then, would be the one to install and manage the in-building system as part of your overall contract. The SpiderCloud enterprise radio-access network (E-RAN) is limited to GSM-based networks.
Please weigh in and express what you think of these solutions. Would you rather project-manage and install the in-building solution yourself or procure the in-building infrastructure and coverage as part of your contract? Or a third option: Just use Wi-Fi for voice and data?
