I much prefer GAN (Wifi Calling) (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_Access_Network" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_Access_Network</a>) to LTE Direct. LTE runs on licensed spectrum, which means the licenseholder (the cell network) can squeeze you for as much money as they want. Unlicensed spectrum is always cheaper, and you hardly need LTE's range advantage for femtocells. Why use licensed spectrum for short-range stuff?<p>I also find it suspicious that this article emphasizes how much buy-in LTE Direct has from gigantic corporations, without making much of a case for why actual endusers would like it. A good clue is that there's no equivalent for Wifi MAC randomization (which iOS 8 does by default) in LTE Direct: spoofing your IMEI is a federal crime. There's no way to avoid being tracked by LTE Direct femtocells, short of shutting off your phone and sticking it in a metal box.
So something like "push to talk" is coming back to mobile phones. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Oh, maybe push-to-talk has never gone away.[1] (It's not a feature offered by my cell phone carrier.)<p>The article kindly submitted here with the interesting new news about phone-to-phone LTE communication reports, "In theory, LTE Direct could be used to create communication apps that route all data from device to device. Some chat apps can already use Wi-Fi and Bluetooth to link up nearby phones, but LTE Direct could offer extended range and better performance. However, carriers will control which devices on their networks can use LTE Direct because it uses the same radio spectrum as conventional cellular links. Wireless carriers might even gain a new stream of revenue by charging companies that want to offer services or apps using the technology, Qualcomm says." As usual, the actual implementation of this service will be all about carrier policies and business agreements.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/faqs/PushtoTalk/faq.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/faqs/PushtoTalk/faq.h...</a>
Isn't this just a cellular mesh network? How does it compare to wifi mesh networking as far as range, security and usefulness? I'd like to see more of these decentralized alternatives to monopoly infrastructure providers, I'm just not sure how feasible they are.
With facebook working on mesh-networking we can be assured that it will be corrupted and heinous. I don't quite understand how the tech community could just simply capitulate freedom, liberty, and anonymity to a malevolent demon like Facebook.
This would be fantastic for disaster situations if coupled with the right software. If the radios can speak on unlicenced spectrum, it'd open up even more possibilities. For example, you could have a "cellular" connection on all your devices, and not just your cell phone.<p>See <a href="http://stevenjewel.com/2014/01/android-mesh/" rel="nofollow">http://stevenjewel.com/2014/01/android-mesh/</a> for some of my ramblings along these same lines from earlier this year.
"Some see the technology as a potential new channel for targeted promotions or advertising."<p>A fair amount of the article is devoted to the potential for advertising, tracking and 'user experience' - which often equates to 'we will encourage you to buy something'.<p>I hope this feature has an 'off' switch or a set of granular user preferences.
Nice! I’m sure Japan and South Korea would be awesome early deployment targets since nearly everywhere has such blazing fast internet to use as a backbone.