Another day, another Weightless-N network…
Last month I blogged about a Weightless-N network in London, covering a large part of the centre of the city. Just one month later and here are two more in another European capital city and major port. This time we’re in the beautiful country of Denmark.
What’s interesting about this deployment is that the topography and building density are quite different to an urban environment like London so, just like that deployment, we’ve conducted some real world tests on network range performance here too.
Copenhagen is the capital of Denmark - a coastal city with a size of approximately 85 square kilometres and a population of approximately 1.2 million in the area covered by the network. It is a city built on predominantly low lying flat ground with peaks to the north and west rising to little more than a few tens of metres. As capital cities go it’s a different proposition to London with its dense urban sprawl. 300km to the west lies Esbjerg where the second Weightless-N network is deployed - and a quite different topography.
Esbjerg is smaller with a population of around 70k and a size of around 15 square kilometres. But it is also exceptionally low lying and flat - take a look at this aerial photograph on Wikipedia. This topography translates into exceptionally long range. In fact tests around Esbjerg show that the Weightless signal reaches far beyond the city to satellite towns as far as 25km away. None of this is a demonstration of quality of service (QoS) of course but it is an indication of the external range possible with Weightless-N. And remember, this isn’t modelled, it is measured and real.
Weightless SIG Member, Nwave Technologies, is the company behind this deployment and they have worked closely with two of Denmark’s leading Accelerator organisations. One of these is Accelerace Management and Jes Nordentoft from this group was specifically asked about a recent press release from Sigfox and their proposed network deployment in Denmark. Jes commented “that proposed technology is proprietary and users would be tied to a single operator - with the operator referenced being little more than a startup seeking funds to deploy a network”. It’s true, that proprietary technology does tie users into a single network operator. This is a factual statement but not one you hear articulated often. Would you buy a mobile phone that could only be connected to a single network. That you couldn't choose. Or change from? I wouldn’t.