There are many talks and writings about the IoT industry, its prospects and the serious business expectations associated with it. Marketing, PR materials and publications are ahead of reality, which significantly raises business expectations causing a lot of confusion. It matters also which time in the technology lobbies the analysis and publication that a person reads originates. A serious oppositions is between alternative technologies (disrupters) and the well-established mobile telecommunications industry. In today’s diverse and fast growing world, it’s hard to say “Here’s the technology that meets most requirements” of different industries. Adding the business laws, especially that the business case is the one that determines which technology is successful, not how great it is, things become even more interesting and unpredictable.
According to our team, which deals in depth with the issue of IoT, up to this date we can say that there is no clear winner between the various technologies. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. In Europe the main confrontation happens between two wireless LPWAN (1) technologies for data transmission from sensor devices, namely:
- NB-IoT & Cat M – data transmission technologies, part of mobile standards and implemented by mobile telecom operators around the world;
- LoRaWAN – alternative data transmission technology;
Both technologies differ significantly, which gives rise to speculation. As businesses need such technologies, we will shed light on them by looking at the situation and trends in Europe.
Misconceptions and facts about NBIoT vs. LoRaWAN
Standardization. Mobile operators across Europe proclaim that they use standard technology, meaning developed, defined, published, further developed, etc. from standardization organizations engaged in mobile technologies, while for LoRaWAN “it unknown” who is responsible or rather the so-called proprietary standard. There is a lot to talk about on the topic, but the above belongs to the so-called manipulation. Here is our opinion:
The definitions for NB-IoT & Cat M are indeed published by standardization organizations directly involved in the telecom industry, where there must be order and interoperability;
LoRaWAN is the so-called “open standard” technology. In many places you will find that this is a “proprietary” standard, which only scares the end customers, otherwise it is just another technology for data transfer. LoRa has a Board of members of world-renowned companies in the ICT industry that take care of the management and development of the standard. In addition, there is a very strong community – an approach in which the practical development and application of this technology for sensor networks is developing much faster. A huge community of the largest companies to single developer engineers around the world are involved;
If we have to make a parallel between NB-IoT and LoRaWAN, it is like between Windows and Linux operating systems.
Energy efficiency between LoRaWAN and NB–IoT. It is often claimed in the marketing materials of mobile operators that NB-IoT is not only as effective as LoRaWAN, but even superior to it. To date, this is definitely not true. Practical experience around the world shows that LoRaWAN is about 3 times more energy efficient;
End device prices. Unfortunately, the component base for the production of NB-IoT devices is still more expensive than LoRaWAN. It is expected that over time and increasing the production of such end devices, the difference will reduce.
Network coverage or distance between an IoT end device and a wireless base station. In the marketing materials, the two opposing parties argue with numbers in dB from the two technologies: transmitters and receivers, antennas and other parameters. From practical point of view, such a difference is not observed in the main case.
The other thing that mostly NB-IoT marketing materials advocate is that the technology provides significant coverage (covers a huge distance and area) and has low consumption. But no one says we have either just one or just the other and never both at the same time. There is low consumption, but at short distances. Long distances are covered, but consumption is no longer small.
Important note: NB-IoT technology is much more efficient than the available mobile standards we know: 2/3/4/5 G!
Data volume. Here we can definitely say that NB-IoT has the ability to transmit a significantly bigger amount of data. The question is when it is needed. One temperature sensor uses only 2 bytes in most cases.
Mobility in NB–IoT and LoRaWAN.
LoRaWAN is not a mobile technology in the way we perceive the connectivity of our mobile smartphones;
NB-IoT in the current version is pseudo-mobile meaning that the transition from cell to cell requires additional procedures to identify and new connection establishment;
Encryption and reliability of transmitted data. NB-IoT is said to have a higher degree of encryption, security, etc. The reality is that in compliance with basic rules in the development of devices and software for them, the reliability of both technologies is the same. Breakthroughs in both technologies occur, but mainly due to oversight and omissions in the construction of platforms, devices and writing software, poor configurations and others.
Open and “private” standards – community approach v.s. development groups and standardization institutes; licensed and unlicensed spectrum…
Often IoT articles use a number of specialized terms, well-arranged in complex scientific statements, that end with a “conclusion” why we should use one technology and avoid another. In most cases, the advantages of one technology are to some extent the disadvantages of the other.
Bandwidth:
NB–IoT uses a licensed frequency spectrum meaning that without a license, procedures and serious investments, similar to those made by mobile operators, there is no way to build an NB-IoT network.
LoRa uses unlicensed (free) spectrum similar to Wi-Fi networks, subject to certain regulations for radiated power. In this way, a LoRaWAN cell or even a network with regional and national coverage can be built. This is the reason for rapid development of LoRaWAN technology.
Territory coverage:
It should be noted that when a mobile operator decides to launch an NB-IoT service with national coverage, it can do so relatively quickly and cover a huge area. This is not the case with LoRa networks. With them, everything is built from scratch.
NB-IoT and LoRaWAN applications in the IoT industry
It is difficult to say that there is an area where one or the other technology cannot be used. The decision as to which is more appropriate for a given case is mainly determined by:
Necessary financial resources for building the solution;
Time needed to build the solution;
OPEX ahead to maintain the decision;
Other details that are specific to the case;
Globally (to date) there are areas where one technology is more prevalent for certain projects. For example:
NB-IoT is used for cases where there are geographically scattered sensor devices;
Financial institutions and more conservative industries would prefer to partner with institutional companies and mobile telecoms, where NB-IoT is also more widely used;
LoRaWAN is developing very vigorously in remote metering for utilities – the water and sewerage sectors are a typical example. They are also widely used in agriculture and animal husbandry, as they are often located in places where mobile coverage is sometimes lacking;
Recently, LoRaWAN has settled in the microclimate monitoring sector in buildings and premises. Some analysts call LoRaWAN the “new wi-fi” technology of sensor networks in buildings and industrial areas.
For training and educational purposes, LoRaWAN is widely available due to its accessibility: you do not need a telecom operator; service contracts; fixed operating costs.
In conclusion, we can say that the LPWAN Sector is developing extremely dynamically and the different approaches have their advantages. For now, there is no clear technological winner. There are preferences and rather business applications would give a boost in one direction or another.
Expect soon our real business implementations and news from the local and international IoT market.
- (1) LPWAN: low power WAN – low energy data transmission technology;
- (2) LoRaWAN: long range WAN – it is based on declassified military technology for data / message transmission