Its a competition unlike any other. A competition offered by the Army to use applications developed for cell phones in the combat theatre. Its different another way too — its not limited to the usual bezy of DoD contractors. Anybody can play. –

Cellphone technology is gearing up to go to war. From defense giants like Lockheed Martin, which rolled out a new militarized mobile network this morning, to the start-up tech firm Berico Tailored Systems and even individuals, a diverse range of players is pursuing an equally wide range of approaches.

The most basic approach is that of “Apps for Army” (A4A), a contest held by the Army to develop new military-specific applications for the personal cellphones that many soldiers already have.

But civilian phones rarely work in a war zone: If you think your reception is bad, try getting a signal in rural Afghanistan. Forward bases in devastated countries don’t have access to the billions of dollars in very static infrastructure that civilian mobile devices require, and the Taliban routinely shuts down cell towers with threats and sabotage. Current military network devices require so much power and weight that they are only practical at fixed command posts or on vehicles; soldiers on foot scream into staticky handheld radios the old-fashioned way. So the critical problem in bringing handheld devices to troops in the field is how to get them on the network.

Dare not call is open source, surely the govt would close source any winner for security reasons once selected. So maybe it should be called Open Sourcing? Anyway it is very novel and far from the usual way of gaining DoD business.

Linky.

While the tech media lemmings continue to push a plethora of praise the the decidedly totalitarian Fruit Phone, consumers are voting with their dollars elsewhere. Open source makes for tremendous efficiency in the implementation an build process enabling a variety of choices versus a monoculture. This has created so much momentum behind Andriod, that it’s mobile OS dominance  has become something akin to Microsoft’s practical monopoly on the desktop.

Google’s Android platform has gone from activating 100,000 units a day in May, to 200,000 daily units as of today, according to Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

Schmidt was speaking to journalists (pictured above) at the Techonomy conference in Lake Tahoe, CA, and the technology blog TechCrunch managed to get some video of the chat (see below).

The activation growth shows impressive progress for Google’s mobile OS in the span of just a few months. Schmidt pointed to recent quarterly shipment numbers that showed Android phones outselling the iPhone in the last quarter as proof and said that he confirmed the number with Google’s own internal figures. (Mobile Beat)

While Android is open source, there are some big caveats that come with its dominance. It will be the top target for exploits. We still haven’t developed an effective way of policing them on the desktop, and many mobile users tend to be even less tech savvy than desktop users. Then there’s the fact that while the platform is open, implementation is crippled by carriers.That limits users choices on how they use their handsets and  allows carriers to continue to nickel and dime them for simple services that could be replaced by simple apps. Lastly, the Andriod project, while open is overseen by Google. Many of us will argue that this “do no evil” company is anything but. Searchzilla continues to unapologetically cook its search results to favor a political agenda along with pay for placement. Worse yet, Google’s CEO has repeatedly stated that we have no right to privacy online. It’s virtually certain that some of this attitude will be baked into Andriod if it’s not already present.

There is a silver lining. Open source projects tend to spawn forks and branches when the overseers overstep. Andriod and its inevitable variants are likely to dominate mobile for some time to come. This will put Apple back in the boutique business for mobile. In other words, if smart phones were shirts, we won’t all be forced to wear turtlenecks. It will also most likely make Google’s Chrome OS irrelevant.

Conclusion: look for the cloud in your pocket, soon,and cheap. It also means you’ll have many more choices than you have now.

In a world loaded with technology we act like campers swatting flies with 19th century band allocations. –

The problem is that we’re all locked into the spectrum offered by a single cell phone carrier, and our phones can’t even access most of the wifi hotspots that are in range, much less use them to make calls.

As Yap et al. outline in a provocative new paper entitled Delivering Capacity for the Mobile Internet by Stitching Together Networks, this leads to all sorts of inefficiencies that could be solved by a network ruled by standards that allowed devices to be agnostic about which portion of the wireless spectrum they are currently using:

- Increased capacity through more efficient statistical sharing. Cellular network operators tend to heavily over-provision their network in order to handle times of peak load and congestion. Most of the time, the net- work is lightly loaded. If instead they were able to hand off traffic to each other, or from cellular to WiFi networks, then their traffic load would be smoother, and their network more efficient. For example, what if AT&T could re-route traffic from their iPhone users to T-Mobile during an overload? Or T-Mobile could re- route their customers’ flows to a nearby WiFi hotspot?

- Exploit differences in technologies and frequency bands. Mobile technologies such as EVDO and HSPA provide wide area coverage with consistent bandwidth guaran- tees; while technologies like WiFi provide high band- width and low latency. Lower frequencies provides better coverage and penetration; while higher frequen- cies provides better spatial reuse. Being able to use the most appropriate technology for the application at hand would make best use of capacity available.

- Open up new sources of capacity. The ability to move between networks also open up new sources of capacity. For example, one can now use a network such as that of fon.com to supplement their main network, without having to deploy an extensive WiFi network. Such crowd-sourcing can be a powerful tool to cover dead spots and relieve congestion.

ThirdPipe has observed this since it started posting. We have advocated a technical solution set that included opening up the bands, requiring intelligent spread spectrum devices. We could open up that other 95% of the bandwidth not currently being utilized. Prices would drop, additional services can be had and disasters like the AT&T 4G debacle in places like New York City.

Its time.

Linky.

For those of the geeky variety, and not so, starting today McDonalds open up its WiFi to all comers. Free. With some catches.

Access is free. So general surfing will be available. According to McD’s web page (here) certain services and particular access needs may still require paying for the privilege. But I am fine with that. It is a step in the right direction.

McD’s being altruistic? Not totally. Their heart is in the right place, but their core reason is profit of course. You see McD’s has been in a battle Royale with StarBucks in the morning fast food segment going on 5 years now. Both players have toyed with the idea of going free on WiFi. Fact in some segments I believe StarBucks has already done so. Why do it? Draw customers in. Once they have you inside you might just buy a cup of coffee at a minimum or pop for a whole meal in the best of cases. Least thats the thinking.

This won’t go unnoticed of course. Figure StarBucks to counter across the board very quickly.

The real question becomes does WiFi stay viable for very long? In a strong parallel, WiFi hotspots are the 21st Century equivalent of the pay phone. Useful sure. But you are ‘parked’ till you finish your communications. Yet the growth of smartphones are anathema to that model as the CPE are tied to metrowide cellular/3g/4g services unrelated to specific locale. So WiFi services that McD’s is providing will fade just like the wall payphone at the local tavern did.

That is pulling the plug on POTS. You know that little jingly thing your mother and grandmother still use at lifeline rates? Yes its still out there but dwindling by the day. So what happens? –

In response to a Notice of Inquiry released by the FCC to explore how to transition to a purely IP-based communications network, AT&T has declared that it’s time to cut the cord. AT&T told the FCC that the death of landlines is a matter of when , not if, and asked that a firm deadline be set for pulling the plug.

AT&T tells the FCC that supporting traditional POTS landlines is impeding investment in broadband, VoIP, and wireless services.AT&T said in its response to the FCC that “with each passing day, more and more communications services migrate to broadband and IP-based services, leaving the public switched telephone network (”PSTN”) and plain-old telephone service (”POTS”) as relics of a by-gone era.”

It also stated “It makes no sense to require service providers to operate and maintain two distinct networks when technology and consumer preferences have made one of them increasingly obsolete.”

Is AT&T right? Yes. The fact is Central Office based systems have long lead times and nearly as long tax treatment. Most of the majors were using 19/20yr MACRS or ACRS depreciation on the capital investment as that was agreed to by both the industry and the IRS as appropriate, circa 1950’s. Little has changed on that front ever since. But that poses a problem for say Version who just put a new CO remote in 5 years ago. (Rare as that is.) So how would that install be treated? Under the current rules an accelerated recapture would take place for junking the equipment. That’s a major hit when you consider that even today CO investments are in the billions. So the Telcos would push for tax relief if devaluation ever happened.

My gut says not so fast. Even though what AT&T says is true I have the tingly feeling in the back of my head that it won’t work out that way. AT&T would take the revised recapture relief to the bank, not do any more R&D/advanced services/VOIP/network upgrades, then cry poor mouth all the way into the CEO’s pocket. I am not against AT&T, its just how these guys have operated for years. I have been in the belly of this beast to know better.

There of course is another fly in the ointment to a devaluation of CO networks. I call it the other 1200. That is approximately how many phone companies there are in this country. Most are small operators, functioning as COOPs in rural territory that none of the majors even want to touch. At a minimum there would have to be some sort of relief offered to these companies. At a minimum most would require a DSLAM to get their customers on to VOIP. Most likely SBA enhanced funding would have to be offered at 0% interest to these companies. To date I have not heard of any plans to do so.

Devaluing the POTS network has to happen. We need to realize that as soon as possible. We also need to make sure that in the switch serious profit taking does not occur. Compensation where needed, support where required, but in the end it should be a net-net wash.

Linky.

Look, I think Verizon has the duty to make a buck for its shareholders. It also in my view has a obligation to play fair with its customer base. Sometimes the two are in conflict. When that happens, sometimes the FCC takes notice –

“Late Friday, Verizon Wireless responded to the Bureau’s queries. The company’s answers, however, are not satisfying and, in some cases, troubling. In particular, I am concerned about what appears to be a shifting and tenuous rationale for ETFs. No longer is the claim that ETFs are tied solely to the true cost of the wireless device; rather, they are now also used to foot the bill for ‘advertising costs, commissions for sales personnel, and store costs.’ Consumers already pay high monthly fees for voice and data designed to cover the costs of doing business. So when they are assessed excessive penalties, especially when they are near the end of their contract term, it is hard for me to believe that the public interest is being well served.

“I am also alarmed by the fact that many consumers have been charged phantom fees for inadvertently pressing a key on their phones thereby launching Verizon Wireless’s mobile Internet service. The company asserted in its response to the Bureau that it ‘does not charge users when the browser is launched,’ but recent press reports and consumer complaints strongly suggest otherwise.

“These issues cannot be ignored. Wireless communications are an essential part of our lives, linking us to our places of business, our communities, and our loved ones. The bottom line is that wireless companies can truly earn their desired long-term commitments from consumers by focusing primarily on developing innovative products, maintaining affordable prices, and providing excellent customer service. I look forward to exploring this issue in greater depth with
my colleagues in the New Year.

Or so says Mignon Clyburn.

Verizon responded –

* most customers who terminate do so in the first year;
* no matter when a customer terminates a contract, Verizon loses more money than the ETF covers;
* based on those two points, Verizon would lose too much money if it evenly prorated the $350 ETF;
* so by unevenly prorating, Verizon can keep the initial ETF lower than it otherwise would be, but high enough over the life of the contract to adequately offset losses.

Here’s the problem with their logic. If the customers require such high support $$ then adjust you plan rates. Also please explain why we keep hearing in the press about phantom key sequences that activate services without knowledge of the customer. It might explain the additional support costs. Also if most smartphone users quit in the first year then smart money would say you slam them for $350 up to and including month 13 or 14. Then prorate monthly as the chance of leaving has decreased significantly. Eh?

Bottom line? All the carriers thought they were just selling a cell phone with the capability to view short video clips. They never thought people would spend hours watching YouTube clips, short films, etc. They were wrong, got caught flatfooted and so now they are CYA’s themselves all over the place. No sympathy fellas.

Linky.

Well you better hang on to your wallet! AT&T is preparing to readjust its pricing and policies. Oh and it does not apply to just iPhone, but any smartphone data enabled device —

IPhone users who jam the airwaves by watching video on their devices will be put on tighter leashes, an AT&T Inc. executive said Wednesday.

The carrier has had trouble keeping up with wireless data usage, leading to dropped connections and long waits for users trying to run programs on their devices. AT&T is upgrading its network to cope, but its head of consumer services, Ralph de la Vega, told investors at a UBS conference in New York that it will also give high-bandwidth users incentives to “reduce or modify their usage.”

Well this sounds like the knee jerk reaction of a bunch of suits who did not listen to the network engineers. If you sell a device capable of doing full signal video on a 2″ screen, well damn don’t blame the customer wanting to use it. Especially if you and your partners feature such capabilities in your advertisements.

Now in a capitalist system, price adjusting is ‘the’ method for moderating demand. It will work for bandwidth too. So no faults there. But where I would draw the line is — if flows to the shareholders or the executive suite totally then shame. A significant portion of the bounty ought to go to upgrading the network to increase capacity. That is what the engineer in me says.

No data on changes, prices or when this all happens. But do keep this in mind there dear reader. When it happens you can then opt out without an ETF charge if you wish.

Linky.

It what has to be a positive move the FCC has released a query for suppliers for a database platform and service that will be part of the whole infrastructure. —

On November 4, 2008, the Commission adopted a Second Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order (Second Report and Order) in ET Docket 04-186 that established rules to allow new, sophisticated, unlicensed wireless devices to operate in broadcast television spectrum at locations where that spectrum is unused by licensed services.1 This unused TV spectrum is commonly referred to as television “white spaces.” The rules will allow for the use of unlicensed TV band devices in the unused spectrum to provide broadband data and other services for consumers and businesses.

To prevent interference to authorized users of the TV bands, TV band devices must include a geo-location capability and the capability to access a database that identifies incumbent users entitled to interference protection, including, for example, full power and low power TV stations, broadcast auxiliary point-to-point facilities, PLMRS/CMRS operations on channels 14-20, and the Offshore Radiotelephone Service. 2 The database will tell a TV band device which TV channels are vacant and can be used at its location. 3 The database also will be used to register the locations of fixed TV band devices and protected locations and channels of incumbent services that are not recorded in Commission databases.4 The Commission decided in the Second Report and Order to designate one or more database administrators from the private sector to create and operate TV band database(s), which will be a privately owned and operated service. Database administrators may charge fees to register fixed TV band devices and temporary broadcast auxiliary fixed links and to provide lists of available channels to TV band devices.

Why a database is needed for a broadband low power spread spectrum channel? Well multiuse. The band(s) in some cases will have public service users in some areas. So any smart device must be able to discern that they reside in the same locale with say a fire dept siting on the open band between formerly CH 10-11. With that knowledge a smart device can map around and use other channels.

Its good news though. It means that finally the FCC is looking to see that white space systems are brought online. Personally I hope the Hams get in the act. We could see some wonderfully weird devices using the airwaves that might show commercial usage.

Linky.

Before you you rush out and and sign a contract to get your hands on that hot new Droid handset in a couple of days, consider this: If you want our of the contract, you’ll have to pony up as much as $350 to leave the dark helmeted one’s network. The ETF will decline by $10 a month. That means you’ll still pay as much as $120 to leave in the last month of a two year contract.

The carrier is raising early termination fees on Novermber 15 to $350 for “advance devices” only. Clearly VZW is targeting users who were abusing the buy one get one free BlackBerry deals and those that figured out that it was cheaper cancel their current contract and pay the $175 ETF than to pay full retail for the hot new handsets like the Droid. (Mobilecrunch)

How’ that much ballyhood “network neutrality” for mobile really working out? As long as carriers can lock devices to their networks, and keep other compatible devices out, the marketplace will never work for the consumer. While there’s been plenty talk from the almighty FCC about addressing this, no real action has been taken.

Well the Net Neutrality rules have been codified by the FCC. All that is left is the wrangling about peripheral details. As a recap the prime components are —

The rules codify four old principles and introduce two new ones. Broadband providers must not block users from sending legal content on the net. They must let users run the applications and services they like and connect whatever devices they care to. And providers must not harm competition among ISPs or online services. The new principles require that broadband providers not discriminate against content services (i.e. block Skype because it competes with an ISPs voice service) and that they disclose to users and the feds how they manage their networks.

The rules would also explicitly extend beyond so-called wireline providers such as DSL and cable and apply to wireless internet services, such as 3G, satellite and WiMax. Providers would have leeway to shape or throttle traffic for network management purposes or to help police or “homeland security.”

The full rendering is here.

Couple of observations/effects now that this have been issued –

• Figure that the Telcos will now move to push congress for fiscal relief. The most likely move being a tax recapture modification for a period of years so they can accelerate the depreciation of the PSTN netowrks. 18 year depreciation rules need not apply anymore in telecom.
• Is ‘carrier of last resort’ now a dead duck? The new rules are not clear. But you can bet the Telcos will wish it so.
• This could be liberating for the Telcos as well, were they to play their cards right. Sure the PSTN will shrink. Were I Telco I would foster it. Partner with a Skype or other VoIP or their own captive and get the last of the user base on VoIP. Gut the CO of the old switch gear. Work with folks like Akami and turn the free space into network edge data centers. Lower costs, new services, lower cost per user. What’s not to like?
• Just because you can attach it does not mean the provider can’t shut you off. The new rules have ‘network manageabiltiy’ aspects attached. That folks includes bandwidth throttled or outright port closure.
• End of walled garden video channels? When the consumer can now get any device they want (within reason), the restrictions on say HBO having to be a channel line up partner with Comcast or TWC no longer exist. An example would be the Roku folks lining up HBO, FBN, NFL and other content as either free or pay ala-carte. Roku just does the cross billing to/for the consumer.

  Oddly the Comcasts of the world don’t need to be left out of this game. They could switch over what they currently carve out of their baseband to broadband and play the same game with the providers they already have.

• The handset race will heat up. With proven chipsets to support network access without concerns for interoperability the universe of devices and device types are going to skyrocket. Some old main stays like Motorola and Nokia might find themselves outclassed. The rate of change may become so fast that brand manufacturing may become a lost art.

In many ways the edges are going to be a new game. A great deal more diversity in product selection is on the horizon.

Linky.