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.

If you’re a regular reader, you’re already well informed on the end of voice as a viable wireless business. Sprint and Verizon had invested heavily in national 3G data services for years, while AT&T lagged. Now that 4G is coming online and 3G matters to to a growing number of customers -  like those who grossly overpaid for iPhones, AT&T is playing catch up. It hurts if you’re AT&T and one of your competitors that has been out investing you in 3G calls attention to that fact in advertising.  True to AT&T’s track record it continues to prefer competing in the courts over upgrading. Perhaps AT&T customers who are experiencing poor data service should be careful about what they say publicly too.

AT&T earlier this month filed a lawsuit claiming that Verizon is misleading customers by suggesting that AT&T subscribers cannot access wireless Internet services throughout its network. In the opening paragraph of its legal rebuttal to the suit, Verizon very plainly surmised its argument: “AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s ‘There’s A Map For That’ advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts.”

The rebuttal filed on Monday in a Georgia district court was in response to two complaints AT&T filed with the court asking that the Verizon advertisements be pulled from the airwaves. AT&T has called the claims in the advertisement “false” and “misleading.” And the company claims it has caused “irreparable harm” to AT&T’s wireless business. (Cnet)

Verizon representatives have responded to the press on these claims. But now the company has filed its official response to the court in a 53-page document that lays out the company’s defense.

It’s also worth mentioning that if Verizon really wanted to put the hurt on AT&T, all it would really need to do is dramatically drop 3G  prices. Since the wireless space is a cartel of spectrum licensees, that isn’t likely to happen. Still, a little competitive sparring is a good thing, There should be more of it. I’d bet even the lawyers agree.

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.

This blog has been saying that voice channels on mobile is a anachronism. With the largest chunk of CPE now being smart that supports both a voice and data channel, the reality is the voice channel is passe. Well it looks like AT&T saw the handwriting –

Bowing to openness pressure from the FCC, AT&T renounced on Tuesday its opposition to internet telephone calls that use the iPhone’s 3G data connection.

In short, Skype on the iPhone is now OK by AT&T, the company said in letters to Apple and the FCC.

AT&T’s change of heart comes just after the FCC controversially announced that it was planning to extend internet openness rules to mobile networks. The wireless carriers are fighting back, arguing that wireless networks are not robust enough to operate without intense network management.

AT&T made no mention of the FCC in its announcement, crediting the change instead to a routine examination of its policies.

Now the result we applaud. Though we are left with a bad after taste considering that AT&T was dragged there kicking and screaming. But that is not a panacea either. Consider that in certain markets like NYC the 3G bandwidth is overburdened and drops are a given with the average iPhone user. So having a Skype call dropped could be annoying. Especially since 1/3 of iPhone data calls are dropped daily.

We are 2 steps forward, one step back. We now have some open light on open access. But we are hindered by the lack of bandwidth coupled with a reduced revenue of the providers to fund the upgrades for more bandwidth.

Linky.

To be sure, a certain number of dropped calls are to be expected when you’re dealing with the wonders of cellular communication, but some phones do seem to fare worse then others when paired with certain carriers in particularly congested regions. Apparently fed up with such problems in New York, Gizmodo reader Manoj decided to stop by an Apple Store to see if something might be wrong with his iPhone — this, after apparently being assured by AT&T that everything was all right on its end. After a few tests, the Apple Genius determined that Manoj’s phone was dropping 22 percent of its calls, which turns out to actually be “excellent” compared to most iPhone users in the New York area, where a dropped call rate of 30 percent is said to be average — according to the dude at the store, anyhow. The Genius further went on to confirm that the phone was indeed “fully functional,” and that the problem is “consistent with the service provided by AT&T.” So, nothing to worry about, folks — everything is “normal.”

22% drop rate with 30% average in NYC. Sounds to me like AT&T has a backhaul problem. NYC is a dense wireless area, even for 3G. Of course there is that pesky data hang time. Or it used to be. The way I see some women with the cellphone surgically attached to their ear I tend to wonder. (Sorry ladies, not sexist, just observational fact.)

I wonder if T-Mobile is having the same problems with the Google phone?

Whole thing here.

Wireless carriers, which have been among the fiercest opponents of such regulation, continue to restrict what kind of data travels over the airwaves they control. For example, earlier this year, AT&T restricted an Internet-phone service from Skype so iPhone users couldn’t place calls on AT&T’s cellular network. At the time, AT&T cited network congestion concerns.

“We believe that this kind of regulation is unnecessary in the competitive wireless space as it would prevent carriers from managing their networks — such as curtailing viruses and other harmful content — to the benefit of their consumers,” said Chris Guttman-McCabe, vice president of regulatory affairs for CTIA, the wireless industry’s trade group.

If the FCC does force U.S. wireless carriers to open their networks to data-heavy applications like streaming video, it could push them beyond the limited capacity they have. Already, in areas like New York and San Francisco, a high concentration of iPhones has caused many AT&T customers to complain about degrading service.

In such a scenario, wireless carriers may have to rethink how much they charge for data plans or even cap how much bandwidth individuals get, said Julie Ask, a wireless analyst at Jupiter Research.

Granted, the FCC proposals that are supposed to be released tomorrow have some far ranging effects. The Boss covered it in a prior posting from the ISP point of view. But wireless would be effected by this as well.

There has been a minor snit going on with iPhone/AT&T and the Skype folks. Skype has developed an app for iPhone to provide VoIP service on the data channel. Google has similar GoogleTalk for Android (though not available for T Mobile). Well the new rules would change all that.

The carriers would finally have to face the fact that voice as a channel is dead. If they do, we will see a major alignment in their pricing plans post haste. Which should bring a major consumer battle to the fore. I the iPhone user will make the claim that I am permitted to use Skype on the data channel as I wish at the old contracted rate for my plan. The Carriers will of course say the presence of Skype on the device voids the contract and the new rates apply. Figure a nice lawsuit will ensue.

But the bigger problem for the carriers is investment. They need to get bigger pipes out on the ether. But in this economy they are loathe to pay for the capital investment to make a go of it. Even in major urban centers like NYC there are congestion problems on the AT&T network, a problem that will probably persist for quite some time.

Tomorrow should be interesting!

Linky.