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.

Apple and AT&T have an agreement in principle that neither party would partake of supporting anything that injuries the other party in any material fashion. AT&T is concerned about users foregoing the voice components on iPhone and using the data component via VoIP. Google then shows up with an application for the iStore to do exactly what AT&T does not want. Is it rejected? Welllll, not exactly, but then you can’t download it either –

AT&T and Apple told the FCC that they did have an agreement that Apple would not help iPhone owners use VOIP calling services like Skype on the iPhone. VOIP calls use the data, rather than the voice plan, and would cut into the companies profits. Thus, Apple and AT&T agreed to cripple the Skype iPhone app so that it would only work when the iPhone used a WiFi connection.

The companies say they also agree not to let apps that stream live television, which AT&T says would strain its network.

As for Google and its app store?

Its FCC filing emphasizes that Android phone users can get apps from outside the store — unlike iPhone users. (Users can “jailbreak” their iPhones to do so, but this invalidates the warranty.)

It says only one percent of apps in its online marketplace have been rejected, mostly due to copyright or obscenity reasons.

Google did not, however, mention that it too crippled mobile apps at the request of a telecom.

T-Mobile asked Google to remove apps that let customers use their phone as a modem for a laptop, a practice known as tethering, and Google complied. T-Mobile, like all of the U.S.’s largest carriers, charges customers extra for that service. Google later re-allowed the app, but not for T-Mobile customers.

Is Google the unvarnished victim in this? The maiden for her prince to open the gates? Well not exactly either. Google is doing the same thing for T-Mobile on Android platforms. Google you can pucker up, but wash your shoes first, they reek of BS.

All this jockeying and “where’s the pea” is going for naught too. Wimax is continuing to rollout. The following cities are targeted this year — Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Las Vegas, Philadelphia, Portland, Seattle. Wimax is already in Atlanta, NYC, Los Angeles and the outskirt of WashDC. So many of the mass market areas are in coverage. The upshot is the Wimax providers are not freaking out that VoIP will traverse their network. Fact some providers are offering bundles that include VoIP. So the cat’s already out of the bag. Fact some are considering using a “netbook-as-phone”.

By the way Who if on first and What is on second and Google is in the outfield. Google still has not understood how damaging their lack of 700mhz ownership means to them over the long haul.

Linky.

… and could still be if we got our heads out of the sand. All those large muni installs that never happened still could. But the muni itself has to give up the idea of WiFi as an income source. –

…just wanted to share the joy. This week we successfully completed the first 802.11n long range link in the network. Its not very far (only 4KM) but it is very promising. 80 to almost 100Mbit TCP Traffic with 20MHz channels and ~150Mbit with 40MHz. Currently we are dealing with the redesign of our feeders and trying to find an optimal soft/hardware set. We are all really excited to see what AWMN V3 will bring to us. The first link has been routing traffic successfully at 80Mbit since the 11th of June 2009.

That’s right, 80-100Mbit data rates on N channel commercial hardware and open source software. Happening here in the USA? Nope. Athens, Greece. They just happen to have one of the largest Muni WiFi installations on the planet. Web Page here. (Brush up on your Greek)

The logic here by many in the Muni world here is that WiFi should be like a toll road and everybody pays. The reality is they should be treating it like a freeway and charge nothing. Why? Same reason as the freeways — access. A Muni should not look at WiFi as a revenue source but a revenue enabler.

The reason Muni’s support freeways is that the improved access increases business interest in relocating there. The Muni benefits indirectly by increase in revenue volume and revenue velocity by those who relocate businesses there. That gets reflected in the increased sales tax revenues.

The same can be said for Muni WiFi. The WiFi presence increases the sales velocity of product. Need a restraunt? Geolocate one using the Muni system. Pablos Mexican restraunt business improves he pays more to the city. Its the same game. Of course you can play the tiered game as well. Open free base service at a given base rate. Become a subscriber and your base rate is raised. The subscriptions going to pay for the electric bill.

That model with a few exceptions is being deployed everywhere else but here. Why?

HT: saschameinrath.com

…Well to tell the truth, everybody. The bigger losers are of course the TV broadcasters. They spend all that time, money and effort and now its on hold for a couple of months. Another loser is the government itself. They spend a $1Bn in public awareness, enforcement, public policy to have this be a disaster –

This aggressive campaign has pushed consumer awareness rates well above 90 percent, according to Megan Pollock, a spokeswoman for the Consumer Electronics Association.

“We have been working for almost three years to educate consumers that this is the day,” Pollock said. “How do we re-create that? It will be hard to start over.”

It will also be costly - forcing the government and industry to pour more resources into additional public service announcements and outreach efforts.

For many television stations, a delay would also mean the additional expense of continuing to broadcast both an analog and a digital signal for another four months.

So lets run some numbers. There are ~90m households in this country. Lets assume that everyone of them has at least 1 TV set. Also assume that half of them have cable. That works out to ~$22/TV. Or roughly half the value of the $40 converter coupon. It seems reasonable to me that we could have just sent a $22 refund check via the IRS to everyone who filed either Joint or Head of Household and been done with it. Put a “redeemable for any converter purchase” on it and been done with it.

I hazard it would have been more effective than the boatload of effort that has been expended to date. Highly recommend you read the Wired article linked below.

Linky

The last three months have been a whirlwind of proposals to many things broadband. Here, here and here. There is even a modicum of divergent thought on the issue here at ThirdPipe. I myself being camped on the side of the land rush is almost over. Adoption rates are flat because those that crave the speed or have the need have done so already. I am not saying there are areas still not served. There are. But the easy pickings have been fulfilled.

The next big chunk of user base are those in areas where laying cable just does not make sense. Here we enter the land of wireless and WISPs. It is the next logical step. But before we go off the deep end and blow a whole bunch of tax dollars we might want to reflect a moment on some interesting facts provided by a recent Pew survey –

Of dialup users

• 33% say the price of broadband would have to fall first. By how much was not indicated.
• 19% would not switch under ANY circumstance.

Of those not connected to the net at all

• Only 13% said they did not have access.
• But 33% just did not care to be online at ALL.

Of the combined group, 51% voiced some opinion that the need for broadband was not relevant to their life. That is a really telling number considering we are suggesting the expenditure of massive amounts of tax dollars for the privilege to lay cable past a house that will never use it.

Dog you must be a troglodyte! Actually no. I crave the speed that my current provider supplies me. If I have a valid reason to upgrade to even higher rates I would do it. Just don’t have the demand right now. My concern is more that of a taxpayer than a consumer. If a good chunk of the yet unserved are not going to use the service then is it wise public policy to spend the dollars to do so? One could make a very cognizant case that if the purpose of the program was to increase broadband usage then a more salient method might be a means tested tax break for those that have access to broadband but cannot afford it. (A 33% number of possible dial up switchers hampered by cost, that is a target rich environment for such a program.)

But I advocate an even better use for the funds so earmarked. Shift them to the unallocated 700mhz ‘D’ block that bombed 18 months ago. Forgo another auction in the space. It is for public service functions, treat it as such. Put those funds into the hands of the first responder communities as grants to get the build out done. Private enterprise will come along to get the sale. We as a society benefit 100% from the costs by improving our first responder performance and response times. We get a stimulus as a side benefit. The overall ‘payback’ will be much higher than that next increment of households many of which will never tap into the broadband plant even if it is available to them.

Link to Pew Report.

Like the boss said, a big vote yesterday by the FCC. Comparatively we got crumbs for what should have been the 700mhz band auction earlier this year. But you know what? When all you have is cumbs, make crumb cake –

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Federal Communications Commission voted Tuesday to open up unused, unlicensed portions of the television airwaves known as “white spaces” to deliver wireless broadband service.

The vote is a big victory for public interest groups and technology companies such as Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp. that say white spaces could be used to bring broadband to rural America and other underserved parts of the country.

“White spaces are the blank pages on which we which we will write our broadband future,” said Jonathan Adelstein, one of two Democrats on the five-member commission. Adelstein added that white spaces could represent a “third channel” to reach consumers beyond the telephone and cable networks that represent the primary competition in today’s broadband market.

What can we make of this? Quite a lot in fact, if people cooperate to make it happen. Envision a set up similar to a Fon network. Thousands of White Space Nodes (WSN) all put together in a mesh network available to those who wish to partake. Like Fon it could have a private-public side. Private for those in house transmissions you keep to yourself. Public for that portion of bandwidth you wish to share with your neighbors. Or a public only if a bunch if members of a community wanted to go that route. The tool to tie this all together? Hamachi. I am not aware if it has been tried to this scale but as the tool it is the way to go. A national public key would have to be agreed on and a small cadre of geeks to agree to the rules that everybody benefits from. (e.g. the internet model for wireless.)

This ruling will have an effect in the market if We The People build it out quickly. The main one being, keeping other wireless providers honest. If one can get for free your wireless access in the public square then –

1) The rates one pays will be based not on the fact that the carrier is the only game in town but on value and service. If the consumer is reasonably satisfied with what is available for free, then the value proposition for even $20/mo must have either bandwidth, broader availability, or services over the free service to be competitive.

2) The paid for service must be broad. By that I mean the paid service must be national or at least multistate regional to be worthwhile. If with AT&T 700mhz setup I have to futz with the CPE to get it to work in LA then NYC vs just it working on the free band then the value decreases.

If the assessment above is reasonable who wins who loses? Surprisingly Verizon will be relatively unaffected as the only national wireless carrier. Their only constraint will be price. AT&T and the other regional 700mhz winners will have to be careful. All wireless carriers — price depression will ensue. NAB, no effect, they had no standing for loss to begin with and no plans to gain from it to boot.

Build it and we will all gain.

Linky.

Update: Come to think of it there is one other big loser in this decision — FemtoCell. This for a couple of reasons. The first is with a local WSN to use for both voice and data why would the consumer go for a locked device from a carrier? On a comparative cost the consumer will get a dual use product. Viral participation is always a winner over a single source solution.

Thomas Jefferson would be very proud of the FCC tonight, and Dr Dog predicted this one correctly.  Some of the spectrum that belongs to all of us is being returned to all of us to use as we see fit with some limits. All five votes were for opening white spaces for use by low power unlicensed devices. This is significant because even low power transceivers perform very well in the 700MHz band. Not only will this enable “WiFi on steroids”, it could make for an additional wireless pipe.

Denying a tremendous last-minute lobbying effort by broadcasters, the vote on white space devices went ahead as planned today after a several-hour delay at FCC headquarters. When the vote came, though, it was unanimous. For the Democrats on the Commission, the devices are appealing because they offer a potential new avenue for broadband services, while the Republicans are pleased for the same reasons, but love the fact that this is a deregulatory order that focuses on less regulation and more competition.

Robert McDowell praised the “prudent and cautious Order” adopted by the FCC, saying that it would unleash “entrepreneurial brilliance” in the US wireless market.(Ars Technica)

The FCC also voted to approve the Sprint / Clearwire WiMAX and the Verizon / Alltel mergers. I doubt Mr Jefferson would approve of how much of the public spectrum Verizon is being allowed to control.

The FCC is holding a workshop for those interesting in getting their community up to speed on the Big I. Can’t happen soon enough for those sitting between the eastern rockies and the Mississippi river. –

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) today provided additional information regarding the Rural Broadband workshop to be held in Phoenix, Arizona, on November 20, 2008.

The workshop will be held at the Mountain Preserve Reception Center, South Room, located at 1431 East Dunlap Avenue from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. The workshop will be held free of charge; however, attendees will be responsible for providing their own transportation, lodging, and meals http://www.mprc.net/pages/home.html). Additional information via email will be sent to all registrants with the agenda as well as specific logistical information.

This workshop is designed to provide communities, organizations, and businesses in rural America seeking to bring the benefits of broadband to their communities with an opportunity to learn about the resources, programs, and policies of the FCC and USDA. The topics to be covered at the workshop include the following: different technology platforms used to provide
broadband services, USDA funding for broadband deployment, the Universal Service Fund, the FCC’s Rural Health Care Pilot program, and wireless spectrum access. The workshop will also provide communities and organizations with an opportunity to share their experiences about
broadband deployment in rural and hard-to-reach areas.

Another words just about everybody who is dissatisfied with their current carrier!

Linky

In reality I thought that RIM would have been toast back in 2000-2002 timeframe. But those folks seem damn resilient and their corporate clients seem hidebound to stick with them as well. The Wired gives it another go –

Research In Motion, maker of the indispensable BlackBerry devices, may see sales stall in this brave, new, sucky economy.

That’s the conclusion of Tavis McCourt, an analyst with Morgan Keegan. He expects sales growth will slip from 40 percent in 2008 to between 25 and 30 percent in 2009.

Shareholders apparently share his concerns, because the stock sank more than 8 percent in Monday’s trading session.

But there’s the catch: McCourt also thinks new products in the pipeline, such as the Storm, (right), and the Bold, (below), may help save the day.

“We continue to believe RIM should grow significantly faster than the smart phone market given its aggressive new product introductions,” McCourt wrote in a note to investors.

While fancy new phones are great to have on the menu, they don’t really change the economic environment, in which $300 purchases are given very careful consideration, and $20-per-month in added fees aren’t very digestible.

Anything different this time around on RIM’s demise? Well a few –

• SmartPhones as now almost standard fare these days. Only thing is RIM has kept pace.
• iPhone and now Android are serious contenders. Many of their feature eclipse RIM’s offerings.
• Reliance on a single network infrastructure should give many pause in the enterprise space. The consumer really does not give this much thought.
• Economy of scale as networks like LTE and XOhm take hold may make RIM’s offerings uncompetitive.

This time around I am not placing any bets on making a short sale against RIM. Been there, done that and have the margin call to boot.

We touched on the topic of telecommuting and using it as a means to kill $4 gas here. Well Wired has picked up on that with the following Home Sweet Office: Telecommute Good for Business, Employees, and Planet. I am all in favor of this. –

Two decades later, however, most workers still trudge to the office. Though a third of the more than 150 million working Americans telecommute at least occasionally, most do so just a few days each month. Only 40 percent of companies permit any sort of work-at-home arrangement, which means most insist on full-time attendance. According to a 2006 survey by the Telework Exchange, the top fear among resisters is that they’ll lose control of their employees, whom they doubtlessly envision frittering away the hours between 9 and 5 playing Minesweeper and munching Cheetos.

Telecommuting’s foes couldn’t be more misguided. When gasoline costs $4 a gallon, companies shouldn’t just be doing all they can to expand telecommuting — they should be scrapping their offices entirely. No, not turning them into toy-filled communal spaces, as advertising titan Chiat/Day infamously did in the early-’90s, but abandoning them outright.

That might sound a bit radical to those who swear by the office’s supposed benefits, like camaraderie and face-to-face collaboration. But time and again, studies have shown that telecommuters are every bit as engaged as their cubicle-bound brethren — and happier and more productive to boot. Last year, researchers from Penn State analyzed 46 studies of telecommuting conducted over two decades and covering almost 13,000 employees. Their sweeping inquiry concluded that working from home has “favorable effects on perceived autonomy, work-family conflict, job satisfaction, performance, turnover intent, and stress.” The only demonstrable drawback is a slight fraying of the relationships between telecommuters and their colleagues back at headquarters — largely because of jealousy on the part of the latter group. That’s the first problem you solve when you kill your office.

Alvin Toffler suggested in MegaTrends that we would get back to the cottage industry with the home above the store. We are slowly getting there. But to have this happen in earnest one must have the infrastructure. For all the vaunted talk about infrastructure upgrades — roads and bridges mostly — the idea of a vast high speed wireless telecommunications network seems to take a back seat. Yet by implementing the network one would reduce the amount of $$ spent for roads and bridges. The only State that seems to recognize that fact is California, as flawed as the proposal was.

Oh and the fuel crisis? Well 150m Americans commute daily. If we could eliminate just a ¼ that would go a long way. Almost as dramatic as the Pickens Plan. Its a 2fer that should not be ignored.