Tuesday, January 26, 2010
March 17th is the deadline for the FCC to deliver what is being called a "national broadband plan" to congress. Following the Recovery Act in 2009, funding (and awareness over the need) was made available for ramping up broadband infrastructure in the U.S. as part of an overall plan to bolster our economy and remain competitive nationally. By the urging of this blog and countless other activists in the broadband community, the FCC has received no shortage of input on the broadband plan.

Last Friday, another big player joined the mix. The Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA) filed it's comments with the FCC. What did they have to say? According to their own report to WISPA members and constituents, their focus involved 6 major points:

1. Many rural communities do not yet have access to broadband (24 million households).

2. Without access to broadband, the best and brightest young people usually leave for bigger cities causing a “rural brain drain” that negatively affects rural economies.

3. WISPs who want to extend service to unserved and underserved rural communities need both better access to funding and better access to spectrum.

4. WISPA suggests several methods of improving WISP funding mechanisms, including the creation of a “Universal Broadband Fund”.

5. WISPA also suggests several methods of improving access to clean spectrum for WISPs. The availability of clean spectrum positions WISPs to benefit from more favorable funding options.

6. The FCC’s support and promotion of WISPA’s suggestions in the National Broadband Plan (including this filing) will help revitalize America’s economy.

Not surprisingly, the focus remains on rural broadband access as well as continued talk over the spectrums available to wireless broadband. Whatever the outcome, the most important matter, however, is that the FCC receives enough support and public outcry to make sure that on March 17th, congress indeed sees the great need for change. You can provide your own feedback at www.broadband.gov.

Labels: Broadband Plan, FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, Rural Broadband, WISPA

posted by Nick Carter at 3:46 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Over the past year, the issue of the FCC's broadband plan has come up over and over on this blog. One of the most important topics, of course, is the charge to tell the FCC your thoughts on Fixed Wireless Broadband. Well, guess what! They listened.

Tony Bradley of PC World reported just a few weeks ago: FCC Urged to Expand Wireless Broadband Access. Urged how? Via the very request for your input that we shared months back. The FCC has sought input via formal submission, as well as via social media, blogs, etc. The Government, it would appear, is listening to the people.

As Bradley's article notes, however, one of the overwhelming proposals on the table has to do with the availability of spectrum. In April of last year, we reported on Verizon's buy-up of a huge chunk of the 700mz spectrum. But that brings up two dilemmas: do we want only one company dominating the FCC licenses, and even so, is this spectrum enough?

If fixed wireless broadband is indeed the technology that can make broadband ubiquity a reality in the U.S., then shouldn't we have more spectrum devoted to it? That's what some critics are suggesting. However, the Department of Justice is not so quick to meddle where existing media markets are already succeeding. The switch to digital television, after all, went SOOO smoothly, we certainly don't want to endure such a switch-a-roo again.

The lines haven't closed. Your voice can still be heard. Let the FCC know your thoughts on Fixed Wireless Broadband.

Labels: Broadband Plan, FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, Stimulus, Verizon

posted by Nick Carter at 7:11 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Friday, January 1, 2010
Last week, the futuristic science-fiction film Avatar and Pandora's data network inspired me to dream of a far-off future broadband network on earth. This week, my feet are planted more firmly on the ground. As a new year and a new decade dawns, what can we expect from wireless in the near future.

Top 5 Wireless Broadband Developments to Anticipate in 2010:

1. iPhone Tethering. As an avid iPhone user, I have resisted the last several OS updates for fear that they will shut down the slight modifications I've made to enable tethering (the very connection I am using to post this article). In order to keep up with competition (i.e. droid), they'll have to open this feature to their users.
2. 4G rollouts made available to most major metro areas. Whereas now its still a rare find and something most people don't even know about, 4G will be the talk of techno-toys next Christmas season.
3. FCC's Broadband Plan. They're due to present the plan to Congress this year, which means we could start to see the new policies and procedures in place before the end of 2010.
   
4. The Verizon/Google Home Internet Package. The droid/VZW pair-up is just the beginning. With Google's ubiquitous exposure to the consumer today, and Verizon's extensive network, look for the pair to release a home internet package to rival the Cable providers and--of course--"The" phone company.
5. 3G Enabled Vehicles. Pair this with the prospect of VOIP over wireless networks and you've got the ability for your home phone and internet to follow you wherever you go.
   

Now, I must offer the disclaimer that these are merely light-hearted and hopeful predictions based on my own personal observation. I don't have an insider track to Google's product release, and I'm not offering competitive investment advice. Just some fun, and hopefully inspiring, predictions on this New Year's Day!

Happy New Year!

Labels: FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, Google, New Year, Verizon

posted by Nick Carter at 7:19 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, December 1, 2009
As we have discussed several times on this blog, the FCC is drafting a National Broadband Plan which will lay out ways the government can improve broadband service in the U.S. The plan is scheduled to come out in February, allowing plenty of time for feedback on the issue. And, it warrants mentioning that there are no certainties as to how many of its suggestions will ultimately be adopted.

But, there are other measures--policy measures which the FCC does not require congressional approval to make--that are already being put in place. It would appear that the FCC is wasting no time in getting us caught up with global broadband standards. Examples include educating the consumer on wireless broadband, freeing up air-waves for wireless broadband use, and most recently: making it easier to get towers in the air.

Amy Schatz of the Wall Street Journal reported that:

"Of the 3,300 applications for new towers or to put a new antenna up on an existing tower, more than 700 have been pending for more than a year..."

That means communication companies like Verizon and AT&T who want to add more coverage are stalled by local and state government bureaucracy. Before any new tower is erected, or even a new antenna is placed on an existing tower, approval must be sought from the local authorities. When those applications are delayed, the expansion of fixed wireless broadband in our communities is slowed.

Under the new policies handed down by the FCC, local agencies will have only 90 days to review and respond to new antenna applications, and 150 days where a new tower is requested. If the agency fails to respond in that time frame, then the wireless carriers can seek a decision from federal courts.

If you've got an idea for how wireless broadband can be expedited across our nation, let your voice be heard. Download the FCC's public notice and follow the instructions found there.

Labels: ATT, Broadband Plan, FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, Verizon, wireless carriers

posted by Nick Carter at 7:19 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, November 24, 2009
First and foremost: bravo! Twice in one year we've reported on the federal government soliciting feedback from the business community on its plans for the future (the last time being when the NTIA requested feedback on rural broadband). There's something heart-warming to see government working in such a way.

Yes, indeed, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is asking for comments from for-profit businesses, non-profit organizations, and economic development programs around the nation. As congress prepares to hear a bill next February on the FCC's famed Broadband Plan, the commission is going to dig deep for some hard numbers to back up their proposed needs for the nation.

Specifically, the FCC is asking about what does exist and what would be required. Can people access broadband at libraries and community colleges? If so, are they. And if not, what level of broadband is needed in a rural community in order to actually attract new business--and thereby jobs--to that community? What bitrates are required? Redundancy? And, on the docket we also find the question: is wireless broadband a viable solution?

As we consider how to get broadband access to the rural areas of the United States, there's an obvious economic incentive to go wireless--no, not just the stimulus money. It's less expensive to implement, faster to get live, and easier to build redundancy. But, I dare say that the FCC already knows all of that. What they want to know is, after it's implemented, live, and redundant--will it meet the demand? With ever-increasing speeds, network coverage, and security, it's safe to say "yes." What many fail to realize is that this is not your average air card anymore.

To let your voice be heard, download the FCC's public notice and follow the instructions found there.

Labels: Economy, FCC, Federal Communications Commission, Fixed Wireless Broadband, NTIA, Rural Broadband, Stimulus

posted by Nick Carter at 6:55 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, October 27, 2009
After the digital switch, that grand fiasco that forced the upgrade of every household in America to a digital television signal, Verizon snatched up the 700mz spectrum in an FCC auction to beef up their coverage on the wireless broadband scene. Now, the FCC is talking about reclaiming even more of the spectrum currently devoted to television broadcast and dedicating it to wireless broadband (see FCC Considers Shifting Some TV Airwaves to Broadband).

What's the motivation? Well, it's two-fold -- and I'm not sure which is more important. First, there's money to be made. By reclaiming licenses on certain ranges of the spectrum (currently offered to free broadcast networks) and then reselling those to the more lucrative broadband industry, it's estimated that our government could add over $60 million to their coffers.

Second, however, is the infrastructure that it would augment. As a nation, we still lag behind other developed countries in our ability to provide fast, reliable broadband to everyone everywhere. There's no doubt, especially for rural areas, fixed wireless broadband is the answer. In catching up, the projection is that our businesses will be more competitive. Our small business markets will be strengthened (underpinning a strong economy all around). And, our dear old friends like Verizon and AT&T will have more goodies to hock.

What are the costs to you? Well, there are few drawbacks to the idea of being more efficient and more targeted with our airwaves. There's only so much of a spectrum that can be used, so it makes sense to put those waves to good use in the most needed area: broadband. After all, you can watch tv on the internet now! In the WSJ's article (cited above) there is some talk about converting all free broadcast television to paid subscription. It will be a shock for some at first, but when you think about it, on par with most other forms of modern communication.

What do you think? Would you pay for TV (if you don't already) in the interest of seeing more of America reached with broadband connectivity?

Labels: "Internet infrastructure", FCC, Federal Communications Commission, Fixed Wireless Broadband, Rural Broadband, Rural Broadband Access, Verizon

posted by Nick Carter at 2:33 PM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, September 15, 2009
It would seem that the social-media savvy of our commander and chief is beginning to trickle down the government bureaucracies. Last week, the FCC jumped into social media with both feet as they seek to engage the public on issues regarding the nation's broadband coverage. And, this is no sterile so-called blog hosted on a government server. I half expected to see nothing more than a news feed with comments disabled, but instead found a web 2.0 blog design with comments enabled.

It gets even better. Broadband.Gov is turning, just as web 2.0 demands, to 3rd party social media venues as well. Their public feedback mechanism is powered by IdeaScale and allows the populus to vote and comment on what we feel should be the top priorities of any federal broadband plan. Go ahead, weigh in on the FCC's broadband plan... you can even add your own topics ad-hoc!

And, of course, no social media reach would be complete without a presence on Twitter and Facebook. The FCC has managed to secure a 3-character twitter user name "FCC"--which certainly required some cooperation from Biz Stone and the crew. Likewise, the FCC's Facebook page can be found at www.facebook.com/FCC.

So, what is all this buzz about. Well, to learn more about the Broadband Plan, I would direct you to (where else) the social-media video site, YouTube, where the FCC's own YouTube channel has been created.

In all seriousness, however, I want to first of all applaud the FCC for such a monumental step. To see a bureau of the Federal Government moving so enthusiastically into the realm of social media is a much greater advancement than many might realize. Second, I want to encourage readers to take this opportunity. Our leaders are reaching out. They're listening. So, be heard.

Labels: Broadband Plan, FCC, Federal Communications Commission, Social Media, Stimulus

posted by Nick Carter at 5:12 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, September 8, 2009
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asked for input last month on what actually should constitute "broadband" connection speeds. The government sets a standard for what is technically considered broadband and what is not. The motivation, at least originally, was simply that we could not allow dubious tech companies to slap a road-runner emblem on a 56K modem and try to advertise it as broadband.

But the current definition was recently opened to debate by the FCC, eliciting a range of responses from those affected by any modifications. A public interest group called Free Press, urged the FCC to dramatically ramp up requirements to 5 mbps for both upstream and downstream. For a sense of perspective, that would be over 8x the current definition for downstream speed, and 25x the current upstream speed. But companies directly affected by any decision, such as Verizon Communications Inc., urged the FCC to be more conservative.

Appeals to the FCC cited competing nations' who have set the bar for broadband far higher than the U.S. However, it's important to note that the nations cited in Reuters report (France and Japan) are in fact 1/18th 1/26th the size of the U.S. respectively. The challenge of Rural Broadband presents a uniquely different landscape for technology and business in the U.S. than in most other nations on the globe.

Where do you think the bar for broadband should be set? If higher, how shall we ever get there? If the same, what will motivate carriers to improve?

Labels: Broadband, Broadband Speed, FCC, Rural Broadband, Verizon

posted by Nick Carter at 9:31 AM Link to this Article  2 Comments

Tuesday, June 16, 2009
As Britain unveiled its plans this week to stay competitive with the rest of the world in regards to broadband speed and availability across the islands (sorry, Ireland, it is plural), Gordon Brown reported that "The internet is as vital as water and gas." Brown compares the infrastructure of roads and bridges built in the 19th century Industrial Revolution with the infrastructure of cable and towers being built today.

I'm not sure how the leap is made from bridges and roads to water and gas, but I do agree with Brown's assessment of broadband's importance to growth in the 21st century. Here on our side of the pond, we're realizing the same about our own future. Much attention has been given to the role of Fixed Wireless Broadband infrastructuree for rural internet access, both on this blog and elsewhere.

So how do we compare with Britain's stance in the broadband race? Well, first, I'd like to point out one interesting observation made by Brown: "The private sector is rightly leading the way and investing significant sums." Not to engage in political debate, but I would hardly say that the stimulus funds channeled from the government through our private companies qualifies as private investment.

However, Brown goes on to cite several needed advancements in Britain that the U.S. has already stepped out on. First, the FCC's release of a large spectrum for wireless use. Brown also emphasizes copper and fiber optic networks over fixed wireless broadband. I believe that the U.S. will be far better suited competitively as we invest in untethered networks with more scalability.

Whoever is in the lead, one thing is clear, it is a race. The nation that emerges in the 21st century as having the best and most reliable broadband access will--just as with railways at the turn of the last century--gain a distinct advantage in the world economy.

Labels: Economy, FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, Rural Broadband, Stimulus

posted by Nick Carter at 7:12 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, June 9, 2009
We reported several months ago on this Broadband Stimulus Package, all the promise of growth and a new era of broadband leadership in America, and of course, the opportunity to chime in about wireless broadband. Well, several readers on Wired.com have chimed in, but unfortunately not through the proper channels.

It seems that most of the formal feedback requests have been completed by the telecom providers that can afford to pay someone to chase the paper trail required for submission. The more casual readers, however, have resorted to the more casual feedback system: comments.

And yet, though there may seem to be no bridge between the formalities of Capital Hill and the "new-fangled blog thingies" on the Internet, Wired.com has spanned the gap. In a formal submission to the FCC, Wired sifted through the chaff and assembled the top comments from their blog(s) into one coherent document for the FCC to review. You can read the FCC submission here.

The problem, of course, is that the comments don't amount to a cohesive message. There's conflicting ideas, not the least of which is the devotion to terrestrial networks (fiber optics and copper cables) and of course, Fixed Wireless Broadband like wimax, 3G, and 4G. So, whose voice will be louder? Have you weighed in yet? Download the form.

Labels: Broadband, FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, NTIA, Rural Broadband Access, Stimulus

posted by Nick Carter at 8:27 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Tuesday, March 31, 2009
We've heard about it. We know it's coming. We've even been invited to interact with the NTIA and FCC. So, how are providers of fixed wireless broadband solutions responding? We heard one report that made me jump for joy (and start pricing airfare).

Andy Vamvakias of Premium Choice Broadband in Maine took it upon himself to advocate for the entire state of Main with regard to the broadband stimulus funds that are being made available. Under his won volition, Andy flew to DC to lobby not only for his small broadband provider but for his great state to get a piece of the pie. "There is no guarantee that stimulus money of any significant amount will come to Maine," he said. "If we don't move quickly and convincingly, we stand to lose it."

Andy's position is that the funds should be made available directly to businesses who can put it to use quickest, as opposed to trickling down through the usual bureaucratic channels of government grants and the like. In Andy's case, he believes he could spend 10 million in a matter of weeks, creating work for 10-20 people and providing broadband network access to currently unserved or underserved areas.

I'd like to go on record with a hearty "here-here" for Andy. What are your thoughts on how the funds could be used in your area for the best economic gain? And, what are you doing about it?

Labels: Broadband, FCC, Fixed Wireless Broadband, NTIA, Rural Broadband Access, Stimulus

posted by Nick Carter at 7:07 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments

Monday, March 16, 2009
The $7.2 Billion that the NTIA and FCC now have on their hands created a flood of over 2000 individual requests for meetings and follow-ups from advocacy groups, local and state government agencies, and private companies all across the U.S. Following the first of several public meetings on the topic, we now have a systematic means for follow-up. The agencies have released an RFI form requesting information relevant to the proper handling of these funds.

You can download the form at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/frnotices/2009/FR_BTOP_RFI_090312.pdf. Don't be shocked to find a lengthy form. No doubt, in part, to weed out those deeply interested in the process from the casual squalkers. But, if you (like us) desire to see the funds used appropriately in the rollout of broadband access for the U.S., we encourage you to take the time.

Labels: Broadband, Economy, FCC, NTIA, Rural Broadband Access, Stimulus

posted by Nick Carter at 11:06 AM Link to this Article  0 Comments