http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-app www.lastmileonline.com Blog RSS Feed en 2008-09-07T11:43:47 hourly 1 1970-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.49/title.taking-the-reins The Democratic National Convention started this week in Denver, while the Republican National Convention kicks off next week in Minneapolis. The media maelstrom surrounding these two events will be rife with campaign posturing, while the barrage of political advertisements continue to reign our TVs. These waning summer months of a presidential election year bring the promise of a new White House administration in January, which will also bring a change in public policy. The broadband industry sure could use it. The United States has consistently been ranked in the middle of the pack, globally, when it comes to broadband deployment penetration. New blood at the helm could spark new innovations to boost the broadband market. Or this country will be stuck with more of the same. We have been talking here about the prospect of a national broadband policy as a means put more emphasis on deploying high-tech and high-speed communications networks. However, will such a policy hamper this rapidly changing market? Some industry experts have urged the government to make changes to slacken regulations on broadband, like Verizon’s Dick Lynch, who says, “The public interest can best be served by getting as much broadband in front of as many people as possible, as quickly as possible and ensuring that investment keeps up with demand. To a large extent, this is a matter of taking down the barriers to investment and refraining from erecting new ones.” Speaking at a recent meeting of the Progress and Freedom Foundation, the Verizon executive vice president and chief technology officer adds, “Dynamic industries like ours require flexible solutions that can evolve and adapt to a changing environment — not rigid regulatory solutions that are one step behind the marketplace.” Others, like John Cooper, president of the consulting firm MetroNetIQ and a frequent commenter on this blog, say that citizens and public leaders must be proactive in the effort to deploy broadband to their communities. Instead of waiting for policymakers and private companies to make these decisions, Cooper says that public policy should come from the public. “The first step is to accept that we’ll have to take matters into our own hands,” Cooper wrote, commenting on a July post. “When communities realize that they have inside their own boundaries all the skills, talents, resources and initiative they need to do this on their own, then they will be off and running.” The key to helping communities realize this, Cooper says, is education. You can view the candidates' views on broadband (and technology in general) on their campaign Web sites. For the Democrat, go here. For the Republican, go here. Do you think either candidate will make a big difference in the broadband industry? Does one have a better policy, or will just the addition of fresh blood spark the market? Am I opening a can of worms? Advocacy August 26th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.48/title.olympic-broad-jump This week, many of us will be tuning in to the Olympics to watch those young athletes -- and some not so young -- achieve their gold medal dreams. Some of us might be tuning in from our computers to watch streaming video from Beijing. NBC has made a big deal of its uber-coverage of the games, employing broadband technology to fill the gaps of its TV broadcasts. However, some people aren't too impressed with NBC's approach. The broadcasting company decided to spend big money on video coverage, but is saving much of it for prime time TV rather than live online streams. New York Times deputy managing editor Jonathan Landman accuses NBC of "oldthink." Of course, Landman is trumpeting his media company's coverage over NBC, but his point is valid. If NBC is showing an event on tape delay, it won't make the video available until after it airs on TV. So much for high-speed communication. In addition, NBC is also monitoring its online visitors to make sure they're located in the United States. And here I thought the Olympics were a global event. I commend NBC for its savvy video content and nifty Web site (www.nbcolympics.com), but the company is missing the broadband boat. If I'm interested enough in an event, I'm not going to wait until the delayed broadcast to find out what happened. I'll get my news elsewhere, just like everyone else. Oldthink, indeed. News and Rumors August 13th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.47/title.on-second-thought-how-about-not-free-wi-fi The super-duper iPhone is again grabbing headlines and AT&T is again retracting an offer of free Wi-Fi access. Coincidence? CNET News.com reports that AT&T announced access to the free iPhone service and then quickly killed it. "For the second time in less than six months, AT&T mistakenly published a notice on its Web site indicating that Apple iPhone users would get free access to the wireless operator's more than 17,000 Wi-Fi hot spots around the country." Oops. Sorry guys. CNET reminds us that AT&T did the same thing six months ago with its Laptop Connect customers. AT&T isn't commenting on the double flub. If the iPhone didn't already generate enough drooling, I'd go all conspiracy theory on you and claim AT&T did this on purpose to nab more customers. But I guess I won't. Back Talk John Cooper, commenter and occasional contributor to Last Mile, made some interesting points regarding my last post, "Let Them Eat the Internet." He says communities need strong leadership to educate others and initiate broadband deployments. "The first step is to accept that we'll have to take matters into our own hands. When communities realize that they have inside their own boundaries all the skills, talents, resources, and initiative they need to do this on their own...then, they will be off and running." Check out Cooper's site MetroNetIQ.com for more about his stance on community broadband deployments. Continue the conversation in the comments or let me have it for making you read more about the iPhone. News and Rumors July 18th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.46/title.let-them-eat-the-internet In the effort to close and seal the Digital Divide in the United States, a new Internet advocacy group is pushing to provide world-class, high-speed Internet access to every home, business and civic institution. InternetForEveryone.org was established to make broadband a national priority and to empower the populace with the communications infrastructure that will "create good jobs, foster entrepreneurship, spread new ideas and serve as a leading engine of economic growth," the group's Web site explains. InternetForEveryone.org hopes to put the United States back near the top of the broadband rankings instead of the dismal 15th. Providing everyone with broadband services would certainly up the penetration rate. The group's aim is to foist a national campaign on Congress to connect the country with quality and cheap broadband services. The group wants you to have your cake and eat it too. To serve up this broadband cake, the group's Web site says that everyone must play their part. "America's digital decline is a troubling problem that must be faced now. Putting America back on top and bringing open, high-quality, affordable Internet connections into every home will require a comprehensive and innovative approach. It will require input from federal, state and local governments, businesses large and small, nonprofit organizations and public advocates, civic groups, churches and schools. Everyone must play a role." And, presumably, if we all play our part, we'll each get our just desserts. As Marie Antoinette most famously didn't say, "Let them eat cake." Perhaps with a piece of broadband cake, the American people can make a little bread and help pull the United States out of its current economic woes. A national broadband policy would go a long way in closing the Digital Divide. But what is the first step in making such a policy a reality? And is it possible to have both high quality and low cost? Let us know what you think in the comments. Advocacy July 8th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.45/title.fcc-finally-speeds-up-broadband The Federal Communications Commission has stopped dragging its feet, taking a step toward updating its antiquated definition of "broadband." Hitherto, the commission defined broadband as Internet speeds of about 200 kilobits per second. Kilobits? Do they still have those? I've hemmed and hawed about this issue in the past. Finally, as Ars Technica reports, the FCC has rebooted its broadband notions. The commission announced a tiered definition of broadband, which still includes the 200 Kbps as "first generation data" services. I guess that's in case we get nostalgic for that slower era. Here's how the FCC breaks it down: "First Generation data:" 200 Kbps up to 768 Kbps "Basic Broadband:" 768 Kbps to 1.5 megabits per second 1.5 Mbps to to less than 3 Mbps 3 Mbps to less than 6 Mbps 6 Mbps to less than 10 Mbps 10 Mbps to less than 25 Mbps 25 Mbps to less than 100.0 Mbps 100 Mbps and beyond Well, look at that! The FCC even planned for a beyond. It's nice to see some forward thinking in a nation that ranks below many European and Asian countries in broadband. (Although, Verizon president and COO Denny Strigl pooh-poohed that notion at NXTcomm in Las Vegas last week when he said that the United States leads the world in broadband connections if not penetration.) Broadband deployment could be a warm elixir in these cooling economic times by facilitating better communication and better commerce. Having a jumping off point of broadband service levels allows citizens, communities and service providers better understand the market demands. Do you think the FCC's standards are suitable? Do these standards go far enough? How do you think this will affect the broadband market in the United States? Standards/Regulations June 24th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.44/title.fcc-not-paying-attention-to-broadband-market The wireless broadband market took a giant step back from free metro wireless networks last year. Instead service providers and municipalities have leaned more toward funded, applications-based networks for such things as public safety, utility monitoring, healthcare and government operations. (Read Last Mile's story on wireless mesh networks for more.) However, does this scaling back from free metro networks preclude the idea of a nationwide free wireless network? The FCC's Kevin Martin apparently doesn't think so. (Thanks to On the Mark for the source.) Martin says that the FCC will auction 25MHz in the 2155-2180 MHz spectrum, and the winning bidder will have to provide a free wireless network to 95 percent of the country in 10 years. Meanwhile, the wireless association CTIA has denounced the idea in a June 5 filing to the commission. "History has proven that prescriptive auction regulation ultimately undermines the public interest, rarely achieves its advertised benefits and is a poor substitute for allowing the marketplace to function freely," the CTIA said in the FCC filing. "The public interest is best advanced by the Commission's long-standing flexible-use spectrum policy, which provides spectrum licensees the freedom to innovate and respond to consumer demands." FCC's prescriptive auction of the D Block in the recent 700 MHz auction failed to meet the reserve price, and the commission is still debating how to proceed with a re-auction. In a sustained commitment to address the nation’s public safety communications challenges, the FCC is seeking public comment on how the commission should proceed with the reauction and licensing of the 700 MHz D Block spectrum while maximizing the public safety and commercial benefits of a nationwide, interoperable broadband network. In July 2007, the FCC adopted rules for the 700 MHz Band spectrum that included the creation of a 10-megahertz license in the D Block to be part of a 700 MHz public-private partnership with the adjacent 10 megahertz of spectrum dedicated to a Public Safety Broadband License. The 700 MHz public-private partnership was designed to achieve the important public policy goal of promoting public safety interoperability, allowing police, fire and other first responders to better communicate with one another in times of emergency. Because the D Block did not meet its $1.3 billion reserve price in the 700 MHz auction, the FCC intends to re-auction this spectrum under revised rules. The FCC seeks comment, ideas and recommendations on how to revise the rules for the D Block and whether such a public safety network remains in the public interest. In addition, the commission is interested in technical requirements of the shared wireless broadband network. The FCC also seeks comment on how the D Block should be auctioned and licensed for commercial use if it were not required to be part of a public-private partnership. The FCC requests input on other ways to facilitate the deployment of a public safety broadband network if it found such a partnership were no longer in the public interest. Certainly, the public is interested in free wireless Internet and a nationwide public safety network, but has the FCC forgotten that broadband is a business? Why should service providers buy spectrum licenses that don't offer much in return? I just don't see it happening. Uncategorized June 11th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.43/title.the-broadband-plateau-in-the-u-s Once again the United States ranked behind most of Europe and Asia in broadband availability, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which surveyed its 30 member countries and ranked the United States 15th -- for the second consecutive year. Meanwhile, it appears after a decade of rapid growth and reaching approximately 60 percent penetration in the United States, broadband has reached a plateau point. Some researchers, like John Hodulik of UBS Research quoted in PC Magazine, speculate that the broadband has simply run out of room to grow. Even if that were true, has broadband run out of room to improve? Growth does not have to measured in terms of available infrastructure and per capita subscription. PC Magazine defines broadband as 256 Kbps, which is similar to FCC broadband speeds we've discussed in previous posts. Internet content is sucking up more and more bandwidth and soon -- heck, now -- those speeds will not be adequate for the video, voice and data services that consumers enjoy. If the the United States is expected to climb the international rankings in broadband, service providers will need to find ways to grow. Supporting content is key. Else broadband providers will be seeing a negative impact on penetration, rather than this perceived plateau. How can the United States stay competitive on a global scale? Are we really at a plateau? Let us know in the comments. Uncategorized May 27th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.42/title.stop-collaborate-and-listen Last week, I had the opportunity to attend the Collaboration Technology and Engaging the Campus symposium at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. The event's focus was on bridging the digital divide and broadening broadband communication to improve education and business competition in a global marketplace. Many times, the phrase "from town to gown" was used to describe the cooperation between society and educational institutions. It struck me that the needs for broadband networks is essentially the same for municipalities, businesses, schools, hospitals and any other entity that might come to mind. Broadband networks enhance those communities, period. For example, OneCommunity and CWRU launched a new wireless network on the campus, which also encompasses the surrounding community. Such a network enhances both the university and its surrounding neighborhood by providing Internet access to residents and fostering communal interaction between towners and gowners. Similar networks -- regardless of the technology used -- help draw interest to the area and bolster the quality of life in a community. The relationship would be the same if the network were municipal-based. In simple terms, such a network makes the people happy by supporting applications that students and residents enjoy and need. The same would logically be true with other communities (such as businesses and hospitals mentioned above). What the discussions at the Collaboration Technology symposium suggest is that collaboration between all interested parties -- and leadership among those interested parties -- is essential to the proliferation of broadband networks. If everyone wants improved video, voice and data services over IP, as we assume they do, then everyone should get involved with the processes that bring those networks to bear. It may sound like a grassroots proposal, and maybe it should be. Let the people speak, and let them be heard. Getting people more involved in the deployment of broadband networks would help drive demand to push these networks to all corners of the United States, which in turn would improve our ability to compete in the global marketplace. How do we encourage more involvement from the communities that broadband networks serve? Where are the leaders to promote better connectivity? Uncategorized May 13th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.41/title.what-is-beyond-broadband Sometimes a headline catches your eye that makes you think the writer must have been half drunk when he wrote it. That's what I thought when I saw "Broadband to be Obsolete within a Decade." But then I kept reading. The post at HighPosition.net describes "the Grid," which is the name of the network that was created to  support the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, at the European Organization of Nuclear Research. (Otherwise known as CERN, for you Dan Brown fans.) The LHC produces massive amounts of data that would strangle average computer networks -- we're talking petabytes, here, or millions of gigabytes. The Grid was designed with "super-fast" fiber optic cables that send research data to scientists all over the world at near instantaneous speeds. The network delivers data about 1,000 times faster than today's broadband services, according to HighPosition.net. According to the CERN site, the Grid handles enough data to fill 100,000 DVDs a year. Now, that's a network I could get used to. No more bogging down when someone's using BitTorrent or streaming video. No more waiting for YouTube to load. I wonder where my service provider is on this network upgrade ... We've talked about re-defining what broadband means. This blows those definitions out of the galaxy. However, could this truly be a reality in 10 years given today's market? It sure sounds like something fun to write about in the coming years. Uncategorized April 18th, 2008 http://www.lastmileonline.com/index/siteblog-post-action/id.40/title.are-rural-communities-saying-forget-it-to-broadband Is David McClure, CEO and president of the United Sates Internet Industry Association (USIIA), getting enough fiber in his diet? According to a post on the Web site, Broadband Reports, McClure says, "virtually every U.S. household and business has access to broadband, and even in many rural areas has a choice of broadband technologies -- fiber, wireless, cellular, cable DSL or satellite." Really? What McClure is really arguing is that it's not broadband deployment that is the problem, but broadband adoption is lacking in these seemingly neglected communities, as he writes in this editorial in the DesMoines Register. [You can read more about McClure's view's in "Deployment of Broadband to Rural America" (PDF) from the USIIA.] Is the issue really about the willingness of the public to adopt broadband? McClure's report shows that "broadband" is deployed in so-called rural areas. Sadly, McClure sticks to the FCC's and other antiquated definitions of broadband, which we have discussed previously here. I will give him props for admitting that the broadband definition is inadequate. But doesn't that admission debunk his whole argument? What do you think? Are rural communities underserved in the broadband market? Or are those communities disinterested in services? Uncategorized April 9th, 2008